Republicans: Snowden Is 'Dangerous'... to their dreams of a police state

T

Timshel

New member
http://www.newser.com/story/169267/republicans-snowden-is-dangerous.html

(NEWSER) – So far there's been little official reaction to Edward Snowden's revelation, but Peter King was all too ready to come out firing. King released a statement saying the US should "prosecute him to the fullest extent of the law," the Guardian reports. "This is a matter of extraordinary consequence to American intelligence." King then went on CNN and called Snowden "a defector," adding, "This person is dangerous to our country."


Republican Intelligence Committee chairman Mike Rogers echoed that remark, saying Snowden had "released just enough information to literally be dangerous." That comes on the heels of Bill Kristol yesterday cautioning that the NSA situation "is totally different from the IRS abuses, which I think are very serious, and I think it’s very important for conservatives and Republicans to make that distinction," according to Mediaite. Interestingly enough, it seems that Snowden himself is a Republican donor—assuming Ron Paul counts. An "Edward Snowden" made two $250 donations to Paul's cause in 2012, the most recent donation having been made from Hawaii, the Washington Post reports.
 
All this is happening under Obama, because of Obama...and you have the gall to try to drag Republicans into it.....

Your BDS has progressed to a new level....RDS....you're wearing out that crap about blaming others for everything Obama fucks up....not many people

are still buying that bullshit after 5 years of government rule under Democratics and Congressional rule for years before that....
 
SmarterthanYou said:
War is necessary to control the people. King and Kristol are cohorts in the police state advocacy.
Click to expand...


While I find his views on pretty much everything abhorrent, at least King is open and honest about his views. Much of the rest of Congress is too mealy-mouthed to commit one way or the other and end up pretending not to see what they're authorizing and then feigning shock and surprise about what they've allowed the government to do.

You can count on one hand the number of Senators who have spoken up about what the government was doing before the Snowden revelations.
 
NOVA said:
All this is happening under Obama, because of Obama...and you have the gall to try to drag Republicans into it.....

Your BDS has progressed to a new level....RDS....you're wearing out that crap about blaming others for everything Obama fucks up....not many people

are still buying that bullshit after 5 years of government rule under Democratics and Congressional rule for years before that....
Click to expand...


LOL. Here are 2 op-eds from today by former Bush Adminisrtation officials defending the surveillance state:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100...8535492421480524.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...1d09ac-d1c9-11e2-a73e-826d299ff459_story.html
 
The money quote from Thiessen:

Unfortunately, some on the right are joining the cacophony of condemnation from the New York Times and MSNBC. The programs exposed in these leaks did not begin on Barack Obama’s watch. When Obama continues a Bush-era counterterrorism policy, it is not an outrage — it is a victory.

And when those programs are exposed by leaks, it is not whistleblowing — it’s a felony.
Click to expand...


So blow it out your ass, Bravo.
 
Dungheap said:
While I find his views on pretty much everything abhorrent, at least King is open and honest about his views. Much of the rest of Congress is too mealy-mouthed to commit one way or the other and end up pretending not to see what they're authorizing and then feigning shock and surprise about what they've allowed the government to do.

You can count on one hand the number of Senators who have spoken up about what the government was doing before the Snowden revelations.
Click to expand...
so very true, yet they get away with doing this because of the partisanship of most apologists from both sides.
 
Dungheap said:
While I find his views on pretty much everything abhorrent, at least King is open and honest about his views. Much of the rest of Congress is too mealy-mouthed to commit one way or the other and end up pretending not to see what they're authorizing and then feigning shock and surprise about what they've allowed the government to do.

You can count on one hand the number of Senators who have spoken up about what the government was doing before the Snowden revelations.
Click to expand...

I gotta mostly agree with you.

'Bill Kristol yesterday cautioning that the NSA situation "is totally different from the IRS abuses'

Kristol is right about this being 'different'....but its no less totally an abuse of power and unconstitutional in my view...some needs to go to jail over this
abuse, not just lose their jobs......to imagine that terrorists don't realize that communications with Americans isn't being watched is to think they
are stupid......there not.
 
NOVA said:
I gotta mostly agree with you.

'Bill Kristol yesterday cautioning that the NSA situation "is totally different from the IRS abuses'

Kristol is right about this being 'different'....but its no less totally an abuse of power and unconstitutional in my view...some needs to go to jail over this
abuse, not just lose their jobs......to imagine that terrorists don't realize that communications with Americans isn't being watched is to think they
are stupid......there not.
Click to expand...


If no one went to jail over the Bush Administration's warrantless wiretapping in violation of the law, no one is going to jail for the NSA doing stuff Congress said it court do for which it got a court order.
 
Dungheap said:
The money quote from Thiessen:

When Obama continues a Bush-era counterterrorism policy, it is not an outrage — it is a victory.

And when those programs are exposed by leaks, it is not whistleblowing — it’s a felony.
Click to expand...


