US Intel Officials keep Talking about Killing Snowden, then say “trust us with your data”

9 Responses

1. 

   How many people contributing to various blogs and fora said the same thing about George W. Bush during his presidency? In the heat of discussion when emotions run high, many people have expressed similar sentiments about someone with whom they vehemently disagreed. But they did not mean it, any more than the anonymous individuals quoted by Mr. Masnick meant it regarding Snowden. This piece is a desperate attempt by Mr. Masnick to try and show how “dangerous” members of the intelligence community are. It won’t wash.

   • 

     Even if we suppose that few NSA employees wish to do wrong, it is an agency controlled by political processes and appointees, like the CIA, and all such agencies have been turned to political ends at times at the convenience of the administration, in every era of our recent history. Even a small group like GWB/Wolfowitz’s zionist Perle/Feith/Wurmser team operated offices within the CIA to provide fake “intelligence” to GWB that brought us the Iraq travesty and humanitarian disaster. And that was over the protests of much of the CIA. It is the potential of such “factions” (as Jefferson, Madison, and Jay put it) against which we need checks and balances, and these have never worked to regulate the secret agencies, and no longer work even between the federal branches. While the statements of a few are not an argument, they do show the problem: the dark state is an interest group and it is beyond control. The motive and the servants of abuse are there, regardless of the good character of the majority, and they have assembled a technology and a pretext for tyranny which far exceeds any demonstrated capacity of democracy to regulate. And we have not even protected our “public” institutions from control by economic forces, so that we have no freely elected representatives to regulate them.

   • 

     Would you be troubled if your local police department personnel talked that way about a criminal that they could not find? What about someone that stole police records, would it be OK to talk about killing him? What if a city counselor wanted to reduce the police budget, would you be troubled if the police joked about doing him in?

     When someone like the US intelligence community, who kills people regularly, jokes about killing someone you should take them seriously.

2. 

   The fact that the intelligence community has an emotional response to Snowden is not the reason they cannot be trusted. They cannot be trusted because they are human beings. No group of people should have unchecked power to invade our privacy. It is not what our founding fathers wanted. And there is no logical reason to trust anyone with such power. Is the vetting system of the American government so magical that only superheros make it into the secret halls of power?

3. 

   The frightening part of this story is that they DO mean it – literally. The national security apparatus is desperate to destroy Mr. Snowden’s reputation and shut him up by any means necessary. Congressman Rogers opines that Snowden was probably working for the Russian FSB and then provides no proof of his allegation. If Mr. Snowden is smart, he will be very, very careful and watch his back. I am sure there are many people in the national security apparatus who are perfectly willing to eliminate this threat – even if it means doing it by extrajudicial means. The American deep state wants total control over everyone on this planet, and they are prepared to use death squads, black ops, drones, hits, or smears to get their way.

4. 

   This is why Snowden has given to WikiLeaks control over the release of his data: So that the only reason to kill him is pure revenge, it would gain them nothing other the generating a KGB like fear in everyone else.

5. 

   And it it not a long reach to them wanting to or even controlling Presidents. These people are about control, that’s what spying is about, controlling situations through information and actions based on information.
   The military have mantras to inspire the “right” kind of thinking in soldiers, it would be no surprise to find that in the intelligence community too, choosing those with the most “right” attitude to hold higher offices, perpetuating those attitudes year after year.

6. 

   It was only a piece of tape on a door lock at the Watergate Complex, and the persistence of “country lawyers” like Sam Ervin and a few actually decent people in the Imperial capital, that stood in the way of a lot more really rotten crap and crushing of the rights we believe we have.

   I was just reminded of how frail the protections we think we have against the 1984 treatment really are, running across this little vignette from the life of a fairly conservative guy, Jack Anderson, who dared to expose some of J. Edgar Hooveritallup’s very dirty linen:

   “Targeted

   In 1972, Anderson was the target of an assassination plot in the White House. Two Nixon administration conspirators admitted under oath they plotted to poison Anderson on orders from senior White House aide Charles Colson.[15] White House “plumbers” G. Gordon Liddy and E. Howard Hunt met with a CIA operative to discuss the possibilities, including drugging Anderson with LSD, poisoning his aspirin bottle, or staging a fatal mugging.[16] The plot was aborted when the plotters were arrested for the Watergate break-in. Nixon had long been angry with Anderson, blaming Anderson’s election eve story about a secret loan from Howard Hughes to Nixon’s brother[17] for Nixon’s loss of the 1960 presidential election. Anderson remained a target of FBI investigation after his death; in February 2006, the FBI contacted Anderson’s family to obtain his files and search for classified documents.[18] The FBI agents claimed to be looking for documents pertaining to American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) as part of an espionage investigation. In November 2006, the FBI quietly gave up its pursuit of the archive. The archive, as revealed in The Chronicle of Higher Education, contains Anderson’s CIA file, along with information about prominent public figures such as Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, Thomas Dodd, and J. Edgar Hoover.” link to en.wikipedia.org

   Reassure us. Bill and Joe, about how there’s nothing to worry about. Sleep well, Professor — I hope your friends inside the beast are still looking out for you. And Snowden? Hey, they were only emoting or joking when they were saying they would happily kill him for shaking up their evil, ugly little scam… Right?

7. 

   .
   OK. here’s the thing:
   NSA is scooping up every blessed electronic communication on the planet.
   Including those “anonymous” posts casually talking about killing my buddy Ed.

   Here’s a test for those elected officials who either are in charge (Obama) or overseeing (Rogers) the NSA:
   Show me the money.
   Who, by DNA sequence, wrote those treasonous remarks ?
   Certainly Clapper and Alexander already have collected this info.
   Let’s see them on next Sunday morning’s gab news shows, and ask them to gab about who those anti-constitutional fascists are, and how they chose to spend more time with their families.

   The President probably doesn’t know who these folks are.
   His direct reports directly report nothing to him until the issue hits the top 10 on Google News.
   But by now both Feinstein and Rogers know who they are. Let’s see them face the nation and ‘splain how they are exercising proper oversight.

   And if the NSA says they don’t now who posted those comments, then what’s the use of spending $6 Billion a year if they can’t even answer such a simple question ?
   .

Comments are closed.