So now, they are trying to sell the illegal warrantless spying as being necessary. "A vital part of the war on terror". They are rebaptizing it "The Terrorist Surveillance Program". They have issued a 42 page justification for it. They sound scared shitless, and rightly so.
Let's look at this logically. What we have here is:
Eavesdropping on Americans with no judicial oversight. Why, IF those being listened to are legitimate targets, would there be any need NOT to get a warrant? No reason at all, so you have to ask yourself just how legitimate those targets actually were and are. Because despite having this program going on, they were also still asking the court for warrants against legitimate targets.
It seems that they have been listening in on and reading the emails of thousands of people. So, you say, if they haven't done anything wrong, they have nothing to worry about, right?
Wrong. Sorry to be a cynic.
As someone who has lived in countries that listen in on phone calls, reads emails and so on, all in the name of "security", let me tell you what it can do.
1) Private information gathered can be used to stifle dissent or embarrass potential critics.
2) Business information gathered can be sold or given to your competitors, because they donate to the right people.
3) Business information gathered can be used for untraceable insider trading by those who are privy to it.
4) Personal information gathered can be used to destroy the reputations of political opponents.
5) Information gathered from political opponents can give the politicians in power a massive advantage.
The end result is that you no longer have freedom of speech because you are afraid to use it. Not unless you are all ready to invest in the same technology that the governments use to avoid having their communications monitored.
Imagine that you are a peaceful anti-war protester. In the course of exercising your right of free speech, you come to the attention of the government. (Yes, they have been monitoring the anti-war people, the anti-recruitment in high schools people and so on). From that day forward, your phone calls are monitored, your emails are read, every detail of your intimate life is laid bare to strangers and all of this was decided upon by an individual who apparently doesn't feel that he has to justify why YOU were chosen for monitoring.
Now, let's say that you own a business making widgets. At the office, you are in negotiations with a foreign company to sell your widgets overseas. In order to prepare your reply to their bidding process, you discuss over the phone and via email with several of your top managers about the bid details. This foreign company has also invited other companies to respond to their bid request. One of them is a big donor to the current political party in power. Your confidential business information concerning the bid that you are prepared to submit is passed on to the big donor, which he then uses to craft his own bid to be lower than yours, and you lose out on a million dollar contract. Because no one has to justify why YOU were chosen for monitoring.
Let's say that certain politicians have day traders working out of their offices, as has been allegated about Frist and Delay. It doesn't take much of an imagination to realize what value confidential business information (aside from the "political intelligence") would have for these people. You would be charged for insider trading, but no one knows that they got this information from YOUR phone calls and emails except a few insiders and they aren't telling.
Can you imagine what it's like to fear sending a naughty email to your husband while he's on a two week business trip, because maybe someone else is reading it? And storing it in a database somewhere? How about fearing that forwarding a political joke that makes you laugh will land you on the "persons to be monitored list"? How about fearing to speak to your lawyer on the phone about an ongoing problem? Your doctor? Or anyone with whom your conversations are not for public consumption?
So, the big question is: Are you willing to take this government on their word that the only people they are listening to are terrorists? They don't need to justify to anyone other than themselves how they are choosing targets, according to what they are saying. How about the next government, or the one after that or any of those that follow? Hard to say, isn't it? Maybe right now, you are on the side of the current administration. But maybe the next administration or any that follow won't be one that you agree with. How will you feel then? Because according to these guys, the "War on Terror" is going to last a long long time.