Posted by Tina
Cliff Kincaid of Accuracy in Media suggests that Edward Snowden, the NSA whistleblower who leaked secret documents on security surveillance to the press, is a spy:
The fingerprints of America’s enemies and adversaries are all over the disclosures about the NSA’s terrorist surveillance program. It is significant that NSA contract employee Edward Snowden would flee to Hong Kong—controlled by China—and that he would select Glenn Greenwald, a far-left columnist, as his mouthpiece.
Even CNN is questioning the motivation behind this security leak and quoted Bowden from “The Guardian” article:
“The government has granted itself power it is not entitled to. There is no public oversight. The result is people like myself have the latitude to go further than they are allowed to,” Snowden told the paper.
Persons like himself? Does he realize he just admitted to being a man of questionable character? This man had other choices. He could have expressed his concerns to Congress.
Greenwald insists that terrorists already know “we surveil their communications” and “…the only things we damaged are the reputation of American political officials, not national security.”
Sounds like the intent on Greenwalds part was to give America a big black eye…Snowden still has not turned up after leaving his Hong Kong hotel…well, at least you and I don’t know his whereabouts.
What do you think guys, friend or foe?
Snowden has revealed that gooferment is overreaching. Again. He hasn’t gone into details, but every American should realize that they are a potential target for a goofernment running amok.
Trust in goofernment is at an all-time low, and deservedly so with all of the shenanigans recently revealed. And as yet, NOBODY has been fired, or jailed.
The excuse that this snooping is to find terrorists didn’t work with the Boston bombers, who were all over the internet and cell phones. So then, if it doesn’t work with terrorists, WHOM is it targeting?
This story isn’t over.
But Obama said, “Osama Bin Ladin was dead and the terrorist were on the run.”
If he was telling us the truth before last November then those building must be for US citizens data information.
Right? Cuz, we do soooooo trust our government to always tell us the truth.
I’ll even bet if Petraeus and Allen were asked how their emails became available, that ended their careers, they’d tell us a very interesting story.
I have been kicking this question around in my head from the second I heard about this guy. I have no idea what his motivation was but I can understand why he didn’t go to some committee to blow the whistle. According to “officials” everyone knew about it, they were ok with it. So by going to a committee and blowing the whistle would have been pointless.
This guy did us the citizens a service by letting this ugly cat out of the bag. I really like this guy for a couple of reasons. First off he saw a wrong and did something about it. Second, he pissed off Obama. Third he has the MSM in quandary they don’t know what to report on him and I love it.
It seems to be if he were a true spy he would have reported back to whoever he is working for and kept in working.
Oh and one other reason I like this guy is he was a believer in the “hope and change” and saw it for the bullshit it was.
I am waiting to hear from the usual suspects on this new scandal.
J.S. You are absolutely right! The Wall Street Journal reports:
Also…when the President goes to Europe this summer he’s liable to get an earful from Angela Merkel:
Obama took a moment to whine that nobody objected when Bush was president (wrong) and assured us, according to Big Peace, that “his administration undertook an overhaul of these programs when he took office.”
Isn’t it that “overhaul” that seems to be at the heart of the problem?
“This man had other choices. He could have expressed his concerns to Congress.”
This may be the most unintentionally funny sentence written about politics this year.
Cliff Kincaid’s baseless claim that Snowden is a spy is unsurprising, since in a previous article for the Orwellian-named “Accuracy in Media,” Kincaid also made false claims about another whistleblower, Bradley Manning:
“As some alleged “conservatives” pretend that homosexuals are just like us, we are witnesses to a case of an openly homosexual soldier, Bradley Manning, recently admitting to leaking classified information to WikiLeaks. As Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council (FRC) has pointed out, Manning was politically motivated to do this damage to the United States. His anger over the military services’ homosexual policy is what led him to betray his country.”
http://www.aim.org/aim-column/cpac-and-the-conservatives/
This is a complete lie. Manning was primarily motivated by witnessing human rights violations and collateral damage done by the U.S. during the Iraq War. While he was also struggling with gender identity issues at the time, his main purpose was to expose the truth about atrocities he witnessed, not to further a political agenda. DADT had almost nothing to do with it. This is very well documented.
But that’s not the worst thing Kincaid says in that article; the whole thing should be alarming to anyone who isn’t filled with contempt for gay people. In the same piece, Kincaid argues that “there is no such thing as a ‘gay conservative’ unless the term ‘conservative’ has lost all meaning,” and quotes another author uncritically who argues that decriminalization of homosexuality was a “mistake,” because one reason civilizations fall is the acceptance of homosexuality (there is not a shred of historical evidence to support this ridiculous canard). He also says this:
“Rather than debate whether “gay conservatives” exist or ought to have prominent speaking roles, CPAC should be sponsoring a panel on the dangers of the homosexual movement and why some of its members seem prone to violence, terror, and treason.”
Kincaid offers no evidence that gays are more likely to be “prone to violence, terror, and treasion;” in fact, statistically speaking, gays are more likely to be the victims of violence than the perpetrators. The only two examples Kincaid gives are Bradley Manning (who had no intention of aiding enemies of the state, as even the man who turned him in confessed in court) and Fred Corkins, the extremist who opened fire at the FRC.
Kincaid is also an open proponent of Uganda’s “Kill the Gays” bill. Here is an article in which he expresses condemnation for a Republican congressman who opposes the bill. Note that while he admits that the bill imposes the death penalty on people for being gay, he does not once express any problems with this, and even calls it a “pro-family” bill(!):
http://www.aim.org/aim-column/odd-couple-of-coburn-and-franken-condemn-uganda/
Kincaid is also a birther who believes Obama’s real father was Frank Marshall Davis.
