Jimmy Carter on Snowden: "The invasion of human rights in American privacy has gone too far"

[Catherina]

Jimmy Carter to @CNN on Snowden's disclosures: "The invasion of human rights in American privacy has gone too far."

Jimmy Carter to @CNN on Snowden's disclosures: "The bringing of it to the public notice has probably been, in the long term, beneficial"

Jimmy Carter to @CNN on Snowden: "I think that the secrecy that has been surrounding this invasion of privacy has been excessive"


I didn't catch it, I just saw the tweets.

[Douglas Carpenter]

1. God Bless you President Carter!!

[Uncle Joe]

2. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, Catherina.

[dkf]

3. Thank goodness for the old timers who can bring us back to our senses.

[Go Vols]

48. +1

[Douglas Carpenter]

109. indeed

[MannyGoldstein]

4. Now the Third Wayers can hate Carter even more

But he's OK in my book

[frylock]

24. our greatest living president IMHO

[JDPriestly]

136. +100000

[JayhawkSD]

164. I won't disagree that he's our greatest living FORMER president.

This nation has only one president at a time; seldom ahs a good one.

We do not elect them to office for life; fortunately.

[msanthrope]

66. "He's obviously violated the laws of America, for which he's responsible,

but I think the invasion of human rights and American privacy has gone too far," he told CNN's Suzanne Malveaux.

I think President Carter sounds very sensible.

[ConservativeDemocrat]

94. Only in your angry, hate-filled, dreams, Manny...

I respect President Carter tremendously. He is advocating for his position in a way that is actually effective.

Among other things, he isn't:

- Pretending the courts have ruled the NSA's activities unconstitutional when at every opportunity they've done the exact reverse.

- Bashing people who are concerned about terrorism.

- Making absurd claims about the U.S. becoming a fascist state.

- Adding this to a long list of constant outrage-a-holic bashing of the President, a non-stop drumbeat of anti Democratic Party hatred.

- Inventing strawmen to attack, instead of actually addressing the points the other side is making.

Still, on this issue, I do disagree with President Carter(*). I must note that except for computerization, the mission of the NSA is basically completely unchanged since when he was President. Which leads to the obvious question, "If the NSA, FISA Court system, and Third-party Doctrine is really so bad, why didn't you reform it when you were President?"

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

(*) Except, perhaps, for worries about the unaccounted for expense of these programs, and financial oversight. I am sure there is a lot of pork-barrel hiding in these programs, and would absolutely support a law saying that anyone receiving a secret government contract would be unable to lobby the U.S. - because people opposed to the expense of secret programs can't effectively argue that the money is being wasted.

[former9thward]

108. That little exception you tried to put in there is not so little.

"except for computerization" Computerization allows spying to go millions of times faster and encompass millions of times larger pools of information. It has changed the program in qualitative ways not just quantitative.

[timdog44]

151. An off subject analogy.

Just yesterday I put some music on an external hard drive. MP3 music which is fairly compressed. A hard drive that is smaller than a wallet. It has about 240 gigabytes of music. Thousands and thousands of albums. Plus all the top 100 songs of every year from 1950 through 2002. And then thousands of individual songs besides. And these are all Rock, Pop and Country. Computerization has made things easier and faster and with much more capacity. What can be stored on computers owned by surveillance companies is like trying to imagine how many stars are in the Milky Way. You can't.

[rhett o rick]

121. So we are finely getting to people you wont throw under the bus.

There are two sides in this class war the 1% is waging. Sadly there are a lot of authoritarian Democrats that are supporting the 1% authoritarian state including FISA spying and the Patriot Act. These authoritarians have decided that their personal security trumps our Constitutional rights.

I stand with Pres Carter, Ms. Plame, Mr. Wilson, Rep Grayson, Sen Wyden, Sen Udall, and against lying Republicans Clapper and Mueller.

[midnight]

160. I like your statement.

[liberalmike27]

162. What

Do you think Fascism looks like? What do you think it is? It's corporatism, where all decisions are made, not for humans, but for corporations. In banking, the MIC, the SIC, private prisons, privatize everything including education, make laws where you can't sue them, judges make it OK to contribute and bribe our politicians.

