Now the press and the Left are upset that the government spies on our enemies. Even when our enemies communicate with people in America. Given that our enemies want to kill us, as the President has noted, I certainly do want to know why the enemy is calling you (or vice versa). And no matter how many times the press calls this a "domestic spying" controversy it is not about domestic spying.
But the press wasn't always so fired up to defend the rights of phone callers (via Instapundit) and justified the Presdident's use of Echelon to spy. Even when the spying was certainly different:
So, during the Clinton Administration, evidence existed (all of the information used in this article was available at the time) that:
-an invasive, extensive domestic eavesdropping program was aimed at every U.S. citizen;
-intelligence agencies were using allies to circumvent constitutional restrictions;
-and the administration was selling at least some secret intelligence for political donations.
These revelations were met by the New York Times and others in the mainstream media by the sound of one hand clapping. Now, reports that the Bush Administration approved electronic eavesdropping, strictly limited to international communications, of a relative handful of suspected terrorists have created a media frenzy in the Times and elsewhere.
The Times has historically been referred to as “the Grey Lady.” That grey is beginning to look just plain grimy, and many of us can no longer consider her a lady.
So what mysterious difference is there that accounts for the change in opinion from the late 1990s to now? Discuss amongst yourselves.
The Left and the press have pledged their love and loyalty for life, so the Left won't play this game.