AIM also still contends that the Clintons had Vince Foster murdered, a conspiracy theory so thoroughly disproven that even Ann Coulter calls it “discredited” and a “hoax.”
So, really, Tina. I say this as a favor. The next time you post such a serious claim–accusing someone of beinbg a spy–it would seriously behoove you to examine the credibility of the person making that claim. To do otherwise is grossly irresponsible.
Furthermore, your linking to AIM and Kincaid is yet another thing to consider in the discussion of perceptions of bigotry and the Republican “brand.” Over the past few weeks, most of the conservatives on this blog have denied any responsibility in creating the impression that Republicans have a bigotry problem. You’ve argued that this is a “false narrative” perpetrated by the left. But here we have you linking to man, and an organization, that spreads lies about gay individuals; says gay people are not allowed in the conservative movement; that gays are more prone to violence and terror than other groups; that the homosexual movement is a “monster” bent on “infiltrating” the conservative movement; that; advocates laws in foreign countries that put homosexuals to death; and says that decriminalization of homosexuality here in America was a “mistake.”
And this is a man, and a group, that enjoys a place of respect in the conservative movement, and is viewed by many as a voice of truth and “accuracy” in the face of a slanted media.
If you don’t see how THAT justifies the impression among many that the conservative movement is one that tolerates and promotes bigotry–and if you still believe this perception is unwarranted and merely created by your political enemies, rather than by your own movement’s actions and public statements–then I really don’t know what else to tell you.
Your. Movement. Has. A. Bigotry. Problem. It’s time to deal with it.
The Left seem’s ok with this whole NSA mess, it makes me laugh. Obama already knows that we on the Right can’t stand his worthless @ss and have no problem screaming it from the rooftops. He is worried about the 50 million degenerate piles of $hit that voted for him. The ones who committed felonies to get him elected.
In a criminal enterprise the criminals know how the cops will act and they deal with it. What they really keep an eye on are the scum bags below the boss. Sleep well liberal scum bags!
I think Obama has a ton of dirt on a ton of people Left and Right who are unworthy of our trust and sooner or later this thing is going to bust and it will be time to clean house.
I also think our next President should send in a B-2 and flatten that NSA facility, damn the cost.
Oh and one other thing, hasn’t the UN been trying for years to get control of the Internet? Seem’s like they have been handed a golden opportunity thanks to Obama and this guy.
Chris: “This is a complete lie. Manning was primarily motivated by witnessing human rights violations and collateral damage done by the U.S. during the Iraq War.”
Okay, that’s what he said.
It doesn’t mean there weren’t other motivating factors. In truth no one can know his deeper motivations. His couldn’t have been a casual decision. A lot of people were “upset” about the war; almost none were motivated to betray their country. His actions suggest more deeply rooted emotional or sociological challenges. (That’s an opinion)
“The next time you post such a serious claim–accusing someone of beinbg a spy–it would seriously behoove you to examine the credibility of the person making that claim. To do otherwise is grossly irresponsible.”
If you had read for comprehension, rather than a rabid need to pounce, you would know that I did not “accuse” anyone of anything. I posted an article making a suggestion that he might be a spy. It’s an opinion.
I didn’t offer my opinion because I don’t know enough about it. I did say that Greenwald seems to be motivated by giving the US a black eye and I did suggest that Snowden seemed to admit to having a character issue.
“it would seriously behoove you to examine the credibility of the person making that claim.”
It would behoove you to participate by expressing your opinion on the topic rather than playing hall monitor and pretending you have the authority to pronounce guilt on the opinions of others…or teach me from your lesson plan.
Kincaid is an American citizen. he has a right to his opinion just like you do. I’m not afraid of opinions and I don’t think you should be either.
Of course being a modern progressive your own motivation is most likely to control speech.
We don’t do that here.
“…that spreads lies about gay individuals”
OPINIONS! He has opinions. Get over it!
“…If you don’t see how THAT justifies the impression among many that the conservative movement is one that tolerates and promotes bigotry…”
I see that it promotes free speech and open debate. What’s your problem?
If you cannot see that you and your progressive, underhanded, snooping, immoral, targeting, branding, intolerant, radically bigoted, hall monitoring pals are attempting to stifle free speech you should try reading a few books on America that weren’t written by anti-American propagandists from the progressive movement. Your buddies are so intolerant that they stoop to engaging in slimy, questionable activities to stifle the political opposition and their votes and ruin the reputations of anyone who happens to disagree with them.
From my perspective you and your ilk are sorry excuses as Americans…you can take the boot thuggery and hall monitoring and stuff it!
“Your. Movement. Has. A. Bigotry. Problem.”
Care to borrow a mirror?
Peggy: “I’ll even bet if Petraeus and Allen were asked how their emails became available, that ended their careers, they’d tell us a very interesting story.”
Ahhh, Peggy, you are paying attention! The corruption is so rampant that it’s hard to tell who’s doing what to whom…or is it who? Whatever!
The Hillary State Department sex scandal is another curiosity.
Leadership starts at the top…but worse yet…America has a severe character problem.
This administration can and would stoop to anything.
Toby thanks for the thoughtful remarks.
I’m in turmoil because there is a justified security issue here. We have an unconventional enemy that uses unconventional methods to wage war. The tools we have to counter them are extremely sensitive in terms of privacy and so require loyalty to our country, character to uphold stringent standards, and a sacred commitment by what we hope are patriotic Americans who are charged with working to keep us safe. My dad kept secrets from WWII for his entire life and he would never have dreamed of betraying our country from either perspective!
