Posted on 08/14/2013 9:37:45 PM PDT by Absolutely Nobama
Our dog eating Dear Leader, Barack Hussein Obama, had this to say about the "phony" NSA spying scandal during his August 9th "press" conference:
***
"As I said at the National Defense University back in May, in meeting those threats we have to strike the right balance between protecting our security and preserving our freedoms."
http://www.npr.org/2013/08/09/210574114/transcript-president-obamas-news-conference
***
Ladies and gentlemen, the above quote needs to be immortalized in some way. Perhaps it should be carved into the base of the Statue of Liberty or onto the side of a mountain. Maybe children should be forced to memorize it in their union infested government run schools, or better yet, children should be forced to recite it after turning their parents in to Thinkpol.
You see ladies and gentlemen, there isn't a better example than the above quote of what kind of fascist pig Barack Hussein Obama truly is.
In the above quote, the Indonesian raised Obama basically states that the federal government can eat away at our freedom for whatever reason it feels like. Now of course, this isn't news. We the Victims have watched Obama's circus of destruction-like administration wreak havoc on our rights and the Constitution in many, many ways. We've seen Obama unilaterally decide to declare war on Libya, we've seen Obama change Obamacare on a whim several times, we've seen the IRS attempt to silence Conservative dissent, and we've seen the charge to obliterate the Second Amendment and harass journalists, just to name a few crimes against the Republic.
However, this is different.
Now he's claiming the government can shred the Constitution in the name of national security, sort of like, Godwin's Law be darned, Adolf Hitler did when he pushed the Enabling Act through the Reichstag.
Don't get me wrong: I'm all for the War on Terror. I fully support the idea of dispatching Islamonazis to Allah. But let's not kid ourselves. The NSA spying program has absolutely nothing to do with national security. If it did, wouldn't the feds have caught on to Tamerlan Tsarnaev after he made his Islamonazi Youtube page, for example ? Here's another: How did Edward Snowden walk out of the NSA with four laptops full of classified data and hop on a plane headed to Hong Kong while telling his superiors he was taking time off for the treatment of epilepsy ? These are just a few examples, and I'm sure you come up with quite a few yourself.
The camera (literally and figuratively---take a look around at your nearest intersection.) is pointed at us, not them. Apparently, We the People Who Foot The Bill For All of This are a far greater threat than genocidal Jihadis bent on enslaving the Free World to Shariah Law. (2+2=5 indeed!)
Now that the common sense part of the program is out of the way, here's another question: Where in the heck does the Constitution mention anything about striking "right balance" when comes to any of our rights ? Our rights were given to us by our Creator, not by the federal government, and yes, they are unlimited. Now, I know there will be those who toss out lame examples like "you can't shout 'fire' in a movie theater," or "we have the right to bear arms, but you can't put land mines in your front yard". These arguments are nothing more than the needless slaughter of straw men. The only thing we can't do as a free people is violate the rights of others while exercising our rights. Shouting "fire" in a movie theater isn't illegal in itself, but creating a public disturbance is. We can't have landmines in our yards because they're a danger to the community. (Guns have triggers and require the user to pull them to fire. Regardless of what the libtards would have you believe, guns don't just fire all willy nilly on their own.)
Here's the only "balance" recognized by the Founding Fathers when it comes to being harassed by any level of government:
***
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
***
Yep, that's the Fourth Amendment. We the People have the right to live our lives as we see fit and as long as we're not breaking the law or violating the rights of others. Owning a telephone or surfing the internet doesn't create the probable cause described in the Fourth Amendment. Neither does being at war. Actually doing something creates probable cause. For example, calling Taliban held territory in Afghanistan on a regular basis creates probable cause. My wife calling me to demand that I bring home milk does not create probable cause. (And not for nothing, Islamonazi terrorists don't use the internet or cell phones to communicate. They, like the mob, use couriers, kind of like the one that was followed to track down Osama Bin Laden.)
The bottom line is this: We're on the edge of complete economic, political, and social disaster. The Snowden Job For The Ages shows just how close we are to that edge.
Given that Russia and China are active enemies of the US, it does matter. It also matters that the information is out there for the various other enemies in the world.
