OP-ED COLUMNIST
Peeping Barry
By MAUREEN DOWD
Published: June 8, 2013 429 Comments
WASHINGTON — THE acid that corroded George W. Bush’s presidency was fear — spreading it and succumbing to it.
You could see the fear in his eyes, the fear that froze him in place, after Andy Card whispered to W. in that Florida classroom that a second plane had crashed into the twin towers.
The blood-dimmed tragedy of 9/11 was chilling. But instead of rising above the fear, W. let it overwhelm his better instincts. He and Dick Cheney crumpled the Constitution, manipulated intelligence to go to war against a country that hadn’t attacked us, and implemented warrantless eavesdropping — all in the name of keeping us safe from terrorists.
Americans want to be protected, but not at the cost of vitiating the values that make us Americans. That is why Barack Obama was so stirring in 2007 with his spirited denunciations of W.’s toxic trade-offs. The up-and-coming senator and former constitutional law professor railed against the Bush administration’s “false choice, between the liberties we cherish and the security we provide.”
Now that we are envisioning some guy in a National Security Agency warehouse in Fort Meade, Md., going through billions of cat videos and drunk-dialing records of teenagers, can the Ministries of Love and Truth be far behind?
“There was of course no way of knowing whether you were being watched at any given moment,” George Orwell wrote in “1984.” “How often, or on what system, the Thought Police plugged in on any individual wire was guesswork. It was even conceivable that they watched everybody all the time. But at any rate they could plug in your wire whenever they wanted to.”
It was quaint to think we had any privacy left, once Google, Facebook, Twitter and Instagram braided themselves into our days and nights.
As Gene Hackman, playing a disillusioned N.S.A. analyst in the 1998 movie “Enemy of the State” put it, the agency has been in bed with the telecommunications industry for decades, and “they can suck a salt grain off a beach.”
Still, it was a bit of a shock to find out that No Such Agency, as the N.S.A. is nicknamed, has been collecting information for seven years on every phone call, domestic and international, that Americans make. The Guardian’s Glenn Greenwald, who first reported the collection of data from Verizon, called the N.S.A. “the crown jewel in government secrecy.”
The Washington Post and then Greenwald swiftly revealed another secret program started under Bush, code-named Prism, that lets the N.S.A. and the F.B.I. tap Microsoft, Yahoo, Google, Facebook, PalTalk, AOL, Skype, YouTube and Apple, lifting audio and video chats, photographs, e-mails and documents in an effort to track foreign targets.
The Post reported that the career intelligence officer who leaked the information was appalled and considered the program a gross intrusion on privacy. “They quite literally can watch your ideas form as you type,” the officer said.
President Obama defended his classified programs even as Greenwald spilled one more bequeathed from W.: identifying targets overseas for potential cyberattacks. So much technological overreach, yet counterterrorism officials still couldn’t do basic police work and catch the Boston bombers before the marathon by following up on warnings from the Russians.
Don’t count on Congress to fix the assault on privacy. In a rare bit of bipartisanship, driven by a craven fear of being seen as soft on terrorists, both parties have lined up behind the indiscriminate surveillance sweeps, except for a few outliers on either end of the spectrum.
Obama was in California on Friday to meet the Chinese president, Xi Jinping, who could have offered some technical assistance on Internet prying. (NBC’s Mike Isikoff reported that the Chinese hacked into the Obama and McCain campaign computers in 2008.) Certainly, it was tricky for our Big Brother to chide Xi about China’s cyberhacking in America.
The president insists that his trellis of surveillance programs is “under very strict supervision by all three branches of government.” That is not particularly comforting given that the federal government so rarely does anything properly.
Obama says agents are not actually listening to calls, but as the former Sun Microsystems engineer Susan Landau told The New Yorker, the government can learn an immense amount by tracking “who you call, and who they call.”
When James Clapper, the director of national intelligence, was asked during a Congressional hearing in March whether the N.S.A. was collecting any information on “millions or hundreds of millions of Americans,” Clapper replied “No, sir,” adding, “not wittingly.” That denial undermines our faith in the forthrightness of those scooping up every little bit of our lives to feed into government computers.
The president calls the vast eavesdropping apparatus “modest encroachments on privacy.”
Back in 2007, Obama said he would not want to run an administration that was “Bush-Cheney lite.” He doesn’t have to worry. With prisoners denied due process at Gitmo starving themselves, with the C.I.A. not always aware who it’s killing with drones, with an overzealous approach to leaks, and with the government’s secret domestic spy business swelling, there’s nothing lite about it.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/09/opinion/sunday/dowd-peeping-president-obama.html?src=rechpA version of this op-ed appeared in print on June 9, 2013, on page SR11 of the New York edition with the headline: Peeping Barry.
