Julian Assange: Surveillance Apparatus ‘a Threat to U.S. Democracy’
Source: ABC News
WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange today dismissed criticism from British and U.S. intelligence officials who called recent leaks about secret surveillance programs a “gift” to terrorists, saying in an interview on “This Week” that the programs are a “threat to U.S. democracy.”
Andrew Parker, the new head of Britain’s domestic intelligence agency MI5, said in a speech Tuesday that the leaking of classified information about surveillance programs such as those by Edward Snowden “hands the advantage to the terrorists.”
NSA director Gen. Keith Alexander said Thursday that terrorists “listen, they see what has come out in the press and they adjust. … I believe people will die because we won’t be able to stop some of those threats.”
Assange, the mastermind behind WikiLeaks’ release of tens of thousands of secret documents online in recent years, rejected that notion today. “Every time the press embarrasses the security establishment, shows they have been acting unlawfully, against what they have said to Congress or to the media, they trot out this old canard, that some speculative harm sometime in the future might happen, when we’re discussing harm that is happening right now, as a result of these abusive programs,” Assange told George Stephanopoulos...
Read more: http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/10/julian-assange-surveillance-apparatus-a-threat-to-u-s-democracy/
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts).
4now
(1,596 posts)to the rape charges.
Indi Guy
(3,992 posts)...when articles of this nature are posted.
How do you feel about illegal surveillance 4now?
Zorra
(27,670 posts)
PSPS
(13,579 posts)Worshiper/Apologist Hit Parade:
1. This is nothing new
2. I have nothing to hide
3. What are you, a freeper?
4. But Obama is better than Christie/Romney/Bush/Hitler
5. Greenwald/Flaherty/Gillum/Apuzzo/Braun is a hack
6. We have red light cameras, so this is no big deal
7. Corporations have my data anyway
8. At least Obama is trying
9. This is just the media trying to take Obama down
10. It's a misunderstanding/you are confused
11. You're a racist
12. Nobody cares about this anyway / "unfounded fears"
13. I don't like Snowden, therefore we must disregard all of this
14. Other countries do it
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)good grief people do you even think about it before you support anyone who is an American detractor? Or are they all just one nebulous person to you now?
PSPS
(13,579 posts)VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)as an authority on American Democracy? Do you?
Fantastic Anarchist
(7,309 posts)And really, what difference does it make where he hails from?
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)Fantastic Anarchist
(7,309 posts)...just like anyone else.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)and some here hero worship him....of course an Anarchist would...I am not surprised!
Fantastic Anarchist
(7,309 posts)Derp!
Indi Guy
(3,992 posts)VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)exactly what would he know about American Democracy? Furthermore...I would guess he leans either Libertarian or Anarchist....So his view of what IS American Democracy will be skewwed by that as well.
Indi Guy
(3,992 posts)Also, since you're guessing that he's a Libertarian or Anarchist, you're only guessing that his view of our democracy is thusly skewed -- right?
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)Well is he a Democrat or a Republican?
Uncle Joe
(58,284 posts)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_assange
WikiLeaks was founded in 2006.[22][76] That year, Assange wrote two essays setting out the philosophy behind WikiLeaks: "To radically shift regime behaviour we must think clearly and boldly for if we have learned anything, it is that regimes do not want to be changed. We must think beyond those who have gone before us and discover technological changes that embolden us with ways to act in which our forebears could not."[77][78] In his blog he wrote, "the more secretive or unjust an organization is, the more leaks induce fear and paranoia in its leadership and planning coterie.... Since unjust systems, by their nature, induce opponents, and in many places barely have the upper hand, mass leaking leaves them exquisitely vulnerable to those who seek to replace them with more open forms of governance."[79]
Assange is the most prominent media spokesman on WikiLeaks' behalf. In June 2010, he was listed alongside several others as a member of the WikiLeaks advisory board.[80][81] While newspapers have described him as a "director"[82] or "founder"[46] of WikiLeaks, Assange has said, "I don't call myself a founder";[83] he does describe himself as the editor-in-chief of WikiLeaks,[84] and he has stated that he has the final decision in the process of vetting documents submitted to the site.[85] Assange says that WikiLeaks has released more classified documents than the rest of the world press combined: "That's not something I say as a way of saying how successful we are – rather, that shows you the parlous state of the rest of the media. How is it that a team of five people has managed to release to the public more suppressed information, at that level, than the rest of the world press combined? It's disgraceful."[76]
WikiLeaks has been involved in the publication of material documenting extrajudicial killings in Kenya, a report of toxic waste dumping on the coast of Côte d'Ivoire, Church of Scientology manuals, Guantanamo Bay detention camp procedures, the 12 July 2007 Baghdad airstrike video, and material involving large banks such as Kaupthing and Julius Baer among other documents.[86]
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)Wikileaks is not American Democracy...