How slavish to corporations does our congress, and president have to be, before you'd call what we have Fascism? I just wonder.

The range between Republicans and Democrats is so small, and that range is teetering on the edge of the right-wing spectrum so far, that we're entering nearly into an Orwellian State, a 1984 situation.

[Jakes Progress]

152. Yeah. I mean, have you ever seen Jimmy in a bathing suit?

Not as dreamy as our guy.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

163. I love this fucking thread!

[nadinbrzezinski]

5. He must be a racist, ron paul libertarian, or just plain out commie

oh I forgot his chief offense, TERRORIST.

[L0oniX]

12. Giving aid and comfort to the enemy.

[nadinbrzezinski]

13. Yup, terrible I tell ya! Somebody needs to keep the propaganda straight

[arely staircase]

50. well since he said snowden should be prosecuted

I guess he is an obamabot police state apologist

[Number23]

144. Sounds like he gave a nuanced (read: pragmatic) response

Ecuador's rationale appeared to have won support from former U.S. President Jimmy Carter. If another country wants to give haven to Snowden, "then that is their right as a sovereign nation," he told CNN's Suzanne Malveaux. "If the United States can acquire custody of him, I'm sure he will be brought to trial, and that's the way the law should be implemented."

Snowden's acts may have some positive impact, Carter said.

"He's obviously violated the laws of America, for which he's responsible, but I think the invasion of human rights and American privacy has gone too far," he said.

It's very interesting that the OP didn't add that part in.

[xchrom]

6. du rec.

[Douglas Carpenter]

7. this needs to go viral - please recommend and keep kicking

[Matariki]

9. okay.

[Douglas Carpenter]

63. thanks - this needs to go to the front page

[woo me with science]

125. +1

[progressoid]

8. Under the bus you go Jimmy.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

10. Well, he's a notorious libertarian and probably has boxes in his garage.

[Douglas Carpenter]

69. didn't he have a girl friend who is a pole dancer?

or maybe I'm thinking of someone else

[robbob]

82. No, he's just had lustful thoughts

...about having a girlfriend who's a pole dancer.

[Douglas Carpenter]

101. maybe that was it - I wonder if Mr. Snowden has lustful thoughts too. He seems to be such a seedy

character. It wouldn't surprise me.

[L0oniX]

11. Well ...that will pissoff the assholes.

[ReRe]

26. Possible Duzy!

Struck me funny anyways.

[RainDog]

14. k&r n/t

[backscatter712]

15. Welcome to the awesome party under the bus, Jimmy!

We've got Rage Against the Machine playing!

[Waiting For Everyman]

16. K&R

[Ichingcarpenter]

17. 26 Senators and a great President

Thankyyou JImmy.

[Recursion]

18. Carter is right

From what I've seen all of DU agrees that the secrecy has been excessive.

[Go Vols]

20. Give it a few minutes

the Snowden haters will be along shortly.

[Recursion]

22. Hey, I'm a notorious sensible woodchuck

And I've said for 5 years now the legal framework here is fucked seven ways to Sunday, and nobody has disagreed.

[red dog 1]

19. K&R...Thanks for posting.......Jimmy Carter is brilliant!

On his first day as President, Carter ordered solar panels be installed on the White House roof.
On HIS first day as President, Reagan ordered them removed.

[ProSense]

21. That's not

"Jimmy Carter on Snowden." That's Jimmy Carter on the NSA.

This is Jimmy Carter on Snowden: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023119933

[ucrdem]

23. ProSense, you are good.

Very good.

[Douglas Carpenter]

27. here is the entire quote so people decide for themselves

Snowden's acts may have some positive impact, former President Jimmy Carter said Friday.

"He's obviously violated the laws of America, for which he's responsible, but I think the invasion of human rights and American privacy has gone too far," he told CNN's Suzanne Malveaux.

"I think that the secrecy that has been surrounding this invasion of privacy has been excessive, so I think that the bringing of it to the public notice has probably been, in the long term, beneficial."

