Whenever the Bush Administration wants to ramp up its fear-mongering in order to scare people into complying with its agenda, it always turns to its buzzing ace in the hole – the radiological bomb. When it's time for this danger to be paraded around, we are subjected to tales of League of Justice-like heroic struggles led by George Bush against an array of nuclear villans. The President is then applauded for doing whatever dirty work he needs to do to protect us from this ultimate danger. For that reason, the sudden emergence of this controversy over the Bush Administration’s ostensibly novel and aggressive warrantless surveillance in search of unusual radiological activity at Muslim mosques and businesses inside America has a strong deja vu feel to it, and more than a whiff of manipulation.
In 2002, when the Administration wanted to roll out its shining new internal detention policy -- whereby American citizens could be detained and incarcerated indefinitely with no due process based on nothing more than George Bush’s unreviewable, secret say-so -- it did so by having John Ashcroft and others launch a media blitz, where they flamboyant announced that the Administration caught the dreaded "Dirty Bomber," Jose Padilla, whose (uncharged, unproven) diabolical plot to kill us all with a radiological bomb was so scary that we had to throw him (and then other citizens like him) into a military hole indefinitely, without access to a lawyer and without even being charged with a crime.
And, anyone who opposed the Administration’s wholesale denial of due process to this American citizen was, by definition, guilty of trying to block George Bush from protecting Americans from being melted with radiation (probably because such whiny nay-sayers secretly sympathize with the terrorists and want them to win). When people are petrified about radiological bombs being detonated in their cities, nobody is much in the mood for listening to boring claptrap about constitutional precedents and due process.
Americans were terrorized enough by this radiological threat into remaining quiet while the Administration went about institutionalizing one of the worst and most un-American nightmares imaginable -- having your own Government arrest you without charges and stick you in a prison indefinitely, where you are denied any contact with the outside world (including a lawyer), even denied the right to know why you are there, and denied any opportunity to prove your innocence.
And when the Administration, during the run-up to the Iraq invasion, wanted to smash any remaining doubts about whether it was really such a good idea to invade another country which had not attacked us and which could not do so, it dispatched Condoleezza Rice and others to start ominously talking about "mushroom clouds" and uranium enrichment and "the world’s most dangerous weapons in the hands of the most dangerous dictators." And that settled things, good and quick. Yeah, war is a last resort and all that, but if the alternative is to sit around waiting for a Saddam-armed terrorist to vaporize us all with radiation, let’s get that invasion going. What are we waiting for?
And now, in the midst of a very serious and escalating eavesdropping scandal over patent lawlessness at the White House, what is suddenly thrown into our laps and our minds? It’s that dreaded radiological bomb again, this time being cooked up at shadowy Muslim mosques by evildoers who want to melt our children. And what does this unauthorized "leak" tell us? That George Bush has been on the hunt to stop them – by breaking some eggs and maybe even ignoring some technical paperwork procedures. But when it comes to stopping Muslims detonating radiological bombs inside America, isn’t overzealousness a good thing? Is it really necessary to comply with all of that paperwork – all of those bureaucratic warrant procedures which the subsersive hippy losers are always yapping about – in order to stop terrorists from using nuclear weapons against us?
And presto, in the public mind, the NSA law-breaking scandal is immediately transformed into a fear-driven referendum, yet again, on whether we want George Bush to protect us from nuclear-wielding Arab terrorists or not, even it means that he breaks a few petty rules in the process. It’s the left-wing, egg-headed law professors and ACLU whiners, with all of their tedious, legalistic paperwork obsessions about "probable cause" and warrants, versus the resolute, rule-defying cowboy doing his best to hunt down the Muslim terrorists among us in order to protect us and our children from being melted. That’s not much of a contest, and it’s one that the cowboy has won again and again. And it's the only contest he's needed to win.
The Administration’s purported efforts to find radiological activity in Muslim mosques is now supposed to be thrown onto the pile along with its lawless NSA eavesdropping program, so that the whole confusing controversy is aggregated into nothing more than the same tired, irrational terrorist-defending fetish of trying to impede George Bush in his valiant crusade to protect us from The Terrorists. And sure enough, like puppets on cue, the most blindly loyal of the Bush defenders are spitting out exactly this scary tale.
