The Center-Right Will Win This Debate: NSA Day Three
Since it's arrival on the scene Thursday morning, the blogosphere has erupted. Part of it is in outrage over this miniscule program. The rest are standing and defending it. On Thursday in one of his last posts of the day, Captain Ed filed what we believe to be the final word on the matter.
All day long we, joined by a good majority of the center-right blogosphere, dove into the story; feet first. We picked it apart, pulled the relevant facts from it, and started to formulate the defense of a program that is not only quite legal, but like the terrorist surveillance program outed by the New York Times, it was an asset in the war on terror. Those on the Left lost thier minds. Unhinged nuttiness erupted from them--from Patrick Leahy's indictment of "tens of millions of Americans" to Jack Cafferty's declaration we live in a "total dictatorship. Those who understand this program, what its uses are, and have a fairly good idea of how it works are it's ardent defenders.
Today, our ranks were enhanced by Richard Falkenrath, who wrote an op-ed defending the NSA program revealed by the USA Today. Mr. Falkenrath is the former deputy of homeland security adviser and deputy assistant to the president.
(Hat-Tip: Michelle Malkin)
On Thursday, USA Today reported that three U.S. telecommunications companies have been voluntarily providing the National Security Agency with anonymized domestic telephone records -- that is, records stripped of individually identifiable data, such as names and place of residence. If true, the architect of this program deserves our thanks and probably a medal. That architect was presumably Gen. Michael Hayden, former director of the NSA and President Bush's nominee to become director of the Central Intelligence Agency.
The potential value of such anonymized domestic telephone records is best understood through a hypothetical example. Suppose a telephone associated with Mohamed Atta had called a domestic telephone number A. And then suppose that A had called domestic telephone number B. And then suppose that B had called C. And then suppose that domestic telephone number C had called a telephone number associated with Khalid Sheik Mohammed, the mastermind of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. The most effective way to recognize such patterns is the computerized analysis of billions of phone records. The large-scale analysis of anonymized data can pinpoint individuals -- at home or abroad -- who warrant more intrusive investigative or intelligence techniques, subject to all safeguards normally associated with those techniques.
Clearly, there is a compelling national interest in understanding and penetrating such terrorist networks. If the people associated with domestic telephone numbers A, B and C are inside the United States and had facilitated the Sept. 11 attacks, perhaps they are facilitating a terrorist plot now. The American people rightly expect their government to detect and prevent such plots.
Very few career government officials possess the expertise, initiative and creativity needed to devise a system to penetrate such networks, using only existing statutory and presidential authorities, employing only existing technical and personnel resources, and violating the privacy of no American. Yet, if the USA Today story is correct, this appears to be exactly what Hayden did.
Some legislators and observers have questioned the legality of the alleged NSA domestic telephone records collection program. If the facts of the program are as reported in USA Today, there is every reason to believe that the program is perfectly legal.
There are, of course, strict legal limits on the ability of federal agencies such as the NSA to compel the provision of domestic information or to collect it secretly. The USA Today story, however, alleges that three telecommunications companies -- AT&T, Verizon and BellSouth -- provided it voluntarily. How else could one company (Qwest) decline to provide the information? Since there is no prohibition against federal agencies receiving voluntarily provided business records relating to their responsibilities, it appears that the NSA's alleged receipt and retention of such information is perfectly legal.
The three companies reported to have supplied telephone records to the NSA also appear to be acting lawfully. The Telecommunications Act of 1934, as amended, generally prohibits the release of "individually identifiable customer proprietary network information" except under force of law or with the approval of the customer. But, according to USA Today, the telephone records voluntarily provided to the NSA had been anonymized. In addition, the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986 explicitly permits telecommunications companies to provide customer records to the government if the government asks for them. So it would appear that the companies have been acting not just in the public interest, but also within the law and without encroaching on the privacy of any of their customers.
Bureaucrats excel at finding reasons not to do something. They are most often guilty of sins of omission, not commission. A timid, ordinary executive might have concluded that it was too risky to ask U.S. telecommunications companies to provide anonymized call records voluntarily to an agency such as the NSA, dealing with foreign intelligence. If the USA Today story is correct, it appears that Mike Hayden is no timid, ordinary executive. Indeed, it appears that he is exactly the sort of man that we should have at the helm of the CIA while we are at war.
Not only is this an endorsement of Mike Hayden to become the new DCI, but it is a measured, sound defense of a program that could prove to be an effective and lethal weapon in this war. for the Left to continue these attacks shows that their votes to support this war were hypocritical at best; at worst, a political stunt to curry favor. Either way it is viewed, it is time for them to either tow the line, or show America their true colors; openly and unadulterated. They have been living in silence and shadow long enough, and their antics there are going to cost this nation dearly in the long run.