Asked to elaborate, he said, "I think the American people deserve to know what their Congress is doing."
If another country wants to give Snowden haven, "then that is their right as a sovereign nation," he said. "If the United States can acquire custody of him, I'm sure he will be brought to trial, and that's the way the law should be implemented."

http://edition.cnn.com/2013/06/28/us/snowden-lawyer-offer/index.html

[Warren Stupidity]

28. oops. game. set. match.

[flamingdem]

29. Not complete. It's missing the part where Jimmy says he broke the law and should be tried

Jimmeh is not a libertarian

[Douglas Carpenter]

33. no Jimmy is not a "libertarian" nor are those of us who are committed to constitutional democracy

[flamingdem]

35. I know

that's for the Libertarian trolls who've infested DU

[Pholus]

36. Put em together and what do you have?

What Jimmeh actually said. And you missed the point where it was in response to someone quoting the missing HALF of that same quote.

What is it with people only quoting half of a statement? Sheesh!

[flamingdem]

37. Jimmy knows what time it is

[Douglas Carpenter]

47. not true .. the entire quote is there

[NoMoreWarNow]

43. I totally agree with this

Thanks to President carter for some common sense in this matter.

[Douglas Carpenter]

54. /

[JDPriestly]

138. Intelligent response. Carter is one of our most intelligent presidents ever.

[Doctor_J]

159. Wow. He really doesn't understand chess

"I think the American people deserve to know what their Congress is doing."

Now there are the words of a man who didn't get his pony.

[Maedhros]

30. Well, this is:

Jimmy Carter to @CNN on Snowden's disclosures: "The bringing of it to the public notice has probably been, in the long term, beneficial"

But, overall, you're right: this entire issue is about the NSA and those who control its policy, not about the merits or failings of those who brought the issue to our attention.

[Pholus]

32. You finally GOT it!

For three weeks we've been saying NSA=bad and you are stuck on SNOWDEN=bad.

Now we can see Carter is saying BOTH of those things.

It's not even a shocker -- he said the EXACT same thing in your blue linkie but you were interested in only HALF of what the former president said in the same breath -- cutting out the good bit at "but".

As usual, a wonderful job of selective quoting on your part. Well played.

[ProSense]

38. No,

You finally GOT it! For three weeks we've been saying NSA=bad and you are stuck on SNOWDEN=bad.

Now we can see Carter is saying BOTH of those things.

It's not even a shocker -- he said the EXACT same thing in your blue linkie but you were interested in only HALF of what the former president said in the same breath -- cutting out the good bit at "but".

As usual, a wonderful job of selective quoting on your part. Well played.

...but I think the realization that Carter is saying "both" and the exact same thing I was saying is going to lead to the kind of obfuscation above.

Snowden is one issue and NSA oversight is another.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023083231

[Pholus]

41. Yes, Snowden was always secondary to the core issue.

And 4 days ago you said it for the first time. Nice, because you were one of the lead boosters of trying to make the issue all Snowden all the time for the last few weeks.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023083768

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023073847

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023077695

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023073906

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023090261

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023079419

http://election.democraticunderground.com/10023073906

http://sync.democraticunderground.com/10023083231

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023069890

[ProSense]

44. Thanks,

And 4 days ago you said it for the first time. Nice, because you were one of the lead boosters of trying to make the issue all Snowden all the time for the last few weeks.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023083768

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023073847

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023077695

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023073906

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023090261

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023079419

http://election.democraticunderground.com/10023073906

http://sync.democraticunderground.com/10023083231

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023069890

...let me added a few more.

Spanish judge Baltasar Garzon says his legal team won’t represent NSA leaker Edward Snowden
http://upload.democraticunderground.com/10023101737

The Errors of Edward Snowden and His Global Hypocrisy Tour
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023112872

Ecuador has no plans to halt commerce ties over Snowden: Correa
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023114551

Ecuador threatens legal action against leaker of invalid travel document for Snowden
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023114430

Ecuador cools on Edward Snowden asylum as Assange frustration grows
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023119831

[Pholus]

51. .

[ProSense]

53. .

[whatchamacallit]

55. Your duplicitous posts have made it abundantly clear where you stand on civil liberties

You'll wear it like a stain forever.

