Surveillance and National Security During Nixon Years and Today

As we know, the Nixon Administration made use of illegal techniques to secure information it felt was necessary to protect national security. This was the essence of Watergate. Note that "Watergate" really wasn't about the break in at the Watergate Apartments, but a larger picture of operations "The Plumbers" and subsequent cover up.

Most people think Nixon and his administration were dead wrong in what they did. Congress subsequently passed strict laws limiting the FBI and CIA.

Although most people have a knee-jerk anti-Nixon reaction, the reality was that the situation was not that simple. Nixon was not paranoid -- his Administration really did very determined enemies out to destroy it by any means possible, as well as disrupt the affairs of the country as much as possible. Many young people of the time--those who were in the forefront of the protest movement--really didn't understand the economic and social harm they were doing to everyday life of the country by the disruptions. Nor did the appreciate the evil enemy we were fighting in Vietnam. (Yes, contrary to Jane Fonda, they were pretty ruthless; remember the boat people fleeing the country afterwards.)

I know personally from those days radicals were coming to college campuses and spewing propaganda to recruit people to disrupt everyday life and succeeding in some ways. This is not, contrary to belief of some, legitimate political discourse. These were criminal acts and a violation of the rights of other people.

It was Nixon's responsibility as President to protect this country. Where Nixon erred is _how_ he went about it. The law enforcement agencies of the time had existing various police powers. One problem was that J. Edgar Hoover refused to cooperate with anything; he was still fighting ancient battles that no longer were relevant.

Moving on to today, the reality is there are evil enemies out there who want to destroy the U.S. Critics of the Bush Administration have turned this into a political issue which is wrong. Just as critics hated Nixon because he was Nixon, today's critics hate Bush because he is Bush. Both groups focused on the person, not the issues.

Anyway, the Patriot Act and other surevillance techniques is a tough issue. I personally object to some elements because (1) I don't think they'll do any good and (2) I think they could be misused; for example as a backdoor way to enforce drug or tax laws. As to the specific issue of monitoring overseas phone calls, as mentioned, there are historic precedents to that. If the target of such monitoring is potential terrorist activity and the information gathered is limited to such (can't be shared for other agencies outside of defense), it would appear to be legitimate defense measures.

In a prior thread someone else mentioned that what happened in the past is irrelevent. Not true. Precedents, for good and bad, are a part of our culture. To nail one politician for doing the same thing that other politicians were known to have done is selective enforcement and wrong. We honor FDR greatly today, but he did do many of the same things Nixon did.

Reply to
hancock4
Loading thread data ...

Cabling-Design.com Forums website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.