Ron Paul: I’m worried that the government might kill Edward Snowden with a drone

This just reinforces my opinion that this whole "Snowden" deal is manufactured story.

You have politicians from the left and right being paraded in the media talking about the legality of the spying programs.

Poles calling Snowden a traitor.

Poles stating these circumventions of the fourth amendment are necessary to keep us safe.

Now we have a Pew poll that "proves" most Americans are "just fine" with the illegal snooping.

Finally we have the good Dr. on his megaphone worrying about a drone attack on our hero, whistleblower.

Come on, People. The media and the government are partners. This has been contrived to let everyone that didn't already know they are spying on all Americans. It's purpose is to normalize the behavior in the public's eye and to get everyone used to it.

That is my buck-fifty. I know I am one of the few here that think this way.

reply to post by GrantedBail

I agree.
At the very least, Ron Paul is just trying to get some publicity from Conspiracy theorists.

Because really...if the government did that, they'd have a #storm on their hands. They'd be crossing a huge line...even bigger than wiretapping everyone.

They would never do it. It'd be suicide, and I think Paul is smart enough to realize this.


But Grantedbail, you're probably right. This whole thing smells fishy.

reply to post by GrantedBail


Sadly you are probably right. This story is starting to stink. If he is the real deal then he should be on the first flight to Iceland.


If this is a setup whoever thought it up is kinda stupid. It has opened a door that was closed and sealed shut. Now we will be debating about privacy. And people want to be free. I don't care how many BS polls I see.

I worried too that he was Jimmy Hoffa'ed, but a friend brought me great peace with these words:"It was our Lord that gave him the wisdom and the strength to speak out and because of that I know the Lord is watching over him."

That being said, I do believe Ron is well aware of drone capabilities and perhaps was just warning us or putting the idea of drone attacks in our heads.

“When the drones get here, another Obama program, the drones are going to be awesome,” he warned.

“The drones will have scanning devices that can fly over your home and grab all the digital data in the place where you live. The drones are going to up the ante, there’s no doubt about it. The only question is whether this is still the United States of America. There’s nowhere to hide anymore.”

www.wnd.com/2013/06/troops-targeted-by-nsa-for-anti-obama-views/?cat_orig=us

State Air Guard bases are phasing out fighters and picking up drones.

They were just talking about going after the reporter who broke the NSA leaks with the help of Edward Snowden. This is a dangerous presidence if reporters are going to be held responsible for reporting possible illegal activity by the government. This is simply a strong armed tactic to keep reporters at bay.

What reporter is going to risk exposing anything related to any questionable government programs? The free press is supposed to protect its people from government tyranny. Where are the checks and balances here? This is alarming, because the last thing we want is a press that is controlled by our government.

So a whistle-blower is now going to think twice, before he exposes any illegal or criminal activity on the part of our government? The last time I checked, I lived in the United States of America. We have a constitution that protects our rights and freedom from a government over reaching their authority.

reply to post by Sankari


If the crocks behind the government scandals with the NSA knows that they are full of dirt and Snowden have some of that dirt on them, you bet your butt that they want him death.

or what you think that they are going to invite him for afternoon tea and cookies?

I think Sankari has a point here.

Does the US have drones over Hong Kong. And if they have, will they fire on Snowden, or shoot a cruise missile with all the ensuing collateral damage? How are they going to explain that?

Indeed, let's be logical.

reply to post by Bob Sholtz

because that has stopped the U.S. before?

You really think the US government would strike Snowden in Hong Kong with a cruise missile or a drone?

Get real.

Originally posted by WeRpeons
They were just talking about going after the reporter who broke the NSA leaks with the help of Edward Snowden. This is a dangerous presidence if reporters are going to be held responsible for reporting possible illegal activity by the government. This is simply a strong armed tactic to keep reporters at bay.

What reporter is going to risk exposing anything related to any questionable government programs? The free press is supposed to protect its people from government tyranny. Where are the checks and balances here? This is alarming, because the last thing we want is a press that is controlled by our government.

So a whistle-blower is now going to think twice, before he exposes any illegal or criminal activity on the part of our government? The last time I checked, I lived in the United States of America. We have a constitution that protects our rights and freedom from a government over reaching their authority.

And all from a president who preached "protect free press". Program is ruined now because of how they interpreted and then applied the patriot act. It's not because of Snowden or the press. But wait - the government is never wrong. They are perfect

reply to post by GrantedBail


I have the same degree of confidence in poll results as is do with MSM and their official story.

"Lies, damned lies, and statistics"

WTHeck, polls are meant to persuade the sheep that they have the wrong ideology and better change their thinking because they must be wrong if they are in the minority. Sadly, this tool works and MSM knows it.

Government's got the goods on everybody - you, me, themselves and Pew.
Just sayin' there is more corruption in the world than we realize.

Then again, they could be accurately reflecting how successful the MSM has been in persuading public opinion.

I like to read the comments below articles and anybody that calls Snowden a traitor right now is getting jumped on big time. The comments are so foul against Obama they lack full works. That's what I'm seeing from this chair.

Originally posted by marg6043
reply to post by Sankari

 

If the crocks behind the government scandals with the NSA knows that they are full of dirt and Snowden have some of that dirt on them, you bet your butt that they want him death.

or what you think that they are going to invite him for afternoon tea and cookies?