SAVE
E-MAIL
SHARE
Try unlimited access to NYTimes.com for just 99¢. SEE OPTIONS »
429 Comments
Readers shared their thoughts on this article.
ALLREADER PICKSNYT PICKS
Newest
Comments Closed
MLSullivan10WA
I can say that my personal experience with "the government" not reading your e-mails was when a former boss went to Dubai for a couple of years to work. He sent me maybe two emails which included some birthday party photos. Only problem was I couldn't open them. Blocked. Then when I responded to him telling him that, he never received the message. Deleted. That was in 2005.
June 9, 2013 at 4:03 p.m.RECOMMENDED2
HansFlorida
Winter in America.
R.I.P. Gil Scott Heron
June 9, 2013 at 4:01 p.m.RECOMMENDED4
steve hunterseattle
In a police state government leadership always lays claim to only making "modest encroachments on privacy.”
We live in a country founded on freedom with a constitution that deeply respects the individual and his or her right to freedom from tyranny. Blindly trusting government agencies who conduct surveillance under the cloak of secrecy is just that, blindness. Acts of terrorism, foreign or domestic have become an unfortunate part of our daily lives but cowering under the presumed protective veil of the CIA and NSA will not spare as we learned with the Boston bombers recently.
We are violated by social media outlets, Google and I suspect the data mining that likely goes on by logging onto the NYT. We are subject to radar scans, strip and body cavity searches at airports, CCTV and now the SCOTUS has approved DNA swabs without consent. We have our phone calls and email monitored and our location tracked by our smart phones.
Somehow all of these "modest encroachments" are cumulatively taking on epic proportions.
I am glad that I am old, I hope not to live to see the day when all new borns are bar coded, inserted with a micro chip, their DNA mapped and live life on the grid. We have lost our humanity in all of this and it is being reflected in our irresponsible government and society. Somehow government manages to secretly staff and fund the billions in dollars for this rather elaborate surveillance apparatus takes and can't fix a bridge.
June 9, 2013 at 4:01 p.m.RECOMMENDED17
tr connellypalo alto, ca
Your hatred takes you over the top again. Please read the book "Big Datza" so you can know what you re talking about<
June 9, 2013 at 3:59 p.m.RECOMMENDED6
Mr. ModerateCleveland, OH
Being President is a lot more complicated than running for president.
Given our technological capabilities and the nature of the terrorist threat, these programs, if carefullly monitored, are both necessary and appropriate.
The NSA is looking for people, networks and organizations that intend to do us serious harm. And I'm not talking about pressure cookers.
June 9, 2013 at 3:59 p.m.RECOMMENDED7
The AncientPennsylvania
Perhaps Maureen could see fear in Bush's eyes, but I suspect she wanted to see what she saw and saw it. The rest of her piece after that is right on target. Obama did not start the snooping and despite the ignorant comments to that effect, we all know Bush did. And we know why. However, we also know that Obama has expanded these programs immensely, when he had said he would reduce them. The unfolding scandals will continue, since we now see so many areas of the government that have been abused in this same manner: the NLRB shutting down Boeing's plant, Fast and Furious, Solyndra, the IRS, Benghazi, and now massive police state spying.
People continue to say that there is no proof that the "White House" directly orchestrated all this. Does that matter? It is the President's government. He called out the Tea Party. His appointees shut down Boeing, managed Benghazi, expanded the spying, expanded drone strikes and killed Americans. He is responsible for his team. He's not responsible for Congress of course, but they have been largely irrelevant since the 2010 elections. Besides, all one could accuse them of related to these issues is that they did not know about them or stop them. The fact that Obama said Congress knew all about the spying and agreed with it. Some Senators knew. That's it. And, had the entire Congress known about it and passed legislation to stop it -- to stop what Obama's administration was doing -- do you really think he would sign it?
June 9, 2013 at 3:59 p.m.RECOMMENDED3
mike.nyergesnew york
From the reaction of many key political leaders and others, including the President, it would seem that the argument for amassing phone and other electronic data to tease out the dangerous needles in the haystack and save lives is extremely seductive. But will there be opportunities in the near future, with a nexus of new law and technology, to prevent the mentally ill from going on a gun-fueled rampage and killing innocent people? Could we prevent a significant percentage of suicides by applying the same legal and technical instruments? Could we eliminate the violence and harm of the illegal drug trade by identifying and redirecting demand? What other benefits could emerge from a brave new world shaped by 360-degree surveillance? Is there need for the Fourth Amendment when there is the complete elimination of privacy? What is liberty when we are free to pursue life and happiness under the benevolent rule of the algorithm? Hyperbole? Oh, most certainly.