Unfortunately, we can no longer count on people to have the character and integrity necessary to hold top secret positions. If they aren’t security leakers or betrayers they are morally corrupt and using the technology for nefarious reasons.
The basic problem for me is lack of character. I’m not entirely sure this guy has heroic motivation…ego maybe.
As far as I can tell, this guy had a GED and he was a low-level person in a defense contractor company but he still made well over $122,000 a year. I would love to know what the people above him make and he had access to a lot of information. Sorry, but I’m not buying into this argument that privatization saves us so much when a high school drop out can make this kind of cash doing government work. And now they are building a big data center in Utah. Sounds like pork to me. Who approves that money?
The other day our pathetic Congress voted to defund ACORN. ACORN has been out of business for years. Idiots. Can they please do some work for the people they were elected to serve?
Tina, I am not trying to “control speech.” That is a ridiculous charge that you use as an attempt to shut down criticism of anyone on your side of the aisle. Kincaid has every right to say what he said. By the same token, I have the right to call him a dick for it. To mistake that for some kind of censorship is severely misguided. And to repeatedly call me “intolerant” for calling out bigoted speech is backwards, and shows that, to you, the only kind of bigotry that exists is bigotry against conservatives. It is all political with you. Your total inability to admit when someone on your side has done or said something wrong does not reveal good moral character.
Certainly you understand that freedom of speech does not mean freedom from criticism. You have no problem criticizing speech from Democrats that you find objectionable. I will sometimes disagree with you that a statement was objectionable, and I’ll offer a defense if I think the speaker was right. But I don’t pretend like the entire enterprise of judging people based on the opinions they express in public is somehow off-limits, corrupt, bullying, or tyrannical.
Like I said, I informed you about Kincaid’s past writings as a favor to you. You don’t want the Republican party to be branded as racist, sexist, or homophobic? Neither do I! I would love to move on from such tired battles. But, in order to do that, Republicans have to start rejecting the most racist, sexist, and homophobic voices in their party–not giving them prominent positions of power, not making excuses for them when they say bigoted things, not trying to justify bigotry under the guise of mere
“opinion.”
When the man who runs one of your movement’s most influential websites all but hangs a sign on the door saying “Gays need not apply,” I don’t understand how you aren’t concerned by that. Unless you agree with Kincaid that gay people cannot, by definition, be conservative, I would think you would be concerned about alienating a growing voting block. Why don’t you reject his views and say they don’t represent the majority of Republicans? (I don’t believe they do, but I think this attitude is too widely accepted among Republicans in power.) Do you want your party to be a big tent again? If so, you should recognize that there are influential Republicans who are standing in the way of that goal. But you’d rather blame Democrats for your inability to reach left-leaning voters. Republicans are as much to blame for this failure; many of them, like Kincaid, purposefully ignore or demean large groups of potential voters.
“It doesn’t mean there weren’t other motivating factors. In truth no one can know his deeper motivations.”
Well, yes, which is why no one should simply invent deeper motivations and then apply them to Manning with no evidence whatsoever. Agree or disagree?
You seem to use this defense a lot when conservative speakers make things up that can be neither proven or disproven. “Well, it could be true” is not a good excuse for making a baseless assertion. Stating that Bradley Manning was motivated by DADT with no evidence, while leaving out his actual stated motivation, is dishonest, regardless of whether it “might” be true. Agree or disagree?
“A lot of people were “upset” about the war; almost none were motivated to betray their country.”
First of all, “a lot” of people hadn’t seen the info Manning was privy to, until he released it. Remember, the most damning thing Manning released was a video of American soldier attacking a van full of journalists and children, while joking about it as if they were playing a video game. This would be enough for a decent man to release this information. The public has a right to know the cost of warfare.
Second of all, I don’t agree at all that Manning “betrayed his country.” He may have betrayed his government, but as a small-government conservative, I hope you can appreciate the difference. Manning did his patriotic duty to his fellow Americans by releasing this information.
“If you had read for comprehension, rather than a rabid need to pounce, you would know that I did not “accuse” anyone of anything. I posted an article making a suggestion that he might be a spy. It’s an opinion.”
I’ll remember that if you are ever baselessly accused of being a spy, Tina. Come on. You have to realize that repeating an assertion like that, as if this were a game of telephone and not a person’s life we’re talking about here, you are being irresponsible. Even if you don’t explicitly say something yourself, linking to a non-credible source who makes baseless accusations with no evidence is wrong. Why is that so hard to understand?
I, too, blame the country’s current lack of morals. It seems that in the Internet Age, some people seem to think they can say anything, about anyone, at any time, and not face any social consequences for doing so. They seem to think they are entitled to be completely free from criticism even as they attack others, and that they should never be held accountable for spreading lies and baseless accusations about people.
“I didn’t offer my opinion because I don’t know enough about it. I did say that Greenwald seems to be motivated by giving the US a black eye”
Why? Because he has a different opinion than you? Why are you trying to control Greenwald’s speech?
Do you see how those are completely ridiculous and useless questions, meant to avoid any and all engagement with Greenwald’s actual expressed positions? I disagree with your assessment of Greenwald, but I don’t actually believe you are violating his constitutional rights by expressing that assessment; that would be absurd.
Tina, even the article you linked to contains a number of needless swipes at gays. Here is the second paragraph:
“Greenwald, an open homosexual now living with his “husband” in Brazil, came to our attention in 2009 when he proudly received an award named after I.F. Stone, a leftist journalist exposed as a Soviet agent.”