[ProSense]

59. I stand

"Your duplicitous posts have made it abundantly clear where you stand on civil liberties"

...with Jimmy Carter: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023119933

You stand with Snowden.

[whatchamacallit]

61. Both lies.

yourself

[ProSense]

62. Oh,

"Both lies."

...should I stand with Ecuador: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023119831 (I'll stick to the U.S. and Carter)

[whatchamacallit]

64. Your tangential link shuffle

fools no one. Seriously.

[ProSense]

65. .

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3120627

Do you see what I see?

[whatchamacallit]

67. Yeah

I see you referencing someone else's post. What the hell does it have to do with you?

[Zorra]

147. Did you expect anything else? Lies are the stock in trade of the state propagandist. Check it:

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”
~ Joseph Goebbels

“The most brilliant propagandist technique will yield no success unless one fundamental principle is borne in mind constantly - it must confine itself to a few points and repeat them over and over”
~ Joseph Goebbels



Sound like anyone we know?

[Herlong]

86. You've got a black or white thing going on but that's cool

[ProSense]

87. No, I don't, but nice try.

[Herlong]

95. ProSense is my favorite!

maybe I should stop posting after my fourth beer.

Love from

Laid back in California

[chimpymustgo]

113. Shameful, Prosense. And a stain forever, here at DU. Trust the Bill of Rights.

Not our "leaders". They lie to us, you know.

[ProSense]

114. "Shameful," chimpymustgo.

"And a stain forever, here at DU."

WTF?

[JDPriestly]

140. Do you agree with Carter that if Snowden is given asylum in some

country, that is the business of that country?

[ProSense]

141. Well,

Do you agree with Carter that if Snowden is given asylum in some country, that is the business of that country?

...sure. I mean, isn't everything a country does its business? I also agree with Carter on what this country's business is: to prosecute Snowden.

If he gets asylum, he'll be another country's headache, as Assange is proving to be for Ecuador.

Ecuador cools on Edward Snowden asylum as Assange frustration grows
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023119831

It's not looking good for Snowden.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023124655

[woo me with science]

117. See post 116. nt

[DisgustipatedinCA]

126. It would be helpful if you'd add a few links for post 116. ;)

[Herlong]

104. Please translate!

[Pholus]

107. The extent of surveillance programs in the US. nt

[Herlong]

110. Awsome if true

Last edited Sun Jun 30, 2013, 09:19 AM - Edit history (1)

[treestar]

73. All the crowing up above it just so typical

Let's not find out more, lest it not be what we want!

[woo me with science]

116. Prosense: "Spying on Americans was, is and will still be illegal."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2461323

Bush is spying on Americans: opponents and activist groups. The law can't be changed to make that legal.

ProSense (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-15-06 08:53 AM
Original message
Edited on Wed Feb-15-06 08:53 AM by ProSense

Bush is spying on Americans: opponents and activist groups. The law can't
be changed to make that legal. The Republicans are trying to pull a fast one with this "law change" tactic by framing the illegal spying as warrantless spying on terrorists; therefore, the law is being changed to give Bush the authority to spy on terrorist. Spying on Americans was, is and will still be illegal. Bush committed crimeS by illegal spying on Americans and breaking existing FISA laws.

I'm sure all criminals would love to have a law passed that retroactively absolves them of their crimes.

[sibelian]

118. WELL, THERE YA GO.

Woo, you win the entire discussion board.

If I ever meet you, it's my round.

[sibelian]

119. KICK.

RECOMMEND.

[woo me with science]

120. Sounds like fun. :)

Here's to transparency.

[ProSense]

132. "Here's to transparency."

Your lame gotcha failed. Transparency:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3122648

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3122717

Pwned!

[ProSense]

130. Ah, can't quit

being disingenuous, huh: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3122617

Do you stand by this post, Prosense?

Bush is spying on Americans: opponents and activist groups. The law can't be changed to make that legal.

ProSense (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-15-06 08:53 AM
Original message
Edited on Wed Feb-15-06 08:53 AM by ProSense

Bush is spying on Americans: opponents and activist groups. The law can't
be changed to make that legal. The Republicans are trying to pull a fast one with this "law change" tactic by framing the illegal spying as warrantless spying on terrorists; therefore, the law is being changed to give Bush the authority to spy on terrorist. Spying on Americans was, is and will still be illegal. Bush committed crimeS by illegal spying on Americans and breaking existing FISA laws.