Bush NEVER did anything like this....and it is whistle-blowing....it bringing to the publics attention the Obama administrations abuse of power...bordering on criminality.

criminality with the IRS, with the data mining, with fast and furious and with Benghazi....someone needs to go to jail...quite a few actually.
 
Dungheap said:
Eh, I think they get away with it because, unfortunately, most people don't really give a shit.
Click to expand...
for some, definitely. I think the greater reason for this though is they don't care because of partisanship. look at the way things are treated on this very board. obvious abuses of the constitution are accepted because of who is in the white house, but 8 years ago, it was the very same way, just by the other side.
 
NOVA said:
All this is happening under Obama, because of Obama...and you have the gall to try to drag Republicans into it.....

Your BDS has progressed to a new level....RDS....you're wearing out that crap about blaming others for everything Obama fucks up....not many people

are still buying that bullshit after 5 years of government rule under Democratics and Congressional rule for years before that....
Click to expand...

I did not try to drag them into it. They jumped in themselves. It is a fact that this started under Bush and you were warned about it.

It should be stopped and not just devolve into another anti-Obama football for faux limited government advocates, like you. Rand Paul might win back some support if he can affect some real changes, but I am doubtful he will be able to with King, McCain and other Republican supporters of the police state.
 
Dungheap said:
Eh, I think they get away with it because, unfortunately, most people don't really give a shit.
Click to expand...

I think it is a combination. The obvious partisanship of apologists like Bravo makes many people quickly lose interest. They see it for what it often is, a political football. People like Bravo don't care about this issue or the AP wiretaps unless they can hang it around Obama's neck.

I am hopeful that the few, seemingly, sincere defenders of liberty like Justin Amash and Rand Paul will actually do something about this or at least bring the proper context and show people that it is not just partisanship. Somehow, my tepid support for Amash and Paul marks me as an obvious Obama supporter to some of the idiots here.
 
Dungheap said:
LOL. Here are 2 op-eds from today by former Bush Adminisrtation officials defending the surveillance state:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100...8535492421480524.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...1d09ac-d1c9-11e2-a73e-826d299ff459_story.html
Click to expand...


From your link...

"Nor do these programs violate the law. Start with the Constitution. The applicable provisions lie in two clauses in the Fourth Amendment. The first bars "unreasonable searches and seizures." The second provides that "no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause" established by affidavit, and it requires that warrants describe with particularity what or who is to be seized, and from where.


So Obama says there is 'probably cause' involving everyone living the US ?
The warrants describe with particularity what is to be seized ?....Does that mean ALL COMMUNICATIONS ?
The warrants describe with particularity from where it is to seized?.....Does that mean EVERYWHERE ? THE INTERNET USAGE ? YOUR TELEPHONE ? YOUR EMAIL ?

Dung...just go back to sticking your hear in the sand....you gotta be mostly blind anyway.
 
NOVA said:
From your link...

"Nor do these programs violate the law. Start with the Constitution. The applicable provisions lie in two clauses in the Fourth Amendment. The first bars "unreasonable searches and seizures." The second provides that "no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause" established by affidavit, and it requires that warrants describe with particularity what or who is to be seized, and from where.


So Obama says there is 'probably cause' involving everyone living the US ?
The warrants describe with particularity what is to be seized ?....Does that mean ALL COMMUNICATIONS ?
The warrants describe with particularity from where it is to seized?.....Does that mean EVERYWHERE ? THE INTERNET USAGE ? YOUR TELEPHONE ? YOUR EMAIL ?

Dung...just go back to sticking your hear in the sand....you gotta be mostly blind anyway.
Click to expand...


I love how I'm the one sticking my head in the sand when you quote George W. Bush's attorney general defending the surveillance state while pretending George W Bush had nothing to do with it. LOL.
 
Professor Baxter said:
http://www.newser.com/story/169267/republicans-snowden-is-dangerous.html

(NEWSER) – So far there's been little official reaction to Edward Snowden's revelation, but Peter King was all too ready to come out firing. King released a statement saying the US should "prosecute him to the fullest extent of the law," the Guardian reports. "This is a matter of extraordinary consequence to American intelligence." King then went on CNN and called Snowden "a defector," adding, "This person is dangerous to our country."


Republican Intelligence Committee chairman Mike Rogers echoed that remark, saying Snowden had "released just enough information to literally be dangerous." That comes on the heels of Bill Kristol yesterday cautioning that the NSA situation "is totally different from the IRS abuses, which I think are very serious, and I think it’s very important for conservatives and Republicans to make that distinction," according to Mediaite. Interestingly enough, it seems that Snowden himself is a Republican donor—assuming Ron Paul counts. An "Edward Snowden" made two $250 donations to Paul's cause in 2012, the most recent donation having been made from Hawaii, the Washington Post reports.
Click to expand...


US officials say this every time there's a public discussion that could limit their authority. US officials also provide misleading or directly false assertions about the value of these programs, as they did just recently with the Zazi case, which court documents clearly show was not unveiled by PRISM.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top