How is the fact that Greenwald is an “open homosexual” (and who the hell even still uses that terminology?) at all relevant to this story? Why the scare quotes around the word “husband?” Kincaid is absolutely OBSESSED with gay people, and devotes a substantial portion of this article, purportedly about accusations of Snowden being a Chinese spy, to airing his already well established greivances with homosexuality.
These should be red flags to you when you consider linking to someone. Again, I say this not to play “hall monitor.” I say it because I believe the unhealthy state of the Republican party today is unhealthy for our entire nation. You don’t have to take my advice; I can’t make you. But I can try and make you aware that, when people on the fense see voices like Kincaid’s treated by other conservatives as not only credible, but as a lone voice of truth challenging the mainstream media, it’s going to give those people negative impressions of conservatives, and make them less likely to want to listen to your points of view. And when you’ve alienated everyone but your core voting block of elderly whites, you’ll have no one to blame but yourselves.
Wow, he’s also wrong about I.F. Stone being “exposed as a Soviet agent.” Many have theorized about this, but it was never proven:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I._F._Stone#VENONA_project_decrypts:_Agent_.22BLIN.22:_a_question_of_identity
Has Cliff Kincaid ever been right about anything? Ever?
Toby, I mostly agree with your assessment of the whistleblower. It seems like this was the right thing to do.
You are right about many (but not all) leftists being OK with the NSA spying under Obama. This alarming Pew poll shows that, when asked in 2006 whether such surveillance was justified, a majority of Republicans said yes and a majority of Democrats said no. Now, the opposite is true (although the Democrats are more evenly split).
http://www.amptoons.com/blog/2013/06/11/partisan-bias-and-nsa-surveillance/
As Ampersand writes, “Basically, very large portions of both parties alter their view on NSA surveillance based on who’s in the White House. Good thing that we can be sure the opposing party will never, ever win an election again, right?”
Princess, I’ve missed your perspective here.
Sorry, I made a mistake in the last comments. It isn’t Democrats who are more evenly split about the acceptability of NSA surveillance under the Obama administration, it’s Republicans. So in this case, both sides are being hypocritical about this issue, but the Democrats are being MORE hypocritical.
Chris: “…at all relevant to this story?”
Was it pulled into the story by me or was it you that has now pulled it into this story? It may or may not be relevant, I don’t know. If this pair, Snowden & Greenwald share a grudge against our government for issues related to their sexual orientation they might have conspired to do this to hurt the government. The point is we do not know very much at this time.
“hese should be red flags to you when you consider linking to someone.”
Only if I considered myself the hall monitor for speech in America, which I don’t. I do my best to let people speak freely knowing I will not always agree with them. For instance, I don’t discount everything you have to say just because you hold differing views than I have…hint, hint!
“I believe the unhealthy state of the Republican party today is unhealthy for our entire nation.”
That’s a bit arrogant.
The R party is in the midst of a battle for it’s soul. This happens from time to time in politics. The dominant radical progressives currently controlling the Democrat Party haven’t done much for its brand. I suggest you clean up the stuff in your own barn before you go preaching to others. The progressives can lay claim to a lot of destruction in America.
“But I can try and make you aware”
Don’t bother, there is nothing wrong with my awareness that you could influence.
“…when people on the fense see voices like Kincaid’s>>>”
If you were sincere in your concerns for “America” you would have let this aspect of the article remain off of the PS site. Since you chose to make it an issue here, even though I did not, your intentions and motives are suspect. Sorry pal, you aren’t exactly a good example for people on the fence yourself.
Have you an opinion regarding the actual subject of the post? Friend or Foe?
“…but as a lone voice of truth…”
Oh please, can the adolescent drama. Lone voice! Phftttt!
“…make them less likely to want to listen to your points of view.”
You assume everyone else is just like you.
If a person has little curiosity and strong bias, and if they have been trapped in a particular box, there’s a good chance they won’t listen to you in some cases or to me in others. If they are willing to take what they can use and discard the rest they will find value. I don’t need to create a generation filled with identical clone-like people who all think exactly alike. Progressives apparently do.
“And when you’ve alienated everyone but your core voting block of elderly whites, you’ll have no one to blame but yourselves.”
You really are full of yourself!
Our readers should know that there are a lot of very fine young people that can and do hear the conservative message and they share it quite well with others in their age groups:
Young America’s Foundation
Teen Age Republicans
College Republican National Committee
“elderly whites”
But you’re not bigoted or biased, right Chris? You are one of those tolerant, inclusive…totally phony…progressives!
The GOP had more minorities on stage at the last convention that the Democrats had. GWB had more minorities in his administration that Obama has had. It’s incredible how progressives dismiss the very fine, capable minorities that call themselves republican/conservative. Perhaps the real problem is the numbers are growing. and that’s partly because, the progressive party is permanently stuck in adolescence…the age group with a heart (emotions) that is usually liberal, irresponsible, emotionally driven, demanding, and whiney…until reality slaps them up side the head…at which time they begin to become conservative.
Thanks Chris, you have illustrated quite perfectly how the Republican brand has been tarnished by incessant yammering and profiling by the PC, hall monitoring, Saul Alinsky radicals in the Democrat Party.
Progressives are destroyers, as evidenced by the current state of our economy…with a deep psychological need to control.
Most young people are smart enough to figure it out if they bother to compare.
Condemning people for advocating that gays be put to death is not “PC.” It’s just the right thing to do. If you don’t see that, then you have no grounds to lecture anyone on proper moral behavior.
“The R party is in the midst of a battle for it’s soul.”