I'm sure all criminals would love to have a law passed that retroactively absolves them of their crimes.

Yup, stand 100 percent behind it.

Ever heard of the PAA: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023026724

[LondonReign2]

166. Oh good

Another self-referential post stuffed with blue links that have absolutely nothing to do with post they are replying to but is instead intended to obfuscate the fact you thoought it was bad when Bush did it but your thrilled that Obama is doing it.

[ProSense]

168. Well, at least you can pretend.

[LondonReign2]

171. One of us is pretending alright

Money quote:

ProSense (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-15-06 08:53 AM
Original message
Edited on Wed Feb-15-06 08:53 AM by ProSense

Bush is spying on Americans: opponents and activist groups. The law can't
be changed to make that legal. The Republicans are trying to pull a fast one with this "law change" tactic by framing the illegal spying as warrantless spying on terrorists; therefore, the law is being changed to give Bush the authority to spy on terrorist. Spying on Americans was, is and will still be illegal. Bush committed crimeS by illegal spying on Americans and breaking existing FISA laws.

I'm sure all criminals would love to have a law passed that retroactively absolves them of their crimes.

[whatchamacallit]

131. Haha awesome!

Nice find!

[woo me with science]

167. Isn't it telling, the shift.

We have always been at war with Eastasia.
We have always been at war with Eurasia.

Greenwald is right. Snowden is considered a grave threat, and must be smeared and destroyed.

[truth2power]

156. Thank you, woo....

I just posted this on another thread, but it bears repeating:

"Your principles are tested by where you stand when they're doing things or implementing policies that you would have opposed if the other guy had won."

-- Jeremy Scahill

[woo me with science]

157. Scahill is absolutely right.

Thanks for the quote. It does bear repeating.

[burrowowl]

175. Yes, it does bear repeating.

How many protesters against the war in Vietnam, people during the McCarthy era, etc. been harassed, put in prison, etc.
and wow the FBI didn't have the tools they have now and the NSA is amok. All that computer power could be put to much better use tracking climate change, medical and scientific research, etc.

[LondonReign2]

165. woo wins the thread

[WillyT]

25. HUGE K & R !!! - THANK YOU !!!

[think]

31. K&R /nt

[ReRe]

34. Ahhhh (sigh) Thank you Pres Jimmy Carter!

K&R

Nothin' like that social media. Thanks, Catherina!

[Ichingcarpenter]

39. Snowden wanted a national discussion

well he got it and it was necessary in order to have disucssions about the nsa.

[quinnox]

40. K&R! Great to see President Carter and his support of civil liberties

[proverbialwisdom]

42. Proud supporter here.

http://www.cartercenter.org/index.html

Consider joining.

[Go Vols]

103. +1

[Douglas Carpenter]

45. kcik

[zeemike]

46. That only confirms to me what I have believed for decades.

That Jimmy Carter is the real deal and an honorable man...and no doubt has a moral compass that points in the right direction.
K&R

[Pholus]

58. When the character smearing comes out, I tend to think it a distraction.

Much like his presidency. But here is to Jimmy Carter, someone who seems to completely get it.

[Herlong]

79. I Stand With Jimmy Carter!

"True enough, this compass does not point north."
"...Where does it point?"
"It points to the thing you want most in this world."
―Jack Sparrow and Elizabeth Swann[src]

[woo me with science]

49. K&R

[Douglas Carpenter]

52. are there seriously people on DU who do not think the invasion of human rights and American privacy

has gone too far?

[Pholus]

56. Temporarily. At least until a Republican controls the NSA again.

Then, we will have the unity we had back in 2002-2006.

Yay for us!

[Douglas Carpenter]

68. that is what is has me banging my head against the wall . Being called a libertarian or paulbot

for holding the same exact position that 99% of DU held when Bush was President. It's not the pro-constitution people who have changed their positions - it's them

[Pholus]

88. Yeah, I thought Democrats were united by their values but that was shook

by this poll:

http://tv.msnbc.com/2013/06/10/support-nsa-surveillance-it-might-depend-on-whos-president/

If I read it right, a third of Democrats have always thought this was peachy (though they were very quiet on DU in 2006), and when a Democrat runs the country, it goes to 2/3.