I'm sure they would like to squash him and his story. The thing is, he has already given his info to the Guardian. Perhaps that's why they want Greenwald, or are attempting to make him fear them. It is too late to stop the leak. More dirt to come.

Killing either Snowden or Greenwald destroys any shred of credibility the government clings to and tells the world they are cold blooded killers as well and spies gone wild.

They are hog tied and yes their only chance is to persuade public opinion in their favour.

It is media wars alright, but not just between U.S. and foreign nations. It is a war between the government and the awake citizens of this country who have their number.

If we did not have the internet we would be #ed.

reply to post by bluemooone2


Paul was saying some good stuff there. It would have been nice if the anchor wouldn't have decided she should talk over him so we couldn't get his full perspective. I will suppose/hope that she had to ask about whether or not he thought Snowdon was going to go to the Russians with the information, but I got the impression that she was concerned herself. Did you see that too? Was I just misreading her?

Great post, OP!

reply to post by GrantedBail

This just reinforces my opinion that this whole "Snowden" deal is manufactured story.

it's possible, but i don't think it likely. i think the spin is manufactured, but i think he released those files absent of the government's will.

bradley manning leaked documents and he was labeled a traitor and slandered in much the same way. obviously the news is trying to convince people that these programs are good and legal, but they're still hammering snowden.

fox news group "the five" ALWAYS has the unwanted opinion voiced by the one "democrat" in the group, they set him up as a strawman and fire away. if he was not part of the group, there would be no discussion. he's supposedly liberal, yet he was the only one who thought the programs were bad. they all said they would trade liberty for safety except him, and they grilled him for it. if i remember correctly, they also grilled him for supporting leakers if the leaked information was about illegal activity.

that speaks wonders on the issue to me.

reply to post by sad_eyed_lady

Killing either Snowden or Greenwald destroys any shred of credibility the government clings to and tells the world they are cold blooded killers as well and spies gone wild.

true, so if they're out to kill him, expect him to "disappear", and you'll hear the news say he has gone underground and detectives can't find him anywhere (wanted for questioning and to insure china/russia doesn't "hurt" him of course). the story will be forgotten in a few weeks, and people won't be left with the impression that the government assassinated him.

Originally posted by GrantedBail
This just reinforces my opinion that this whole "Snowden" deal is manufactured story.

You know, that's all I can really come up with as well considering the facets of the story itself.
It feels like it has feathers, it tastes like "Shaoyazi", waddles when it walks, and quacks....
I am thinking we have a water fowl here.

Keep up the posting GrantedBail, I am really digging what you have to say.

I have been watching your posts for awhile now, and I can't help but love hearing what you have to say time and time again.

Originally posted by GrantedBail


That is my buck-fifty. I know I am one of the few here that think this way.

edit on 12-6-2013 by GrantedBail because: (no reason given)

Isn't it messed up that even considering or speculating the possibility of a conspiracy is frowned upon mostly here at a conspiracy theory themed website?

Myself, I find it frustrating and almost depressing at times.
I don't let that get me down, I just try to improve my approach.

It has been working out positively though, as I try to improve myself the ATS community has been very receptive and kind about it (social reinforcement of my insanity? haha).

It's not that you "think this way", but rather it is that you are "questioning things" that don't seem to add up very well, and trying to find out why it doesn't add up. What missing pieces explain all of this?

Your opinion is a result of having so many questions, but no real answers. It leads to it's own pre-defined conclusions, that we are essentially slaves and we are constantly manipulated into consenting to it and requesting heavier chains.

Originally posted by Tribunal
reply to post by Bob Sholtz

 

because that has stopped the U.S. before?

You really think the US government would strike Snowden in Hong Kong with a cruise missile or a drone?

Get real.

PopSci.com - Why The U.S. Won't Dare Kill Edward Snowden With A Drone Strike
There are about 1,100 compelling reasons why the NSA leaker shouldn't fear death from above.

Accidentally killing innocent civilians, so long a criticism of the American targeted killing program, would become a terrifying certainty in Hong Kong. FATA suffers more drone strikes than anywhere except Afghanistan, and has a rough population density of 300 people per square mile. Hong Kong, by contrast, has 17,000 people per square mile. It's unlikely a drone, flying above Hong Kong at 30,000 feet, could even locate Snowden in a population that dense.
If a drone could find Snowden, it's reasonable to assume that that hundreds of innocent people would be killed or injured in the missile attack, which almost certainly constitutes an act of war between the U.S. and China.

Hong Kong is probably an unsafe place for Snowden because of other reasons, but death by American drone strike isn't something he has to worry about there.

reply to post by muzzleflash


Wow! I am humbled. What a nice thing to say. Thank you.

reply to post by Sankari

Oh dear. Poor old irrelevant Ron Paul, the paranoid conspiracy theorist's friend. You can always rely on him for a whacky media statement.

Is Edward Snowden currently located in any country where the US is operating drones? Is there any evidence that the government wants him dead? Is there any evidence that killing him would actually help the government in any way, considering the information he's leaked is already in the public domain?

Seriously folks, let's get logical here please.

I like Mr. Paul's stance on things, generally speaking, but I'm going to have to side with you on him going into wacky land here. As for killing Snowden though....given his position and former positions, yeah, I'd say they likely have some good reasons for wanting him dead...but they certainly won't do it with a drone or cruise missile into Hong Kong.