Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

JDPriestly

(57,936 posts)
63. It has stifled your free speech and the free speech of every person
Tue Jun 25, 2013, 05:41 PM
Jun 2013

in the country.

Have you read the book, "They thought they were free?"

http://www.press.uchicago.edu/Misc/Chicago/511928.html

When a government begins a surveillance plan it always seems benign, harmless. But ask anyone who lived or traveled in Eastern Europe when it was communist or in the USSR or who lived through the NAZI era in an occupied country what it was like.

I know someone who was a small child in NAZI Germany. Before the end of WWII, the adults around him all praised the Fuhrer and listened reverently to his speeches on the radio.

The very day the war ended, all the adults who had been so awed by Hitler were celebrating: "Finally, he's gone that &$%@&%$."

The day will come when you watch what you say because someone might hear you. You don't feel it now, but inevitably as sure as the sun will come up tomorrow, that day when you are no longer free will come.

For some it is already here. For the Walmart employees who were thinking of organizing a union and have been fired.

If you work for a boss who disagrees with your political views, you can lose your job. This kind of surveillance permits bosses to find out about the internet and phone activities of their employees.

It interested me that one of the whistleblowers stated that the surveillance he did which targeted a lot of individuals required him to pull up the records on a lot of lawyers and law firms. Why do you suppose that was? Apparently specific political figures were also targeted. That chills our most basic political functions. The sitting president can obtain intelligence information on the pizza orders of someone running against him -- or far more problematic details of the life of his opponent. That destroys the balance within our separation of powers.

The entire scheme of this surveillance within the US (and I am talking about the metadata and nothing beyond that in this post) is utterly incompatible with our Constitution.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Clarify this for me nadinbrzezinski Jun 2013 #1
I didn't know they were surveilled in the 90s. Catherina Jun 2013 #2
And Christian charities. nadinbrzezinski Jun 2013 #3
More like an Aircraft carrier. tblue Jun 2013 #25
They can join the ACLU and Amy Goodman, described here recentily as part of a pack of rat-fuckers. sabrina 1 Jun 2013 #42
The question is "by whom?" No decent Democrat would do such a thing. Wow. n/t Catherina Jun 2013 #51
They Are Absolutist, Ma'am, In Their Particular Area The Magistrate Jun 2013 #5
So are they racists, or Paulites? nadinbrzezinski Jun 2013 #8
The Magistrate's shtick grew thin? That is so ironic coming from you in particular. LOL KittyWampus Jun 2013 #18
I just dropped the irony on my foot. Ikonoklast Jun 2013 #23
A little confused sir.... daleanime Jun 2013 #33
Are you a Thurgood Marshall fan? JDPriestly Jun 2013 #36
The US only cares about International law when it suits them. liberal_at_heart Jun 2013 #4
Brings back memories of the UN and the Iraq war...... think Jun 2013 #14
What? ProSense Jun 2013 #6
Haven't realized what you are defending yet have you? dkf Jun 2013 #10
LOL! There was nothing "unlawful" about the program. ProSense Jun 2013 #11
Are you kidding me? You think that what North Korea does isn't legal in their country? dkf Jun 2013 #13
No, and ProSense Jun 2013 #15
Human rights don't have anything to do with any countries laws. That's the point. dkf Jun 2013 #17
Definition of Human Rights is international Savannahmann Jun 2013 #20
+++ marions ghost Jun 2013 #35
Hey! Of course the GCHQ program is unlawful - are you kidding? temmer Jun 2013 #21
It is unconstitutional. JDPriestly Jun 2013 #37
That is a logical deduction if one believes that... bvar22 Jun 2013 #12
out of someone`s ass.... madrchsod Jun 2013 #29
this is getting deep :O. allin99 Jun 2013 #7
Ecuador is a sovereign nation.... bvar22 Jun 2013 #16
yeah, but you know how the u.s. gets a little nutso... allin99 Jun 2013 #22
The US has been "screwing" Latin American countries for over a century. bvar22 Jun 2013 #48
Whoa! Where is this "The USA is not King of the World" coming from when the indepat Jun 2013 #49
The administration is showing great audacity in digging the hole deeper it's stuck in. Tierra_y_Libertad Jun 2013 #9
of course not, the facist scum. those govt thugs are just pissed they got caught. boilerbabe Jun 2013 #19
K&R. I have said it before, Snowden deserves the presidential medal of freedom quinnox Jun 2013 #24
Amnesty SamKnause Jun 2013 #26
If rendition, torture, and executive authorized execution of American citizens is legal... wundermaus Jun 2013 #27
"The organization noted that an individual cannot be extradited East Coast Pirate Jun 2013 #28
And revealing details of activities against other countries is espionage intaglio Jun 2013 #30
Read Thurgood Marshall's dissent in Smith v. Maryland. JDPriestly Jun 2013 #38
As it was a dissent ... n/t intaglio Jun 2013 #43
Dissents can become decisions -- when the facts change. JDPriestly Jun 2013 #44
Yup, but at the moment it remains a dissent. n/t intaglio Jun 2013 #45
But we should bring it to everyone's attention because explains why JDPriestly Jun 2013 #47
No it explains why those 2 Justices in that particular opinion intaglio Jun 2013 #50
But the situation in that case was not at all similar to what is being done now. JDPriestly Jun 2013 #53
Oddly I do not defend the practise intaglio Jun 2013 #56
This program most definitely chills not only speech but freedom JDPriestly Jun 2013 #61
Has it stifled your free speech? intaglio Jun 2013 #62
It has stifled your free speech and the free speech of every person JDPriestly Jun 2013 #63
How? intaglio Jun 2013 #64
Watch this video. JDPriestly Jun 2013 #65
But, as Marshall pointed out, while the case handles a Fourth Amendment JDPriestly Jun 2013 #55
AI...pull your head out of your ass. SoapBox Jun 2013 #31
People who tell Amnesty International to "STFU" Comrade Grumpy Jun 2013 #32
So we've found who you go in lockstep with treestar Jun 2013 #67
What does that have to do with anything? Hissyspit Jun 2013 #34
Well we haven't drop down to the level of a Russia goolag or re-education camp of China gitmo is pam4water Jun 2013 #39
The lines are being drawn between the authoritarians and the liberals, looks like you choose the rhett o rick Jun 2013 #60
Amnesty International to be declared an evil commie traitor organization in 3...2...1... n/t backscatter712 Jun 2013 #40
The United States is going to pursue Snowden. timdog44 Jun 2013 #41
Amnesty International is entitled to release whatever statement they wish... MattFromKY Jun 2013 #46
HUGE K & R !!! WillyT Jun 2013 #52
regarding Manning's treatment, G_j Jun 2013 #54
AI has most credibility when they refer to international law supported by international treaties struggle4progress Jun 2013 #57
K&R. pacalo Jun 2013 #58
K&R idwiyo Jun 2013 #59
What human rights violations? treestar Jun 2013 #66
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Amnesty International: US...»Reply #63