The desperate efforts of Congress to change the public view of Edward Snowden appears to be continuing. This week someone in the Senate attempted to change the description of Snowden as a “dissident” to a “traitor” on Wikipedia. The White House and congressional leaders are clearly alarmed that many view Snowden as a whistleblower. The media groups like NPR previously yielded to pressure not to call Snowden a whistleblower and instead use the less flattering term “leaker.” However, that is not enough because it does not seem to have helped.
Snowden’s disclosures have embarrassed President Obama and congressional democrats, including Democratic members, who have been openly misleading the public about warrantless surveillance. While refusing to push for the prosecution of National Intelligence Chief James Clapper for perjury in earlier testimony, they are demanding that Snowden be tried as a traitor. These are politicians who know that optics are everything when spinning a scandal. It is essential for them to have Snowden referenced in the least flattering ways like “traitor” or “criminal” as opposed to “dissident” or “whistleblower.” The same tactics have been used with regard to Julian Assange. Media outlets have yielded to demands that he never be called a journalist or a whistleblower. He is simply defined as “an Assange.”
The attempt by the person in the Senate to change the description of Snowden was blocked by a keen eye of an editor. The person’s IP address was tracked back to the US Senate and the change was attempted one day after Snowden was granted political asylum in Russia.
In the meantime, Sen. Charles Schumer (D., NY) is calling Putin a “bully” for protecting Snowden. Of course, the United States has been threatening nations to cut off humanitarian aid and trade if they grant asylum to Snowden. It is the U.S. government that has been spying on every citizen without warrants and threatening journalists disclosing such abusive programs. It is the U.S. government who put reporters under surveillance and lied to the public. Schumer has nothing to say about that, but Putin is a bully. The funny thing is that Putin is a bully. A well-documented, unabashed bully. However, Democratic Senators have no moral standing to be denouncing others after their shameless role in the erosion civil liberties in this country. Once the party most associated with fighting for privacy and civil liberties, Democrats like Dianne Feinstein and Nancy Pelosi are fighting to reinforce a growing security state apparatus in the country. They are joined by Republicans who followed a similar blind loyalty to George Bush in the prior administration. Even Senators like Al Franken are speaking out in favor of these massive surveillance systems and attacking Snowden.
The problem is that the public is not buying it. They are the subjects of these surveillance systems and polls show that the public is now more fearful of their own government’s attack on privacy than they are terrorists. That is why Snowden has to be mocked and vilified and ultimately tried as a criminal. They know that in the eyes of voters either Snowden is a traitor and a villain, then they are.
Source: Daily Mail
Other whistle blowers have taken great personal risk to expose the great threat to democracy posed by the growth and use of secrete government powers.
But it is Snowden and his documents have finally made it possible to pursue these issues through the courts and impossible to avoid vital political discussion.
There really are two issues and Snowden has hit squarely at both of them.
The first, most obvious is the issue of spying on literally every electronic communication of every US citizen regardless of whether there is any conceivable link to any threat.
The second is the threat to open democratic society posed by secret courts in which there is no adversarial process, and citizens have no standing to appeal the results. Indeed, it is only through the heroic efforts of whistle blowers like Snoden that ordinary citizens even know of the secrete decisions.
At the time the FISA court was implemented, my guess is that most thought the court would function much like magistrates deciding narrow technical issues regarding government request for warrants.
But the court has taken it upon itself to decide major constitutional issues that change the government’s understanding of fundamental relations between the government and the governed.
These cases have taken place in secrete with no meaningful adversarial process, and no chance for citizens to appeal.
How could anyone claim that these decisions have any validity at all?
What prevents this system from deciding anything? If it did, what recourse would citizens have.
What prevents this secrete court from deciding no warrants are ever necessary, indefinite detention is ok, summary execution falls within police emergency powers, we are all chattels of the state, or that Obama is beneficent leader for life?
Before you tell me that these examples are far fetched, please tell me what the review process is for the current system. What, exactly, is the check and the balance. Where, exactly, is the power to rein in a secrete court that has the power to decide anything with no chance for appeal?
