Former NSA official was already blowing the whistle earlier

[Keep The Change]

I came across this article awhile back and it was chilling then. I started warning friends about what they say online. Things said now could be reviewed at a later date in the event they wanted to build a case against someone.

http://rt.com/usa/surveillance-spying-e-...izens-178/

So if any sort of rebellion with tax rebellion, protests of govt, rallying against govt powers, etc was taken by a group of people or patriots in this country, then prior talk online, phones, facebook, forums were sitting in a storage facility and they would be sifted through. Anything using violent language or anything said against the govt would be pulled out of the storage to build a case against this group. They would destroy reputations, prosecute if possible as anarchist, terrorist, etc. Therefore killing any possible revolt, revolution, or any sort of rebellion even if peaceful protest or rebellion.

The govt has a vested interest in these sort of systems. It of course helps in fighting terrorist. At least some of it because it certainly didn't help with the Boston Bombing.
But it will protect itself from the populace rising up against it to challenge the over reaching and over bearing power the govt has. We are paying for the tools they will use against us to protect itself and self preserve itself.

[Kikn]

Here is the video from the network guy who blew the "Whistle"

[video=youtube;5yB3n9fu-rM]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5yB3n9fu-rM&feature=player_embedded[/video]

[LRRPF52]

The programs have nothing to do with countering terrorism, and everything to do with control over the population, journalists, politicians, teachers, professors, doctors, etc.

Stalin is envious from beyond the grave.

[Keep The Change]

This info can and will be used to build a case against somebody that they suspect as up to no good. "No good" could be an actual terrorist or it could be Christian Conservative who they deem dangerous. They already view conservative constitutionalist patriots as enemies of the federal govt or "state". When it is actually this group that wants the smaller constitutional govt and this is counter to the big overseeing govt, which is how the govt justifies calling this group enemies or potential threats.

So one day the govt may continue their overbearing and over reaching power grabs and many people may be ready to revolt, protest, take to the streets, etc. At that moment they will build a case from all the prior emails, forum post, facebook arguments, phone calls, etc to build a case against these terrorists, anti-govt, right wing extremists to either prosecute, destroy their reputations and credibility, make them enemies of the country in the eyes of the uninformed, etc etc. This will further entrench their power because many will fear to protest or push back.

Heck this could be used to combat politicians that want a more constitutional govt. It's already been done with via the IRS with their targeting of groups to affect the election outcome, it will happen in the intelligence community as well. Information is power and they will have it all and can discredit anyone.

[Trooper]

NSA Leaker a Soldier in the Ron Paul Revolution?
http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2013/06/10/nsa...evolution/

He appears to be good enough to make $200K per year.

[Nukes]

NSA Document Leak Proves Conspiracy To Create Big Brother Styled World Control System

http://www.blacklistednews.com/NSA_Docum...0/Y/M.html



The more things change...

[BjornF16]

[Nukes]

"We are not there yet."

http://endoftheamericandream.com/archive...nal-crisis

[Nukes]

In a constitutional republic, even suspected terrorists have the same rights as free men.

In a police state, free men have no more privileges than slaves and terrorists.

[montana]

In a constitutional republic, even suspected terrorists have the same rights as free men.

In a police state, free men have no more privileges than slaves and terrorists.



I agree completely, "kind of obvious which type of country we are living in now" I found this on the internet but I think it sums up my thoughts on the present mind set of this country.

Our government is trying to pull a fast one. They are trying to convince us that their most pressing mandate is to provide the American citizens with the greatest measure of safety possible. Forget the freedoms mandated by our founding fathers and entrusted to us in the United States Constitution and the Bill of Rights – SAFETY is the guiding principle of our new Keepers. Our Keepers are not alone in their carefully conceived deception – they have entreated willing accomplices in the media and the marbled halls of academia to perpetuate the lie that safety can be bought for the piddling sum of freedom.

Safety and Freedom are incongruent concepts. Safety is an illusion, a passing ideal. It is the calling card of every power-hungry tyrant in the history of our world. It is the stock-in-trade of every tin-pot dictator. The promise of safety is the destroyer of freedom in every first-world nation on this earth. Safety is a deception sold to a gullible people. Freedom, on the other hand, was established in the hearts of men by their Creator. We crave it. We fight for it. We were born for it. True men understand the eternal value of freedom and will guard and protect it no matter the cost. They understand that safety cannot be bought, but found in the strong towers of God alone. They know that freedom is born in our very heart and cannot be traded for a mere illusion.

I don’t want whatever safety our government thinks they can offer us – I want only the freedom that is our birthright.

