NSA chief says legislation to stop media leaks is only weeks away

[ACatWithThumbs]

This should be struck down by the Supreme Court though, right?

I hope so.

And people shouldn't forget that this will also effect Europe.

If they make a law to mouth shut US media they will also mouth shut EU media.

As we all know if the US says "jump!" the EU asks "How high?"

People really have to start protesting or make petitions.

Or we will end up with a second China/Russia.

 

[Misanthrope]

I hope so.

And people shouldn't forget that this will also effect Europe.

If they make a law to mouth shut US media they will also mouth shut EU media.

As we all know if the US says "jump!" the EU asks "How high?"

People really have to start protesting or make petitions.

Or we will end up with a second China/Russia.

 

 

I contest that being a Fascist state where the control lies on private corporations would be infinitely worst than a fascist state where the control lies within the Government. Funny how ultimate economical freedom quickly consolidates back into a rich elite that controls the government through legal bribes and reverts back to no freedom at all.

[Phillyphries]

The Supreme Court will never accept this, it is unconstitutional from the start.

 

Everyone here is so dramatic, becoming China? What are you, 12?

[Misanthrope]

The Supreme Court will never accept this, it is unconstitutional from the start.

 

Everyone here is so dramatic, becoming China? What are you, 12?

 

Hey China has been gradually becoming a capitalist country for a while, why can't the reverse be true? 

[mr moose]

I contest that being a Fascist state where the control lies on private corporations would be infinitely worst than a fascist state where the control lies within the Government. Funny how ultimate economical freedom quickly consolidates back into a rich elite that controls the government through legal bribes and reverts back to no freedom at all.

 

I contest that both fascist and communist rule end in the same dilemma,  an oppressive controlling dictatorship (or group of entities) that ensure the poor are subjugated and the rich/powerful have everything. 

 

I do feel we need a balance of both worlds in order to maintain true freedom and genuine prosperity.

[qwertywarrior]

each time i read something like this i feel like  terrorists are these invisible forces that some how have this insane amount of power that for some reason arnt willing to use 

 

some one tell me how long will we actually fight this invisible enemy

will he be  alive for ever

will our freedoms slowly be taken away for the sake of security

 

it seems the scope is changing

 

the enemy is us

there are huge data bases of information being collected on us and our congressmen among others

if we say this is wrong they point at the few thousands that died  over a decade ago and tell us we love the terrorists

 

we are living in a McCarthyism but there are no communists the new enemy are terrorists

faceless people and if we try to argue then we are them

 

how many countries are we going to destroy

and people ask why does the world hate us

[Misanthrope]

I contest that both fascist and communist rule end in the same dilemma,  an oppressive controlling dictatorship (or group of entities) that ensure the poor are subjugated and the rich/powerful have everything. 

 

I do feel we need a balance of both worlds in order to maintain true freedom and genuine prosperity.

No, your base sample for Communism just happen to be Fascist dictatorships for the most part, yet when other revolutionary means are employeed i.e. Anarchism, communism, as in the idealist class society, isn't fascist but participatory. The historical problem was that all socialist revolutions were betrayed by Fascist leaders or sponsored by them: Stalin and Mao. However as most of my anarchist friends love to point out the Spanish civil war was an exception to that rule.

[mr moose]

No, your base sample for Communism just happen to be Fascist dictatorships for the most part, yet when other revolutionary means are employeed i.e. Anarchism, communism, as in the idealist class society, isn't fascist but participatory. The historical problem was that all socialist revolutions were betrayed by Fascist leaders or sponsored by them: Stalin and Mao. However as most of my anarchist friends love to point out the Spanish civil war was an exception to that rule.

my base sample? It's an observation of the general trends in which socialist policy tends always to head, just like the capitalist model always tends to lead to a model of rich companies and working poor.

[Paralectic]

Bunch of retards over there in the USA.

[Lyons]

Land of the free!!! Snowden, Wikileaks and other leak/cables sources are already in significantly deep legal shite, I doubt any form of legislation will stop them from continuing in their ways...