Who the hell is HE to tell US what threatens it?
Uncle Joe
(58,284 posts)press outside our border?
Assange's contention re: that the more secretive and unjust organizations or nations are the more they induce fear and paranoia in its' leadership and planning coterie is a universal ideal.
In his blog he wrote, "the more secretive or unjust an organization is, the more leaks induce fear and paranoia in its leadership and planning coterie.... Since unjust systems, by their nature, induce opponents, and in many places barely have the upper hand, mass leaking leaves them exquisitely vulnerable to those who seek to replace them with more open forms of governance."
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)Are you suggesting Julian is a member of the press now?
He is a Libertarian...this is Democratic Underground. I think we know more about it than he does...TYVM
Uncle Joe
(58,284 posts)Furthermore political nor national affiliation has anything do with whether one is a member of the press or not.
I'm curious what is your definition of the press?
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)I think you forgot that part...
my definition of the press most certainly doesn't include the weasel Julian Assange. Although, he purports to be impressed with Republicans...so I am sure he would love a gig on Fox News!
Uncle Joe
(58,284 posts)History is full of autocratic nations run by dictators that hold "elections" with the winner already predetermined and the one major common denominator is they don't have a free press.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)Uncle Joe
(58,284 posts)You're putting the cart before the horse.
The U.S. Constitution was adopted on September 17th 1787.
The Bill of Rights including freedom of the press and freedom of speech in the very First Amendment wasn't ratified until December 15th 1791
No President was elected by the people until John Q, Adams election of 1824 and even that one had some shady underpinnings which eventually propelled Andrew Jackson to the White with a clear majority 647,286 popular votes and 178 electoral votes to John Q. Adams 508,064 popular votes and 83 electoral votes.
African American Men weren't allowed to vote until the 15th Amendment was ratified February 3rd 1870. Even after this with the advent of Jim Crow Laws, poll taxes etc. etc. were set up to deny them the right to vote.
The 17th Amendment allowing the American People to vote directly for their Senators wasn't ratified until May 31st 1918.
The 19th Amendment allowing American Women the right to vote wasn't ratified until August the 18th 1920.
Freedom of the press and freedom of speech directly led to those changes, along with the Civil War; but even that can be tied to a free press in motivating the people.
Without freedom of the press, you would have no elections of any consequence, this isn't a game what came first in regards to democracy, "the chicken or the egg," it was clearly the press.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)by this analogy the Republicans stealing people's votes are just all pretty much just another thing to take away as deemed appropriate.
I disagree...I think that was then this is now....What made us a great country was......elections......we could throw the bums out...what good is a free press...if you cannot throw the bums out?????
and this is neither here nor there...Assange is NOT a journalist...he can keep his silly ass in the consulate for eternity for all I care. He expected his followers to risk some skin in the game....but he is certainly all about saving his own....
Uncle Joe
(58,284 posts)actually used reason and logic in interpreting these paragraphs in my post, you would know that freedom of the press empowered the American People to adjust for those inequities.
The people didn't come out on their own in a vacuum, they had information which empowered them and in turn elevated our society.
No President was elected by the people until John Q, Adams election of 1824 and even that one had some shady underpinnings which eventually propelled Andrew Jackson to the White with a clear majority 647,286 popular votes and 178 electoral votes to John Q. Adams 508,064 popular votes and 83 electoral votes.
African American Men weren't allowed to vote until the 15th Amendment was ratified February 3rd 1870. Even after this with the advent of Jim Crow Laws, poll taxes etc. etc. were set up to deny them the right to vote.
The 17th Amendment allowing the American People to vote directly for their Senators wasn't ratified until May 31st 1918.
The 19th Amendment allowing American Women the right to vote wasn't ratified until August the 18th 1920.
"Throwing the bumbs out" is far more difficult if not impossible, if you don't have a free press.
Your claim of "that was then and this is now" basically disregarding history along with human nature and supporting your diminishment of a free press can only lead to putting the bums (Republicans and otherwise) in to power with less chance of ever having them thrown out.