They can takes our lives….but they can never take our FREEDOM!

[BjornF16]

In a constitutional republic, even suspected terrorists have the same rights as free men.

Depends…not if you are an alien captured outside of US territory and brought into the US for justice. See United States v. Verdugo-Urquidez http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/ge...4&page=259

[montana]

Depends…not if you are an alien captured outside of US territory and brought into the US for justice. See United States v. Verdugo-Urquidez http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/ge...4&page=259

So the 4 American citizens killed in Yemen by a drone strike "where the last time I looked we had not declared war" were murdered with out due process by our government?

[bwaites]

So the 4 American citizens killed in Yemen by a drone strike "where the last time I looked we had not declared war" were murdered with out due process by our government?

Technically, yes.

[Nukes]

Depends…not if you are an alien captured outside of US territory and brought into the US for justice. See United States v. Verdugo-Urquidez http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/ge...4&page=259

Let's not confuse legalisms with what is right. Even Red China (Are we there yet?) has its legalisms.

If you want to play at legalisms, the key word in my statement is "in."—"In a constitutional republic, even suspected terrorists have the same rights as free men."

Verdugo-Urquidez was not in the U.S. He was in Mexico.

If you wanted to argue that the USA is not a constitutional republic, but a sham, I'd accept that argument.

Indeed by pilpul, the Marvelettes.... er... Supremes contrived a legalism to nullify the Fourth Amendment in the case of Verdugo-Urquidez, just as they have contrived legalisms to make theft-by-government and death-by-government "legal." In the case of theft-by-government (asset forfeiture) the fiction is that the government is not prosecuting the owner, but prosecuting the property and the property has no rights, so the property can be seized and forfeited without any meaningful due process or recourse.

The pilpul coming out of the US legalism system is expectedly absurd and self-serving, bearing no relation to what is right.

[BjornF16]

No, he was put on trial here IN the USA, so that meets your "in a constitutional republic" litmus test. He wasn't afforded ALL rights and privileges of the Constitution because 1. He wasn't a citizen, and 2. Was apprehended in Mexico where the search of his premises took place.

Not a legalism…just the plain facts.

But I do appreciate the fact you keep quoting me…it's like being stalked…I think that is also a characteristic of NPD. :eek:

[BjornF16]

Technically, yes.

That is technically not correct, in at least al-Awlaki's case. His uncle brought a lawsuit into US court system to challenge his being on the "target list". The judge ruled against the uncle (or against al Awlaki, if you prefer). So there was judicial review, and therefore, due process.

Al-Awlaki was an openly acknowledged militant leader of al Qaeda in Yemen who was actively planning strikes against the US…that makes him a legitimate target regardless of citizenship. His legal status was "illegal combatant" and was not afforded legal protections in international law.

The other three are allegedly victims of collateral damage of legitimate foreign al Qaeda targets.

There is precedent from WW1 and WW2 of Americans being killed by Allied forces on the battlefield while fighting for the Germans…Bill, would you say they were murdered without due process?

[bwaites]

In the case of combatants killed in a declared war with another sovereign nation, no. But this is not a declared war, and no charges were brought. He was not tried, even in absentia.

Lots of gray area here, but bending only creates more. What if he were an American Catholic fighting in Northern Ireland? Would he still be targeted as a terrorist?

There are literally thousands of Americans on the watch list, but none of us know if we are included.

[BjornF16]

In the case of combatants killed in a declared war with another sovereign nation, no. But this is not a declared war, and no charges were brought. He was not tried, even in absentia.

Lots of gray area here, but bending only creates more. What if he were an American Catholic fighting in Northern Ireland? Would he still be targeted as a terrorist?

There are literally thousands of Americans on the watch list, but none of us know if we are included.

But Congress did authorize military action against al Qaeda and it's operatives (Authorization for Use of Military Force against Terrorists, September 14, 2001). It has not expired. Al Qaeda was a declared hostile terrorist organization, a "non-state actor".

The US is not engaged in hostilities with al Qaeda (or the IRA for that matter) in Northern Ireland.

[montana]

So if congress out laws the right to own so called assault weapons , hand guns , etc I guess it is legal and the second amendment is null and void as as they seem to have made the 5th amendment null and void. It is much easier than amending the constitution. Up is down and down is up, day is night night is day. I'm not buying it.

[montana]

The three other Americans killed were just collateral damage I guess. This practice of killing 50 innocent people for every one person being targeted is going to create more terrorist and perpetuate the problem. This is not only stupid but immoral.

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2013/05/20/...d-killing/