Posted on 06/16/2013 7:19:50 AM PDT by jimjohn
With all the banter going around concerning this ‘rouge element’, we need to take an honest look at what information has been revealed and more important - what makes this leaked information so damaging, and why Snowden is so dangerous?
“Rather...it’s LOTS of LONG-TERM safety we’re talking about. Big difference.”
Based on that, you should prefer random and warrant-less car stops and searches, random and warrant-less home searches.
Heck, why not an NSA camera up your butt?
You have nothing to hide, right?
Why not microchip every citizen so we can track everyone in real time (that one is in Obamacare)?
If trashing the 4th amendment is helpful, why not do exactly the same in every area? You will increase your safety by LOTS. It will be for the children and for you! You will be safer against the evil terrorists.
May I ask, if you are willing to give up your Constitutional Rights and Guarantees that many American founders fought and died for, what are you left to protect against the threat of terrorism? Just your life with no rights? Once you strip away the plain language of the Constitution that guarantees your rights AGAINST the government, how does that make you better off than Russians?
No, favoring some phone surveillance does not automatically translate to favoring full surveillance.
There's no evidence that random car searches, etc. stopped any terror attack. However, phone surveillance has. And if phone surveillance was stopped the terrorists would have free reign to chatter and form plans all they want in one of the easiest ways possible.
I'm not sure why people are so hyped up over this on the right. Did no one know that the Patriot Act was in place? Do people have horror stories of themselves, their neighbors or even distant acquantances being violated? What's changed other than one punk now harbored by communist China (who used to be an Obama supporter and is probably an OWS type) telling us that, yes, the Patriot Act is in effect?
“No, favoring some phone surveillance does not automatically translate to favoring full surveillance.”
If you are willing to trade your Constitutional Rights for safety, you must only want a small amount of this “safety”.
“There’s no evidence that random car searches, etc. stopped any terror attack. However, phone surveillance has.”
You need evidence to know that searching someone’s property, papers, home, vehicles etc. can find things? Random stops and searches will find all kinds of things - open liquor, drugs, illegal weapons, explosives, illegal aliens, and evidence of terrorism. The founders wrote the 4th exactly to prevent warrantless searches - which are abused by gov’t under the guise of keeping you safe. They knew what you do not.
“And if phone surveillance was stopped the terrorists would have free reign to chatter and form plans all they want in one of the easiest ways possible.”
That is why due process makes gov’t present evidence that indicates someone’s communications should be monitored. NON TERRORISTS should not be monitored without evidence, due process and specific places and items mentioned in a warrant.
“I’m not sure why people are so hyped up over this on the right.”
We respect the Constitution. We know it is necessary for freedom.
“Did no one know that the Patriot Act was in place? Do people have horror stories of themselves, their neighbors or even distant acquantances being violated?”
Yes and opposed it. Yes, abuse is happening every day. Are you reading the actual news?
“What’s changed other than one punk now harbored by communist China (who used to be an Obama supporter and is probably an OWS type) telling us that, yes, the Patriot Act is in effect?”
Snowden confirmed our worst fears from the inside. Supposedly Bush ordered monitoring of only international calls - those that had no expectation of privacy. Now the government is verging on totalitarianism by monitoring everything:
Your calls
your credit card purchases
Your movements
your internet usage
etc.
YOU the terrorist. YOU must be monitored 24/7. YOU cannot be trusted. YOU no longer have 4th amendment rights that are sacrosanct. I am not safer because YOU are monitored.
Freedom is more important than America.
I want the safety that stops mega-attacks like 9/11. Apparently many don't care about that anymore or erroneously think that it is no longer a risk.
Random stops and searches will find all kinds of things - open liquor, drugs, illegal weapons, explosives, illegal aliens, and evidence of terrorism.
But, as I said...no need for it since the phone surveillance has been enough to stop the type of attacks that are widely orchestrated.
Again, did you really not know the Patriot act was happening?
Snowden fled to commie China and has an offer for asylum in commie Russia. This tells me EXACTLY what his mentality is.
The two stories have an obvious synergy. The IRS is all over our finances. An evil president has used it to harass political opponents. Now the NSA is building a far more intrusive apparatus. What happens when Obama or an evil successor decides to misuse it?
Even if you don't think Obama is evil, you have to worry that the political winds might shift and bring back Tailgunner Joe and HUAC.