Yes, indeed: will the party continue to tolerate extreme bigotry, or will it crack down on the fringe extremists, like Buckley did with the John Birch Society? That is the battle that matters most for the party’s future, and its soul. Which side will you be on, Tina?
Chris the Democrat rank and file booed God and voted him off the platform at the convention in 08 and the leadership had to quickly put God back in (against their wishes) fearful that such a move would lose Obama the Christian/black Christian/religious vote.
God fearing, albeit at times sinful, is far superior to a party that would seriously consider denouncing God entirely…and in a country that is 75-80% Christian and less than 2% atheist pure suicide politically speaking. Soul searching trumps godlessness every time.
And by the way you are the one “lecturing” on a topic that is not under consideration. Buzz off!
Regarding I.F. Stone and his communist ties:
Ron rodash – P J Media:
I.F. Stone, Soviet Agent, Case Closed, John Earl Haynes, Commentary Magazine:
The Commentary piece is long but contains information like the following taken from official documents and papers:
Not sure if he’s a friend or foe right now. Too soon to tell. I want to hear more about him and his motive before I commit. I want to believe he’s a modern day Paul Revere sounding the alarm that we are under attack. Just not sure yet.
I don’t fault him for not going to congress, because they’re a part of the problem. Who was he going to trust enough to go to?
His GED also doesn’t concern me, because there very “bright and bored” students who drop out of high school all of the time. Their intelligence and maturity are beyond what’s offered and they need a more challenging curriculum and setting.
Princess, ACORN is still around and as strong as ever. They just changed their name.
An ACORN by Any Other Name Still Smells Like an ACORN, Critics Say:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/03/25/similar-groups-acorns-place-republicans-foul/
ACORN shell of itself as it renames office:
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/acorn_shell_of_itself_as_it_renames_8lgPE13txxVbLsUqYKZnmN
ACORN considered name change:
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1109/29990.html
ACORN Getting A Makeover: Group Looking For New Name, New Branding After Video Scandal:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/15/acorn-getting-a-makeover_n_499522.html
Princess ACORN is not out of business they have just dispersed and now exist under other names…but I’m with you, what could the defunding of ACORN accomplish if officially it doesn’t exist under that name?
I agree that it’s curious that a serial dropout with a GED could be worth that kind of money…or, for that matter, be eligible for a security clearance at that level!
Peggy I’d be very interested in what you see as “the problem”. I’m not comfortable with the surveillance apparatus but according to some the original law has been compromised under this administration. So is it the system or is it corruption that is the problem?
If it’s the system what do you suggest we do instead?
A calm assessment by Max Boot, Commentary on the other options open to Snowden:
Max Boot is a leading military historian and foreign-policy analyst.
I really want to comment on this one, but I can’t. So, if you will allow me this one time I need to just stay out of it. All previous posts re my comments on such programs and or persons have been pulled. I have no position. First for everything I guess…(said biting my lip) -Jack
Tina, The problem as I see it is this whole data mining isn’t about keeping America safe, it’s about power and control. If they wanted to really keep America safe they would go after the known instead of net fishing for the unknown.
Who in congress could Snowden go to? He lived in Hawaii with democrat representatives. No help there. Ninety percent or so of congress say they knew nothing about NSA, PRISM or what was going on in Utah. So, no help there either. The ten percent or so who did know would have either thought he was a nut case or would have turned him in. Remember he had access to each and everyone congress member’s data and information. The handful who really knew about it were serving on the committees and approving the funding. No help there for sure. Where did all of the funds come from to build that facility and where are the future funds going to come from to staff and maintain it? It will cost trillions over the years.
We know there are over 15,000 students in the US on expired visas. And it’s not just limited to students. There are visitors, business and other types of visas. Obama’s own aunt and uncle are here on expired visas. This information should be make it easy to find these individuals. They’re not living in caves on an isolated mountain, but right here amongst us. We know terrorist from all over the world are crossing our borders. Finish closing the border.
Instead of spending the time and money going after tens of thousands of individuals we know are or could be the source of terrorist attacks congress, the Bush and Obama administrations decided to gather data on 300 million US citizens who generate billions of data each and every day. That’s not just crazy it’s just stupid. What will our population be in ten years? Probably more. What will the daily data collection be then? In the trillions?
We had the opportunity of looking for the needle in a haystack, if we had gone after the known. Now, there’s a field the size of Nevada filled with haystacks. We’re looking for the handful of individuals who want to do us harm. And every day the population grows and data producing products are purchased another haystack/s is added.
I believe some, if not all, of the 9/11 hijackers and the Boston bombers were here on expired visas or in violation of their student visas‘.
One of the authors of the Patriot Act said what is happening today with this data collection was not the original intent of the act.
From Huffington Post:
“Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.), one of the authors of the Patriot Act, said in a Thursday letter to Attorney General Eric Holder that he is “extremely troubled” by the National Security Agency’s seizure of the phone records of millions of Verizon customers through a secret court ruling.
“I do not believe the released FISA order is consistent with the requirements of the Patriot Act,” Sensenbrenner wrote. “How could the phone records of so many innocent Americans be relevant to an authorized investigation as required by the Act?”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/06/jim-sensenbrenner-nsa_n_3397440.html
Bonus: Biden in 2006.
“I don’t have to listen to your phone calls to know what you’re doing. If I know every single phone call you made, I’m able to determine every single person you talked to. I can get a pattern about your life that is very, very intrusive,” he told CBS News.
