http://www.dianawest.net/Home/tabid/36/EntryId/2540/Surveillance-Can-We-Take-a-Step-Back.aspx
I’m taking a short break today from promoting “American Betrayal” — an Amazon History “Hot New Release” since publication day (thanks, everyone!) — to write about the latest stages of tyrannical development in these United States for Dispatch International. The assignment is the burgeoning Obama scandals — IRS, Prism, whatever breaks next.
This means two things:
One, this assignment is really no break at all from promotion of American Betrayal, because American Betrayal is a history of tyrannical development in these United States, and why we can’t see it.
Two, partly because of the newspaper’s mainly Euopean readership, I will be taking an explanatory step back from the tight-focus coverage and anaylsis of events to date.
Americans should, too.
Regarding the latest scandal to break — the communications surveillance scandal — I think something big is being overlooked in a near-sighted debate to determine whether security trumps privacy to prevent a terrorist attack. On the one hand, we have our 4th Amendment guarantees against no- probable-cause searches and seizures. On the other hand, we are told, the US government has that night-sweats-desperation, that countdown-clock-urgency to do whatever it takes to prevent a terrorist attack. That means, they say, scooping up our “meta-data” and treating them with 4th Amendment inspired kid gloves (right).
What is being overlooked? The US government is saying we need to fish from a pool of 300 million Americans to find and pre-empt the next “terrorist” — or else. It is saying that we need to do this because there are no other predicters of “terrorism.” It is saying that there are no doctrinal predicters of “terrorism.” It is lying. It is lying about “terrorism” itself.
Why — to keep us safe? Or to keep Islam safe?