Treason: You are liars. You are cowards. You are scum.

[kpete]

Treason
By Don Henry Ford Jr., on June 22nd, 2013

In light of recent charges filed against Edward Snowden, I, as a citizen of the United States charge members of Congress, the White House, the Department of Justice, The FBI, the CIA and the NSA with aiding and abetting enemies of the United States (citizens).

With violating your oaths to defend the constitution of the United States.

With misprison of a felony (multiple counts).

And treason.

You are liars.

You are cowards.

You are scum.

- See more at: http://agonist.org/#sthash.j4EzVYsv.a8LpwoBr.dpuf

[Arctic Dave]

1. Hear hear.

[Narkos]

2. Fuck this noise

What the fuck happened to DU? It's turned into tea bag territory and it's embarrassing

[railsback]

3. Don't go there

They will try to get you banned for observing the obvious.

[Narkos]

4. Oh, I'll go there

This place has turned into a bizarro world

[railsback]

8. Maybe we should start one of those 'safe havens'

for those who've been temporarily banned for 'stepping out of line'.

I've got like 4 already, and not even to 1000 posts.

[okaawhatever]

12. Yes it has and it's the same group of people. This thread is a perfect example of one

of that group posting inciting threads when we begin to return to normal. Gotta stir the pot some more. There is a definite pattern here. Sad.

[Marr]

49. It certainly has.

Not too long ago, everyone here was against broad brush domestic surveillance, and a collection of other Bush era policies.

[im1013]

54. +100!!

[sibelian]

60. Thank you.

[Hydra]

85. +1000

Bush policies are all fine when a (D) is doing it!

[SammyWinstonJack]

89. +1.

[Fire Walk With Me]

6. Anyone who speaks out against a corporate/neocon owned government is automatically

a Koch brothers shill? Nice. Sorry, but this entire nation was founded upon calling BULLSHIT to BULLSHIT.

[Fire Walk With Me]

11. Ignoring your pathetic insult, I shall begin to detail what you are obviously utterly ignoring:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3072552

Start paying attention. Your ignorance is what is actually insulting here, not your accusations.

[Narkos]

13. Jesus dude, a blue link?

[Fire Walk With Me]

16. Yes, a link to facts which you are very obvious willfully ignoring. Ignorance isn't bliss.

All you have are name-calling and purposeful ignorance. Yet you position yourself as important? Much is wrong in America, and this brief exchange highlights a vast amount of it.

Hopefully someday those who sling shit may (HA!) actually become willing to engage in conversation and research, instead of simply throwing fecal matter. Best luck with such.

[Narkos]

22. Blue links are not substitutes for discussion

[SwampG8r]

73. tell that to prosense lol nt

[sabrina 1]

21. But you didn't answer the question. You haven't stated your position at least in this thread, on the

issue of the Government violating the rights of Americans. Do you support this vast 'collection and storing' of every American's phone records 'which could be used in the future if need be'?

I don't, I didn't when Bush was doing it. So does that make me a teabagger, Koch Brothers, Alex Jones, got any more, I am not that familiar with all these people, follower, or am I just someone who respects this country's laws because they are what make us a democracy?

[Narkos]

25. Smith vs Maryland 1979

Took you a long time to be outraged

[sabrina 1]

33. I don't know you, have we met? No, it didn't take me a long time to be outraged.

I've been outraged for so long about this issue that I made sure to work as hard as I could to get rid of the Republicans who supported all of Bush's horrific programs and to get Democrats into power so we could begin the process of returning to some semblance of democracy. Starting with prosecuting war criminals, ending Bush policies, appointing DEMOCRATS, not REPUBLICANS to a Democratic Administration.

I thought the days of being outraged, which gets exhausting after a while, were coming to an end as we dismantled the surveillance state, the Patriot Act, and all the other Orwellian named 'programs' instituted by the Bush war criminals and their corrupt Wall St buddies.

Instead I am still outraged. It's been nearly five years since we danced in the streets.

So yes, those of us who were always outraged over these policies and are not about to grow to love them just because our team is doing it, 'sound like Alex Jones, Ron Paul, are Racists, Teabaggers, Right Wingers etc etc.

This is what you implied. And those of us who refuse to learn to love the surveillance state don't give a tinkers curse what those who are willing to support Bush policies have to say.

[Narkos]

36. Okay. That's a reasonable opinion

[Egalitarian Thug]

74. If only you had been reasonable first, you might be able to reply to this. n/t

[JDPriestly]

52. There was no internet in 1979. The government was not doing massive

surveillance in 1979. Smith v. Maryland has only very limited, very marginal relevance to the program we are discussing now.