So I guess I the local DU environment gets explained by that although my explanation is unkind:

1) In 2006, our team colors were not flying AND a lot of people dissatisfied with Bush's actions were looking for a place to vent. Certainly that drew me to DU in the first place (11 years ago now. Crud, I'm old). Posting tended to be about all the awful stuff Bush was doing, which was several times daily. Values folks and their issues got ample commiseration from the team color folks since it involved the gross misdeeds of the other team. So we were united in our disgust and helplessness and naively concluded that this united us philosophically.

2) In 2013, our guy is in, many people upset about the issues will probably not come here to vent (just like in 2006 someone upset by Bush wouldn't have frequented FR). So, people who hang out on DU are more heavily represented by the team colors crowd. An issue with values, even the ones that looked like they united us years back, now causes discomfort as it could be taken as a poor reflection on our team. So point out the problems and get defensively attacked for not seeming properly supportive.

So, it's just demographics and timing. Frankly I probably should not hang around here right now -- I was raised DFL and I strongly agree with the Democrats on 90% of the issues, but that last 10% (surveillance and the right to be left alone in my head) seems like such a large chasm right now. Add to that, I get highly annoyed by the team color folks because of their seeming relativism on this issue -- even with the numbers it kind of shocks me. But, I was projecting myself on people not like me. I tend to see wrong as wrong and truck with the Democratic Party because it is closer to my beliefs than any other party.

Just accept it for what it is -- a diverse group of people here for a variety of reasons and we'll hardly ever be in lockstep (and if we are, things are going bad for the country). For years, I was a dedicated lurker. I regularly wish I had the willpower to go back to that -- it's just easier!

So just hang in there! One bad election and we'll all be united again! I think I'm actually saying that I enjoy the bickering instead.

[Douglas Carpenter]

99. Shock indeed!! They don't even believe in freedom and constitutional democracy except when they can

use those concepts as an attack on their opponents when they are out of power. This leaves me completely gob-smacked. I have accepted all along that on many major issues - from single payer universal healthcare, expanding the social/economic safety net to the Israel-Palestine conflict - I have to grin and bare it - because the mainstream Democratic Party position is not the same as mine. But I faithfully voted straight Democratic, donated as much I could to help Democratic Party campaigns and did everything I could get Democrats elected. - But this goes way beyond all those other issues which are extremely important to me. It seems many Democrats - just like most Republicans (In their case I knew it all along) don't fundamentally seem to see anything wrong with setting up infrastructure for a totalitarian sate - as long as their party is in charge of it.

[woo me with science]

97. There is seriously a lot of propaganda on DU. nt

[DCBob]

57. I agree with Jimmy that it appears to have gone too far.. anyone can see that.

The question is whether its legal and necessary. I think its both.

I also agree with Jimmy in that Snowden broke the law and should face justice.

[NoOneMan]

70. So you think its necessary to go too far?

[DCBob]

72. I said it "appears" to have gone too far.

Last edited Sat Jun 29, 2013, 11:32 PM - Edit history (1)

If it necessary and legal then its not too far.

[NoOneMan]

74. Necesary and legal are both arbitrary concepts

But thats interesting. You are saying that it merely "looks" like its gone to far but since the government has changed the laws to make it ok since 9/11, then its fine, right?

So then, it follows, anything the government deems or makes legal is then ok, no matter how extreme (in so far as they can justify its necessity with rhetoric)?

[DCBob]

75. Sorry, but there are lots of critical issues that arent simply right or wrong.

I believe, based on what I know and have read, what they are doing is both legal and necessary. Im sure you have the opposite opinion. So be it.

[nadinbrzezinski]

76. I hate to say it, but your posts are classics of citizens who do live

in a closed society. They are even more down the rabbit hole than they used to.

[DCBob]

77. WTF??

are you stalking me?

[nadinbrzezinski]

78. Nope, just happened to see this exchange

Sorry.

