3 ms·
Ah, the Espionage Act of 1917. One of the governments finest attacks on free speech. And it worked. The Supreme Court, in wanting to uphold a conviction against
by colejohnson66 7y ago
Ah, the Espionage Act of 1917. One of the governments finest attacks on free speech. And it worked. The Supreme Court, in wanting to uphold a conviction against someone protesting a war they almost certainly agreed with, ruled it constitutional.
And do you really think the government will give him a fair trial? No. They almost certainly will give him a secret trial. How are those even constitutional?
And regarding the legality, we have a constitutionally protected right listed in the Fourth Amendment: the protection against unreasonable searches and seizures. The NSA’s indiscriminate spying is a search, no matter what Comey and the government say. If I steal documents off my employer’s computer and never read them, I’ve still committed a crime. Why is it different when the government does it? National security? What security am I receiving in exchange for them stealing data off my computer (and then saying they didn’t)?
- brokenmachine 7y ago>Why is it different when the government does it? National security? "National security" is obvious doublespeak. National security does not mean security for the general public, it means security for the incumbent power.
- m-p-3 7y agoIndeed. Nationa Security is like what HR is to a company. It's there to defend the company's interests, not the employees and it will gladly throw one under the bus if they can legally get away with it.
- gerbilly 7y ago> National security" is obvious doublespeak. Just change one vowel and it becomes about right: nOtional security.