It will probably take a long time and quite a few decisions, but eventually, the Supreme Court will realize that this massive surveillance is incompatible with the Constitution on a number of grounds.

Not only does it deprive individual Americans of their innate right to express themselves freely with each other, but it elevates the executive branch of our government far above the others by giving the executive the authority to collect the metadata on anyone serving in the other branches as well as anyone running for office for the legislature. Thus the separation of powers is jeopardized, actually nonexistent when the executive can spy on the members of the other branches of government. So we have a constitutional crisis. A lot of people don't understand that, but that is where we are. Smith v. Maryland has nothing to do with the current situation. It dealt only with the Fourth Amendment issues and its use in convicting a criminal. It did not concern collecting information on law abiding citizens with absolutely no reason to do it other than that it is possible o do it.

In Smith v. Maryland, Thurgood Marshall dissented saying among other things:

The use of pen registers, I believe, constitutes such an extensive intrusion. To hold otherwise ignores the vital role telephonic communication plays in our personal and professional relationships, see Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. at 389 U. S. 352, as well as the First and Fourth Amendment interests implicated by unfettered official surveillance. Privacy in placing calls is of value not only to those engaged in criminal activity. The prospect of unregulated governmental monitoring will undoubtedly prove disturbing even to those with nothing illicit to hide. Many individuals, including members of unpopular political organizations or journalists with confidential sources, may legitimately wish to avoid disclosure of their personal contacts. See NAACP v. Alabama, 357 U. S. 449, 357 U. S. 463 (1958); Branzburg v. Hayes, 408 U. S. 665, 408 U. S. 695 (1972); id. at 408 U. S. 728-734 (STEWART, J., dissenting). Permitting governmental access to telephone records on less than probable cause may thus impede certain forms of political affiliation and journalistic endeavor that are the hallmark of a truly free society. Particularly given the Government's previous reliance on warrantless telephonic surveillance to trace reporters' sources and monitor protected political activity, [Footnote 3/2] I am unwilling to insulate use of pen registers from independent judicial review.

. . . .

BLACKMUN, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which BURGER, C.J., and WHITE, REHNQUIST, and STEVENS, JJ., joined. STEWART, J., post, p. 442 U. S. 746, and MARSHALL, J., post, p. 442 U. S. 748, filed dissenting opinions, in which BRENNAN, J., joined. POWELL, J., took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.

http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/442/735/case.html

About Thurgood Marshall:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thurgood_Marshall

He was a liberal and one of the most distinguished and best Supreme Court Justices in the history of our nation.

It is not uncommon that the Supreme Court confronting new facts turns to a dissent in a former case for guidance in issuing an opinion. And the Thurgood Marshall dissent in Smith v. Maryland is an excellent dissent, well reasoned.

The facts in this massive surveillance system that permits analysis all the metadata to create a picture, a sketch of someone under surveillance and their connections are very different from those in Smith v. Maryland in which a suspect's telephone records were obtained without a subpoena. In Smith v. Maryland, the police were examining the records of a specific person without a warrant. They were not just willy-nilly examining all connections of most of the communications of masses of people. They did not have the computer capacity to handle that much information.

So I would not count on Smith v. Maryland's precedent. The facts are very different. Smith v. Maryland might carry the day in some decisions for a few years, but if we continue to have anything resembling our current constitutional government, Smith v. Maryland will eventually be overturned, I think, at least with regard to this massive surveillance.

In addition to everything I have already explained, the authorities who are collecting this so-called metadata have the ability to make a lot more sense of it by using computers than they did in 1979. I would also like to point out that in 1979, the government was not collecting the metadata of members of Congress or of members of the judicial branch of government.

This new surveillance does not just raise 4th Amendment issues but also raises 1st Amendment and other human rights issues as well as separation of powers issues. Thurgood Marshall -- as usual a visionary who saw much further than his contemporaries on the court.

Sorry if I am rambling. It is getting late.

[tk2kewl]

81. Nicely done

I wonder why Narkos has not rebutted...

[HiPointDem]

45. you sound like a troll

[SidDithers]

72. Zombie of Hannah Bell calling another DUer a troll...

Sid

[railsback]

18. Shit flies fast in cyberspace

[img][/img]

As long as you're willing to put it out there… and it gets logged… and then some server administrator decides to jack it. Its really up to you and no one else.