June 9, 2013 at 3:57 p.m.RECOMMENDED2
toomgermany
If you really wanted to be safe, disconnect from the internet and write long hand letters to your friends. We still have a US Post Office to deliver these.
June 9, 2013 at 3:57 p.m.RECOMMENDED11
Bruce RobertsonRedmond, WA
Comments have been made about Obama not going far enough fast enough in stepping away from Bush security policy. What does he know now about the hard facts of his job and the threats to our country that he did not know as a candidate?
June 9, 2013 at 3:57 p.m.RECOMMENDED4
PhilsterPhoenix,AZ
I am amazed by the people who feel that when the government gathers information it is somehow nefarious, yet when private corporations do this it is "the magic of the marketplace". I wonder how many of these telecommunications corporations do their own internal correlations of the information that they acquire. Isn't that somehow scarier than the government doing it? After all, what limits do corporations have on themselves these days?
June 9, 2013 at 3:57 p.m.RECOMMENDED17
George WoolfeFalmouth MA 02540
"The Federal Government so rarely does anything properly." I am disappointed in you,Maureen, when you make such a statement. I can provide you with a long list contradicting this statement, but you don't need one from me.You can prfovide your own list.Of course, there are many examples of improper actions on the part of thegovernment, but there are just as many proper ones You are too good a journalist tomake suchasilly and inaccurate statement
June 9, 2013 at 3:57 p.m.RECOMMENDED10
SteveK9Toronto
I would not add criticism for failing to apprehend the Boston bombing perpetrators ahead of time. You cannot stop every nutjob or crank, unless you want just the Orwellian nightmare you are describing. I would rather take a chance that a screwball will blow me up, then live in a police state.
June 9, 2013 at 3:57 p.m.RECOMMENDED5
RJDnew york city
In this day and age, any one who still thinks that what is said, written, or seen electronically is going to remain secret is either totally naive or just plain stupid. Both Republicans and Democrats should take a deep breadth and give President Obama the benefit of the doubt on this matter even though he vigorously opposed these measures during his initial campaign back in '08.
By the same token, President Obama does owe the American people a complete explanation about this program, particularly in light of the IRS targeting scandal which has severely tarnished, not just the Agency, but has cast doubt on the credibility of this Administration.
There have been far too many impressions of deception and obfuscation thrust onto the public stage in the last several months affecting the Departments of Justice, State, Treasury, DHS, and HHS.
Therefore, it is incumbent for President Obama to clear the air and regain a sense of direction and control before these so-called scandals take a significant toll on his ability to govern.
He is the Leader and he is responsible for whatever has gone right or wrong under his watch............Only he can set the record straight.........we need to hear from the President directly on all of these issues and it needs to happen sooner rather than later.
June 9, 2013 at 3:57 p.m.RECOMMENDED5
RLColorado
We would berate our government for not using such tools to detect embryo terror plots after they blow up another tall building. At this very moment there must be hundreds if not thousands in various stages of development from hate thought to building the hardware and recruiting the suicide delivery personnel. Just knowing of the potential of being monitored may well prevent many terrorist wannabe’s from planning and encouraging each other into that final act. What our President must guarantee is that results are vetted properly, and have an independent oversight, and never used inappropriately (ref. the Richard Nixon era) that no innocents are jailed and tortured or worse yet zapped by a drone in error. Easy to demand, challenging to deliver, but better to err on the soft side, because as soon as a big mistake is made congress will bow to politics and cancel all such tactics not matter how successful overall.
June 9, 2013 at 3:51 p.m.RECOMMENDED5
M.J. HogueBarranco, Lima, Peru
All things considered, 12 yrs. after the act, the ripple effect continues to make Osama Bin Laden the most powerful man in the world (dead or alive). He rivals Hitler as his influence escalates with time and his deplorable victory is his gift that keeps on giving. And we capitulate.
June 9, 2013 at 3:51 p.m.RECOMMENDED11
Lori FrederickFredericksburg, VA
Just as with the Stasi in East Germany, the quest for information is insatiable andd the State turns to criminalizing thoughts, pre-actions, and wishful thinking. This is a dangerous slope but there's no turning back. Only action form the public can put the brakes on this ravenous beast.
June 9, 2013 at 3:51 p.m.RECOMMENDED2
Sherry WackerOakland
Where there is the ability to gather information government will do it. Information is power.
There will always be a pendulum swinging as citizens and governments keep this power in balance.
When we are afraid, as our leaders urged us to be after 9/11 the pendulum swings towards government power. When we citizens again become confident the power will swing back to us.
