Privacy concerns about terrorist communications don't extend to IRS

Mac Johnson:

Like most folks, I live in constant fear that my phone calls to Pakistan’s Tribal Territories are being intercepted by the National Security Agency (NSA). And don’t even get me started about my emails to Yemen!

Well, not really. But I doubtless would worry about such things if I listened to privacy “advocates,” the ACLU, the New York Times and assorted other whiners and malcontents who want me to believe that overseas eavesdropping operations violate my obvious expectation of privacy when blabbing away to Waziristan on my satellite phone.

Allegedly, such eavesdropping is a crisis of lost civil rights soon to be investigated by a Congress near you. It’s a little hard for me to take those complaining about all this seriously, though, since A) they will be the first ones screeching about an “intelligence failure” after the next terrorist attack, and B) every one of them seems perfectly unbothered by the income tax.

Let’s compare the privacy consequences of these two government programs for your average citizen and judge where the true Big Brother threat exists. The NSA eavesdropping program threatens me with the prospect of having my communications with central Asia or Londonistan scanned for innocent phrases like “martyrdom operation,” or “Ammonium Nitrate.” If I call my buddy Omar to talk about farming and current events, this could result in my harmless private communication being tagged for later analysis. This is the NSA’s big threat to the privacy of the innocents.

On the other hand, the income tax and the Internal Revenue Service (the domestic intelligence agency charged with enforcing this tax through a never-ending campaign of record keeping and data-mining) threaten me with the prospect of financial ruin and imprisonment if I do not surrender, in writing, on time and in proper format, proof of every significant financial transaction I’ve ever made.

...

He makes a good point, that the left ignores. Which is more intrusive? Which is more likely to effect every adult American.

As I said in other posts, I want the NSA to intercept every enemy communication that they possibly can. I especially want them to intercept enemy communications with someone who is in the US. I don't need the FISA court to interfere with that surveillance. In fact i think they are more likely to screw up an operation than help it. That has certainly been the recent history. I would rather trust the NSA to make that decision than the NY Times or any group of Democrats.