more on NYT story on domestic surveillance

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

Begin forwarded message:

From: Brock Meeks <Brock.Meeks () msnbc com>
Date: December 17, 2005 5:05:44 PM EST
To: dave () farber net
Subject: RE: [IP] more on NYT story on domestic surveillance

Overall, I agree and applaud Robert's comments below.  The ever shifting
definition of "terrorism" and what comprises a "terrorist" or "providing
safe harbor to terrorists" is troubling at best and could be detrimental
to one's personal security at worst.

I disagree, with Robert's statement about how the U.S. regards acts of
domestic terrorism, such as the one perpetrated by McViegh:  "But of
course, that type of home-grown terrorism is not discussed now that the
Bush Administration has conflated terrorism with everything Islam."

I cover the "homeland security beat" and in the capacity I have dozens
of sources from FBI agents to ICE agents to Border Patrol agents to
pilots flying the Black Hawk helicopters of the Customs and Border
Protection division.

I assure you that the Department of Homeland Security spends a great
deal of time ferreting out homegrown terrorism; in fact, put a bottle of
JD in front of me and I'll make the case that we spend TOO much time
chasing homegrown terrorism instead of focusing on foreign threats.

Finally, when Robert writes:  "...the NY Times' unwillingness to expose
this  secret surveillance regime lest its reporters lose their coveted
access to the Washington power players..."  I don't quite believe this
to be the case.

(And if you read my earlier message regarding the NYT debacle, you'll
know I'm not an apologist for them).  If the NYT wanted to cultivate or
protect its "access" to power, they would never had published in the
first place.

This is why I asked the question: "Why publish NOW?"  It's as if
Managing editor Bill Keller found his editorial courage or simply got
tired of being the industry's punching bag or perhaps the NYT got
spooked that someone ELSE was about to break the story (I'm betting on
the latter.)  I know I sweat bullets when a scoop of mine is held up (by
editors, lawyers or trying to track down corroborating sources) fearing
another news organization will pull the rug out from under me.

"Cultivating access" in the town isn't done through holding stories
(though you can special access on a limited basis, as I explained in my
previous note about holding a story and gaining access to some inside
operations).  No, here in D.C. you cultivate access the old fashion way;
the Judy Miller way: you become a mouthpiece for high level officials
without the balls to put their name to quotes and information they feed
to reporters, knowing some of my more craven colleagues would damn near
sell their soul for exclusive news crumbs being swept off the White
House table into their dog bowls, er... news holes.




-----Original Message-----
From: David Farber [mailto:dave () farber net]
Sent: Saturday, December 17, 2005 4:39 PM
To: ip () v2 listbox com
Subject: [IP] more on NYT story on domestic surveillance



Begin forwarded message:

From: Robert Bryce <robert () robertbryce com>
Date: December 17, 2005 2:13:54 PM EST
To: dave () farber net
Subject: Re: [IP] NYT story on domestic surveillance

Hi Dave,
For IP, if you like.

I agree with Adam Thornton regarding the NY Times' betrayal of their
duty to report that the NSA was spying on US citizens without a court
order.
But it seems to me there are other, larger perversions occurring to
American democracy -- and perhaps even worse, the English language --
which are largely being overlooked. First and foremost is the flimsy
justification for all of this spying both here and abroad.
Bush and his cronies insist it is being done to stop "terrorists" and
"terrorism."
Well, the definition of terrorism depends on which side you are on.
Terrorism is what the powerless use against the powerful. As Islamic
scholar Juan Cole points out, "humiliation is what causes terrorism."
Menachem Begin participated in a bombing attack against the British
who were inside the King David Hotel in Jerusalem in 1946. The
bombing killed 91 people - most of them civilians. Begin later became
the prime minister of Israel.
By any definition, the bombing of the King David was a terrorist
attack. So was Begin, by definition, a terrorist? Or was he a freedom
fighter? Or perhaps, an insurgent? (By the way, Defense Secretary
Rumsfeld insists on calling the insurgents "anti-Iraqi forces.")
The worst act of terrorism on American soil before 9-11 was committed
by a non-Muslim, a former Marine, and an ardent believer in the
Constitution. His name was Timothy McVeigh. He blew up the Murrah
Building in OK City because of what federal police did at the Mount
Carmel building in Waco. McVeigh was motivated by his disgust at the
abuse of federal police power in Waco that led to the death of same
80 Branch Davidians -- most of them children.
But of course, that type of home-grown terrorism is not discussed now
that the Bush Administration has conflated terrorism with everything
Islam. And yet, it appears that the very type of terrorism that
McVeigh perpetrated is made more likely by the broad powers that Bush
has conferred on America's -- call them what they are -- secret police.
Meanwhile, as has been duly reported here on IP, John Gilmore is
fighting in court over his need to show an ID at the airport. And
what is the federal government's response? It is: we have a secret
law that requires Gilmore, and everybody else, to show IDs at the
airport.
Hello?!!! A secret law? Even the judge in Gilmore's case was
incredulous.
This creeping secrecy (the size of the federal intelligence budget is
secret) combined with the NY Times' unwillingness to expose this
secret surveillance regime lest its reporters lose their coveted
access to the Washington power players, is eroding our liberties and
the rule of law in ways that are both sad and frightening.

best
rb


Robert Bryce
Austin, TX 78704
512-445-5097
robertbryce.com



-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as brock.meeks () msnbc com
To manage your subscription, go to
  http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at:
http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/


-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as lists-ip () insecure org
To manage your subscription, go to
 http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/