F.B.I. Abuse of Security Act
As I mentioned previously, the FBI is illegally plundering in your private lives and yesterday FBI Director Robert Mueller stood before Congress, again, explaining why. Falling on his sword with statements of personal accountability, Mueller dutifully carries out the Penitential Order liturgy before Congress. Why does Congress continue to grant him absolution? I want to step through a few items that caught my attention in the New York Times article.
Mueller says:
How could this happen? Who is to be held accountable? And the answer to that is I am to be held accountable.
This ain’t the first or second time Mueller has pulled his groveling rug out. Is Mueller going to take action against himself or is George Bush going take action? Nothing is going to happen. Accountability means absolutely nothing in the Bush administration.
Mr. Mueller attributed the inaccuracies to “deficiencies in the database” and the failure to retain signed copies of national security letters in all cases.
“We have already taken steps to correct these deficiencies,” he said.
“Deficiencies in the database” is too ambiguous to make any determination about the nature of the problems, the severity or consequences. Mueller might as well have said, we messed up and stopped there. Furthermore, when did Mueller take steps to correct the problem(s) and what were those steps? Did he take these supposed steps three months ago and only reveals them now because he got caught with his hand in the cookie jar?
And then there is the ever-present innocence of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.
[Gonzales] noted that the information discussed throughout [the inspector general's] document was the kind that the bureau “would have been entitled to if we had followed the rules.”
That is about as self-contradictory as it gets. We broke the rules to receive information that we were already had the right to get. That makes absolutely no sense and bears no purposeful logic. More importantly, whose rules? Gonzales’ rules or the rule of law? History has proven repeatedly the two are rarely the same. Bush and Gonzales make up rules as they go along, so that statement has zero credibility.
The Times report, based on statements made I presume, gives the impression that no one was harmed.
Although the investigation uncovered no examples of lives turned upside down or businesses disrupted, the privacy problems went beyond the theoretical in a few instances.
How does the FBI know? There were 142,000 national security letters issued between 2003 and 2005. The FBI followed up on 142,000 letters? They confirmed with every person(s) or organization that no harm was done? I don’t believe that for a minute. And, what about 2006?
Now, to the more encompassing issue. George Bush has promised repeatedly that proper controls were in place to keep his illegal surveillance programs from getting out of control and even more illegal (if that’s possible). So, where were all those promised procedures and why did they fail (like everything else Bush promises)?
I simply can’t wait until next week to find out what other screw ups this administration has done or plans to do.
0 Responses to “F.B.I. Abuse of Security Act”