NSA — wiretaps, surveillance, and talking points?

If there’s an innocent explanation for this, I’m anxious to hear it.

Democrats on the Senate intelligence committee are complaining that the National Security Agency has played politics in support of the secret program to intercept phone calls between alleged terrorists in the United States and abroad.

On July 27, shortly after most members of the committee were briefed on the controversial surveillance program, the NSA supplied the panel’s chairman, Pat Roberts (R-Kan.), with “a set of administration approved, unclassified talking points for the members to use,” as described in the document.

Among the talking points were “subjective statements that appear intended to advance a particular policy view and present certain facts in the best possible light,” Sen. John D. Rockefeller IV (D-W.Va.) said in a letter to the NSA director.

That’s putting it mildly. Supposedly non-partisan officials with the NSA, whose job descriptions probably don’t include “produce talking points to help Republicans look good,” wrote up instructions for Republican lawmakers to say things such “I can say the program must continue” and “There is strict oversight in place … now including the full congressional intelligence committees.”

Indeed, Republicans were also told to say, “Current law is not agile enough to handle the threat posed by sophisticated international terrorist organizations such as al-Qaeda” and “The FISA should be amended so that it is technologically neutral.”

In other words, the NSA was supposed to offer lawmakers guidance on classification. Instead, with the administration’s blessing, the agency was used to promote the line the Bush gang wanted to hear.

It seems to be something of a pattern.

Indeed, since Bush took office, there have been far too many instances in which federal agencies, which are supposed to be objective and impartial, have been misused for partisan gain.

Tom DeLay, for example, used civil servants at Bush’s Treasury Department to work up an attack of John Kerry’s tax plan. Bush appointees pressured officials in HHS to hide the truth about the White House Medicare plan. Questions have been raised about whether the CIA was misused in smearing Richard Clarke after he criticized the president’s counter-terrorism efforts. In April 2004, we learned that Treasury has issued a series of controversial press releases with a Bush-campaign tagline.

And, of course, federal officials at the Department of Homeland Security misused agency websites to help attack Kerry during the presidential campaign.

Now, the NSA is writing talking points for Republican senators. Raise your hand if you’re surprised.

Ummmm, Carpetbagger, you forget the numerous occasions in which various Generals have been called in to bolster the administration’s talking points. I don’t worry so much about a minor agency here or there, but when you use the entire Pentagon to swing your propaganda, we have a problem.

  • Wouldn’t that be weird if one of those agencies was like 100% ideological Republicans, but made itself look like a bunch of swank hippies in the media.

  • “The FISA should be amended so that it is technologically neutral.” – NSA Lawyers

    Actually, they want to amend FISA so it is gutless. They want to wiretap Americans without the slightest reason to believe the wiretapped are in any way guilty. They have such a useless program that they generate thousands of tips which have produced less than 1 percent of actual cases. They are running the FBI ragged and covering their butts for their failure before 9/11/01.

  • Now, the NSA is writing talking points for Republican senators. Raise your hand if you’re surprised.

    *decider raises hand* ‘whoa, thassa good one!’

  • Puppet on a string or ventriloquist dummy. Pick your metaphor, these guys aren’t fussy as long as they keep getting their fat government paychecks.

  • CB, granted there are a million examples, but a particularly egregious one is the SSA statements sent to taxpayers each year that were amended (a couple of years ago) to tell each taxpayer that Social Security will be insolvent unless drastic changes are made, etc., darn near echoing the administration’s (soon-to-be-revived) campaign to privitize/gut Social Security. Shameless.

  • From the article:

    “[Lt. Gen. Keith B. Alexander, the NSA’s director] had earlier told Rockefeller that the talking points were in response to requests from more than one committee Democrat for guidance as to what could be said publicly as the policy debate began over what should be done with the program.”

    Translation: The only thing a Senator can say in public about the program is that s/he supports the program.

    Yet another thing that creeps me out about the current Admin. is the image they project. Either they are:

    A. So blase about being evil goons that they don’t even bother to make up a semi-credible lie.
    or
    B. So dim-witted and incompetent that if our safety truly is in their hands, we are screwed.

    Perhaps it is a little of column A and a bit of column B.

    Apropros of nothing: I live a few miles from Fort Meade/No Such Agency and I have these strange finger spasms when I drive past. Really. It’s wierd. The middle finger of one hand will just shoot up…

  • Comments are closed.