[Monkie]

64. so why did you hide your search criteria, this is a edited document

you have no problems with the lies of clapper and mueller and obama? because this is a fact, the leaks and the reactions too these leaks have proven that all three have lied, the last one being obama, now obama only lied to the american public in a statement, but the others lied to those elected by the people of the US , those who have a constitutional duty of oversight.
the documentary proof is there, the chronology of the leaks and the recorded statements, on video, of clapper and mueller and obama do not lie.

[railsback]

80. Geezus

Just a verbatim quote in Google. And there it is for billions across the globe to see. Its really not that hard to understand.. unless you don't want to.

[cliffordu]

28. Our OP friend has never varied from that stance,

except that he /she has now included others in the hatred of the president.

[Rise Rebel Resist]

53. funny how whenever the indefensible needs defending

the misguided starts saying their motives must be hate.






Maybe their racist too

[cliffordu]

63. It's they're, not their.

[Rise Rebel Resist]

66. LOL

id love you if it wasnt for the stuff you guys smear yourselves in. defending the indefensible.




whatever makes you think is holding up the crumbling fort. just remember to wash your hands

[Rise Rebel Resist]

67. LOL .

id love you if it wasnt for the stuff you guys smear yourselves in. defending the indefensible.




whatever makes you think is holding up the crumbling fort. just remember to wash your hands

[alcibiades_mystery]

71. I love how some of these assclowns have decided (among themselves, of course)

that they've "defeated" some kind of "racism talking point."

No, actually, a lot of them are fucking racists, as clear as day, and you can pile up all 250 of their little clique to deny it, but that doesn't change the fact.

[Number23]

87. Nailed it again. SPOT ON.

these assclowns have decided (among themselves, of course) that they've "defeated" some kind of "racism talking point."

What they fail to understand is that if anything, their non-stop braying has done nothing but add a thick, shiny layer of truth to the point that many posters have made that racism couldn't be ruled out as a reason for so much of the dishonest smears tossed at this president.

[Number23]

34. + a million. Some of us have been saying that for years

I remember when the Tea Party first emerged and some on DU were running around saying that DUers should stop hating and find "common ground" with the Tea Baggers.

And when minority posters said "but they are racist" many of us were accused of inciting hatred and "focusing more on our differences than our similarities." SHOCKINGLY ((!! )) some of these same folks were the first to jump on the Snowden bandwagon.

[JustAnotherGen]

68. +1

Yeah - I remember them wanting us to overlook the witch doctor pic. For some reason that thread stayed with me. . .

[Number23]

86. "For some reason that thread stayed with me..."

Probably because one of the main ones encouraging solidarity with tea baggers was the one you said is the only person you've ever put on ignore for other racially questionable comments. Funny that, huh?

[SunSeeker]

41. +1

[Hissyspit]

42. You can ask me. I've been here for ten years.

It seems very much like it did 10 years ago.

[Tx4obama]

5. The author of that piece of crap can Go F*CK himself.

Fuck Don Henry Ford Jr

Fuck Rand Paul

and...

Fuck Edward Snowden

[blkmusclmachine]

26. -1.

[Progressive dog]

78. +1

This Ford guy is some sort of admitted convicted felon and a Ron Paul for president guy. He thinks he's a cowboy.
Fuck him and the horses he rode in on.

[cthulu2016]

7. This is very silly.

How could the US government commit "treason"? Who is "the enemy"? The enemy of what?

Who are we (the people) in a legal state of war with?

Who are we (the united states) in a legal state of war with?

Makes no sense at all.

[Fire Walk With Me]

14. The neocons and the Bush Disaster Family, whose initiatives have resulted in the trouble we see

today. The very surveillance state. Their whittling away through it, the Constitution (we've lost the 1st, 4th, and 5th Amendments). The billionaire and corporate revolving door into the white house and through associations such as ALEC, corporations actually writing laws which states adopt (such as the "stand your ground" law in the Trayvon Martin case). The Trans-Pacific Partnership which is ALEC gone international. Alan Grayson wrote about it this week, here on DU, saying it removes our country from us, should it be allowed to pass.

Those things, and more.

[Narkos]

15. I think you belong over at Infowars

We try to do rational discussion over here

[Fire Walk With Me]

17. Like just now when you utterly ignored my link to facts to support my position

which you could only engage with personal insult? Pot calling the kettle very black.

[Union Scribe]

19. Who's we?

You just woke up from some DU coma to complain about posters here. I haven't seen you discuss anything.

