Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: The ACLU's own text contradicts its case for Snowden's asylum bid. [View all]RC
(25,592 posts)41. You seem to be the expert on ignoring.
People are free to ignore facts, but they're still facts. So go on, keep ignoring them.
You are people, are you not? Or just a person? Many of your long winded posts would do a Right-wing BLOG justice.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023231312
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023217632
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023203719
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023191175
And so on.
The problem is not Edward Snowden, but what our government is doing to us and the world. No matter how you twist, distort and throw tires on the fire, for your smoke screen, all Snowden is doing is exposing political wrong doing by our government. That is why he, Snowden, is a political refugee seeking political asylum. By no stretch of the imagination is it legal to hoover up all of our electronic commutations into huge data bases, for later searching. No matter how much you distort reality to try to make it as somehow legal, because a "warrant" was used. And a rubber stamped one at that.
A reading of the 4th Amendment by most anyone with a 5th grade education or above, would question the legality of what our government is doing in our name to "protect us" by hoovering up our digital communications.
Protect who? Most certainly not us, but themselves. That is obvious, yet you defend their action as somehow right and moral, because you think it is legal? Legal, yet in obvious violation of the Constitution, because a Right-leaning court ruled it is legal, in spite of the wording of that Constitution?
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
103 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Sorry, but you used all those damned "linky-facty" things again, so clearly your post ...
11 Bravo
Jul 2013
#49
Oh good, the morning ProSense effort to claim that black is white, up is down..
Savannahmann
Jul 2013
#3
Definition of POLITICAL CRIME: a violation of the law for political rather than private reasons
Luminous Animal
Jul 2013
#21
It would be more informative if ProSense posted a thread-du-jour about illegal spying...
Sancho
Jul 2013
#13
Well ...someone has an agenda ...and what the NSA does isn't part of that agenda...
L0oniX
Jul 2013
#99
He's also applying our Bill of Rights to the entire world. Which smacks of irony and immense hubris.
randome
Jul 2013
#30
Recongizing the inalienable rights of all is not the same as governing them all.
Luminous Animal
Jul 2013
#43
inalienable, unalienable - Inalienable and unalienable are interchangeable
Luminous Animal
Jul 2013
#50
Snowden has been charged with espionage. Espionage is a political crime.
Luminous Animal
Jul 2013
#42