Furthermore no where in the 1st Amendment does it say you or anyone else has to like someone for them to be a member of the press or to have freedom of speech.
If that were the case, there is no doubt we wouldn't have a free press and in turn no free elections.
RC
(25,592 posts)When are the rest of us going to realize this country IS the worlds problem, that Snowden, Manning, Assange, etc, are trying to expose? How can the rest of us, knowing how corrupt our government is, still support the people doing the wrongs? Instead we demonize those that expose those wrongs. 
Isn't this supposed to be Democratic Underground and aren't Liberals/Progressives supposed to be against what our country is doing and has become?
Why then do some of us here continue to sweep the criminal wrong doing under the rug and vilify the whistle blowers.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)why should I care what a self described Libertarian from Australia thinks about our country?
RC
(25,592 posts)VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)RC
(25,592 posts)Their 'crimes' are similar, in that that they all exposed wrong doing in out government.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)Julian doesn't fall into our jurisdiction...
We were discussing how an Anti-American foriegn national who publically states he supports the Libertarian cause....And we are supposed to give a Tinker's Damn what he thinks about what is destroying our Democracy. His statement that he supports the American Libertarian party...with the likes of Rand Paul...means this American doesn't give a rat's ass what he thinks..
reddread
(6,896 posts)VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)but good for laughs!
Please Please Please run Rand Paul next time....
Psephos
(8,032 posts)VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)reddread
(6,896 posts)or a psychiatrist.
either way, do you have a valid driver's license?
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)or did you forget you abhor govt authority....
reddread
(6,896 posts)since you have nothing to offer, and vice versa
farewell and adieu
barky bark.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)when you throw Libertarian crud back at em...
Indi Guy
(3,992 posts)Maybe you simply missed it so I'll give you another chance:
"When our surveillance agencies break the law and violate our constitution, including our constitutionally guaranteed rights as citizens, all on a massive scale -- do you consider this a threat worth being concerned with?"
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)because I give us more credit than you do...
Indi Guy
(3,992 posts)Nowhere have I ever said anything like "the end of our country as we know it." ...So please show some respect for the truth, and resist the urge to resort to childish straw man tactics.
I give "us" Americans plenty of credit. In fact, what you are scorning here is exactly the thing you're promoting i.e, our ability to defend and uphold our constitution. That's precisely what I'm doing here.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)Indi Guy
(3,992 posts)Well at least you didn't resort to name calling, as some people do when at a loss for words.
Fantastic Anarchist
(7,309 posts)Response to VanillaRhapsody (Reply #31)
Luminous Animal This message was self-deleted by its author.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)could be....
RC
(25,592 posts)I do not think the actions of the NSA reflect the either the spirit nor the ideals of America. Let alone Constitutional muster.
Apparently you like secret surveillance police states? That was not how our Founding Fathers envisioned this country.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)He is an Australian...he should mind his own damn business! I am sure there are plenty of fucked up things the Australian govt does he can focus on...
If you or I went to Australia and started telling them what was "good or bad for them" do you think they would appreciate that? I happen to know some non-political Australians so don't try to bullshit me...
I thought you Libertarian types were all about "self-reliance" and all that rot....then shouldn't he be minding his business...like you also think Americans should?
RC
(25,592 posts)Maybe that is why you are having a problem with Julian Assange. Aussies are too Liberal.
Libertarian? Me? Boy are you off base. Maybe this will help:
I am to the Left of Center, a little to the Right of where that nail is.
And that Donkey is facing the wrong way. I may fix that soon, if we keep moving to the Right.
Fantastic Anarchist
(7,309 posts)I'm in the red are on the far left.
RC
(25,592 posts)
bvar22
(39,909 posts)Its OK if OUR guy does it!!!
GO TEAM!!!!
Do you have a date for the Homecoming dance yet?
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)bvar22
(39,909 posts)....as all the evidence you have provided on DU illustrates.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)Just because you don't like my positions doesn't make you an authority on ME!
and I am not the one looking for an Anti-American hero...
bvar22
(39,909 posts)Breaking Bad News for VanillaRhapsody.
Julian Assange has WAY more cred than you do.
But Keep Up the Good Work attacking the defenders of our Democracy!
Maybe some day all those stupid people in the World will recognize your Greatness, Brilliance, and Courage!
It could happen if you clap enough and wish hard enough!
