Civil Libertarians Need Not Apply...

[flacaltenn]

There's a recurring theme about this Snowden affair and it's coming from BOTH the left and right of politics and ESPECIALLY the Federal Employees Union..

And that theme is that

1) There are too many contractors in sensitive intel operations.

2) Snowden's vetting was "inadequate" and a principle cause of this leak.

Both of these should be separate topics.. Anyone promulgating #1 is ignorant about the level of expertise and construction capabilities inside the Fed Govt. The number of super secret gadgets required by the INtel community is very large. It would not serve the country to DUPLICATE or REINVENT all of the technology and expertise that resides already PRIMARILY in the private sector. That's stupidity. And arguably -- it's damn near impossible to do that..

Most folks think that NASA got us to the moon. They were the program directors. Grumman, Lockheed, GE, and 30 others -- got us to the moon..

I want to discuss #2.. The assumption that Snowden's security vetting was inadequate is a wild ass guess. NO ONE spouting this nonsense has a CLUE what they found or missed. But the DANGEROUS IMPLICATION is "that a guy like Snowden, with his dangerous Libertarian outlook on civil liberties, should never have been let NEAR a security clearance in the Intel field..

This is truly Scary.. Especially given the other discoveries we're making about govt abuse AND that it's coming from the LEFT and RIGHT at the same time.

What are these idiots thinking? That voting for Ron Paul should be an immediate disqualification? That having a person who vigorously DEFENDS the Constitution and Bill of Rights is a threat to National Security?

That we'd be better off if we PRUNED anyone with a sense of political morality from Govt service? I think that's what they're saying. Because I have NO IDEA what other point they might be trying to make..

 

[Clementine]

Patriots, those who believe 100% in our constitution, the typical red-blooded American citizen who hunts, flies the American flag, served their country in the military, loves freedom of speech and hates paying high taxes seem to be considered enemies of the state these days. The government no longer works for the people. We work for them. We aren't supposed to complain about anything they do (on the rare occasions we find out what they're doing) or we are called names. Disagree with ignoring our immigration laws and we're racist. Disagree with Obamacare and we're racist and uncaring. Disagree with high taxes and we are racist, uncaring and greedy. They want blind obedience and total compliance with their agenda.

We're being spied on and there is no respect for our rights. I think the left is in the midst of a hostile takeover of capitalist America and they have other ideas about what this country should be.

Of course they don't want dissenters to have jobs where they are privy to sensitive or secret info. Whistleblowers are only popular when they expose your enemies, not you.

I'm still on the fence about his Snowden guy, but if people like him don't come forth and tell us what is going on, how else will we know that our rights are being trampled by the very people who have sworn to protect them?

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

The government has become this way because we've allowed them to. The American people are weaklings and cowards. We as a people have allowed ourselves to be emasculated under the phony guise of keeping us "safe" from terrorism. The thing is, terrorism has always existed and 9/11 wasn't the first time we've felt it in our nation's history, yet somehow we've allowed it to be the excuse to erode our civil liberties. People in this country are just pathetic anymore. Our ancestors fought and died for jack shit.

 

[Contumacious]

the government has become this way because we've allowed them to. The american people are weaklings and cowards. We as a people have allowed ourselves to be emasculated under the phony guise of keeping us "safe" from terrorism. The thing is, terrorism has always existed and 9/11 wasn't the first time we've felt it in our nation's history, yet somehow we've allowed it to be the excuse to erode our civil liberties. People in this country are just pathetic anymore. Our ancestors fought and died for jack shit.

.

 

[waltky]

Gonna be hard for other countries to trust us now...

Snowden leaks caused US 'significant harm' - Mueller
13 June 2013 > The disclosure last week of a pair of top secret surveillance programmes has caused the US "significant harm", the head of the FBI has said.

Robert Mueller also told Congress the US would hunt down and prosecute leaker Edward Snowden. Mr Snowden, 29, has admitted disclosing information about National Security Agency (NSA) programmes that seize data from US internet and telephone firms. US officials have promised their own disclosures about the programmes. "We want to provide the American people the information," NSA chief Gen Keith Alexander said following a closed-door briefing to members of the House of Representatives intelligence committee.

He said authorities were reviewing some of the "dozens" of terrorist attacks thwarted with the help of the NSA programmes, "so that we can get more information out to the public". "I think it's important that you have that information," he said. "But we don't want to risk American lives in doing that."

