interesting how there's a major terrorist threat just as the nsa is coming under scrutiny [View all]

[unblock]

on npr they were talking about the embassy closures "out of an abundance of caution" based on "intercepts" and "chatter" gathered from the nsa and other agencies through all this spying and sniffing and whatnot.

they particularly noticed that there were hearings and bills on the hill regarding putting limits on the scope of nsa spying, and there was momentum toward doing something. not sure if i buy that they would have done anything beyond window dressing, but that's what they said.

but now this terrorist threat shifts the conversation to the effectiveness of the spying programs, so the momentum to curtail the nsa's spying capabilities is completely stopped.



first, of course, the effectiveness of spying shouldn't really even be an issue. of course it can be effective, that's why there's a temptation to do it. the question is whether or not it's an invasion of privacy and/or a violation of explicitly safeguarded rights.


but more interestingly, can no one connect the dots enough to think that maybe, just maybe, this terrorist threat might have been played up just a tad in order shift the debate? i mean, the shrub administration did that so many times, so obviously and clumsily. do we really think these same bureaucracies are incapable of it just because a democrat is president?


even the phrase "out of an abundance of caution" suggests that this might have been a borderline decision (to close embassies) but they opted to make a bigger stink of it than they perhaps might have. hmm, i wonder why they went that direction at this time?