I think this goes in the Islamophobia file. Columnist Matt Miller trashes leaker Edward Snowden at the Washington Post, and “nods in agreement” over possible measures the government should use to suppress terrorism:
[W]hat Snowden exposed was not some rogue government-inside-the-government conspiracy. It’s a program that’s legal, reviewed by Congress and subject to court oversight.
The conversation would be entirely different today if we’d had a series of attacks since Sept. 11, 2001. As the Wall Street Journal editorial page (with which I don’t usually nod in agreement) wrote, if the nation suffered another 9/11 or an attack with weapons of mass destruction, “the political responses could include biometric national ID cards, curfews, surveillance drones over the homeland, and even mass roundups of ethnic or religious groups.” Practices like data mining, the Journal added, “protect us against far greater intrusions on individual freedom.”
But because vigilance and luck have left us safe thus far from more massive attacks, Snowden felt entitled to indulge the call of his precious conscience.
There is no court oversight. And it is a PR disaster for American tech capitalism.
It sounds like Miller is really hoping for some horrific terrorist attack so he could see his fascistic fantasies fulfilled.
He might be right. But I do hope the American people realize that a few terrorist attacks will not seriously threaten our security, but that over reacting to them would, as we have witnessed this past decade.
Sorry, this interpretation of Miller’s words is way off base. In no way does he express approval or “nod in agreement” over those extreme measures. Neither the WSJ or Miller are stating that they “should” be used. (Your word , Mr. Weiss!) It is obvious to me they were stating their opinion that if we had suffered another horrific attack, they fear that the political response would have been to impose some or many of those extreme measures, and that , “Practices like data mining, the Journal added, “protect us against far greater intrusions on individual freedom.”
Re: “trashing” of Snowden:
Snowden is a grown, intelligent man who chose to do something really serious. There can be no scrutiny of his character and motivations? Are we all supposed to fall in line and canonize him and pronounce him and his actions exempt from critique? That is as foolish as reflexively thinking our government knows best. I will reserve judgment on whether Snowden is a hero until I know a great deal more about all of this…and that includes him!
Seems to me the Patriot Act, and where it’s been taken by Bush Jr regime and Obama regime, is evidence Americans are as prone to being led by fear-mongers as the Germans once were under “Reichstag Fire” legislation. T Friedman, has joined Miller, among other luminaries. I don’t see much in the mainstream press, or on cable TV news, that does more than treat all the recent erosions under that Act that have come to light, nor the IRS scandal, dragnet scoops of emails and phone numbers activity, etc–as partisan political party maneuvers, e.g., MSNBC pundits v Fox News pundits.
Democrats certainly are not rushing to remember the Pentagon Papers, nor are the Republicans rushing to reveal Bush Jr’s hand in what Obama has enhanced. Dick and Jane don’t remember: “First they came for…., but that wasn’t me, then they came for
…..”
I have a visceral reaction every time i see the term homeland applied to the United States, makes me feel sad for this country that i grew up in and learned to love.
Here is a look at what our Neocons act like out in cyberspace, this is about Gen Keith Alexander:Director of NSA.
by James Bamford.
THE SECRET WAR
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2013/06/general-keith-alexander-cyberwar/all/
He is director of the world’s largest intelligence service, the National Security Agency; chief of the Central Security Service; and commander of the US Cyber Command. As such, he has his own secret military, presiding over the Navy’s 10th Fleet, the 24th Air Force, and the Second Army.