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/06/11/joe-biden-goes-off-on-very-very-intrusive-domestic-spyingin-2006/
Information is power and the temptation to abuse that power is a situation no man or woman should be placed in. I’ve already given two examples where that power may have been used against individuals after Benghazi. Individuals are telling how the IRS targeted them personally after making donations to certain candidates. Businesses like Gibson guitar have been almost shut down because they made donations to a candidate of one party while other guitar manufacturers who imported the same wood, but made contributions to the other political party went untouched.
The IRS abuse has been going on since 2010 even though individuals told members of congress it was happening. Individuals brought before congress are constantly lying, saying they don’t remember, they don’t know who did it or who is responsible. A paper trail of letters and emails link Lois Lerner to the targeted conservative groups, yet she declares she’s done nothing wrong and then takes the 5th to protect herself.
There could not be enough controls put in place to guarantee it won’t happen again. Today the democrats are in control and some day the republicans will be again. This NSA power grab, total control began under Bush, where will it end if we don’t uphold our existing laws and constitution.
Keeping us safe is just another lie they expect us to believe.
Anyone else having computer problems? Mine’s response time has really slowed down in the past few day. Just saying….
“Chris the Democrat rank and file booed God”
You’re wrong, and stupidly so. The debate was over not only whether the word “God” should be included in the platform, but whether to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel even though it is disputed territory. It’s unclear which of those was the main target of the “boos,” since both moves were passed at the same time. Regardless, there is a big difference between booing the idea of a political party taking a position on the existence of God in a non-theocratic country, and “booing God.” If you can’t see that difference, it’s because you’re being willfully obtuse.
“God fearing, albeit at times sinful, is far superior to a party that would seriously consider denouncing God entirely…”
Believing that the party platform should not include references to God is not “denouncing God entirely.” That is just silly. I know many liberals who believe in God and go to church frequently, who still believe that the word “God” should not be in the party’s platform. You do know that the word “God” does not appear once in the Constitution, right? Do you also believe that shows the Founders “denounced God?”
More importantly, whether or not a political party’s platform includes the word “God” says zilch about morality. I know you believe that morality cannot exist without God, but there is plenty of philosophical disagreement about that.
“Soul searching trumps godlessness every time.”
But you’re clearly NOT doing any soul-searching; instead, you tried to distract from your own party’s moral failings by bringing up a completely unrelated perceived moral failure on the part of the Democrats. You ALWAYS do this. You are pathologically unable to critically examine your own party’s flaws.
“And by the way you are the one “lecturing” on a topic that is not under consideration. Buzz off!”
Tina, by continuing to link to extremist sources that promote bigotry, you are essentially plopping down a 500 lb elephant in the room. A 500 lb elephant in the room who won’t stop taking massive dumps on the floor. Then, whenever I point out that “Hey, it kind of smells in here,” you get mad at me and act like I am the one with the problem.
The “PC” charge (also known as the “How dare you be so intolerant of my intolerance!” maneuver) is the last defense for those who have no real defense against charges of bigotry. It is a tactic designed to shut down criticism. You can’t defende Kincaid’s horrific comments, so instead, you act like anyone who criticizes them is somehow doing something wrong. By doing this, you are essentially admitting that you think promoting bigotry is perfectly acceptable, but pointing out bigotry is unacceptable. You have no problem with Kincaid arguing that gays should get the death penalty; in fact, perversely, you see it evidence that your party is more tolerant of free speech and a diversity of opinions (even though Kincaid himself is arguing AGAINST diversity in the conservative movement, by explicitly saying that only heterosexuals can be conservative).
If you don’t want every discussion to devolve into accusations of bigotry, and if you don’t want other people to believe that you are a bigot, there’s a very easy solution to that: stop linking to bigots. I know you see that advice as some kind of huge infringement of your free speech rights, but that’s stupid, and you should stop seeing the world that way.
My criticisms of the author of the piece you linked to are perfectly on-topic, because as I have pointed out, the author has made false accusations against whistleblowers before, and seems to have an axe to grind with Glenn Greenwald for existing while gay, which, again, Kincaid thinks should be a crime punishable by death. I will probably never be able to convince you of this, but credibility and valid sources are things that matter.
What if we are all being played? This thing just does not smell right. This is the second time a low level person has been in a position to obtain very high level info.
Toby, it’s not exactly how it appears. Some truth – some lying. Best I can say.
would y’all loosen them straps on this Chris persons straight jacket. The boy needs a better blood flow’n to his head, needs to wake up some of those cells on the RIGHT side o’his thinker. How in the name of Gods good Glory did Gays and racists scamper into this thing about NSA. And then we git sucker punched with “The R party is in the midst of a battle for it’s soul.” geez, That boy ain’t right
Chris: “…there is a big difference between booing the idea of a political party taking a position on the existence of God in a non-theocratic country, and “booing God.”
Oh really? You wrote just before that: “The debate was over not only whether the word “God” should be included…” and also “It’s unclear which of those was the main target of the ‘boos’…”
By your own words it would be reasonable to assume God was booed or at least made quite unwelcome in Democrat gatherings and policy. The fact that we are not a theocratic nation is irrelevant.
“by continuing to link to extremist sources that promote bigotry…”
The excerpt I sited had nothing to do with homosexuality or Mr. Kincaid. It posed a question entirely unrelated.
It is YOU, once again, who chooses to bring a different subject and your attitude, INAPPROPRIATELY, into this discussion. Your intent remains suspect…and we are done.
If you wish to conduct yourself as a bully, an interloper, and an absolute adolescent pain in the ass, I suggest you get your own blog!
Jack can do as he pleases. I will not post another comment that contains this content again nor will I respond if Jack does post such content.