'Exceptionally vulnerable'

Gen Alexander's remarks came amid a flurry of news conferences and hearings on Thursday as Washington grapples with the fallout from last week's disclosures in the Guardian and Washington Post newspapers. Mr Snowden, a former CIA and NSA contract worker, has admitted giving the newspapers information about NSA programmes that seize vast quantities of data on telephone calls and internet communications from US internet and telephone companies. In testimony in the House judiciary committee, Mr Mueller said those leaks had caused "significant harm to our nation and to our safety".

The FBI director, who is due to step down in September after 12 years in the job, said the history of US intelligence gathering showed plotters adapt their methods after leaks of classified intelligence material. "One of my problems is that we're going to... lose our ability to get their communications," Mr Mueller said. "We are going to be exceptionally vulnerable."

In a press conference after the briefing with Gen Alexander, House intelligence committee chairman Mike Rogers said officials hoped to make public next week the details of terror plots supposedly thwarted by information gained from the programmes. Mr Rogers, a Michigan Republican, said further disclosures would reassure Americans about the scope of US surveillance efforts, including data gathered from phone records. "There are no American names in that lockbox," he said. "There are only numbers in that lockbox."

Sceptics

See also:

US electronic snooping may hurt ties with China
- China's state media, after days of quiet over exposed US electronic surveillance, Thursday warned that the controversial disclosures could damage relations between the two countries.

Reports in state-owned media are considered to be next only to an official response. "The massive US global surveillance programme revealed by a former National Security Agency employee in Hong Kong is certain to stain Washington's overseas image and test developing Sino-US ties," the state-run China Daily said in an article. It cited analysts to support the claim of threat to the bilateral US-China ties.

It quoted Li Haidong, a researcher of American studies at China Foreign Affairs University, warning of the impact the disclosure could have on relations between the United States and China. "For months, Washington has been accusing China of cyber espionage, but it turns out that the biggest threat to the pursuit of individual freedom and privacy in the US is the unbridled power of the government," Li told the newspaper. Edward Snowden, the whistleblower of US' controversial electronic surveillance programme, is believed to be hiding in Hong Kong, the city administered by China, but which has a large degree of legal autonomy.

Newspapers in Hong Kong were full of stories related to Snowden who has galvanised support from human rights activists, who have vowed to fight the former CIA employee's possible extradition to the US. The Global Times, part of the Communist Party-run People's Daily group, called for assertive Chinese action to confront Washington in the wake of Snowden's disclosure. "Before the US government rushes to shut Snowden's mouth, China also needs to seek an explanation from Washington," the newspaper said in an editorial. "We are not bystanders. The issue of whether the U.S. as an Internet superpower has abused its powers touches on our vital interests directly."

Meanwhile, spokeswoman for China's Ministry of Foreign Affairs Hua Chunying Thursday refused to speak to reporters about the issue saying she had "no relevant information to supply". "Just like what I've repeated here multiple times, China is also a victim to the most sophisticated cyber hacking," she said. "We're willing to engage with the international community in constructive dialogue and cooperation so as to jointly safeguard the peace, security, openness and cooperation of the cyberspace."

US electronic snooping may hurt ties with China | Big News Network

 

[Lakhota]

The assumption that Snowden's security vetting was inadequate is a wild ass guess. NO ONE spouting this nonsense has a CLUE what they found or missed. But the DANGEROUS IMPLICATION is "that a guy like Snowden, with his dangerous Libertarian outlook on civil liberties, should never have been let NEAR a security clearance in the Intel field..

What could possibly go wrong?

 

[TemplarKormac]

The assumption that Snowden's security vetting was inadequate is a wild ass guess. NO ONE spouting this nonsense has a CLUE what they found or missed. But the DANGEROUS IMPLICATION is "that a guy like Snowden, with his dangerous Libertarian outlook on civil liberties, should never have been let NEAR a security clearance in the Intel field..

What could possibly go wrong?

What do you mean? It already went wrong. Your government love went wrong, and now we are all paying the price.

 

[flacaltenn]

Gonna be hard for other countries to trust us now...

Snowden leaks caused US 'significant harm' - Mueller
13 June 2013 > The disclosure last week of a pair of top secret surveillance programmes has caused the US "significant harm", the head of the FBI has said.

