Skip to main content

Terrorists who are willing to slaughter as many innocent people as they can, and then die for their cause, are not going to hesitate to use nukes, chemical, biological, or any other weapon they can get a hold of.  This is what we're up against, and it's well beyond the ability of Ben Franklin to understand.

I haven't commented about this issue because I'm frankly very amazed that people are surprised that the NSA is collecting info about people in the U.S.  But frankly, the criticism the Obama administration is now receiving from the left, is as crazy and as out of line as the lack of criticism the Bush administration was receiving when they were pushing through the Patriot Act, with vast support from Dems both in congress and in the general public.

As bad as 911 was, and it was an historic horrific event, the response to 911 did far more damage to our economy, liberty, military, and future than did the actual event.  $trillions wasted on useless wars, thousands of brave American soldiers killed, up to a hundred thousand innocent civilians killed, millions of Americans suffering from the economic damage.  Even after George Bush stole a presidential election and gave our government away to the Oligarchs he represented, the vast majority of Democrats rallied around him and gave him a blank check after 911.

The big rant below the fold

When I see people who openly put their sexual escapades, their latest illnesses, and their financial situation on their facebook pages or in their tweets, and then cry about a loss of privacy, I just shake my head.  And where is the outrage that the Koch brothers, Rupert Murdoch, Rush Limbaugh... can freely buy most of this information, and probably a lot more, from these private corporations?

Keep in mind, the Obama administration did nothing illegal, like bypassing the courts like the Bush Administration.  Now tell me, what president, other than George Bush who ignored National Security warnings, wouldn't use every legal tool at his disposal to try and stop a massive attack from a terrorist group with a WMD?  This is a real threat in todays world!

And how would the U.S. respond to a WMD attack that killed thousands, under a wing-nut, global warming evolution denying, God's will, American exceptionalism Tea Party president?  The biggest threat to our liberty and our future probably won't come from a terrorist attack, but rather from a fatal response from a group of ignorant and crazy Washington politicians when Democrats across the country once again act like sheep and follow the wing nuts through the gates of hell.

This is what Joe Biden had to say yesterday about the Republicans:

“I’m being straight about this. This is not your father’s Republican Party. It really is a fundamentally different party. There’s never been as much distance, at least since I’ve been alive, distance between where the mainstream of the Republican congressional party is and the Democratic Party is. It’s a chasm. It’s a gigantic chasm.
The criticisms of the administration I see around here and elsewhere from the left, going so far as to call it a "Betrayal", are way out of line and are helping the same type of people who created such a mess for our country in the first place.  We need to keep in mind where the REAL danger to our future comes from.

We can and need to have an ongoing discussion about what security we need when technology is making more deadly weapons available to people who won't hesitate to use them against us.  Here's how E.J. Dionne put it in his column today.

This is not, in short, an all-or-nothing debate. We can be far more mindful of privacy and liberty than we have been without gutting the government’s ability to stop future attacks.
So the next time you decide to make outrageous and over the top attacks on the Democrats, keep in mind who you're driving the "let's give the other side a chance" voters too, and if the country can survive a Tea party response to the next terrorist attack.
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  The Dionne piece is very worth the read n/t (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
  •  danger to our nation is not from terrorists. (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    milkbone, pollwatcher, RonV, Mr Robert, stevemb

    Yes, if terrorists pulled off another mass murder in the USA (or anywhere else) that would be very bad. But ultimately the only thing that seriously threatens our national security is another powerful nation-state. Or, pardon me, complete failure to attend to the realities of the changing climate, both economically and in terms of literal climate change.

    The latter is ultimately an internal issue. We the citizens are the only ones responsible for our nation's policies. As for the former, the best way to make sure that no heavily-armed nation-state tries to take ours on with military force is for our government to emphasize, in rhetoric and policy, that cordial relations are in everyone's long term interests, and conflict is generally a waste of time, treasure and human life.

    Even if terrorists were to obtain a nuclear bomb and set it off in a major American city, which would be tragic and horrible, that wouldn't threaten our nation's survival. Your argument that if terrorists attack and wingnuts respond by nuking other countries or otherwise overreacting, the problem is therefore with the terrorists, rings a bit hollow.

    "But there's one thing that gives every Marine the willies, and anyone saying otherwise is a liar. Drop pods. That shit is terrifying, son."

    by Shaviv on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 09:17:30 AM PDT

    •  I don't think I made myself clear (0+ / 0-)
      Your argument that if terrorists attack and wingnuts respond by nuking other countries or otherwise overreacting, the problem is therefore with the terrorists, rings a bit hollow.
      Of course the terrorists are the root problem, but the constant over reaction by the American people tends to have far more reaching and negative consequences.

      Those on the left are now over reacting to this story, and if they push independent voters to the right, we'll get another Reagan/Bush or worse presidency, and 10's of millions more will suffer, just as 10's of millions now are suffering because of those 2 presidencies.

      The criticisms by some on the left are over the top, and the resultant public cure at the next election could be FAR, FAR worse than the disease.

    •  So, the (0+ / 0-)

      blame of any overreaction to another 9/11 type of attack will rest solely with the american people?

      Bin Laden is on record as wanting to provoke the US into starting a war in Afghanistan, and he succeeded.