Make no mistake. Snowden is a great and vigilant protector of democracy. Every citizen is in his debt.
chill1184, You hit the nail on the head. Both parties are sycophants. If their party is in the White House, then you just become a yes person. What is MOST disturbing to me is not how the politicians are acting, but how the MSM is being so quiet. There are only a handful of media outlets willing to even give some coverage. Some, are even sycophantic ala Congressional Dems. But, most are just quiet. That’s what scares the hell out of me. Thankfully, there are more venues than there were just 20 years ago. Thank you Al Gore for giving us the internet.
Well that is a disturbing turn of events. And Jill’s posting about the DEA, the frigging DEA- of course- is even more disturbing. Again, can we call it fascism yet?
Blouise, this is as close as a simple IP look-up on the intertubes gets regarding the address:
NetName: USSAA
NetHandle: NET-156-33-0-0-1
Parent: NET-156-0-0-0-0
NetType: Direct Assignment
RegDate: 1991-12-03
Updated: 2007-04-05
Ref: http://whois.arin.net/rest/net/NET-156-33-0-0-1
OrgName: United States Senate
OrgId: USSAA
Address: 2 MASSACHUSETTS AVENUE, N.E. 6TH FLOOR
City: WASHINGTON DC
StateProv: DC
PostalCode: 20510
Country: US
RegDate: 1991-12-03
Updated: 2011-09-24
Google maps says it’s the postal office/postal museum building. Probably has some govt servers stuck in an office there. Who knows? Without a whistleblower, er, leaker, um, traitor in that particular Senator’s office…….
The police state is here and we are fast becoming the USSR that we feared in the “Cold War”. Our only hope is that before they finally come down really hard enough to end dissent, people will see what is going on and rise up in protest against it. The politics of left and right must be put aside to deal with this common threat to our civil liberties. We still have the power to fight back, as proven by the groundswell protests around the world, some of which have worked. The question is do people have the ability to put aside political differences to coalesce against the usurpation of our civil liberties? I think the jury is still out on that.
Reblogged this on News You May Have Missed and commented:
Wikipedia: Effort To Change Description of Snowden From “Dissident” To “Traitor” Traced To U.S. Senate
“Although these cases rarely involve national security issues, documents reviewed by Reuters show that law enforcement agents have been directed to conceal how such investigations truly begin – not only from defense lawyers but also sometimes from prosecutors and judges.”
Concealing the source of the information also makes it more difficult to gauge the extent of the intrusion of spying into ordinary civilian affairs.
There was a time in this country when there was a firewall of separation between intelligence services, usually directed to external, potential adversaries, and civilian law enforcement. During those days the threat of the police state was understood and acknowledged.
Today there is a clear attempt to expand capabilities that are the foundation of the police state and also to conceal their use and effect.
If these techniques are so useful and important why conceal them. If there are compelling reasons to convert our society to a police state then why not make the arguments publicly so all citizens can know the benefits of spying.
Sometimes the beast that they try to kill becomes the beast that finally kills….
Excellent points Jill and Dredd…..
Elaine,
I wonder if the good ole party is going to let him keep his seat next election cycle….
Elaine,
Without this “traitor” actions, we would all be unaware of the breadth of the government’s spying platforms. If this is the actions of a traitor, what do we call someone who tortures defenseless prisoners or launches deadly missiles at American citizens without judicial due process? We call them Presidents.
We are very interested in the name of the Senator’s office in which the computer with the tracked IP number 156.33.241.5 sits.
Perhaps NSA can tell us …
dredd,
That is interesting. And I thought USGinc. wasn’t supposed to propagandize our citizens (although now that is perfectly “legal”!).
Why is someone from the senate propagandizing us?
Pot calling the Kettle black, Eh??????????? The label, Traitor fits the Obstructionist Tea Partiers much better than it fits Edward Snowden…. In my book Snowden is a Hero!
