Not A Guess Anymore
Given the op-ed that's running today in the LA Times by Representative Pete Hoekstra, I believe my speculation from the other day is confirmed.
We suffered a setback Thursday when USA Today ran a front-page story alleging that the National Security Agency was collecting domestic phone records. This article hurt our efforts to protect Americans by giving the enemy valuable insights into the Terrorist Surveillance Program, which has been focused like a laser beam on Al Qaeda and its known associates.
President Bush's job is to defend our nation and prevent another terrorist attack. He has taken many vital steps to combat Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups. The Terrorist Surveillance Program does not target ordinary U.S. citizens. This is a valuable program that I strongly support because it is protecting American lives. Let me say a few things about this program.
Keeping in mind that Hoekstra is the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, this is very clear, he knew about the program - and so did Democratic lawmakers.
Second, the program fully complies with the law and the Constitution. It has been reviewed by executive branch attorneys, and congressional leaders from both parties — including my friend and colleague Rep. Jane Harman (D-Venice) — have been regularly briefed. Democratic leaders in the House and Senate have been aware of this program for several years yet never expressed any concerns until it was illegally leaked.
So the leaker(s) in an attempt to use this as a political weapon have endangered the entire program and potentially put people at risk and have warned our enemies. My, what wonderful patriots.
I regret that I see little sign of intolerance for unauthorized disclosures of intelligence to the media from some of my Democratic colleagues today. If an individual with knowledge of the Terrorist Surveillance Program thought it was wrong or illegal, he or she could have gone to the intelligence oversight committees under the procedures established by law. By going to the media, the leaker broke the law and the oath he or she swore to protect the nation's legitimate secrets.
This was a grave crime that helped Al Qaeda and its allies in the information war by providing an understanding of our defenses and vulnerabilities against terrorist attacks.
We are a nation at war. Unauthorized disclosures of classified information only help terrorists and our enemies — and put American lives at risk.
So, a politician has been willing to go on the record that this program passes legal muster - which I rather doubt he would do if the program did not. He's also given a glimpse of the buzz saw the Democrats will be likely to walk into if they want to try to push this issue hard enough.
Now, track down and punish the leaker(s), it's about time we took this stuff seriously. Using classified information for partisan political reasons is wrong and it hurts all of us. Period.
By Juggler, Sunday, 14 May , 2006 @ 10:05 am
“So the leaker(s) in an attempt to use this as a political weapon have endangered the entire program and potentially put people at risk and have warned our enemies. My, what wonderful patriots”
You’re talking about Cheney and Libby outing Valerie Plame and putting an end to her program of monitoring Iran’s nuclear capabilities, right?
Oh, no, you’re talking about an illegal program of spying on Americans. In which case, those who disclosed it should be given awards.
By Gaius, Sunday, 14 May , 2006 @ 10:10 am
I see you have them tried and convicted already. Nice job. Especially since it appears as if Joe Wilson may have been talking about what his wife did for a living well prior to the alleged leak.
By Juggler, Sunday, 14 May , 2006 @ 10:28 am
I love it when conservatives turn all civil libertarian. If only they could care about due process for people other than conservative politicians.
Yes, it’s true, Cheney and Libby haven’t been convicted, but it’s now well established that Libby was involved in outing Valerie Plame, and the latest news seems to connect Cheney to the project.
You’ll notice that I didn’t call either Cheney or Libby criminals. In fact, I quoted from your post, and you claimed I had “them tried and convicted.” Well, the same could be said and your statements on the people who leaked the news about this program.
Just because they leaked doesn’t mean they broke the law.
And sorry, a story in NewsMax doesn’t carry much weight.
By Gaius, Sunday, 14 May , 2006 @ 10:32 am
It may be well established in your mind, but it most certainly is not in fact.
By Black Jack, Sunday, 14 May , 2006 @ 10:50 am
Tracking communication patterns isn’t spying on Americans, it’s a common sense effort to employ our technological advantages to catch terrorists and their enablers. It’s quite similar to the methods we used to win the Second World War.
Anyone with the brains of a crabapple ought to be able to see beyond their own political prejudices and grasp the obvious facts. No one cares what Jack said to Jill, but we care a great deal about who terrorists are talking to, and how often they talk, and when.
Once a pattern has been identified, it’s time to actually listen in on the conversation. That’s when the spying begins, and rightly so.