If you havent watched this (and have an hour or so to spare) Id - TopicsExpress



          

If you havent watched this (and have an hour or so to spare) Id love for yall to hear this story, from October, 2014. Last month. It definitely showed me a lot that I am happy that I learned. Jane Meyer: People have said that whistle-blowers generally are moved to disclose crimes. and one of the complicated situations that youre in is that what you revealed was not a crime but maybe a moral, ethical, or political crime, in the way you looked at it. Do you feel that leaking was the only form of check and balance that couldve corrected this? Edward Snowden: Well, there is definitely a point, in every institution, every process, where the FINAL check on abuse of power is whistle-blowing. However, I would dispute that there have been no crimes shown. In fact, weve seen serious violations of law. In the wake of these revelations, we have people testify to Congress that, I believe more than twelve times, NSA employees have used these surveillance powers to spy on exs, to spy on lovers. However none of them were prosecuted because it was considered that the value of the programs... was greater than the interest of justice in basically punishing people whove violated the law. The false claims of senior officials to Congress, was probably one of the most serious crimes that a government official can commit. And that was only revealed by the revelations that we saw in the investigations that followed them up. Beyond that, these programs themselves ARE unconstitutional. Again the very first judge who ruled on this found that they were likely unconstitutional will go to the Supreme Court, and I am confident that the Supreme Court will agree, that these programs went too far. The problem with this is, and what critics claim, the people who are supporting us, is that IF these things are authorized by statute in this way or that way or the other, the Constitution doesnt really matter. Because the Constitution does not assign penalties for violations... but our system of government is founded upon principle that the Constitution is the Supreme law of the land. So, when we say that yes, a statute may have not been violated in this particular instance of this particular case, when you look at the totalitarian circumstance, it is VERY clear that several different amendments of the Constitution whether its our right to freely associate under the first amendment or the fourth amendment, the right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure, has been VIOLATED on a massive and unprecedented scale, a system of surveillance that is unauthorized by any Constitutional authority, has never existed in this country, in this manner. And weve seen public intellectuals, weve seen lawyers, weve seen specialists from all areas of society, agree that this is the case. AND, were this NOT the case, whether it found that these programs were indeed Constitutional, that this was indeed authorized by statute, and that the government could simply claim, invest itself, in secret, that the power to watch ALL of us, without limit, five year records of our behavior, you know, retroactively investigate us, at will....... I would argue that it is still proper and still correct to reveal these programs, because of the strength of the response. Ultimately governments exist for the benefit of the public, and if they are no longer serving our needs, if they are working contrary to the public interest, as opposed to working to further the public interest, thats something that we DESERVE to know, thats something more than we deserve to know, and we have a RIGHT to know, and when officials in the American government are asked to swear an oath to defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, I believe theyre BOUND to stand up and act when they see this kind of behavior and do something about it. And I could be wrong, and Im willing to face historys judgment for that, but I stand by that decision, and I think the reaction of the public, the fact that the structure of the internet, has changed, shows that there is a lot of agreement, and I am not alone. https://youtube/watch?v=fidq3jow8bc
Posted on: Wed, 26 Nov 2014 21:01:11 +0000

Trending Topics



Recently Viewed Topics




© 2015