|
Writers Articles And Opinions |
|
|
|
24 April 2009 By Dave Lindorff For some time
now, many Americans have wondered how Congress, the
elected body that the nation’s Founding Fathers saw as
the bulwark of liberty, could have been so thoroughly
unwilling to, or incapable of challenging the
dictatorial power-grabs and the eight-year
Constitution wrecking campaign of the Bush/Cheney
administration.
There has been speculation on both the far left and
the far right, and even among some in the apolitical,
cynical middle of the political spectrum, that somehow
the Bush/Cheney administration must have been
blackmailing at least the key members of the
Congressional leadership, most likely through the use
of electronic monitoring by the National Security
Agency (NSA).
I’ll admit that (even though we know J Edgar Hoover
did keep a dirt file on members of Congress to help
him support his budget allocation each year) I
considered the idea of blackmail a bit far out. But
now suddenly there is at least some evidence that such
seemingly wild speculation may not have been off the
mark, with reports that the NSA was indeed monitoring
Rep. Jane Harman (D-CA), and that the Bush
Administration used the evidence it had obtained of
her improper conversations with and promises to assist
agents of the Israeli government and its lobby here in
the US, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC),
to blackmail her into supporting the NSA’s warrantless
spying program—the very kind of spying that led to her
being caught on tape plotting with an agent of a
foreign power.
At the time of the taping of Harman’s incriminating
phone conversations, the administration was trying
desperately (and ultimately successfully) to get the
New York Times to hold off on publishing a
shocking investigative report by journalist James
Risen about a massive campaign of warrantless tapping
of Americans’ phone and internet communications.
According to a report by Jeff Stein, published in
the latest issue of Congressional Quarterly, the NSA
in 2004 recorded Rep. Harman negotiating with an
Israeli Mossad agent about helping Israel win a
reduction in the espionage charges filed by the US
against two members of the AIPAC lobby accused of
providing US intelligence information to the Israeli
government (the case against AIPAC’s Stephen Rosen and
Keith Weissman is still waiting to go to trial).
According to the transcript, a copy of which was
obtained by CQ, the Israeli agent offered to
have AIPAC lobby, and more specifically to have a it
arrange for a wealthy Israeli-American donor in
California donate money to Rep. Nancy Pelosi, in order
to get her, once she became House Speaker, to name
Harman as chair of the House Intelligence Committee.
At the end of the phone conversation, Rep. Harman, who
offered to help, was heard to say, “This conversation
doesn’t exist.”
According to reports in CQ and in the
New York Times, which ran a story on the scandal
as its lead news item on Tuesday, then Attorney
General Alberto Gonzales subsequently intervened with
the FBI to prevent any prosecution of Harman, a key
member of Congress on whom the administration was
relying to help it persuade the Times to
withhold its NSA wiretapping exposé until after the
2006 election. In the event, Rep. Harman did
later make calls to a Times, editor, the
paper did hold its story until after the
election, and Harman later was a leading backer
of the administration’s controversial (and, according
to a federal district judge, illegal) NSA spying
program. (Harman never did get the chair of the Intel
Committee, though she did make a run at it. It is
possible that the reason she didn't get it was that,
as Pelosi now admits, she was informed early on by the
NSA of the tap it had done on Harman.)
There are several serious issues here. One is the
extraordinary glimpse it offers into the extent to
which Israel has penetrated the centers of power in
Washington. It is illegal for foreign governments to
directly lobby and to offer to arrange financial
contributions for members of the US government, but
here, clearly, Israeli agents were doing just that.
The role of AIPAC as a front for the Israeli
government in Washington, as exposed here, is simply
stomach-turning, and should make it a toxic
organization to politicians. Instead, they flock
enmasse to its annual meetings, as President Obama did
almost immediately upon winning the November election,
and a large proportion of both houses from both
parties happily accept its campaign largesse.
A second, even bigger, issue is the NSA’s spying
activities themselves. According to CQ, the particular
wiretap that caught Rep. Harman inflagrante with an
Israeli agent was a court-approved tap—part of an
investigation into Israeli government spying
activities. But even if this is true—and at this
point, we’re relying on what the government is telling
us about it—it shows how dangerous the broader
unwarranted monitoring program of the NSA has been,
and remains. Back in 1978, Congress passed the Foreign
Intelligence Surveillance Act FISA) in direct response
to the disclosure during the Watergate hearings and
subsequent investigations that the Nixon
Administration had been using the NSA to conduct
illegal monitoring of the communications of anti-war
activists, and of members of Congress. To
prevent such police-state outrages in the future,
Congress passed the FISA legislation, establishing a
secret court staffed by a panel of
top-security-cleared federal judges, whose sole
responsibility was to consider and grant requests from
the NSA for warrants to conduct secret electronic
surveillance within the US or involving American
citizens abroad.
President Bush used the pretext of the 9-11 attacks
to secretly order the NSA to begin a massive compaign
of surveillance without going through the FISA Court
for warrants, even secretly soliciting the cooperation
of the nation’s several telecom companies in splicing
in routers at their switching hubs to make it possible
to monitor all conversations moving across the wires
and the internet. It seemed to some observers, myself
included, that the only reason the administration
could have had for bypassing the FISA court (which
over 30 years of operation has been incredibly
accommodating of government spying requests) was that
it was planning to engage in spying that would outrage
the public and the Congress and even the FISA judges.
It also seemed likely, given the Bush/Cheney
administration’s public stance that everyone was
either “with us or against us,” and that critics of
the administration’s “War on Terror” or of its plans
to invade Iraq, were “unpatriotic” or “soft on
terror,” that congressional opponents of the
administration would be obvious—and indeed
irresistible--targets of that surveillance.
Now that we have seen proof that the administration
was not above using its NSA-acquired knowledge to
pressure a member of Congress, it becomes absolutely
essential that Congress and the Justice Department
investigate to see whether other members of Congress
were also victims of agency spying, and whether others
besides Rep. Harmon were similarly extorted or
otherwise compromised.
The American public can, at this point, have zero
confidence in the integrity of the Congress or of
their own representatives, knowing that politicians
and government officials may be acting not in the
public interest but rather under duress in the
interest of those who control the National Security
Agency. We can have zero confidence either in the
integrity of the president, who likewise may well have
been compromised by NSA surveillance conducted on him
before he became president.
The only possible position for the public to adopt
as of today is to be suspicious of any politician who
opposes a full and public investigation into
the NSA’s seven-year-long campaign of sweeping,
warrantless electronic eavesdropping, since opposition
to such an investigation, in the wake of the Harman
episode, could well be an indication that the
political figure in question is afraid she or he has
been monitored, or worse, that she or he has been
threatened by those who have the records. Every
citizen concerned about the fate of American democracy
should demand that his or her senators and
representative promptly call for such a public probe.
Even if the administration isn’t blackmailing
individual members of Congress, given that many of
them are sure to have ethical, legal or moral
skeletons in their closets that they would not want
revealed, just knowing that the NSA has been and could
be monitoring their communications, and that the White
House hasn’t been above using that information against
a member, could make them pliant and cowardly.
It is no longer a wild idea at all to imagine that
our Congress has been reduced to the status of a
Potemkin legislature because of real or imagined
spying by the NSA. |