So you know, hard to stalk somebody when mostly checking the CHP traffic site and listening to the fracking radio (scanner) for wild fires. Now that I am "stalking."

[DCBob]

81. Good to hear.

BTW, I am nothing like what you think I am.

[nadinbrzezinski]

84. Hey, I am stuck on scanner traffic

fires are my beat.

So far... (good news because it is hotter than hades out there), no fires. I hate to say it, but we have one... means getting into positively less comfy clothes...

But the medical calls for heat exhaustion and prostration are OFF the scale

[DCBob]

85. Yeah, I heard that..

meanwhile we are about to get hit by a big thunderstorm here in DC. Take care.

[NoOneMan]

83. I have the opinion that "legal and necessary" are not sufficient justifications

"Necessary" is merely opinion and context, so its not entirely relevant. Anyone can claim anything is "necessary" for some purpose (it doesn't make it so).

And we know the country has a troublesome history with what is legal. Slavery was legal. Japanese American internment camps were legal. Segregation was legal. But can two gay people get married legally? Not until a few days ago was this possible (suggesting an arbitrary, dynamic concept of "legal&quot .

This activity we are speaking of has become legal because the government wanted it to be so. It is not legal because it is "good" according to some universal moral standard.

Your attitude basically gives the government a pass. Anything and everything the government does, which they are motivated to legalize, is therefore ok to do with this mindset. Why have laws at all then?


And BTW, I don't believe there is a universal moral standard. But there is the challenge of the people and checks and balances. If we surrender our critical thought to the government, trusting in the benevolence of "legal and necessary", there are no checks and challenges and we are essentially asking to be fucked.

[DCBob]

89. Of course its relevant.

We have to make judgments all the time about what is necessary and what isn't and what should be legal and shouldn't be legal. That just the way life works. If we feel something is wrong then lets change it and make it illegal.

I am all for a full debate on this issue and lets decide as a nation if we think we need to give up some privacy for security.

[NoOneMan]

91. No, its political rhetoric

I can personally claim its necessary that we stop spying on Americans to preserve civil liberties. Such a claim doesn't have any bearing in real life, and actually depends first on a context in which people actually value civil liberties. Frankly, I don't know what these spying experts value and their values probably don't match mine at all, so their claim of spying (for what purpose?) being "necessary" ring hollow.

If we feel something is wrong then lets change it and make it illegal.

Thats pretty much the point of this dialogue. But we can't have that dialogue if we stop at step one with the "its not too far" because its "legal and necessary" argument, which is really a non-argument.

If it "appears" its gone to far to everyone and their dog, then that's a good sign that "legal and necessary" be damned and we have to get to the bottom of this

[DCBob]

93. I think many are ready to have that dialogue regardless of what side they are on now.

Clearly its a problem if so many people are freaked out by it.

[JDPriestly]

143. I think that the all-encompassing collection of electronic communications

and perhaps other data is unconstitutional and therefore legal.

As far as I can tell, thus far, the Supreme Court has not considered whether the US government can sort through such a broad selection of electronic data. The cases I have seen concern the admissibility in court of pen registers, that is records of numbers called and from which calls were received that are related to criminal conduct or obtained in the course of a criminal investigation.

So far I haven't heard about a case concerning the collection of data of this scope and magnitude. I'm not an expert on this.

But the fact that the government is collecting so much data including the pen registers of journalists is completely different from the situations the case law deals with. This data collection violates the First Amendment among othe rights.
It is bound, sooner or later, to chill speech and the free press. That is what happened in the USSR and Eastern Europe. And that is what is still happening in a lot of countries in the world. Russia is repressing a lot of free speech right now. And we don't even need to mention China. First comes surveillance then comes the repression. Same old story. And we are always told that the surveillance and repression are needed to make us safe, to make us secure.

There was a time when we were told, and most of us believed, that our kings were chosen by God and that if we didn't accept their authority, we wouldn't be safe or secure. Now we are told that the NSA knows what is in our best interests, and that therefore we have to let them know all our secrets so that they can protect us.

But who or what is going to protect us from the NSA, that clique of people who must in order to justify that they are grabbing all our data and thereby our secrets, tell themselves and persuade us that they are protecting us.