Violet_Crumble
(35,955 posts)And why are you so convinced that if someone's not American, they must know nothing of US politics? Just because a lot of Americans don't know anything or have much interest in what happens outside the US, don't make the mistake of thinking the same happens in reverse.
I've been critical of Julian Assange over the complete fiasco over Wikileaks preferences in the recent election, but if yr going to criticise him, do it for something worth criticising him over, not because he's not American.
Blue_Tires
(55,445 posts)Assange probably knows much more about the United States than we'd ever want to 
Octafish
(55,745 posts)...Those who believe NSA spying is legal, let alone necessary, should read:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/government-lies-about-spying-again-and-again-heres-whats-really-going-on/5352951
William Binney, Russell Tice and Thomas Drake all collaborate Snowden and detail the NSA "Turnkey Tyranny" with Amy Goodman:
http://www.democracynow.org/topics/nsa/2
PS: Really like your Libertarian Anarchist sideshow.
Uncle Joe
(58,284 posts)Thanks for the thread, Indi Guy.
SleeplessinSoCal
(9,082 posts)Spies and traitors have always been among us, but the Internet wasn't. Nor was a global economy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligence_in_the_American_Revolutionary_War
Not so sure if Assange measures up to the level of threat as posed by the Tea Party. But he's going for it.
Miranda4peace
(225 posts)The threat is not an idea or an apparatus. THE INDIVIDUALS WHO INSTALLED AND MAINTAIN THE UNCONSTITUTIONAL SURVEILLANCE APPARATUS ARE THE THREAT!
BluegrassStateBlues
(881 posts)
warrenswil
(60 posts)He has been all along.
He performed a great public service in disclosing misdeeds of the Bush/Cheney regime.
We praised him and Edward Snowden in
Snowden, Assange give middle finger salute to U.S.
They are both heroes.
The should be taken seriously.
In the (K)now
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)Julian Assange, Australian journalist and creator of wikileaks (still up at wikileaks.NL), was asked which political party he as closest to in his beliefs. His answer: The American Libertarian Party.
I don't take Rand Paul's description of what threatens American Democracy seriously...why should I accept Julian Assange's?
RC
(25,592 posts)Uncle Joe
(58,284 posts)have libertarian wings.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)so your point is?
Julian Assange, Australian journalist and creator of wikileaks (still up at wikileaks.NL), was asked which political party he as closest to in his beliefs. His answer: The American Libertarian Party.
Those are his words...and guess who else calls themselves a Libertarian?
Uncle Joe
(58,284 posts)I totally disagree him re: his endorsement of The American Libertarian Party unless he did so with the thought that pulling the Republican Party from its' all out authoritarian myopia would result in the Democratic Party following suit.
Both major political parties; great shift to the authoritarian quadrant are the force that empowered the recent rise of the American Libetarian Party, giving them much needed propganda.
The two major political parties left a vacuum which the ALP was more than happy to fill.
For the past 40 years both parties have been pulled so far to the right wing authoritarian quadrant, that this has increasingly endangered the American Peoples' civil liberties and resulted in evergrowing monopolies, trusts, and corporate supremacy; which has in turn dominated "We the Peoples'" Government.
Having said that, the American Libertarian Party is not the answer to monopoly, but rather both parties, in particular the Democratic Party shifting more to its' own liberal, progressive, libertarian political quadrant.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_Assange
According to Assange, "It's not correct to put me in any one philosophical or economic camp, because I've learned from many. But one is American libertarianism, market libertarianism. So as far as markets are concerned I'm a libertarian, but I have enough expertise in politics and history to understand that a free market ends up as monopoly unless you force them to be free."[327]
He advocates a "transparent" and "scientific" approach to journalism, saying that "you can't publish a paper on physics without the full experimental data and results; that should be the standard in journalism."[328][329] Assange has called himself "extremely cynical".[70] He has been described as being largely self-taught and widely read on science and mathematics,[49] and as thriving on intellectual battle.[102]
In 2008, Assange published an article entitled "The Hidden Curse of Thomas Paine," in which he wrote, "What does it mean when only those facts about the world with economic powers behind them can be heard, when the truth lays naked before the world and no one will be the first to speak without payment or subsidy?"[330]
In 2012, Assange stated that he has read the World Socialist Web Site "for many years" and appreciated the site's accuracy, though he avoided its commentary on what he called "socialist sectarian issues."[331]
In August 2013, Assange voiced support for Ron and Rand Paul, and the libertarian wing of the United States Republican Party, calling the latter "the only useful political voice really in the U.S. Congress."[332][333]
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)Uncle Joe
(58,284 posts)major to know what Assange is trying to say
According to Assange, "It's not correct to put me in any one philosophical or economic camp, because I've learned from many. But one is American libertarianism, market libertarianism. So as far as markets are concerned I'm a libertarian, but I have enough expertise in politics and history to understand that a free market ends up as monopoly unless you force them to be free."
