A gentleman questioned me concerning my column: “They were warned”
He wrote, and quoted me. “I read your article today online at CFP (Canada Free Press) and you said: ‘If the government violates their trust while mining (and I do intensely fear that possibility) then we must get rid of those violating the Constitution. That means the people must speak loudly and in concert’.
Well, how are the people going to know that the government is violating their trust without someone alerting them to the problem? If the population doesn't know about a problem, how are the people going to speak loudly and in concert against it? You can't have it both ways. Signed Tony”
This was my response: “In your question you show your awareness and understanding of the barb at the end of the hook so to speak. Maybe we need Special Prosecutors empowered to investigate, or better yet, create a safe-haven for Whistle-blowers to go to. But with the establishment of another level of legal bureaucracy we run the danger of creating another monster like J. Edgar Hoover. (Shudder)
I admit I don't know. But I do feel if I take an oath to protect your secrets and I violate it by speaking them before the media, I should ask your forgiveness and understanding of my motives. But, that doesn't absolve me of your right to punish me for the betrayal. The damage done to you is the issue and the fundamental issue is where the individual said he was trustworthy then arbitrarily decided to release what knowledge he had that he found objectionable.
Snowden has claimed "authority" to tap into the communications at a greater depth than we believe he's entitled to go. I don't know if this is or isn't true but, I do know the abuse in this case is his after deriving whatever authority he believes he was privy to from the initial miscreants. They betrayed the Constitution (at least in theory) out of an alleged desire to protect America. Snowden released his information in an attempt to cause harm to the intelligence gathering community which is now compromised by his actions. That in turn creates diplomatic and political peril for American interests both here and abroad.
Who is right?
I don't know. But it's my job as a concerned citizen to question both betrayals. Our brother and sister citizens must decide what they'll do when inhabiting the ballot box. It's either the way of peaceful elections conducted by an informed populace or it will be a revolutionary program causing the enemies of the United States to capitalize on any and all perceived weaknesses.
I thank you for your attention to my efforts and hope you'll stay in touch. I wish to learn from my readers. We may not always agree but we should all be communicating.
The “NSA Scandal” is by definition an action regarded as morally or legally wrong and causing public outrage. Because of the laissez-faire attitude of the American voting public, the bureaucracy empowered to accomplish governmental goals and progress for the nation have come to believe they alone know and understand the depth and scope of dangers imperiling us and our country. This might not be true if such information was placed before the people so they could make their own decisions.
I do not, have never and never will allow my future to be decided solely by such people as Presidents, Senators, Representatives, Ambassadors or bureaucrats in the employ of the government. I find they have agendas contrary to mine and therefore are NOT my friends. I will decide my own destiny and suggest YOU do the same. This is done by voting and holding your representatives in government at all levels responsible for their actions.
It’s understood there will always be instances where some things must be kept secret. But, when exactly was it decided my right to any privacy was done away with because some nutcases with box cutters flew planes into buildings effectively starting a war the idiot presently in the Oval office refuses to admit to.
Nobody has ever asked the American public if they would approve of the wide-scale demolition of Constitutional rights to catch terrorists. It would be a novel thought if the people trusted to put the administration in power was trusted to decide their own futures and the direction of their government.
Thanks for listening