      These kind of events happen in real time,not lining up with the next election in america.

      We already have the leaders in place when the attack happens,and they end up making the decisions.

      After 9/11, americans wanted some kind of response from our government. They did not want to just let it pass without response.

      Do you really expect that after a second 9/11 or a nuke attack, the american people will force a leader to stay restrained,or be restrained in their own reactions?

      When we are attacked, we respond.
      It is a normal human reaction to being attacked.

      Politically, if there is a democratic president in office and it can be shown that a second 9/11 could have been thwarted but the president declined to use the tools the law allows to stop terror attacks....democrats would struggle to regain the white house in awhile,but more importantly, fellow americans will be once again jumping to their deaths in front of our eyes.

      Bush got a pass for ignoring warnings on 9/11 but now that terrorism is front and center in america, no second pass will be given to whoever is in power if they did not use the law to identify and stop attacks.

  •  asdf (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    liberaldregs, RonV
    This is not, in short, an all-or-nothing debate. We can be far more mindful of privacy and liberty than we have been without gutting the government’s ability to stop future attacks.
    Too bad Harry Reid and the President do not agree.  Or maybe the President does agree but is powerless to challenge the NSA... isn't that all the more reason to worry?

    What are you doing to fight the dangerous and counterproductive error of treating dirtbag terrorist criminals as though they were comic book supervillains? I can't believe we still have to argue this shit, let alone on Daily Kos.

    by happymisanthropy on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 09:28:11 AM PDT

  •  Pffffft! (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Mr Robert

    1) We're not surprised.  It's confirmation of shit we've been screaming about for years and getting ignored.  So now that we're getting that confirmation, we're supposed to shut up because it's nothing new?  Bullshit.

    2) If you think the left that's criticizing President Obama wasn't critical of President Bush I really don't know what to say.  You clearly paid no attention at all prior to 2009.

    3) The "it's all legal" claim is BS because there has been to serious test of this shit.  The FISA court deals with non-adversarial applications.  It has no ability to reach the question of constitutionality.  And all attempts to challenge domestic spying in regular Article III courts has been quashed by the administration's successful invocation of national security secrets and/or challenging standing on the basis that what's being challenged is secret (so the plaintiffs can't prove they're being spied on.)  Read the congressional record of the debate over section 215.  Nobody - absolutely nobody - had a clue it would be interpreted so broadly.

    4) Invoking WMDs is pure fear-mongering.  There's no evidence and no reason to think that acquiring and storing years and years of US person data is necessary or useful in preventing some terrorist group from getting their hands on WMDs.  You know what helps?  Working with foreign governments to beter control their WMD stockpiles.   To his credit, President Obama has done a fair amount of that.

    5) The old, tired, "criticizing Obama will help the right wing loonies" crap ain't going to fly.  You don't want him criticized from the left?  Help us convince him he needs to stop doing the shit we're criticizing him for.

    “What’s the use of having developed a science well enough to make predictions if, in the end, all we’re willing to do is stand around and wait for them to come true?” - Sherwood Rowland

    by jrooth on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 09:39:08 AM PDT

    •  You forgot #6: the folks who post their whole (0+ / 0-)

      lives on the internet including the drunken sexting are NOT the people who are up in arms about this. The aforementioned too-much-information people seem to be among the "shruggers": "Nothing about my life is private anymore so why should I care anyhow?". That's not what I say, and jrooth, I suspect neither do you!

  •  No (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Mr Robert, Dogs are fuzzy, stevemb

    It's more like Richard Nixon's world, except with a lot more CPU power, storage density, and network bandwidth (and a lot less intelligence).

  •  If you give two shits about WMD terror (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Darwinian Detrius, Mr Robert

    then first you lock down fissile material all over the globe, as much as possible.

    Two you work closely with nuclear powers - China, Russia and India, most significantly - to maintain control over fissile materials.

    Three, you slash stocks of chemical and bioweapons worldwide.

    Voila, you've just cut the risk of WMD terror substantially.

    But that's not what the NSA is here for. They're here for domestic social control.

    •  Senator Lugar was defeated by wing nuts (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Mr Robert

      Nunn–Lugar Cooperative Threat Reduction in 1992 worked with the Russians to get control of their fissile material.  Lugar was defeated by a wing nut who eventually lost, but that's my point.  This isn't your fathers Republican party, and by going over the top of some of the criticism, you're going to get the Republicans who will do the exact opposite of what you want.

  •  The real danger, the real solution (0+ / 0-)

    Terrorists could set off a nuke tomorrow and it would kill fewer people than are killed by the holes in our health care "system".

    Climate change is going to outclass both.

    The way you stop WMD terrorism is to control the WMDs (Nunn-Lugar was a shining example, and so was Valerie Plame's department), and to infiltrate the terrorists. Spying on Occupy was worse than useless: it took resources that could have been used for threats to public safety.

    Knowledge is power. A government that knows everything has too much power to be tolerated under American values even if it would save lives. We made that safety vs. freedom value judgment a long time ago.

    Freedom isn't free. Patriots pay taxes.

    by Dogs are fuzzy on Thu Jun 13, 2013 at 01:20:51 PM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site