The Gilded Age is one prime example.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Gilded_Age
The Gilded Age was an era of enormous growth, especially in the North and West. This attracted millions of emigres from Europe. However, the Gilded Age was also an era of enormous poverty. The average annual income for most families was $380, well below the poverty line.[1] Railroads were the major industry, but the factory system, mining, and labor unions also increased in importance. Two major nationwide depressions known as the Panic of 1873 and the Panic of 1893 interrupted growth. The South remained economically devastated; its economy became increasingly tied to cotton and tobacco production, which suffered low prices. African-Americans in the South were stripped of political power and voting rights. The political landscape was notable in that despite some corruption, turnout was very high and elections between the evenly matched parties were close. The dominant issues were cultural (especially regarding prohibition, education and ethnic and racial groups), and economics (tariffs and money supply). Reformers crusaded against child labour and for the 8-hour working day, civil service reform, prohibition, and women's suffrage. State & local governments built schools, colleges and hospitals that sometimes received donations from philanthropists and various diverse religious denominations structured the social and cultural lives of many Americans.
(snip)
The major metropolitan centers underwent rapid population growth and as a result, had many lucrative contracts and jobs to award. To take advantage of the new economic opportunity, both parties built so-called "political machines" to manage elections, reward supporters and pay off potential opponents. Financed by the "spoils system," the winning party distributed most local, state and national government jobs, and many government contracts, to its loyal supporters. Large cities became dominated by political machines in which constituents supported a candidate in exchange for anticipated patronage. These votes would be repaid with favors back from the government once that candidate was elected; and very often candidates were selected based on their willingness to play along with the spoils system. Perhaps the largest example of a political machine from this time period is Tammany Hall in New York City, led by Boss Tweed.[27]
Major scandal reached into Congress with the Crédit Mobilier of America scandal, and disgraced the White House during the Grant Administration. This corruption divided the Republican party into two different factions: the Stalwarts led by Roscoe Conkling and the Half-Breeds led by James G. Blaine. There was a sense that government-enabled political machines intervened in the economy and the resulting favoritism, bribery, inefficiency, waste, and corruption were having negative consequences. Accordingly there were widespread calls for reform, such as Civil Service Reform led by the Bourbon Democrats and Republican Mugwumps. In 1884, their support elected Democrat Grover Cleveland to the White House, and in doing so gave the Democrats their first national victory since 1856.[28]
The Gilded Age "Spoils System" fostered the monopolies and trusts which Teddy Roosevelt would later crusade against.
And as I posted upthread.
In his blog he wrote, "the more secretive or unjust an organization is, the more leaks induce fear and paranoia in its leadership and planning coterie.... Since unjust systems, by their nature, induce opponents, and in many places barely have the upper hand, mass leaking leaves them exquisitely vulnerable to those who seek to replace them with more open forms of governance."
A secretive, unjust organization or government will work against the disinfectant of journalistic exposure to prevent public knowledge of corporate/government corruption as a means to maintain or obtain power and wealth.
The more secret, the more paranoid, the more draconian their actions become.
Even a cursory knowledge of history and politics is all it takes to know the abuses that the likes of Joe McCarthy, Jay Edgar Hoover and Richard Nixon were willing to commit for the sake of self-serving power.
Tx4obama
(36,974 posts)I think a bunch of these guys should go back to school and get a real education first.
Uncle Joe
(58,284 posts)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newt_Gingrich
Gingrich received a B.A. degree in history from Emory University in Atlanta in 1965. He then proceeded to earn an M.A. (1968) and a Ph.D. in European history (1971), both from Tulane University in New Orleans.[18] He spent six months in Brussels in 1969–70 working on his dissertation, "Belgian Education Policy in the Congo 1945–1960".[19] In 1970, Gingrich joined the history department at West Georgia College as an assistant professor. In 1974 he moved to the geography department and was instrumental in establishing an interdisciplinary environmental studies program. Denied tenure, he left the college in 1978 as he was elected to Congress.[20]
I'm all for education, the more the better, but having a degree is irrelevant as to whether the message is actually correct or not.
