The Search for Security

We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security.
— Dwight David Eisenhower, U.S. general and 34th president (1890-1969)

---

I think this statement can also be applied to trading our liberty for security. In other words, it may be a paraphrase of Ben Franklin's statement that those who trade their liberty for security deserve neither.

Naturally, this comes to mind because of recent revelations that Prez B*sh had ordered the NSA to tap American citizen's phones. The claim is these citizens were making or receiving calls from Al Quida operatives. The claim is that we have to allow this because we are at war.

The problem is, "The War on Terrorism" is far from a traditional war. The chances of signing a peace treaty with Al Quida or other terrorists are minimal at best. This is a Cold War, which is not winnable in the traditional sense. The best we can hope for is: a) decreasing the terrorists' motivation; and b) minimizing the amount of damage they can do.

We will never be 100% safe. No amount of wire taps or surveillance is sufficient to prevent a small dedicated group of people from commiting any number of highly destructive acts.

Now, Bull Moose is a progressive whose opinion I normally agree with. He argues that the president needs extraordinary latitude in times of war. He further maintains that those who disagree suffer from B*sh hatred.

I'll be the first to admit my strong dislike for Mr. B*sh. The shortest sound bite of his voice causes my blood pressure to rise. I still haven't decided whether he's a well-intentioned shlemiel or a clever wannabe despot. Given that, one might suppose my judgement on this issue is clouded.

But let's look at the evidence. Amoung the American groups that were investigated were dangerous folk like PETA and the ACLU. This is absurd, if not obscene, on its face. This is the sort of abuse one can expect when there is little or no oversight of the intelligence community.

Let's also consider the case of the intelligence presented to support the claim that Iraq was seeking Weapons of Mass Destruction. At best, the administration discounted any evidence contrary to their preconceived notion as disinformation. There is no reason to believe this same sort of prejudice would not be applied to the intelligence gathered from these wire taps.

In other words, I might be inclined to extend the Administration the benefit of the doubt if there were even a hint of good faith. But time and again the Administration has contended that an action is right merely because it says the action is right. I'm reluctant to allow such an actor to rely on star chamber secret courts (the standard created post-Watergate), much less to grant them a free pass for them to investigate or wiretap who ever they feel like on their authority alone.