Southern Comfort thanks for the support regarding Chris. He never misses an opportunity to drag GLBT comfort issues into any conversation. The little tyrant thinks I have to bend to his will. Ain’t going to happen. I don’t think he realizes how rabid and bigoted he can sound at times.
It was , however, I who brought up the “battle” for the “Republican soul”. Didn’t mean it as a sucker punch!
I do think the party is in a struggle to get back to its freedom and equality loving roots. The party has compromised on those basic principles “to work in bipartisan fashion” for much too long. Compromise is always one-sided when we work with Democrats…it means Republicans agree to the egregious breaches into special consideration for designated groups that Democrats favor with goodies and special legislation. We are not hyphenated Americans; we are Americans.
I apologize for letting the discussion veer off course. Thanks for the wake up boot in the butt!
Southern, can I call you Southern? First off welcome to the chat!! What you have now witnessed first hand is the patented Chris sidestep switch-a-roo. He will pull this old chestnut out whenever he needs to cover Obama’s @ss and can’t do it. Needless to say we see it ALOT. We really need to post a warning please do not feed the Libs. You nailed him right off,good for you.
Sorry Miss Tina’ no off’nce to y’all, just misread all the jabbers from your little piss’ ant Liberal Chris., he makes as much sense as drink’n down stream from watering livestock. That boy sounds a lot like this peanut farmer who once said Republicans are men of narrow vision, who are afraid of the future. But then he was a blind sided by own lack o’ vision. Yes ‘sire’ that’s a lovely title, ‘ex-president’. As to your Chris and his jaw in’ A word to the wise ain’t necessary – it’s the stupid ones that need the advice, and like that youngn’, mostly time an time again
The issue is confounding to be sure.
Nobody wants his rights trampled on by an imperial narcissist with a big government machine at his bidding. Which is why we find the likes of Michael Moore in agreement with Glenn Beck. What?
The way I see it there are several issues and they need to be separated so we can more clearly see what’s happened. 1) We have a bodacious security issue. I would think we would keep what works, learn from others with more experience (Israel), and throw out what doesn’t work…after all it has been 11 years since the big one on 911. 2) We have an administration that seems to be unable or unwilling to lead in the capacity of the Presidency. His personal agenda appears to trump his job description and his oath to the Constitution. 3) We have departments within our government that seem to be managed by political operatives.
All of this is adding up to a fistful of scandals that affect and affront not only the American people but also people of other nations and our image around the world.
The old peanut farmer was a stodgy incompetent busybody…we stumbled along under him. This guy is a destroyer!
America is strong but man, we have a lot of heavy lifting ahead. Undoing this mess will be tough.
Welcome to the neighborhood, Southern Comfort. We need more folks like y’all . . .. .
Tina: “By your own words it would be reasonable to assume God was booed”
No. Again, it would be reasonable to assume that what was booed was *the idea of God being included in the party platform.* Again, that is not the same as “booing God,” and you know it. As I have already said, I know plenty of God-believing people who don’t believe American political parties should take a position on the existence of God.
“The fact that we are not a theocratic nation is irrelevant.”
It’s entirely relevant, because that’s the reason for the opposition in the first place.
“The excerpt I sited had nothing to do with homosexuality or Mr. Kincaid. It posed a question entirely unrelated.”
What? The excerpt you cited from Mr. Kincaid, had nothing to do with Mr. Kincaid? Really?
And as I’ve already shown you, Kincaid himself brings up the issue of homosexuality–for no apparent reason–in the second paragraph of the very article you cited. And you’re saying that I am the one “bringing GLBT issues” into the discussion for no reason?
I guess, to you, it’s perfectly OK to bring up gay people in an article that has nothing to do with them, as long as you’re doing so in order to put them down. But if someone responds by defending them from bigotry, that makes that person a “bully.” Your logic is so twisted!
You are so busy being defensive and calling me names, but you haven’t once expressed a negative comment about the author of the piece you linked to. By refusing to do this, you are giving him your tacit approval. I am going to ask you straight up: do you agree with Kincaid that gays are not welcome in the conservative movement, and that gays should be put to death?
Southern Comfort, Sarah Palin called. She wants her affected folskiness back.
Toby: “What if we are all being played? This thing just does not smell right.”
I don’t know why I’m tellin’ you this … cause I’d eat worms and die before I wasted any portion of my life on the Fox News network … but … NPR’s been doing some really good *h*t about how Mr. Snowden did come into possession of such detrimental access.
And it’s all on you private sector contractor promoters!
You want it done cheap … or you want it done right?
You chose, and now you’re stuck with the consequences.
Don’t snivel to me.
Cheap? $122K a year for a single employee ain’t cheap.
And I have to giggle…you’re talking up the superiority of government (done right) and we;ve got a government under Obama that can’t seem to do anything right.
Obamacare is an expensive, intrusive, bureucratic, complicated, pice of crap. Scandals are piling up everywhere…and the economy still sucks!
Who chose?
Maybe NPR failed to tell you…”The One” has been in the choosers seat for almost five years, and you helped put him there…twice!
If you have information about the private contractor this guy worked for spit it out.
Ever hear of a US president being threatened with arrest when he sets foot in another country? Me neither.
‘Arrest Obama When He Visits’: Read the So-Called ‘Obama Docket’ That Calls for Prosecution of the President:
“The Muslim Lawyers Association (MLA) in Johannesburg has submitted a 600-plus page document to the Office of the National Director of Public Prosecution calling for the arrest and prosecution of President Barack Obama when he visits South Africa later this month.”
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/06/12/arrest-obama-when-he-visits-muslim-lawyers-in-south-africa-submit-600-page-complaint-calling-for-war-crimes-prosecution/
Libby, nothing under Obama is cheap or right.