He betrayed all of us, not just DC by going with those two countries. If you want to consider him a patriot, fine - but his alliance with China and Russia are unpatriotic in the least.
All of the threats you suggested are still in our control. Russia and China are not, but Snowden’s damage can be mitigated by bringing him (and his helpers) into US custody and to take further measures to secure the “distributed” information held by “human rights” individuals.
Exactly what “distributed” information, is being held by which “human rights” individuals? Please explain.
Heck, if normal Americans were paying attention (as opposed to going to the Mall or obsessing over “American Idol”. . . ) Snowden’s ‘revelations’ were merely more confirmation of what’s been quietly known for a decade or more.
The program names may change, the tools may change, but the effort has been there for DECADES.
Google “ECHELON”, “CARNIVORE”, and “Total Information Awareness”. . .
You simply repeated your questioned statement. What was the information? Who were the human rights individuals? Insurance of what?
How is this for a secret, the fisa court ruled the nsa meta data program request was UNConstitutional. But the administration ha sruled the court decision Top Secret. Are these the kind of secrets you’re so worried about ?
I’m more concerned about what hasn’t been said given the large opportunity for known enemies to the US to pump Snowden for the most damaging material that he had. What goes on in the US can be fixed; what goes on in hostile territory can only be fixed by bringing him in.
Improperly disclosing anything of that level of classification(or any other that does not permit public disclosure) during any administration is still wrong, no matter if the contents give a fortunate view inside. Aside from being a civilian, Snowden’s case is no different than Manning’s with regards to their improper disclosures.
Their exact identities aren’t known nor what exact information was handed off (and would probably be something that the US would like to know if they wished to clean things up). One of the first press conferences referred to all of this.
You are exactly right. It was said that Snowden e-mailed info, from inside Russia, to some mysterious human rights advocates in insure his safety. There is absolutely no way, for him to securely transmit any information to anyone inside or outside of Russia. Thus, any insurance of his safety is ludicrous. This is a staged event, for what purpose- I have not a clue. *Disclaimer- ALCOA is not now, nor has ever, been my haberdasher.
Your statement: What goes on in the US can be fixed;
If that were true, the disclosures (or confirmations) from Snowden would have resulted in hundreds or thousands of treasonous politicians and bureacrats swinging from trees and lamp posts, right quick. It didn't.
The NSA spying on US citizens is war against US citizens. It does not protect US citizens from any threats, external or internal.
This is why we’ll never be able to form a new party. Snowden is not a traitor. He started a very important national discussion about how much freedom we’ve lost.
I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and stand corrected on the human rights disclosure.
This may be the first appearance of the NSA’s current program:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/3031520/posts
Not a bad view of things.
“Snowden is a F*cking traitor.”
What exactly did he give away that compromised national security? There has been lots of hubbub about it but nothing ever specifically said. Did he actually release anything at all?
You are absolutely right. Good, to the point, and true. May many people read it and learn!
The greatest threat to US citizens are the communist and muslim traitors in this administration, the US Senate, the House, and the US Supreme Court.
I expect other countries to have their own interests first, often at the expense of our interests. That is natural. Just as you guard your house against roving thieves,burglars, murderers and rapists.
But the cops are supposed to be the good guys; on your side, not the thieves, burglars, murderers and rapists side.
So considering the “cops” like the government, we now have cops that invade our houses and steal, burglarize, rape and murder. I consider that much worse than far away enemies you are on guard for. You cannot defend yourself against cops who are rogue, ‘cause who you gonna call? 911?
Additionally, our government, now being an enemy of the people and the Constitution and the rule of law, isn’t defending us against countries or other entities who mean us harm! They’re on THEIR SIDE FOR CRYING OUT LOUD!
Heck, 0bomba just gave Egypt to the Russians!
PS - This is NOT an indictment of cops. I am using this as an analogy.
Well, that sounds nice and easy. Got any ideas how to fix what's wrong in the US? And read my above comments about why the second part of your sentence isn't really accurate.
setha, I was not trying to correct you, and obviously failed to communicate my point.
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.