BOB O'BAR

The country has recently been in the throes of discussing “eavesdropping” and the rights and responsibilities of President Bush. Many that oppose President Bush are claiming that he has authorized illegal wiretapping and should be impeached. These actions have been wrongly termed “domestic spying” or “domestic surveillance.” From my view, these terms are purposefully wrong. The use of the wrong terms is directly tied to the media and unhinged Democrats.

The truth of the matter was skillfully explained by Attorney General Alberto Gonzales to the Senate Judicial Committee on Feb. 6. Let me quote one paragraph from his speech:

“The President’s authority to take military action — including the use of communications intelligence targeted at the enemy — does not come merely from his constitutional powers. It comes directly from Congress as well. Just a few days after the attacks of Sept. 11, Congress enacted a joint resolution to support and authorize the military response to the attacks on American soil. Authorization for Use of Military Force, Pub. L. No. 107-40, 115 Stat. 224 (Sept. 18, 2001) (“AUMF”). In the AUMF, Congress did two important things. First, it expressly recognized the President’s ‘authority under the Constitution to take action to deter and prevent acts of international terrorism against the United States.’ Second, it supplemented that authority by authorizing the President to ‘use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks’ in order to prevent further attacks on the United States.”

Gonzales went on to point out that President George Washington directed that one of his generals find a way to intercept British letters, open them without breaking the seal, copy the contents, then send them on. Washington, in fact, gained access to British intelligence pouches between New York and Canada. Gonzales cited telegraph wiretapping during the Civil War; President Wilson during World War I authorized interception of all telegraph, telephone and cable communications into and out of the U.S.; and during World War II, President Roosevelt authorized interception of all communications traffic into and out of the U. S.

Even with all this history and background, the Democrats in the Senate Judicial Committee continued to question Gonzales as though they heard of this use of surveillance for the first time. They acted shocked and questioned details of the program to the point that even more methods of pursuing the terrorists could have been exposed. The Democrats were so brazen in their questioning that they asked questions to which the answer was classified information. Yet they persisted. Gonzales skillfully dealt with each question and left the Democrats looking rather inept. Gonzales pointed out that four Democrats and four Republicans were regularly advised about the process, and that no questions were raised then. He respectfully declined to name names.

Gonzales also pointed out that the surveillance that was taking place was not “domestic.” One end of the phone call was outside the U.S. There was no domestic to the process. It was an international surveillance. Additionally, no person is involved in listening to conversations until a computer finds certain phrases or words being used in the international call. The computer is not considered to be eavesdropping. After a human reviews the computer findings, then surveillance can take place. But only on those people suspected of being connected to terrorists or terrorist activities. So, not all international calls are involved.

Now, after reading this you can see for yourself how the media and Democrats are twisting the truth of the matter. It was additionally important to point out Gonzales said that,

“During the Clinton Administration, Deputy Attorney General Jamie Gorelick testified before Congress in 1994 that the President has inherent authority under the Constitution to conduct foreign intelligence searches of the private homes of U.S. citizens in the United States without a warrant, and that such warrant less searches are permissible under the Fourth Amendment.”

It seems the Democrats want to forget what happened in other administrations and try and blame Bush for things they know to be lawful. The talk about impeachment is twisted also. In fact, talk of impeachment would be proper if Bush was not doing surveillance of terrorist activity. The President is duty bound to do all in his ability to protect the United States. To do less would be an impeachable offense.

One other point to consider is the fact that no one has factually claimed any injury because of the international surveillance. It seems to me that before anyone comes unhinged, they should present indications of harm. No harm has been claimed. By the way, do the Democrats realize we are at war?

Once again we have Democrats attacking President Bush even though the facts prove otherwise. It is another effort to discredit President Bush because they are no longer in power. The Democrats have been using attacks on things that Bush has done in place of presenting ideas and programs to solve issues. The Democrats are bereft of ideas. Things do not appear to be improving any time soon.

Remember it is up to us to see that they get it right.

(Bob O’Bar can be reached at rto4nmm@sbcglobal.net)