[Misanthrope]

my base sample? It's an observation of the general trends in which socialist policy tends always to head, just like the capitalist model always tends to lead to a model of rich companies and working poor.

In case you missed the point both Stalin and Mao were a pretty big deal. Like bigger than the US and Britain were for capitalism spreading in fact: There was no denying the Russians when they causally killed anybody who didn't align with them. That's why we never found out what could have happened under Lenin, under Trotsky, Under Che: all killed by Stalinist. Just like nowadays we all love to joke about how Americans love to "spread democracy" by just bombing the opposition the same can be said about Stalinist back then. 

In any case, I'll give you another angle: forget the entirety of the first paragraph. Let's call all of it nonsense. That's fine by me. We're still confusing terms here: When you say Communism you're talking about the conclusion of a transitory period. That transition it's been a subject of major discussion (to put it ridiculously lightly: see the aforementioned assassinations) among all leftists who can't agree on how one should transition from the current socio-economical model to the utopian, classless society. So if you consider methods you don't just have communists: You have Marxists, Marxist-Leninist, Stalinist, Maoists, Anarchist, etc. I think you get the picture. So even if it wasn't a matter of leaderships and revolutions being hijacked as I mentioned before, you can disregard each one of those revolutions I mentioned without being able to discredit Communism, simply because it honestly has never really been accomplished at all.

[deathjester]

Source: http://dailycaller.com/2014/03/05/nsa-chief-says-legislation-to-stop-media-leaks-is-only-weeks-away/

 

I recommend read the article, i have cut a few things... In my opinion this would be all they need to continue to do what they do quietly.

 

I would share it on facebook, but they are too busy talking about the Dancing with the Stars cast, arguing for and against whatever cause that celebrities currently endorse, talking about celebrities and posting memes. It would get no likes. 

 

Me posting some dumb "keep calm" meme though would be a major hit.

 

"Already long ago, from when we sold our vote to no man, the People have abdicated our duties; for the People who once upon a time handed out military command, high civil office, legions — everything, now restrains itself and anxiously hopes for just two things: bread and circuses."

 

(Juvenal, Satire 10.77–81)

 

They figured this @%^# out a long time ago.

[mr moose]

In case you missed the point both Stalin and Mao were a pretty big deal. Like bigger than the US and Britain were for capitalism spreading in fact: There was no denying the Russians when they causally killed anybody who didn't align with them. That's why we never found out what could have happened under Lenin, under Trotsky, Under Che: all killed by Stalinist. Just like nowadays we all love to joke about how Americans love to "spread democracy" by just bombing the opposition the same can be said about Stalinist back then. 

In any case, I'll give you another angle: forget the entirety of the first paragraph. Let's call all of it nonsense. That's fine by me. We're still confusing terms here: When you say Communism you're talking about the conclusion of a transitory period. That transition it's been a subject of major discussion (to put it ridiculously lightly: see the aforementioned assassinations) among all leftists who can't agree on how one should transition from the current socio-economical model to the utopian, classless society. So if you consider methods you don't just have communists: You have Marxists, Marxist-Leninist, Stalinist, Maoists, Anarchist, etc. I think you get the picture. So even if it wasn't a matter of leaderships and revolutions being hijacked as I mentioned before, you can disregard each one of those revolutions I mentioned without being able to discredit Communism, simply because it honestly has never really been accomplished at all.

 

Hmmm...   I think we may be at differing levels of depth on the subject.  When I referenced communism, I was referring generally to the socialist policies that are usually associated with a left leaning government party (not so much the Russian model of communism).  Many times we see policies (at least here in Australia) that lead to government control of the media and  new laws governing social conduct where it relates to freedom of association or speech. Fortunately we always get a liberal/conservative party in who swing the pendulum of politics back out to the right which in general seems to end in a balance between the two (so long as we don't get one side in for too long).  Some examples of what I am referring to are laws passed by our last government which ban the media from printing or broadcasting images of asylum seeker boats (we had/have an issue with too many asylum seekers arriving by boat and lit looked bad for the government) and new laws that make it illegal to insult someone.   They were a left wing political party, much like the Obama government in the US at the moment. 

