December 21, 2005
The Left's Privacy Hypocrites
By Michelle
Malkin
Allow me
to sum up the homeland security strategy of America's do-nothing
brigade, led by the armchair generals at The New York Times
and ACLU headquarters:
First, bar law enforcement
at all levels from taking race, ethnicity, national origin and
religion into account when assessing radical Islamic terror threats.
(But continue to allow the use of those factors to ensure "diversity"
in public-college admissions, contracting, and police- and fire-department
hiring.)
Second, institute
the "Eenie-meenie-miny-moe" random-search program at
all subways, railways and bus stations.
Third, open the borders,
sabotage all immigration enforcement efforts and scream "Racist"
at any law-abiding American who protests.
Fourth, sue. Sue.
Sue.
Fifth, yell "Connect
the dots!" while rebuilding and strengthening the walls that
prevent information-sharing between the CIA, State Department,
Justice Department, the Department of Homeland Security and other
key government agencies.
Sixth, hang the white
flag and declare victory.
Seventh, sit back
and wait to blame the president for failing to take aggressive,
preventative measures when the next terrorist attack hits.
Repeat.
The hindsight
hypocrisy of the civil-liberties absolutists never ceases to amaze.
And their selective outrage over privacy violations never ceases
to aggravate. Last Friday, The New York Times splashed
classified information about the National Security Agency's surveillance
of international communications between suspected al Qaeda operatives
and their contacts all over the front page in a naked attempt
to sabotage the Patriot Act. This Tuesday, the newspaper continued
to stir fears of "spying on all innocent Americans"
by recycling old ACLU complaints about FBI monitoring of radical
environmental groups, antiwar activists and some Muslim leaders
and groups.
Alarmists
in the Beltway want investigations (though not of the leakers
who fed the Times its story). The civil-liberties sky
is falling, they say, and never have Americans been subjected
to such invasive snooping.
Funny enough,
another story about unprecedented domestic spying measures broke
a week before the Times' stunt. But neither the Times nor the
ACLU nor the Democratic Party leadership had a peep to say about
the reported infringements on Americans' civil liberties. Sen.
Charles Schumer (by the way, Chuck, how's that apology to Lt.
Gov. Michael Steele over his stolen credit report coming along?)
did not rush to the cameras to call the alleged privacy breach
"shocking." Sen. Robert Byrd did not awake from his
slumber to decry the adoption of "the thuggish practices
of our enemies." The indignant New York Times editorial
board did not call for heads to roll.
That's because the
targets of the spy scandal that didn't make the front-page headlines
were politically incorrect right-wing extremists.
According
to the McCurtain Daily Gazette, in the days after the
1995 Oklahoma City bombing, the U.S. government used a spy satellite
to gather intelligence on a white separatist compound in Oklahoma.
The paper obtained a Secret Service log showing that on May 2,
1995, two weeks after the April 19 bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah
Federal Building that killed 168 people, the FBI was trying to
locate suspects for questioning.
Investigators
zeroed in on the compound in nearby Elohim City. "Satellite
assets have been tasked to provide intelligence concerning the
compound," the document said, according to the Gazette
and Associated Press. The Gazette noted that
"America's spy-satellite program is jointly under the control
of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and the Department of
Defense (DoD). Targeting decisions are classified; however, persons
familiar with the project say any domestic use of these satellites
is barred by agreements between the CIA and DoD." Photoreconnaissance
satellites that gather intelligence from space usually target
hostile governments and foreign terrorists. "The domestic
use of a military satellite for domestic spying is a violation
of DoD and CIA regulations regarding the proper use of top-secret
national security satellites," the Gazette reported.
But with
the exception of a brief Associated Press recap, the
story received absolutely no mainstream-media attention. No civil-liberties
circus. No White House press-corps pandemonium.
The left believes
the government should do whatever it takes to fight terrorists
-- but only when the terrorists look like Timothy McVeigh. If
you're on the MCI Friends and Family plan of Osama bin Laden and
Abu Zubaydah, you're home free.
Copyright
2005 Creators Syndicate
