Napolitano: I’m not “Big Sis”

posted at 10:45 am on September 7, 2011 by Jazz Shaw
[ Homeland Security ]   

Matt Drudge is, “wrong. He’s just wrong.”

So speaks Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano on the subject of privacy and the constant drumbeat of criticism she receives from not only Drudge, but many conservatives. In a rather wide ranging interview, (video to follow) she discusses the balance between privacy concerns and security.

Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano is calling out web news aggregator Matt Drudge for suggesting that she’s an ogre eager to invade the privacy of Americans and in particular those who travel by air.

“I think my nickname is ‘Big Sis.’ I don’t think he means it kindly, actually,” Napolitano said Tuesday, accurately recalling the moniker that often accompanies scary-looking photos of her on Drudge’s popular news site.

“I think that what he means is we are watching too much—kind of an Orwellian view. He’s just wrong. I mean, he’s just wrong,” Napolitano declared during a POLITICO Playbook breakfast at the Newseum. She said the privacy impact of new airport screening technology and similar programs are thoroughly vetted before they are implemented.

“We want to be conscious of civil liberties and civil rights protections—and we are,” Napolitano insisted. “We don’t do anything without kind of running it through our own civil rights and privacy office. We’re one of only two departments in the federal government that actually has a presidentially-appointed privacy office and officer.”

While I’m obviously in the distinct minority on this side of the fence, I’m fairly sympathetic regarding the administration’s arguments on this score. Security and privacy are two of those teeter totter items on our plate which the voters can never seem to balance, along with many others.

The best example I can think of, oddly enough, is the current debate over entitlement programs. Americans have come to the reluctant conclusion that these programs are in trouble and changes are required. But at the same time, each and every poll shows that they want those changes to take place without any cuts to benefits. We seem to have mastered the fine art of wanting it all without having to give up anything in return.

The same can be said for our security. We want to travel safe in the knowledge that our planes will not explode in mid-air or be commandeered by enemies and flow into buildings. But at the same time we prefer not to be overly inconvenienced, slowed down, scanned, probed or patted down. I do have some empathy for those who don’t want the “nudie pics” being taken by the latest generation of scanners, as modesty is a natural human trait. But to their credit, the TSA does offer an alternative for those who don’t wish to be scanned.

Are there failures and abuses taking place as a result of these policies? Without a doubt there are. But those are individual human failings to be ferreted out and addressed, not systemic problems. We have bad – read: “evil” – people who wind up being teachers and priests, too. That doesn’t mean we shut down all the schools and churches.

The irony,of course, is that some of the people screaming most loudly about these invasions of privacy are the same ones who will be lining up to decry a failed president the next time a plane comes down in a ball of flames. And yes, I’ve heard the arguments about how potential terrorists should have been caught long before the got to the gate at the airport. Perhaps that’s so, but given the insidious nature of potential attackers, do you really want to risk your life on that bet?

The same interview touches on the increasing use of cameras in the public square, recording our every move as we travel the streets of major cities. Leaving aside for a moment the fact that you have virtually no legal assurance of privacy when you step out of your house and onto the sidewalk, these tools have led to a lot of captures and convictions of bad guys of all stripes. Sadly, you don’t read much about those stories, since nobody writes about the dog who never bites anyone.

Homeland security has turned into a pretty thankless job these days. We want to eat our cake and have it too. But that’s the world we live in now. If you really oppose it, keep hammering it through the court system for a final resolution. But I suspect that Lady Justice, while blind, will also be deaf to these specific complaints.

Here’s the video of the full interview so you can judge for yourself.

Blowback