by BAR editor and senior columnist Margaret Kimberley
No sooner had they learned Edward Snowden’s name, than bipartisan supporters of the National Security State proceeded to vilify him. “The congressional double cross only serves to confirm that once again there is unanimity in Washington about how best to screw the people.”
Freedom Rider: The Snowden Litmus Test
by BAR editor and senior columnist Margaret Kimberley
“Republican and Democratic members of Congress have exploded in a rhetorical competition to see who can vilify Snowden the most.”
Edward Snowden has been called a traitor, a narcissist, a loser and a danger to national security. Reporters have questioned whether he was friendly enough to his neighbors or why he made a good salary despite having just a GED. He has even been criticized for leaving the military after he broke his legs. His whereabouts are unknown because the federal government is preparing to file charges against him.
Such extravagant and bizarre levels of vitriol can mean only one thing. When politicians and rich pundits all join together to deliver a very public beat down, the victim of the beating is probably someone who did the people a great service.
Snowden revealed the extent of the government’s levels of surveillance conducted in America and around the world. Millions of phone and email records are turned over to the National Security Agency (NSA) in something ominously called operation Boundless Informant. Yes, that is the real name of a program which gives information about millions of human beings from Verizon, ATT, Google, Yahoo, Skype, Facebook, Apple and Microsoft to the United States government. We are all under government surveillance and weasel words like “metadata” should not make anyone feel better. Big brother is watching all of us.
Worse than the government’s disregard for our constitutional rights has been the acquiescence of Congress and the courts. The Obama administration and the Bushites before them all made sure that their lawlessness first passed muster with Congress. President Obama’s first line of defense after the story broke was to announce that congress knew and approved of all his plans.
“Raising the specter of terror has become the last refuge of scoundrels.”
Republican and Democratic members of Congress have exploded in a rhetorical competition to see who can vilify Snowden the most. Far from giving a feeling of assurance, the congressional double cross only serves to confirm that once again there is unanimity in Washington about how best to screw the people.
The normally cool Obama and his top staffers are a bit off stride and noticeably panicking. In his increasingly annoying and halting monotone he assured us that wasn’t listening to our phone calls. And just in case that less than comforting statement didn’t work for you he also claims that the spying program has thwarted terror plots on our behalf. It wasn’t clear if these were the plots invented by the FBI and their informants, but I digress. Raising the specter of terror has become the last refuge of scoundrels.
Edward Snowden worked as a contractor for Booz Allen and Dell before he leaked the NSA information to journalists Glenn Greenwald and Laura Poitras. Most people may not have been surprised that the government spies on them, but they don’t know that the dirty work is performed by private contractors and not government employees.
That is one of the reasons that politicians and courtier pundits are so angry with Snowden. Snowden opened the entire can of worms. All the levels of corruption were revealed in one fell swoop. Private corporations make a fortune off of work contracted out by the government which then proceeds to spy on us all. Thanks to Snowden another dirty little secret has been exposed.
“The Obama administration takes the sledge hammer approach to any revelation or question and crushes anyone who dares to speak up.”
Cases such as this do serve an important purpose. They tell us who can be trusted and who cannot. Equivocation about Snowden’s motives, or the rightness of his decision, or the dangers he presented to the government or to the Obama administration or the war on terror are proof of untrustworthiness. There aren’t many clear lines of demarcation but this is one of the rare instances where a point of view makes one politically suspect or not.
Daniel Ellsberg recently lamented that the Nixon administration illegal acts carried out against him are now perfectly legal. The Patriot Act and its extensions mean that just about anything the government wants to do is legal. They don’t need warrants to spy on us, they don’t event have to tell us they are spying. Whistleblowers are being dealt very harsh sanctions indeed. The Obama administration takes the sledge hammer approach to any revelation or question and crushes anyone who dares to speak up.
Edward Snowden risks facing years in prison like Bradley Manning or life forever on the lam like Julian Assange. Hopefully he was aware of the risks and will elude detection until well after Obama leaves office. He will need to be very lucky and careful if he is to avoid the long arm of United States law. Actually that statement applies to everyone. We can tell the truth but we shouldn’t expect anything resembling mercy.
Margaret Kimberley's Freedom Rider column appears weekly in BAR, and is widely reprinted elsewhere. She maintains a frequently updated blog as well as at http://freedomrider.blogspot.com. Ms. Kimberley lives in New York City, and can be reached via e-Mail at Margaret.Kimberley(at)BlackAgendaReport.com.
For all the policy failures of COP26 it may actually be an inflection point in history -- a point where social and political conditions force a transformation of consciousness and politics that
What are the environmental and ecological impacts of large-scale military occupations by the United Nations “peacekeeping” missions?
The late Brazilian intellectual, artist, and activist Abdias do Nascimento argues that racial democracy is premised on an idea of racial mixing that not only valorizes whiteness, but is predica
In this series, we ask acclaimed authors to answer five questions about their book.
It is the liberal class which is determined to censor as much of public discourse as possible.