June 9, 2013 at 3:51 p.m.RECOMMENDED2
Tommy TSan Francisco, CA
1) Along with everything else, isn't Mr Clapper lying to a congressional committee a tiny bit illegal? Perjury?
2) Why are Americans so cowardly that there is a national tendency to throw away the Bill of Rights in exchange for 'security', whatever that is. Luckily, in the end the FBI and CIA et al have a long history of laziness and incompetence that helps protect us from their pursuit shadows.
Alas two non-shadows eluded our heroes, in plain sight in Boston. Much better, and less work, to spend a mountain of cash listening in on my mom, than to actually do police work.
June 9, 2013 at 3:51 p.m.RECOMMENDED1
docsbuetsVirginia
The difference between Bush and Obama,Maureen-?----TRUST !!
June 9, 2013 at 3:49 p.m.RECOMMENDED1
JanerMPTexas
I was really angry when W's administration began this but very few others were because they were all frightened. Why all the indignation now? The President has to protect the country. If he stopped this program and any thing happened, he'll be blamed. Look at Bengazi. RE: the Boston Marathon. How many warnings does the government get fromcountries all over the globe? The Russians pulled back and refused to give more information. I don't know but I feel sure there was more than this ONE warning that had to be investigated and perhaps those investigations stopped other acts of terror. I don't blame the administration for this.act happening because of the world we live in. I do feel great sympathy for those injured and killed and their families and I wonder how people get so crazy and jaded they believe killing innocent people is a way to solve problems.
June 9, 2013 at 3:49 p.m.RECOMMENDED2
SKVNYC
Dubya had "better instincts"? I never saw any evidence of that. But then most of Maureen Dowd's columns aren't based on evidence or fact.
June 9, 2013 at 3:49 p.m.RECOMMENDED9
ConnieSilicon Valley
There are thousands of former Sun Microsystems engineers. What makes Susan Landau important is her position as a Distinguished Engineer at Sun Microsystems, working on security and public policy. And that's just one part of a distinguished career looking at security and privacy. Right now, she's the IEEE Security and Privacy Associated Editor in Chief. Sun was such a long time ago.
Media commentators, not just Susan Dowd, at the very best, skate across the top of technology, often missing its importance and what it can and cannot do.
And if Ms Dowd is getting her data from Gene Hackman, and a pack of Hollywood script writers, well, I'm even more skeptical of her ability to distinguish what's important and what's real.
June 9, 2013 at 3:49 p.m.RECOMMENDED3
David MichaelEugene, Oregon
The Patriot Act has changed everything much to the detriment of the American public.
"Give me freedom or give me death." It's taking away our freedoms, our dreams, our enjoyment of airline travel, and now our smart phones? Whoa there Nelly. Airlines yes. Smart phones no. Can't we prosecute the NSA for peeping onto our computers and cell phones? No...I guess not. Back to my ordinary life of..."See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil."
I don't won't to say anything harsh guys, but I think Al Qaeda won the first round. So goes the games of"1984" and "2011".
June 9, 2013 at 3:49 p.m.RECOMMENDED2
Jeff CPortland, OR
Like other hot button Constitutional Amendments (right to bear arms), applying current logic to search & seizure is a balancing act, to say the least. No doubt Obama, smeared by foes as somehow tied into Jihad himself and not a true American, tread lightly when it came to rolling back previous war-on-terror transgressions on American privacy.
If the intrusion was so necessary, a national dialogue would have been in order. If meta data of private activity like phone calls and emails was necessary, then public records of what is becoming meta-data is also called for. And a game plan for purging such data.
Needs do change, in doing so new checks and balances are required to.
June 9, 2013 at 3:49 p.m.RECOMMENDED1
Perry MilesNorfolk, VA
Ms Dowd says "The president insists that his trellis of surveillance programs is “under very strict supervision by all three branches of government.” That is not particularly comforting given that the federal government so rarely does anything properly."
Well, by that logic Medicaid, ObamaCare, and Social Security Disability should be axed also; many government programs fail the "properly" standard although they still work with net benefit. When a program is vetted by all three branches of government, I am comfortable with it. It amuses me that liberal pundits buy the slippery slope analogy when it hits their values, but when the NRA and their gun nut dupes use it they are dismissive.
The free press is essential to our freedom, but occasionally it works against our interests. This is one of those occasions. The forces of terrorism are empowered to make themselves safer now, and we are less secure. That's not an argument for censorship, just an observation that press freedom doesn't always work properly.
June 9, 2013 at 3:49 p.m.RECOMMENDED2
READ MORE COMMENTS
Get Free E-mail Alerts on These Topics
Obama, Barack Surveillance of Citizens by Government
Classified Information and State Secrets Cyberwarfare
Ads by Google
