The controversy following revelations that U.S. intelligence agencies have monitored suspected terrorist related communications since 9/11 reflects a severe case of selective amnesia by the New York Times and other media opponents of President Bush. They certainly didn’t show the same outrage when a much more invasive and indiscriminate domestic surveillance program came to light during the Clinton administration in the 1990’s. At that time, the Times called the surveillance “a necessity.”So, it was okay for Clinton to "spy on Americans" and sell some of the intelligence to Democrat corporate donors to use against their political rivals, but if Bush tries to defend the country from al 'Qaeda and their affiliates by using the same technique it's a crime.
Hmm. Now why would that be?
No comments:
Post a Comment