History is full of self-taught people with both good examples and bad.
Furthermore, I've never believed learning stops at the end one's "school life" whether that be high school or college.
Indi Guy
(3,992 posts)...is a Republican -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rand_Paul
So is his dad, although Ron Paul did run for pres as a Libertarian in 88' -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ron_paul
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)GMAFB!
Indi Guy
(3,992 posts)...I fail to see your point. Neither Ron Nor Rand Paul are Libertarian (although Ron could technically be called one). What does Rand's first name have to do with this fact?
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)you think their are no Libertarians in the Republican Party? Are you shitting me?
No matter...Julian sure likes him...
The Wikileaks founder then addressed a follow-up question about former Congressman Ron Paul and current Senator Rand Paul, remarking, “I’m a big admirer of Ron Paul and Rand Paul for their very principled positions in the US Congress on a number of issues,” noting that they have been “the strongest supporters of the fight against the US attack on Wikileaks and on me.”
<snip>
“The Republican Party in so far as how it has coupled together with the war industry is not a conservative party at all and the Libertarian aspect of the Republican Party is presently the only useful political voice in the US Congress,” said Assange, adding, “It will be the driver that shifts the United States around – it’s not going to come from the Democrats, it’s not going to come from Ralph Nader, it’s not going to come from the co-opted parts of the Republican Party.”
“The only hope as far as electoral politics is concerned in the United States presently is the Libertarian section of the Republican Party,” Assange concluded.
Indi Guy
(3,992 posts)Now, let me ask you this:
Given that the US model of democracy traditionally has been looked to the world over as a model to follow, what's wrong with a foreigner making an assessment to what may threaten it?
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)and why on god's green earth (on a democratic party forum) would I care what that nutter says....did you not read he is a BIG fan of Republicans and Libertarians...
Indi Guy
(3,992 posts)Let me ask you (seriously) -- are you British?
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)Indi Guy
(3,992 posts)So, what part of Great Britain are you from?
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)Born in the Philly Naval hospital....so your "little theory" about me has got to be a joke...right?
Besides...would a person from Great Britain be wearing the symbol for Obamacares? Does sound pretty goofy when you think about the great medical system GB has...don't you think?
Indi Guy
(3,992 posts)Then what do you think. In your estimation, is our surveillance system a threat to our democracy?
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)resilient then you give it credit for. I don't think it can be as easily defeated as you I suppose.
Indi Guy
(3,992 posts)...including our constitutionally guaranteed rights as citizens, all on a massive scale -- do you consider this a threat worth being concerned with?
Blue_Tires
(55,445 posts)MrChaoticAttractor
(9 posts)Pvt. Chelsea has the guts to snip his own wanker off.
KG
(28,751 posts)
otohara
(24,135 posts)Camera's on you 8 hours a day is intimidating as hell IMO
reddread
(6,896 posts)they are not there to watch the customers.
bvar22
(39,909 posts)
DeSwiss
(27,137 posts)[center]
[/center]
struggle4progress
(118,228 posts)struggle4progress
(118,228 posts)struggle4progress
(118,228 posts)
NoodleyAppendage
(4,619 posts)Say what you will, but the merits of his argument are sound. Representative democracy CANNOT thrive in a surveilliance/police state.
bemildred
(90,061 posts)
treestar
(82,383 posts)Due to the shut down and debt ceiling crisis?
He's trying to get us back onto the subject of "the surveillance state!" How desperate!
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)Hey Julian, go fuck yourself.
MFrohike
(1,980 posts)I really have no further use for someone showing extreme right leanings while campaigning under the banner of "freedom." Julie, I think you've done a few good things, so do everyone a favor and call it a day. The story was never you and, quite frankly, your choice of political support lately has shown that you are a rank fucking amateur when it comes to what is and isn't dangerous. Good luck and have a nice life.
AnnieBW
(10,409 posts)We don't need Julian Assange to help us out.
The Stranger
(11,297 posts)Are you seeing what I'm seeing?
Both Assange and Snowden are viciously attacked and vilified for reasons contrived or wholly irrelevant to the surveillance state they are exposing.
Tell me I'm not alone.
Jefferson23
(30,099 posts)Yea.
K&R
