Obama: “nobody is listening to your phone calls,” and it’s true
And, in the main, it’s true, nobody is listening to your phone calls.
You are, however, being monitored by robots and computers with the highest levels of artificial intelligence available – everything you do, your texts, your email, your blogs, your Pintrest, tweets, your Facebook, your on-line foot-print is recorded, searched and stored.
You being the average American, no one special, just a citizen — it is happening to you. Not a small list of terror suspects, no, it is happening to everybody.
Why is this happening?
Because nobody will ever say NO to the national data and intelligence complex, and nobody has ever said NO.
“We need it to keep you safe,” they say, and everyone rolls over.
Plus, the “special” classified courts have shredded the First Amendment, and are rubber stamps for requests, they too, never say NO, then add Congress, and Obama, especially.
We are left with expecting those doing the asking to exercise restraint, since whenever they get asked, they say yes. And in the case of the IRS, when the targeting is illegal and done for political purposes, the IRS Commissioner, still said yes.
And when the surveillance types do not have their powers are not strictly limited, they take all they can get.
This is the result.
And President Obama or some one very high up in the White House who met with the IRS Commissioner 157 times, has proven that the illegal use of investigative and data collection authority for political ends happens in America, under the direction of this White House.
The question about whether this data collection will be used to persecute political enemies has already been answered by the IRS scandal.
(Interestingly, no one is asking what the IRS or other agencies were doing to conservative groups who already had their non-profit status approved.)
So, I stand with the New York Times Editorial on the NSA domestic surveillance, it’s wrong, it should be the exception and not the rule.
I fear, however, that unlike the Ron Fournier of the National Journal, the new breed of journalists are never going to mount the sort of campaign they did for gun control or ObamaCare, mainly because they are scared of the State or do not want to criticize their hero, Obama/Holder. Bush may have cracked the door open after 9/11 on the super-state domestic intelligence infrastructure, but Obama blew that door right off its hinges.
You would have thought that once more than one of their own was targeted, the media would have spoken out, but they are all just pathetic Obama yes-men and yes-women, largely spineless and will never, ever attack the President, launch a sustained campaign like they did on gun control and ObamaCare.
The media will always defend him. They are always ready to agree with and parrot like a robot, the White House line.
Which is what is so shocking about the New York Times Editorial. Perhaps the media will sustain the issue, but my money is on NOT. The real motivation behind the media’s sustained campaigns is ideological, unless any ideological position attacks their hero, Obama. Then, they compromise on their ideology.
It is not just the media who put their politics before their reporting.
Where is the American Civil Liberties Union?
Where is the NAACP, talking about how this is a racist attack on blacks?
Where are the great defenders of the First Amendment?
But all of this comes at a cost. Every time one of these Obama scandal events happens, and media ignores or belittles any of the other facets of these stories, they lose a little more credibility, until, people end up looking for their information from other places.
It’s happening right now, for example.
But yesterday, Reuter’s David Rohde writes that Obama is going to experience an “overdue reckoning” for his “penchant for secrecy.”
Really? Who is going to force the reckoning, the lame, White House parroting, robotic media?
Or the House Republicans, who same media relentless either attacks or ignores?
Will the media really go after this issue, or will they roll over and play dead?
My money is on the media rolling over and playing dead, although the initial returns make it clear I could be way off. And I hope I am wrong.