 

A long story short, I was merely pointing out that in my experiences too much socialist governance ends in the same dilemma that too much capitalist governance ends in.   Basically a huge gap between the rich and the poor and exceedingly more poor at that.

[LOST TALE]

[Misanthrope]

Hmmm...   I think we may be at differing levels of depth on the subject.  When I referenced communism, I was referring generally to the socialist policies that are usually associated with a left leaning government party (not so much the Russian model of communism).  Many times we see policies (at least here in Australia) that lead to government control of the media and  new laws governing social conduct where it relates to freedom of association or speech. Fortunately we always get a liberal/conservative party in who swing the pendulum of politics back out to the right which in general seems to end in a balance between the two (so long as we don't get one side in for too long).  Some examples of what I am referring to are laws passed by our last government which ban the media from printing or broadcasting images of asylum seeker boats (we had/have an issue with too many asylum seekers arriving by boat and lit looked bad for the government) and new laws that make it illegal to insult someone.   They were a left wing political party, much like the Obama government in the US at the moment. 

 

A long story short, I was merely pointing out that in my experiences too much socialist governance ends in the same dilemma that too much capitalist governance ends in.   Basically a huge gap between the rich and the poor and exceedingly more poor at that.

The issue is that the far left movements have an incredible broad spectrum on views, to the point that you could just as easily find a totalitarian mini-stalin just as easily as you can find a full blown anarchist along with every possible permutation in between. I do know that I went fairly deep into the subject as you mention but it was to illustrate a point: it bothers me when people lump all communists next to Stalin and claim "oh who cares about those tyrannical dictators".

[XTankSlayerX]

If this spreads into Canada (which it wont)... Damn. Good luck USA

[mr moose]

The issue is that the far left movements have an incredible broad spectrum on views, to the point that you could just as easily find a totalitarian mini-stalin just as easily as you can find a full blown anarchist along with every possible permutation in between. I do know that I went fairly deep into the subject as you mention but it was to illustrate a point: it bothers me when people lump all communists next to Stalin and claim "oh who cares about those tyrannical dictators".

 

I agree, If I was honest about it I actually like the marxist approach (I can see it working well on paper).  

[Entropy]

This should be struck down by the Supreme Court though, right?

There's very little chance that the Supreme Court will find this constitutional. Opinions aside, it's clearly stated in the constitution that they can't do that. Heck, even the reasons behind that amendment are based on governments picking and choosing what can go into the news, by law. (Note: The news media may not cover the less exciting, more important things, but there are always journalists that don't suck)

[Fetzie]

I agree, If I was honest about it I actually like the marxist approach (I can see it working well on paper).  

 

Marxism works until somebody tries to apply it to the real world.

[mr moose]

Marxism works until somebody tries to apply it to the real world.

as I said, it works well on paper, However I think if you look into it deeply enough you'll start to see that most ideals are similar in that the outcome is heavily influenced by the flaws of humanity.

[Sky Daddy]

http://i.imgur.com/ScijR.jpg

This might be relevant

Science got us to the moon, the american government merely paid for it.

[PortentousLad]

Will they also prepare an effigy of the First Amendment to burn?

I was about to ask if this is even possible?

 

well I guess it's time for the US gov. and the US as a country to split get divorced move out, it's been fun but all good things have to end some day. Maybe the Senate can stay at Camerons' until they found a new place.

[Scia]

If this spreads into Canada (which it wont)... Damn. Good luck USA

Canada, Australia, New Zealand, UK and USA are "the five eyes". You've got precisely the same shit going on in each of there countries. The focus is just on the US at the moment because of the leaks.

So this has been going on since after WW2.

[mr moose]

Canada, Australia, New Zealand, UK and USA are "the five eyes". You've got precisely the same shit going on in each of there countries. The focus is just on the US at the moment because of the leaks.

So this has been going on since after WW2.

 

We Australians are not eyes, we are the arse end, We do nothing but take shit from the us and pretend to deal with it like a respected part of the body.