Tuesday, June 11, 2013

The Debate on Secrecy in Spying Likely Difficult Because of Secrecy

That's right, we'd love to talk about the laws we have on the books, but if we did, they'd probably lock us up, but we can tell you in absolutely certain terms that we're, ah, concerned.

Feinstein: I'd love to tell you the truth, but it's illegal to move my mouth.

This NYTimes article is a hoot, well, not really.

Nobody can talk about secret programs because it's treason, sez trustworthy senator Dianne Feinstein.

Treason : the offense of acting to overthrow one's government or to harm or kill its sovereign.

There are other meanings of the word, as in betrayal of a trust, but when it's about a country or a state, the one given is what Feinstein and other government representatives mean, n'est pas?

My take? Snowden = whistleblower = hero. Feinstein = government tool = untrustworthy.

Where am I wrong? Twitter verdict? Thought so. Daniel Ellsberg verdict? Naturally.

Graham: Of course I've been briefed. About what? Can't tell you that. But let's debate!

Wait! Who's talking about Benghazi or the IRS? Nobody. Some good has come of this mess.

Update. Dana Milbank flagged the obvious: NSA secrecy is the cause of its own distress, pointing out that gut-wrenched James Clapper lied to Congress about the program. But John Boehner (R-Idiotville, OH) weighs in that Snowden's a traitor!

No comments:

Post a Comment