When recently asked how he responds to Americans worried about violations of their privacy, due to government spying, President Bush replied, “If somebody from al-Qaida is calling you, we’d like to know why.”
He went on to comment, “It’s seems logical to me that if we know there’s a phone number associated with al-Qaida or an al-Qaida affiliate and they’re making phone calls, it makes sense to find out why,” Bush said. “They attacked us before, they’ll attack us again.”
Of course he’s right on target. Who could possibly disagree with this? If somebody has evidence that President Bush, or any other government official, is using terrorism as a mere excuse to spy on people for other reasons, of course there should be outrage and investigation. However, nobody has presented this evidence and none of the critics of the President, whom I have read, have even suggested that this is taking place. The problem seems to be that it’s President Bush doing the spying, not what the spying is about.
I want my government to spy and do whatever else it takes to catch terrorists. If any government official abuses this power by attempting to use it for any other reason, I certainly want to know about it and I want that person fired–including the President himself, if there is evidence. But this unstated premise that it’s wrong for the government — at least a government led by President Bush — to be doing any spying, of any kind, at any time … this disturbs me, to say the least.
I would like Hillary Rodham Clinton, the likely Democratic nominee for President in 2008 and quite possibly the next U.S. President, to state her position on the subject. Does she oppose spying under all circumstances, or not? I want her, and all other possible future Presidents (especially those who oppose President Bush on everything) to go on record right now as to where they draw the objective line, and why. I have no problem with the standard of spying President Bush has drawn. Yes, he should be held to it. But dislike of the man — and I dislike numerous things about him myself — is not an excuse to oppose what he’s saying.
