Hillary Clinton, the queen of humanitarian plunder, spent some of her time at the University of Connecticut last Wednesday promoting the persecution of NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden along with the official rationale for NSA overreach. Edward Snowden succeeded in obtaining documentation showing that most civilian electronic communications are recorded and monitored by the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA). Widespread acceptance of a surveillance state is one of the political objectives behind the attacks on September 11, 2001.
“People were desperate to avoid another 9/11 attack”, claims Hillary as she defends mass surveillance programs. Like a mafioso flunky, Clinton testifies to the condition of “people right this minute trying to figure out how to do harm to Americans”. This raises the question, ‘what about those outside of the cast and crew participating in the U.S. theatrical presentation known as the “War on Terror?”‘ Way to go, Hillary! You might have been called ‘Secretary of State’, but we recognize a hoodlum when we see one shaking us down for humanity’s last few tokens of governmental restraint. Even if we fork over every last provision of the Constitution, how can we be assured that this thieving mob won’t attack us again? Hillary Clinton has come a long way since the day three thousand were murdered in an effort to change the political landscape. Then she was standing on the front steps of the capital building with her colleagues to introduce a new era of torture beginning with the mangling of “God Bless America”. It couldn’t be more punk.
Publicly taunting NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden, Hillary says it’s “odd that he would flee, we have all these protections for whistle-blowers…” Snowden was fleeing the worst conditions in U.S. history for whistleblowers. The “Espionage Act”, an archaic law aimed at German spies during World War I, was resurrected for the task of putting Bradley Manning away for 35 years. If exploitation of past war-time legal missteps fails to intimidate leakers, there’s always President Obama’s new and improved NDAA (Natonal Defense Authorization Act) that comes complete with a sufficiently vague definition of ‘illegal support of terrorists’. Does such support include paying federal taxes?
“I think turning over a lot of that material—intentionally or unintentionally—drained, gave all kinds of information, not only to big countries, but to networks and terrorist groups and the like.” As we listen to ex-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton accuse Snowden of providing “materials to terrorists”, should we really think it’s “odd” that Snowden decided to flee the country? Snowden couldn’t have predicted these hysterics ahead of time? He chose to alert the public about NSA overreach because he’s aware of dangerous developments brewing in the United States. No entity would need to usurp that much power without the intent to engage in tyrannical pursuits like the “War on Terror”. Today, we recognize Hillary Clinton’s most visible role in this game as far worse than what she accuses Snowden of doing. A role most notoriously evident is the United State’s criminal intervention of Libya and the arming and funding of terrorist rebels in Syria.
Hillary Clinton then attempts to further misrepresent Snowden’s intentions by exploiting misguided public sentiment over the Ukrainian crisis. We’re supposed to believe that Snowden is a cold war spy in cahoots with the ‘Ruskies':
I have a hard time thinking that somebody who is a champion of privacy and liberty has taken refuge in Russia, under Putin’s authority”
It’s called irony, Hillary. It is indeed a sad day when a champion of privacy and liberty has no choice but to take refuge in Russia.