[Narkos]

20. "We" are progressives who place a

Premium on reasoned thought and logic, unlike our conservative brothers and sisters. I am alarmed at the emotionalism and lack of perspective I've observed at DU these last few days. Very disappointing.

[ReRe]

47. Ha! There isn't a "Progressive" or Democratic bone in your body or mind! n/t

[sabrina 1]

24. You seem very familiar with Infowars. And rational discussion here? Didn't you just contradict

yourself right in this thread? Why do you read Infowars btw, everyone here knows that is a CT site.

[Narkos]

27. ?

[Hissyspit]

44. Really? You seem to be ranting and insulting to me.

Lecturing someone with 38,000 posts about what is done here?

[Monkie]

65. help me understand the RW/Paulite/Commie/Chinese/Racist plot to take down the president and profit?

i asked this question and nobody could explain it to me.
you speak of rationality, and attempt to smear others as conspiracy theorists, but explain this plot to me please.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023076814

[freedom fighter jh]

69. Treason: the betrayal of a trust

That's from merriam-webster.com .

The U.S. government has betrayed the trust of the American people by establishing a surveillance state that can't help but spy on all of us all the time, in clear violation of the the spirit of the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, regardless of what kind of legal fig leaves they may have sewn for themselves.

[geek tragedy]

9. The author is a Ron Paul supporter, so his nutty rant

should draw support from a very predictable group of characters.

Oh, and he's a former business partner of the Mexican drug cartels.

[sabrina 1]

29. You know so much about all these CTs, Right Wingers, Alex Jones et al. I've asked you before, why

do you spend so much time on those sites? It's not good to spend that much time on right wing sites, it can start to affect your views. I can give you some links to some great Progressive Dem sites which is where I spend my time. Just say the word, 'cause I've noticed that people who frequent those sites start to sound like them after a while.

[geek tragedy]

31. It's called 'google.' nt

[sabrina 1]

35. I know about google, I use it to get factual information from reliable and credible sources.

[geek tragedy]

37. I was citing accurate information about

the author of this opinion piece.

[Number23]

40. !!!

[Narkos]

32. Gee thanks, Sabrina

[ReRe]

48. Another question: Why do they spend so much time on THIS site?

[sabrina 1]

75. Yes, that is a good question. But in a way, it's good to air these CTs where there are informed

people to provide facts, from credible sources.

[ReRe]

79. I guess you're right...

... but it seems like their MO is to antagonize and not to learn anything.

[pnwmom]

55. You don't have to spend any time on those sites to identify these people.

All you have to do is spend a few seconds googling to find out the background of a writer of a diatribe like this.

[redgreenandblue]

57. Do you have anything except ad-hominem attacks?

Defending total government surveillance of communication is a far-right stance. You and a certain group of people here seem to be hell-bent on defending this far-right stance via personal attacks.

[geek tragedy]

70. The post itself was insane gibberish worthy of a Larouchie.

A word salad of legal terms.

[sabrina 1]

77. ...

I think it's always a good thing to have right wing talking points available here where they can be effectively ripped to shreds.

Some people are just misguided but DU has always been a good place to find the truth and expose the propaganda. Too many informed people here for propaganda to flourish.

[Fire Walk With Me]

23. How in the world can anyone, especially a liberal or dem, support the neocon/Bush/Cheney protocols?

And even attack people who question them ("patriot act", etc.)? Hello, the surveillance state was initiated and built by the neocons and the Bush family. Yet people are arguing for it, viscerally. Remember:

"You are either with us or you are with the terrorists".

From the sons of bitches who stole at least one presidential election? Why the fuck would you trust and defend them?

Unfuckingbelievable.

[sabrina 1]

30. Good question, Fire, a lot of people are asking it.

[Narkos]

39. Bush did it without oversight

[pnwmom]

56. These are not the protocols of the Bush administration. They engaged in warrantless wiretapping

and the Obama administration does not.

[Fire Walk With Me]

58. I know that some of it is older than the neocon project for a new American century

but why in the world can you absolutely state that Obama does not engage in warrantless wiretapping as though you have some inside perspective, not merely an opinion? When this president has over and over proven himself to be a complete disaster regarding our civil liberties, has resulted in the elimination of the 1st, 4th, and 5th Amendments, engaged in literal domestic terrorism against the Occupy Wall Street movement (yeah, they said they weren't spying on us either, yet FOIA documents prove DHS and FBI and likely even more because they now share documents through fusion centers, LIED about spying upon us, as well as sharing our information and their findings with the very corporations and banks we were pointing out to be The Problem)...Obama is a shill for wall street and the banksters who nearly ruined the economy, providing them with continuing billions of taxpayer dollars in bailouts while forcing "austerity" in the form of "sequestration" upon the rest of us...extrajudicial execution of US citizens suspected of terrorism or terrorist links...twice signing the NDAA section 1021 providing for the indefinite detention of US citizens with neither trial nor representation, and the NDAA 2014 being about indefinite surveillance...sure, I believe everything they claim.