He shoots, He scores, high five Southern!
First off Folks Thank ya kindly for the welcome. Well morning chores done and we was sitting round fiddlin wit the electric newspaper and reading where this Chris was a writtin about Sarha nedding folksiness back (actually had to look it up the point), seems this Chris is a wipin’ before ya poop. It don’t make no sense to us. Tell ya what, Tell me what you need and I’ll tell you how to get along without it seein’you can’t do fer yourself son.
“a writtin about Sarha nedding folksiness back”
This is satire, right?
“Cheap? $122K a year for a single employee ain’t cheap.”
Must you be so freakin’ provincial?
“And I have to giggle…you’re talking up the superiority of government (done right) and we;ve got a government under Obama that can’t seem to do anything right.”
Again, must you take refuge in stereotypical horsepuckies … and refuse to address the issues. Did you even bother to look into the facts of Mr. Snowden’s career? Seemingly, he, in his extreme youth, and during his first government employment with the CIA, just after 9/11, garnered a security clearance which made him a choice property to any private contractor he cared to offer himself to.
“Obamacare is an expensive, intrusive, bureucratic, complicated, pice of crap. Scandals are piling up everywhere…and the economy still sucks!”
Off to the dictionary with you: non sequitur. National health coverage has not been, and is not, the subject of this post.
Who chose?
You did … Ms. Government Contractor.
Maybe NPR failed to tell you…”The One” has been in the choosers seat for almost five years, and you helped put him there…twice!
Huh?
“If you have information about the private contractor this guy worked for spit it out.”
Ah, Booz Hamilton’s Ralph Shrader, has been cycling in and out of the government for the last 30 years … did somebody say Reagan?
Tina, you are reaping what you have sown. Don’t snivel.
Libby, just like the President, is standing on the sidelines, posturing as outside the bounds of responsibility while at the same time heaping piles of blame on others. That’s the progressive left right up to the top dog!
This nation is involved in an unconventional war declared upon us by an extremist ideological enemy. Walking away is not an option. Ignoring the problem will not make it go away. The big issue to me isn’t whether the methods used to fight the war are distasteful, they are, or counter to the basic values and rights we hold dear, they are. The question to me is can this administration be trusted with the technology and decision making? It’s a mixed bag because Obama has opted to continue the practices of the former president but when it comes time to be a man and OWN it he pretends he’s uninvolved and places blame elsewhere. Additionally, in other areas of government, he has abused his powers.
We authorize the President to do many unpleasant and distasteful things to protect our nation and our freedom but we should also have a reasonable expectation that the responsibility will be taken with grave seriousness and resolve to serve the nation with integrity and honor.
This President has shown himself to be aggressively irresponsible and abusive of his presidential powers…and that is the rub!
Run Libby…you cannot hide from the stain that is marring this presidency. You and your fellow progressive buddies chose this community organizer as your be all and end all and you have participated as he used every dirty method in the Alinsky playbook to get elected and reelected.
You chose Libby. And for 4.5 years the one you chose has been in the decider seat! We are all reaping what you have sown and it ain’t pretty.
Now…from the “it’s okay to betray ones country” side of this issue …turns out one of Snowden’s allies is a political activist journalist (and writing partner to Greenwald) who is said to have had information in 2004 that could have saved the lives of our soldiers in Iraq and she didn’t bother to warn them. Call Jane Fonda she’s got company:
“Booz Hamilton’s Ralph Shrader, has been cycling in and out of the government for the last 30 years…”
Well you’re a big government girl Libby…what’s the prob?
Notice in Libby’s world Snowden isn’t under suspicion…but the company he worked for is. The company can become a target at will. This is how Halliburton is vilified under a Bush but is a perfectly acceptable contractor under Clinton and Obama.
Character matters. This administration and all of the supportive activists under him in positions of power, cannot be trusted. That is the bottom line.
Gordon Chang, author of “The Coming Collapse of China,” thinks there’s a strong possibility Snowden could be playing for both sides.
“The first clue is that he goes to Hong Kong and they have an extradition agreement with the U.S. and a tradition of close cooperation of law enforcement,” Chang told Fox. “That means, the only thing that stands between him and a lifetime in a super-max prison is Beijing.”
Chang also says the timing of Snowden’s disclosures are suspect.
“He changed the global narrative of China hacking into the U.S. to the American government going after one of its own,” Chang said.
The first of Snowden’s disclosures came right before President Obama met with new Chinese President Xi Jinping.
“That really derailed Obama’s whole talk about cyber security,” he said, adding, “the most rrecent revelations have been about operational details of the NSA spying on Hong Kong and China. This only helps Beijing.”
Chang says it’s likely Snowden went public with his claims because he was tipped off that the NSA was on to him.
Snowden’s most recent claims to the South China Morning Post are that the NSA has more than 61,000 hacking operations globally, the NSA has been hacking computers in Hong Kong and China since 2009 and that the Chinese targets included universities, public officials, businesses and students.
Chang said that if Snowden flees to China ““basically that puts him in a place where U.S. authorities can’t get to him and that’s important because it lets him pretty much do what he wants. And perhaps the issue is that he wasn’t on his own. That he did this with the help of someone else.”
Chang believes that it would be very difficult for Snowden to get the amount of data he got in such a short period of time and from a position where most people didn’t think it would be possible.
Chang also says the time Snowden spent in Hawaii could provide clues as to his true intentions.
“There are a lot of federal agencies in Hawaii where he was and this is a very critical place because this is where we do our surveillance of China,” he said.