Sorry about the title, in that I’m not actually sorry for my impolitic yet true observation that was made for explicitly provocative purposes; but polite society dictates that I offer a pro forma apology in such circumstances sort of way. Anyway, Joshua Foust being sensible on Ed Snowden:*
Russia is a state that is arguably even less mindful of its citizens’ rights than China; human rights groups are unanimous in their criticism of the country, for its persecution of civil rights activists, its harsh crackdown on protesters, its growing harassment of gays and lesbians, and years of unchecked murder of journalists. It is a strange place to seek refuge when one’s complaint is that America is a creeping police state.
It’s only strange if that’s your real complaint. When your real complaint that America is, well, America then it makes perfect sense to seek refuge with America’s avowed rivals. That said rivals are distinctly inferior places to live is irrelevant: that’s never bothered people like Snowden or Glenn Greenwald before, so why should they start now?
(Via Hot Air Headlines)
Moe Lane
*But not being sensible on Bradley Manning. Ach, well, nobody’s perfect.
L’affair Snowden has been a challenge of separating the revelation (domestic surveillance) from the revelator (an anti-American scumbag). So far the people I already respect have done a good job of it, but it seems to be a difficult concept for a large swath of the public.
At least Manning is going to have a verdict handed down soon.
I’d like to have your thoughts on the Amash amendment.
I’ve already seen people calling those congressman who voted it down RINOS. There needs to be some pushback from the right wing political punditry to that charge.
Personally I think the Amash Amendment was stupid and if anybody can be called a RINO ( not saying anybody should) than it’s the morons who voted for it.
I didn’t really think much of it, one way or the other. It was never going to get to the President’s desk, any which way: and I wasn’t really surprised for it not to make it past the House. All in all, I think that the largest issue with it is that it gave Glenn Greenwald a tiny little extra bit of credibility; and such things are bad for the Republic.
Sure. I’m perfectly fine with us having a conversation about National Security and Liberty. To many people on either side refuse to have a rational open conversation. On one side you’ll have the Peter Kings of this world who will call you a terrorist enabler, and on the other you’ll have the Justin Amashes this world who will call you a tyrant.