The Bunny ;)
Since it's arrival on the scene Thursday morning, the blogosphere has erupted. Part of it is in outrage over this miniscule program. The rest are standing and defending it. On Thursday in one of his last posts of the day, Captain Ed filed what we believe to be the final word on the matter.
All day long we, joined by a good majority of the center-right blogosphere, dove into the story; feet first. We picked it apart, pulled the relevant facts from it, and started to formulate the defense of a program that is not only quite legal, but like the terrorist surveillance program outed by the New York Times, it was an asset in the war on terror. Those on the Left lost thier minds. Unhinged nuttiness erupted from them--from Patrick Leahy's indictment of "tens of millions of Americans" to Jack Cafferty's declaration we live in a "total dictatorship. Those who understand this program, what its uses are, and have a fairly good idea of how it works are it's ardent defenders.
Today, our ranks were enhanced by Richard Falkenrath, who wrote an op-ed defending the NSA program revealed by the USA Today. Mr. Falkenrath is the former deputy of homeland security adviser and deputy assistant to the president.
(Hat-Tip: Michelle Malkin)
On Thursday, USA Today reported that three U.S. telecommunications companies have been voluntarily providing the National Security Agency with anonymized domestic telephone records -- that is, records stripped of individually identifiable data, such as names and place of residence. If true, the architect of this program deserves our thanks and probably a medal. That architect was presumably Gen. Michael Hayden, former director of the NSA and President Bush's nominee to become director of the Central Intelligence Agency.
The potential value of such anonymized domestic telephone records is best understood through a hypothetical example. Suppose a telephone associated with Mohamed Atta had called a domestic telephone number A. And then suppose that A had called domestic telephone number B. And then suppose that B had called C. And then suppose that domestic telephone number C had called a telephone number associated with Khalid Sheik Mohammed, the mastermind of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. The most effective way to recognize such patterns is the computerized analysis of billions of phone records. The large-scale analysis of anonymized data can pinpoint individuals -- at home or abroad -- who warrant more intrusive investigative or intelligence techniques, subject to all safeguards normally associated with those techniques.
Clearly, there is a compelling national interest in understanding and penetrating such terrorist networks. If the people associated with domestic telephone numbers A, B and C are inside the United States and had facilitated the Sept. 11 attacks, perhaps they are facilitating a terrorist plot now. The American people rightly expect their government to detect and prevent such plots.
Very few career government officials possess the expertise, initiative and creativity needed to devise a system to penetrate such networks, using only existing statutory and presidential authorities, employing only existing technical and personnel resources, and violating the privacy of no American. Yet, if the USA Today story is correct, this appears to be exactly what Hayden did.
Some legislators and observers have questioned the legality of the alleged NSA domestic telephone records collection program. If the facts of the program are as reported in USA Today, there is every reason to believe that the program is perfectly legal.
There are, of course, strict legal limits on the ability of federal agencies such as the NSA to compel the provision of domestic information or to collect it secretly. The USA Today story, however, alleges that three telecommunications companies -- AT&T, Verizon and BellSouth -- provided it voluntarily. How else could one company (Qwest) decline to provide the information? Since there is no prohibition against federal agencies receiving voluntarily provided business records relating to their responsibilities, it appears that the NSA's alleged receipt and retention of such information is perfectly legal.
The three companies reported to have supplied telephone records to the NSA also appear to be acting lawfully. The Telecommunications Act of 1934, as amended, generally prohibits the release of "individually identifiable customer proprietary network information" except under force of law or with the approval of the customer. But, according to USA Today, the telephone records voluntarily provided to the NSA had been anonymized. In addition, the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986 explicitly permits telecommunications companies to provide customer records to the government if the government asks for them. So it would appear that the companies have been acting not just in the public interest, but also within the law and without encroaching on the privacy of any of their customers.
Bureaucrats excel at finding reasons not to do something. They are most often guilty of sins of omission, not commission. A timid, ordinary executive might have concluded that it was too risky to ask U.S. telecommunications companies to provide anonymized call records voluntarily to an agency such as the NSA, dealing with foreign intelligence. If the USA Today story is correct, it appears that Mike Hayden is no timid, ordinary executive. Indeed, it appears that he is exactly the sort of man that we should have at the helm of the CIA while we are at war.
Not only is this an endorsement of Mike Hayden to become the new DCI, but it is a measured, sound defense of a program that could prove to be an effective and lethal weapon in this war. for the Left to continue these attacks shows that their votes to support this war were hypocritical at best; at worst, a political stunt to curry favor. Either way it is viewed, it is time for them to either tow the line, or show America their true colors; openly and unadulterated. They have been living in silence and shadow long enough, and their antics there are going to cost this nation dearly in the long run.
The Bunny ;)
posted by Syd And Vaughn | 7:11 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home