Glenn Greenwald: The "liberal" position on the Surveillance State

[babylonsister]

Glenn Greenwald
Sunday March 2, 2008 08:10 EST
The "liberal" position on the Surveillance State



It's periodically worthwhile to take note of just how far to the Right our political establishment has shifted over the last couple of decades, and few issues reveal that shift as clearly as the debate over warrantless government spying. The absolute most "liberal" viewpoint that can be expressed is that the FISA court is a wonderful and important safeguard on civil liberties and that it strikes the perfect balance between freedom and security.

But for decades, the FISA court -- for obvious reasons -- was considered to be one of the great threats to civil liberties, the very antithesis of how an open, democratic system of government ought to function. The FISA court was long the symbol of how severe are the incursions we've allowed into basic civil liberties and open government.

The FISC is a classicly Kafka-esque court that operates in total secrecy. Only the Government, and nobody else, is permitted to attend, participate, and make arguments. Only the Government is permitted to access or know about the decisions issued by that court. Rather than the judges being assigned randomly and therefore fairly, they are hand-picked by the Chief Justice (who has been a GOP-appointee since FISA was enacted) and are uniformly the types of judges who evince great deference to the Government. As a result, the FISA court has been notorious for decades for mindlessly rubber-stamping every single Government request to eavesdrop on whomever they want. Just look at this chart (h/t Arthur Silber) for the full, absurd picture.

Yet now, embracing this secret, one-sided, slavishly pro-government court defines the outermost liberal or "pro-civil-liberty" view permitted in our public discourse. And indeed, as reports of imminent (and entirely predictable) House Democratic capitulation on the FISA bill emerge, the FISA court is now actually deemed by the establishment to be too far to the Left -- too much of a restraint on our increasingly omnipotent surveillance state. Anyone who believes that we should at the very least have those extremely minimal -- really just symbolic -- limitations on our Government's ability to spy on us in secret is now a far Leftist.

But it was not always so. When FISA was first unveiled at the height of the Cold War, it was publicly supported by what a May 23, 1977, pro-FISA Washington Post Editorial described as "leaders of the intelligence community and Congress." Upon passage of FISA, a 1978 World News Digest article reported (via LEXIS): "All of the U.S. intelligence agencies were on record in favor of the final bill." And in the wake of revelations of decades of eavesdropping abuses, FISA was supported both by the Carter and Ford administrations. It passed the Senate by voice vote.

more...

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/

[Hydra]

1. Thanks for posting this Babylonsister

Sometimes I think I'm the crazy one for wondering why secret courts are ok...but apparently the world went nuts and a few of us didn't go with them.

[MissWaverly]

2. amen, and why are there 900,000 people on the watch list

We are supposed to be innocent in this country until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. How are ordinary people punished and subject to severe treatment on the flimsiest pretext.

[Hydra]

3. Because the watch list is really ALL OF US

We are the enemy of the gov't, according to them. It's funny since I recall something about "By the people, for the people"

I guess I was mistaken.

[L. Coyote]

4. K & R & Impeach two too

[Leopolds Ghost]

5. Kick nt