by Winifred Stockington

Created on: May 03, 2008

In post-9/11 American politics, the words "defend against terror" have somehow gained magical powers. Under the banner of these magic words, politicians have been able to slowly strip away the civil rights and liberties of American citizens without a peep of protest. Prior to 9/11, if a government official were to propose extensive wire-tapping of American citizens for an extended period of time, we would have cited the misdeeds of the Nixon administration and lead cheers of "not my phone". Add the magic words, though, and we are all silenced.

This is a very slippery slope we find ourselves treading. Obviously, the last thing any of us want is to face another terrorist attack. Nor do we desire to hogtie our government with bureaucratic red tape that prevents them from performing their duties or to force it to reveal state secrets. The NSA and the CIA exist to protect us, and inherent in this task is a certain level of secrecy and a certain level of invasiveness. None of these facts are in question. What IS in question, however, is the manner in which the NSA and the CIA have been conducting these tasks in the post-9/11 world. With cavalier disregard for existing mechanisms of oversight, the Bush administration has enacted policies of surveillance of American citizens that at best can be described as excessive.

And that's the important point, that there ARE existing mechanisms of oversight for wiretapping. In fact, the FISA court (which was established after the transgressions of the Nixon administration came to light) is not only designed to help oversee Federal wiretapping programs, but to do so in a manner that maintains the secrecy of the process. The FISA system builds in time for emergency wiretapping needs, allowing a delay in obtaining a FISA order should there not be time to initiate the process first. It also rarely turns down requests from the government for wiretaps. So why, then, would Bush and the NSA feel the need to operate outside of the FISA court? The only reason would be if they were doing something FISA would not approve of, such as wiretapping for longer periods, more extensively, or with less probable cause. Any one of those possibilities would be direct threats to the civil liberties of American citizens.

The sociologist and philosopher Tocqueville once commented that American society had the interesting potential to breed "mild tyrants", ones who force submission not with threats or violence but by fostering a dependence upon the existing system. In essence, it is a voluntary enslavement, for the individual does not realize that they are being taken advantage of by the tyrant. Unless Americans become more aware of the threats to our civil liberties and begin to protest, we will indeed become subject to this mild tyrant. Ultimately, it is up to us to ignore the magic words and cry out for change.

Learn more about this author, Winifred Stockington.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.