Edward Snowden Is A ‘Whistle-Blower,’ Rep. Justin Amash Says
by
Ariel Edwards-Levy
08/04/2013
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/04/edward-snowden-whistle-blower_n_3703931.html
Excerpt;
Rep. Justin Amash, (R-Mich.), a prominent NSA critic, said Sunday that Edward Snowden is a “whistle-blower” who brought to light intelligence-gathering programs that much of Congress would not have otherwise heard of.
“Without his doing what he did, members of Congress would not have really known about [those programs],” Amash told Fox’s Chris Wallace. “Members of Congress were not really aware on the whole about what these programs were being used for and the extent to which they were being used. Members of the intelligence committee were told, but rank-and-file members really didn’t have the information.”
“So, you still consider him a whistle-blower?” Wallace asked.
“Yes,” Amash said, adding, “As I said, he may be doing things overseas that we’d find problematic, that we’d find dangerous … we’ll find those facts out over time. But as far as Congress is concerned, sure, he’s a whistle-blower. He told us what we need to know.”
Whistleblower, whistleblower Snowden is a whistle blower. Schumer is a disgrace and apparently does not know what a bully is.
“Once the party most associated with fighting for privacy and civil liberties….”
Disagree with you on this one. Save for people like Glenn Greenwald, Russ Fiengold, and Dennis Kucinich most liberals only care about civil liberties when there is a conservative in power. If you want proof just look at civil liberty protests from liberals during the Bush era compared to the Obama era.
As for conservatives at least their semi-honest when it comes to civil liberties. The only civil liberties they only care about are gun rights (and even there they’re hypocrites) and religion. Other civil liberties are regarded as “being soft on crime” among other pathetic justifications.
Some will counter my statement by pointing to Paleoconservatives like Pat Buchanan. However people like Buchanan are only against the warfare state and civil liberties abuses because the traditional base of paleocons are being harrassed by the state. If the state wasn’t going after them, Buchanan wouldn’t be against them.
Jill,
Yep.
Maybe there is a highly sought after trophy involved.
The government is the number one wikipropagandists for a long time now:
(Catapulting The Wikipropaganda?).
Reblogged this on Brittius.com.
The question arises. Is someone who, under oath, in person, lies to the Senate, a Traitor? Clapper is a perjurer for sure. He lied under oath to the Senate. He certainly lied about things that a Whistleblower told the truth about.
We need tee shirts. Clapper is a liar!
Snowden is A Whistleblower!
It does appear that members of the House and Senate are directly involved in illegal spying. Further, when some Congress memebers have tried to get accurate information about the NSA’s activities, they have been blocked not only by the WH but by members of the Senate Leadership. We thus have a true Constitutional crisis.
Therefore, it isn’t a suprise that someone from the Senate is involved in this. I’m so glad the propaganda isn’t working at this time and I hope it does not, no matter what those involved in this illegal surveillance do.
“The desperate efforts of Congress to change the public view of Edward Snowden appears to be continuing. This week someone in the Senate attempted to change the description of Snowden as a “dissident” to a “traitor” on Wikipedia. The White House and congressional leaders are clearly alarmed that many view Snowden as a whistleblower.
We are all whistleblowers now.
They don’t like Snowden because he blew the whistle on their utter unAmericanism.
They are The Queens of Stalingrad.
This is related but not directly on topic: “(Reuters) – A secretive U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration unit is funneling information from intelligence intercepts, wiretaps, informants and a massive database of telephone records to authorities across the nation to help them launch criminal investigations of Americans.
Although these cases rarely involve national security issues, documents reviewed by Reuters show that law enforcement agents have been directed to conceal how such investigations truly begin – not only from defense lawyers but also sometimes from prosecutors and judges.
The undated documents show that federal agents are trained to “recreate” the investigative trail to effectively cover up where the information originated, a practice that some experts say violates a defendant’s Constitutional right to a fair trial. If defendants don’t know how an investigation began, they cannot know to ask to review potential sources of exculpatory evidence – information that could reveal entrapment, mistakes or biased witnesses.”
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/05/us-dea-sod-idUSBRE97409R20130805