Robert Mueller also told Congress the US would hunt down and prosecute leaker Edward Snowden. Mr Snowden, 29, has admitted disclosing information about National Security Agency (NSA) programmes that seize data from US internet and telephone firms. US officials have promised their own disclosures about the programmes. "We want to provide the American people the information," NSA chief Gen Keith Alexander said following a closed-door briefing to members of the House of Representatives intelligence committee.

He said authorities were reviewing some of the "dozens" of terrorist attacks thwarted with the help of the NSA programmes, "so that we can get more information out to the public". "I think it's important that you have that information," he said. "But we don't want to risk American lives in doing that."

'Exceptionally vulnerable'

Gen Alexander's remarks came amid a flurry of news conferences and hearings on Thursday as Washington grapples with the fallout from last week's disclosures in the Guardian and Washington Post newspapers. Mr Snowden, a former CIA and NSA contract worker, has admitted giving the newspapers information about NSA programmes that seize vast quantities of data on telephone calls and internet communications from US internet and telephone companies. In testimony in the House judiciary committee, Mr Mueller said those leaks had caused "significant harm to our nation and to our safety".

The FBI director, who is due to step down in September after 12 years in the job, said the history of US intelligence gathering showed plotters adapt their methods after leaks of classified intelligence material. "One of my problems is that we're going to... lose our ability to get their communications," Mr Mueller said. "We are going to be exceptionally vulnerable."

In a press conference after the briefing with Gen Alexander, House intelligence committee chairman Mike Rogers said officials hoped to make public next week the details of terror plots supposedly thwarted by information gained from the programmes. Mr Rogers, a Michigan Republican, said further disclosures would reassure Americans about the scope of US surveillance efforts, including data gathered from phone records. "There are no American names in that lockbox," he said. "There are only numbers in that lockbox."

Sceptics

See also:

When Mueller talks about "significant harm to our nation and to our safety" he is THINKING that damage stems from a reduction in the SECRET budget of our spies and an INCREASED OVERSIGHT of their SECRET programs. There's you damage. That big complex in Utah will make a great Olympic training facility won't it..

I'm filtering out MOST of these wailings and tuning into the folks who SHOULD be monitoring this spying FBI director defends surveillance programs - Nation - The Boston Globe

Representative John Conyers, the committee’s ranking Democrat, said, ‘‘It’s my fear that we are on the verge of becoming a surveillance state.’’

 

[flacaltenn]

The assumption that Snowden's security vetting was inadequate is a wild ass guess. NO ONE spouting this nonsense has a CLUE what they found or missed. But the DANGEROUS IMPLICATION is "that a guy like Snowden, with his dangerous Libertarian outlook on civil liberties, should never have been let NEAR a security clearance in the Intel field..

What could possibly go wrong?

What do you mean? It already went wrong. Your government love went wrong, and now we are all paying the price.

Lahkota doesn't understand the veiled threat of filtering Intel employees by their political leanings. SURE -- we exclude Communists and foreigners and subversive groups today. But Libertarians have already falsely ended up on "domestic terrorism" advisories. Tomorrow -- could be the Greens or supporters of some wild ass lefty candidate..

Sounds sinister to CLEAR the ranks of our Intel group of anyone who places GREAT value on Civil Liberty dont it?

Listen for it.. And REMEMBER the folks who are repeating this "suggestion"..

 

[kaz]

There's a recurring theme about this Snowden affair and it's coming from BOTH the left and right of politics and ESPECIALLY the Federal Employees Union..

And that theme is that

1) There are too many contractors in sensitive intel operations.

2) Snowden's vetting was "inadequate" and a principle cause of this leak.

Both of these should be separate topics.. Anyone promulgating #1 is ignorant about the level of expertise and construction capabilities inside the Fed Govt. The number of super secret gadgets required by the INtel community is very large. It would not serve the country to DUPLICATE or REINVENT all of the technology and expertise that resides already PRIMARILY in the private sector. That's stupidity. And arguably -- it's damn near impossible to do that..

Most folks think that NASA got us to the moon. They were the program directors. Grumman, Lockheed, GE, and 30 others -- got us to the moon..

I want to discuss #2.. The assumption that Snowden's security vetting was inadequate is a wild ass guess. NO ONE spouting this nonsense has a CLUE what they found or missed. But the DANGEROUS IMPLICATION is "that a guy like Snowden, with his dangerous Libertarian outlook on civil liberties, should never have been let NEAR a security clearance in the Intel field..

This is truly Scary.. Especially given the other discoveries we're making about govt abuse AND that it's coming from the LEFT and RIGHT at the same time.