This is all nothing but a continuation and strengthening of the neocon/Bush doctrine. There are no fucking terrorists. Americans are not fucking terrorists. This is a power grab of amazing proportions. This is:

Ron Suskind, quoting an unnamed aide to George W. Bush (later attributed to Karl Rove[1]):

The aide said that guys like me were "in what we call the reality-based community," which he defined as people who "believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality." ... "That's not the way the world really works anymore," he continued. "We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality—judiciously, as you will—we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors…and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do."[2]

And they're still doing it. Obama is one of them, and is helping it along quite handily. Because one Republican president later (and remember, they steal elections), and activists and protesters and journalists and journalists sources and everyone who looks at them wrong can be Gitmo'd. Period, and seriously. All of the provisions are now in place. All that remains is to use them. This is not going to reverse. This is also no mistake. This is orchestrated, and continuous.

[pnwmom]

59. Why should I believe Ed Snowden, the guy who's running around to China, Russia,

and who knows where else with HIS interpretations of the thousands of stolen classified documents?

[Fire Walk With Me]

62. You certainly do not have to. But perhaps you should take into consideration the reasons I've posted

about why you should -not- believe Obama. For instance, section 1061 of the 2014 NDAA, which provides for analysis of metadata. Which is exactly why metadata is very, very dangerous. It's already causing journalist's sources to shut up, quelling the free press and the very transparency Obama said would be a touchstone of his administration.

When you see how systematic this is, how orchestrated, and how no one is forcing him to do it or are tying his hands from stopping it, it should become clear enough to be extremely worrisome, at minimum.

NDAA 2014, indefinite surveillance:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023057822

[Fire Walk With Me]

61. Oops, wrong place.

[autorank]

38. Nice find kpete

[99th_Monkey]

46. Some peeps on DU can say anything, others not so much

when I posted similar sentements from someone at Daily Kos today, here was what happened.
I'd pass along the article, but since it was scrubbed, I lost track of the link.

Anyway, good luck not getting banned.

Message hidden by jury decision

A Jury voted 5-1 to hide this post on Sun Jun 23, 2013, 03:19 PM. Reason: This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate. (See Community Standards.) When the original post in a discussion thread is hidden by Jury decision, the entire discussion thread is automatically locked so new replies cannot be posted. Show post.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023077158#post6
I even had 17 recs and counting.

[DeSwiss]

50. ''Scum,'' is a call for All That Is to make......

...but huzzah on all the rest of the FACTS!

- K&R

[Democracyinkind]

76. Seconded.

The use of scum is indicative of a world view.

Where does the "Swiss" in your screenname come from? Is it to be read in french and literally? I always wondered. Feel free to answer me in a PM if the question is too private...

[DeSwiss]

82. It is a homage to my ancestors.....

In particular to the guy who made regular trips down to the slave shacks:

[Democracyinkind]

83. Cool. I currently live in Bern.

There's still plenty of von Graffenrieds around

Thanks for sharing!

[ReRe]

51. Great link, kpete!

Thanks! When I seen your OP Title and your name, I thought, "Oh no! kpete has crossed over to the other side!" You can beat me now or later.

I happen to agree with Mr Henry Ford, Jr. How the NSA can say Snowden broke the law and is a traitor, and not admit the same to themselves when they look in a mirror, I will never know. Who's zoomin' who, here? Snowden's just one. What about the 1.4 Million others that work in the NSA? Who carries the greater guilt? One man or 1.4 million men/women?

[Cha]

84. You are a massive ignorant Dickhead, Don Henry Ford Jr.

[Number23]

88. Cha, you crack me up.

38 recs. You know something is bad when even the usual crowd that live in GD like squatters don't lap something this absurd up with a knife and spoon. All while the most desperately clueless among them pat themselves on the back with how "informed" they are and immune to "propaganda."

This place is utterly hilarious.

[Cha]

90. It actually is a Freaking crackup, 23..

unbridled stupid.