Are they really protecting us? If they like us and our associations and the ideas we express online, they probably will. But what if they don't like our associations or our ideas?

And how do they know whether someone is a terrorist? It would be easy if we could be sure that they are only looking for violent types or people planning violent acts, but I don't think that there is any way we can know that for sure. That's because, while we are not allowed to keep secrets from them, they can keep any secrets they want from us.

[morningfog]

172. How can it be too far and necessary and legal?

Classic double think.

[DCBob]

173. here we go again...

please read more carefully..

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3120910

[morningfog]

174. So you disagree with Carter. He didn't use any weasel words.

[99th_Monkey]

60. When the chips are down, President Carter speaks the unvarnished truth.

[DeSwiss]

71. K&R!

[Savannahmann]

80. If only

If only President Carter could have it explained to him how this is just fine, but he probably doesn't have a Top Secret Clearance anymore. If only President Carter would take the word of those who tell us it's fine. Then again, Carter always doubted the claims of the Military industrial complex, which is part of the reason he shut down the B-1 Bomber and several other programs that the Military and their corporate masters were in love with.

[Pholus]

92. And pretty much all the reason he got such a bad rap in the media. nt

[AzDar]

90. K & R

[SammyWinstonJack]

96. Opps!

[marions ghost]

98. K&R

Jimmy

[Ichingcarpenter]

100. kick ....n/t

[Douglas Carpenter]

102. kick

[Zorra]

105. kick

[Douglas Carpenter]

106. and another kick

[Go Vols]

111. Good For Jimmy speaking out

[bobduca]

112. K&R

[senseandsensibility]

115. K and R

Love Jimmy Carter. He's a true patriot.

[rhett o rick]

122. I stand with Pres Carter, Ms. Plame, Mr. Wilson, Rep Grayson, Sen Wyden, Sen Udall, and against

lying Republicans Clapper and Mueller and their authoritarian minions.

[Harmony Blue]

154. Good point

when laid out this way it is easy to see how the sides are aligned.

[rhett o rick]

155. Of course the Corp-Media aligns with the authoritarians. nm

[Luminous Animal]

123. Kick.

[Faygo Kid]

124. Longest living ex-president ever

May you put that record out of reach, President Carter.

[carolinayellowdog]

127. I knew my avatar could be counted on to say the right thing

and hope anyone inclined to trash him is already on my ignore list

[cantbeserious]

128. Thank You President Carter

eom

[orpupilofnature57]

129. The first and most honest man I ever voted for .

[Go Vols]

134. I also

[Nanjing to Seoul]

133. What does this Georgia Bigot know about anything? Racist!

[Go Vols]

135. Got a link

for the bigot part?

I would like to see it.

[Silent3]

137. Here's a link for you: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/sarcasm

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/sarcasm

Hint: the poster wasn't really calling Carter a bigot.

[Go Vols]

139. Pro Tip

there is a sarcasm icon for such post.Its hard to tell when its implied anymore.

[Nanjing to Seoul]

142. Calling Carter a bigot is similar to calling Bernie Sanders a teabagger.

Use common sense.

I should not need to use sarcasm icons.

[orpupilofnature57]

148. +1000 !!!!

[blackspade]

145. Carter FTW!

[awoke_in_2003]

146. Jimmy Carter, the most "real" person to be president...

in my lifetime, just got thrown under the bus by many here.

[reformist2]

149. I hear that Jimmy isn't very nice to his neighbors...

..and he has a lot of boxes in his garage!!!

[rosesaylavee]

150. K&R

[Harmony Blue]

153. Thank you

President Carter.

[midnight]

158. K&R

[Fantastic Anarchist]

161. I heard that if you support what Snowden or Greenwald did, you should be banned from DU.

Heard it on another thread.

Does that mean if Jimmy Carter was posting here, he'd get banned under those rules?

Edit: Oh, and God bless you, Catherina and Jimmy Carter!!!!

[Catherina]

170. Lol! That would leave a very small contingent then n/t

[Douglas Carpenter]

169. knr

[Laelth]

176. k&r for James Earl Carter, Jr. n/t

-Laelth