As Snowden said in his initial interview at that Hong Kong hotel, our taxpayer dollars have funded a turnkey tyranny system:
The greatest fear that I have regarding the outcome for America of these disclosures is that nothing will change. People will see in the media all of these disclosures. They'll know the lengths that government is going to to grant themselves powers, unilaterally, to create greater control over American society and global society. But they won't be willing to take the risks necessary to stand up and fight to change things, to force their representatives to actually take a stand in their interests. And in the months ahead, the years ahead, it's only going to get worse. Until, eventually there will be a time where policies will change because the only thing that restricts the activities of the surveillance state are policy. Even our agreements with other sovereign governments, we consider that to be a stipulation of policy rather than a stipulation of law. And, because of that, a new leader will be elected. They'll flip the switch. And they'll say that, because of the crisis, because of the dangers that we face in the world, some new and unpredicted threat, we need more authority, we need more power, and there will be nothing the people can do at that point to oppose it. And it will be turnkey tyranny.
“But, as I said...no need for it since the phone surveillance has been enough to stop the type of attacks that are widely orchestrated. “
And you know this because it is claimed without proof... so the word of the agency that violated the 4th amendment is believable as they justify their crimes?
“I want the safety that stops mega-attacks like 9/11. Apparently many don’t care about that anymore or erroneously think that it is no longer a risk. “
Then why spy on every American, every phone call, every credit card transaction, etc.? They are not terrorists.
‘Again, did you really not know the Patriot act was happening?’
The PA did not authorize violation of the Constitutional guarantees.
“Snowden fled to commie China and has an offer for asylum in commie Russia. This tells me EXACTLY what his mentality is.”
If the US is after you, there are only 2 places to go. Those are the places. I suspect he will only be safe from extradition in China... if he is still alive.
I appreciate that he revealed the truth of what we feared.
“Please, keep the easily checkable anecdotal evidence coming.”
Will do, but please don’t expect I’m going to give a surveillance-statist like you the names involved so you can check up on them.
Young couple from the Ukraine who came here about 15 years ago. She works where I do, has for a dozen years. They owned land and a house in Ukraine, never a hassle. Came here, met the EPA, the Agenda 21 crowd, and the local and Federal police, all in short order after they bought a simple lot and tried to build a new home. Couldn’t believe it, and still talk about the five year nightmare they had to endure.
Vibrant free spirit from East Germany who feels after five years here that she really had a better life there, especially growing up under Communism, a better mix of freedom and security.
Those are the two I know from Communist countries, but if you’d simply like to know about folks from non-Communist lands who came here looking in vain for the land of the free and are now bitter about it, I can talk at length. Of course, the veracity of the info will not be up to your NSA standards.
With Wikileaks, Anonymous, etc it is “cool” to leak secrets these days. I wondered if this isn’t some kind of conditioning to make people become accustomed, even encouraged, to betray their government.
He’s a pretty good example.
First, the papers were not about a current operation — it was about the decisions made earlier about the vietnam war. Embarrassing, but not likely to compromise any ongoing intelligence.
Second, he tried to work through the system. He even tried to get several senators to take up the cause.
And while he DID share it with people without the proper clearance, he had agreements with them not to divulge it. The reporter who actually broke the story essentially lied to Ellsburg and used it against his will.
Once that first reporter started publishing, he then leaked it to another paper — some say to make sure it got out, others say he was getting back at the 1st reporter for stabbing him in the back.
Then he actually turned himself in, willing to take the consequences of his action.
He was tried. The reason he was not convicted is because of Nixon’s dirty tricks against him, including illegal wiretapping. The judge threw out the case because of prosecutorial misconduct, so we don’t know if he would have been convicted otherwise.
As the judge said: “The totality of the circumstances of this case which I have only briefly sketched offend a sense of justice. The bizarre events have incurably infected the prosecution of this case.”
So in summary, his leak involved embarrasing stuff, not active intelligence information. He tried to go through congress. The first publication was against his wishes, and he turned himself in. And his prosecution was derailed by the illegal actions of the Nixon administration.
BTW, there are many cases of people being tried and convicted for release of classified information. Whether any of them involved clear cases of breaking laws is unknown, but at the moment, there is no indication that anything Snowden leaked would actually indicate breaking the law.
“He’s a pretty good example.”
It is still a very slippery slope, would you agree? I do not believe that anyone in the government wants to see a trial of someone who divulged classified information about laws broken by the ones he/she exposed.
If anyone would be found guilty of divulging classifed information for a current operation then the people who broke the law while carring out classified operations would also have to be tried. That is why I believe that the government does not want to see one of this type of case to go to trial.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.