What are these idiots thinking? That voting for Ron Paul should be an immediate disqualification? That having a person who vigorously DEFENDS the Constitution and Bill of Rights is a threat to National Security?

That we'd be better off if we PRUNED anyone with a sense of political morality from Govt service? I think that's what they're saying. Because I have NO IDEA what other point they might be trying to make..

The government needs to be worthy of having good men keep it's secrets. This was a clear case he chose the people over the government. He made the right choice.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

There's a recurring theme about this Snowden affair and it's coming from BOTH the left and right of politics and ESPECIALLY the Federal Employees Union..

And that theme is that

1) There are too many contractors in sensitive intel operations.

2) Snowden's vetting was "inadequate" and a principle cause of this leak.

Both of these should be separate topics.. Anyone promulgating #1 is ignorant about the level of expertise and construction capabilities inside the Fed Govt. The number of super secret gadgets required by the INtel community is very large. It would not serve the country to DUPLICATE or REINVENT all of the technology and expertise that resides already PRIMARILY in the private sector. That's stupidity. And arguably -- it's damn near impossible to do that..

Most folks think that NASA got us to the moon. They were the program directors. Grumman, Lockheed, GE, and 30 others -- got us to the moon..

I want to discuss #2.. The assumption that Snowden's security vetting was inadequate is a wild ass guess. NO ONE spouting this nonsense has a CLUE what they found or missed. But the DANGEROUS IMPLICATION is "that a guy like Snowden, with his dangerous Libertarian outlook on civil liberties, should never have been let NEAR a security clearance in the Intel field..

This is truly Scary.. Especially given the other discoveries we're making about govt abuse AND that it's coming from the LEFT and RIGHT at the same time.

What are these idiots thinking? That voting for Ron Paul should be an immediate disqualification? That having a person who vigorously DEFENDS the Constitution and Bill of Rights is a threat to National Security?

That we'd be better off if we PRUNED anyone with a sense of political morality from Govt service? I think that's what they're saying. Because I have NO IDEA what other point they might be trying to make..

This would depend on what is meant by 'vigorously defends' the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Liberals, for example, vigorously defend the Constitution and Bill of Rights, if not more so, given the fact they not only defend the Constitution, but its case law as well.

Moreover, liberals understand that the Constitution exists only in the context of its case law, that no right is absolute, and that acts of Congress are presumed to be Constitutional until a court rules otherwise.

Now, if libertarians reject the above settled and accepted principles, if they believe rights are 'absolute' and not subject to reasonable restrictions, if they reject Constitutional case law, and if they reject the Supreme Court’s authority to determine what the Constitution means, then that can certainly be problematic for a given libertarian seeking to join the intelligence community.

Does that mean a libertarian must be summarily disallowed government employment?

Of course not.

But given the libertarian propensity to be hostile to Constitutional case law, hostile to the doctrine of presumed constitutionality, hostile to the Federal judiciary, and hostile to the Federal government in general, a libertarian might be well advised to consider another profession.

 

[flacaltenn]

There's a recurring theme about this Snowden affair and it's coming from BOTH the left and right of politics and ESPECIALLY the Federal Employees Union..

And that theme is that

1) There are too many contractors in sensitive intel operations.

2) Snowden's vetting was "inadequate" and a principle cause of this leak.

Both of these should be separate topics.. Anyone promulgating #1 is ignorant about the level of expertise and construction capabilities inside the Fed Govt. The number of super secret gadgets required by the INtel community is very large. It would not serve the country to DUPLICATE or REINVENT all of the technology and expertise that resides already PRIMARILY in the private sector. That's stupidity. And arguably -- it's damn near impossible to do that..

Most folks think that NASA got us to the moon. They were the program directors. Grumman, Lockheed, GE, and 30 others -- got us to the moon..

I want to discuss #2.. The assumption that Snowden's security vetting was inadequate is a wild ass guess. NO ONE spouting this nonsense has a CLUE what they found or missed. But the DANGEROUS IMPLICATION is "that a guy like Snowden, with his dangerous Libertarian outlook on civil liberties, should never have been let NEAR a security clearance in the Intel field..

This is truly Scary.. Especially given the other discoveries we're making about govt abuse AND that it's coming from the LEFT and RIGHT at the same time.

What are these idiots thinking? That voting for Ron Paul should be an immediate disqualification? That having a person who vigorously DEFENDS the Constitution and Bill of Rights is a threat to National Security?