And with the images now darkly dancing around in our heads of Muslims hiding in their mosques in Los Angeles and Queens and Georgia suburbs and maybe in your own backyard, standing over a toxic brew of radiology and TNT ready to zap us all with their mushroom clouds, all of this annoying chatter about FISA and the Fourth Amendment and the NSA is supposed to meekly fade away, drowned to death by nightmares of our children with their hair on fire and glowing in the dark and George Bush trying to save them.
Is there a limit on how many times or to what extent this trick will work? Can the Bush Administration do anything with impunity as long as it talks afterwards about The Terrorists with nuclear weapons? The Administration has used that trick with great success over and over, and it obviously is of the belief that this radiological well is far from dry. Is this really going to work again?
This is the same thought I had. Most americans care about having their emails read and calls listened.
ReplyDeleteVery few people care if the government goes to their street and uses a machine to see if there is unusual radiological waves on their block.
The idea is to take the harmless surveillance and mix it in with the one that people would object to and hope that it all gets looked at as necessary.
It seems to me that this is an actual leak, as opposed to the non-leak of the illegal wiretaps. Perhaps we should go looking for the leakers of this info. I wonder who we would find at the end of that rabbit hole?
ReplyDeleteThis is clearly a red pill/blue pill moment in time. Me, I choose to stay awake.
Jake
It is certainly true that few people are going to get worked up about warrantless searches to detect radiation in mosques. That is why this story appeared when it did.
ReplyDeleteBut this is not a trivial issue. Technology is evolving at a breathtaking pace, and Justice Scalia -- no leftist pussy he -- has seen that, and has said this technology must not be allowed to vitiate the protections guaranteed by the Fourth Amendment.
To quote from the syllabus in the 2001 Kyllo case in which Scalia writing for the Court held that the govt must get a warrant to direct a thermal-imaging device at a home (my emphasis):
"...the information obtained by the thermal imager in this case was the product of a search. The Court rejects the Government’s argument that the thermal imaging must be upheld because it detected only heat radiating from the home’s external surface. Such a mechanical interpretation of the Fourth Amendment was rejected in Katz, where the eavesdropping device in question picked up only sound waves that reached the exterior of the phone booth to which it was attached. Reversing that approach would leave the homeowner at the mercy of advancing technology–including imaging technology that could discern all human activity in the home. "
That said, there are legal arguments, legitimate ones, that would render snooping on mosques to detect radiation -- without a warrant -- constitutional. That is because unlike the drug case that Kyllo is, the mosque scenario is not primarily a criminal justice issue.
Thanks for the perspective. I read the articles discussing this activity and noted that the use of anonymous sources were cited by the reporters. At the time I thought it was peculiar that all of the sources were telling the reporters that the activity was perfectly legal. I remember wondering why would these people leak this information if they thought it was legal. That seemed dumb. Your perspective provides a possible reason for why loyal government employees would leak details on a program they believed to be a perfectly legal activity. Scary.
ReplyDeleteI think Glenn has nailed this. Very insightful. This is definitely a pro-Bush leak. Now the narrative will be that Bush is trying to stop ay-rabs from detonating radiological bombs and poeple are complaining he didn't fill out the right paperwork
ReplyDeleteTo Republicans, "paperwork" is how they view the Constitution.
Question: can you sue a newspaper ,columnist,goverment, for prepaid propaganda without disclosing
ReplyDelete"this is advertising"
This NYTimes story about NSA data mining is also a deliberate leak. Data mining phone bills doesn't bother most Americans, any more that radiation sniffing from a parking lot. Just look at what Kevin Drum said: "Interesting."
ReplyDeleteThe story is intended to deflect attention from what they are really doing, which is: listening, en masse, to the phone calls themselves, ala Echelon.
Hasn't it occurred to anyone that, if ANY terrorist were to be assembling a bomb, his or her house of worship would be the last place they'd stash it?
ReplyDeleteThe racial profiling here also astounds me -- are all Muslims really THAT BAD???
C'mon folks...
Can you imagine the outrage of the lefies if Bush would have been the least bit agressive on terror before 9/11? Even after 9/11, a tag of "ramping up fear-mongering" is used when Bush is the least agressive on terror. Because those Bush haters are trying to make this a lose-lose situation for Bush(and the US), they complain and complain constantly about everything and nothing. When we had Clinton in there, he did little to stop this evil madness terrorist threat, and paved the way for 9/11. This is why the Dems will never win another Pres election...they will not protect us from those that are trying to destroy us. Thank God for George W, and his courage to DO SOMETHING. Instead of sit around and hope for the best. In case you did not notice, that did not work.
ReplyDelete