That we'd be better off if we PRUNED anyone with a sense of political morality from Govt service? I think that's what they're saying. Because I have NO IDEA what other point they might be trying to make..

This would depend on what is meant by 'vigorously defends' the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Liberals, for example, vigorously defend the Constitution and Bill of Rights, if not more so, given the fact they not only defend the Constitution, but its case law as well.

Moreover, liberals understand that the Constitution exists only in the context of its case law, that no right is absolute, and that acts of Congress are presumed to be Constitutional until a court rules otherwise.

Now, if libertarians reject the above settled and accepted principles, if they believe rights are 'absolute' and not subject to reasonable restrictions, if they reject Constitutional case law, and if they reject the Supreme Court’s authority to determine what the Constitution means, then that can certainly be problematic for a given libertarian seeking to join the intelligence community.

Does that mean a libertarian must be summarily disallowed government employment?

Of course not.

But given the libertarian propensity to be hostile to Constitutional case law, hostile to the doctrine of presumed constitutionality, hostile to the Federal judiciary, and hostile to the Federal government in general, a libertarian might be well advised to consider another profession.

Sorry Charlie --- You must have me confused with all those whining over Citizen's United. Or maybe a mental midget like Sean Hannity.

Libertarians are indistinguishable from True Liberals when it comes to realizing the FRAILITY of a 5 to 4 ruling at the High Court.. It's a roll of the dice -- NOT a re-interpretation of the Founders INTENT. THERE ARE some absolute rights from natural law that I BELIEVE and I like the way the Founders framed them.. YOU need to back off the "hostile to settled law" argument before you disqualify 90% of the Americans to have a job in the Intel Community..

Intel Community doesn't give a hoot about your stand on political funding or abortion or interstate commerce.. Let's see what the INTEL community would have a PROBLEM with about your POLITICAL bent.. Oh --- It's only the 4th and 5th amendments. Maybe the 9th and 10th, but not so much effect on their day to day operation.. So that narrows the interrogation that needs to be made.

Hire all the folks who LOVE Citizen surveillance and want to be safe from monsters hiding under the bed.. And REFUSE employment to ANYONE that questions the limits of ILLEGALITY occuring within the operations of the Intel Unit...

If we Libertarians are guilty of anything, it's a desire to ALARM folks WAAAAY before the fire occurs.
Now there are a few Constitutional issues SO ESOTERIC that I've not even comprehended them (or even tried), that are brought up at Libertarian gatherings. Stuff to do with currency and taxation.. That SOME Libertarians reject and want to change. Good luck. The mainstream of the movement and party aint goin on that hunting party.

Thanks for bringing TRUE Liberals into the picture here.. I believe they are rarer than even Libertarians these days. But they are our STRONGEST CONSISTENT allies on Civil Liberties. I would kiss Conyers today if I had the chance for being so consistent reliable.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

This would depend on what is meant by 'vigorously defends' the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Liberals, for example, vigorously defend the Constitution and Bill of Rights, if not more so, given the fact they not only defend the Constitution, but its case law as well.

Moreover, liberals understand that the Constitution exists only in the context of its case law, that no right is absolute, and that acts of Congress are presumed to be Constitutional until a court rules otherwise.

In other words, you have absolutely no thinking process of your own. You defend tyranny, slavery, and oppression if five people say it's okay. I guess we know who you would have sided with before Brown v Board of Education and in Germany while they were gassing the Jews.

There is a word for you and it's not liberal.

 

[flacaltenn]

The thread was about 2 talking points I had to suffer thru for the first 2 days of the Snowden Affair..

Just wanted to add something about the OTHER talking point..

1) There are too many contractors in sensitive intel operations.


Clearly, the major pushers of this are the Fed Employees Union and anti-market leftists.. But I heard it from some of the major Fox pimps as well.. These are folks that think the Fed Govt really does create and manufacture stuff all the time. And that the finest minds in the nation are available on the Federal payroll to satisfy any Congressional whim..

So ---- why just corporate contractors? What about ACADEMICS working in sensitive areas? You want to talk about security risk -- how about their proximity to 4/20 parties, causual hooking up, radical protest, and political bents on the margin?

Certainly, if great work is being done in encryption, or signal/image processing, or machine intelligence or robotics in academia -- For our safety, we ought to DUPLICATE all that in the Federal ranks.. Well that's what these jerks are saying