NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden has sacrificed his freedom, his future, his family, his home and his model girlfriend in order to warn Americans that they are the targets of a monolithic spy agency which is working feverishly to ensure that privacy is demolished – and most Americans simply don’t care.
Revelations that the National Security Agency was collecting records of millions of US customers of Verizon under a secret court order issued in April, followed by news that the NSA was also pulling private data “directly from the servers” of major US service providers such as Google and Facebook, stoked international condemnation, but not from American citizens, most of whom actually support the idea.
“A majority of Americans – 56% – say the National Security Agency’s (NSA) program tracking the telephone records of millions of Americans is an acceptable way for the government to investigate terrorism,” reports Pew Research Center.
A comparison with a previous poll from January 2006 highlights the fact that more Americans are now likely to support NSA surveillance despite the huge scandal it caused for the Bush administration. Under Bush, 47% found NSA wiretapping of Americans unacceptable whereas just 41% find it unacceptable under Obama.
The poll also finds that whereas 61% of Democrats found blanket NSA surveillance unacceptable under Bush, only 34% oppose it under Obama – underscoring once again how partisanship is used to dismantle American freedoms no matter who is in office.
The survey also reveals that just one on four Americans are following the NSA story “very closely,” whereas the other 73% are presumably more interested in the release of the new XBox and season 17 of Dancing With the Stars.
“Sorry Edward Snowden: you just threw your life away for nothing. The sheep have been properly and thoroughly conditioned and brainwashed, which is why they continue to get precisely the government they so rightfully deserve,” writes Zero Hedge.
While the NSA sites the necessity to stop “terrorism” as its justification for eviscerating the 4th Amendment, the Obama administration is simultaneously supporting Al-Qaeda terrorists in Syria, many of whom have promised to attack the United States once they have finished with Bashar Al-Assad.
The irony of Snowden having to run to Communist China to escape from “the land of the free” is a chilling subtext to the story. Other authoritarian regimes throughout history have also cited security threats as a reason to put the entire population under surveillance.
As Robert Gellately of Florida State University has highlighted, Germans under Hitler spied on and denounced their neighbors and friends not because they genuinely believed them to be a security threat, but because they expected to selfishly benefit from doing so, both financially, socially and psychologically via a pavlovian need to be rewarded by their masters for their obedience.
That “Good German” syndrome is very much alive and kicking amongst Americans today, most of whom seem to be completely at ease with the fact that their government is becoming tyrannical while willing to make any excuse imaginable to deny that the United States is beginning to resemble a high-tech plutocracy which treats its own citizens as the enemy.
As we have previously noted, Americans are more likely to die in bed from accidental suffocation than fall victim to a terrorist attack. They are 1,048 times more likely to die from a car accident than from a terrorist attack and 17,600 times more likely to die from heart disease, according to statistics.
Even the global elite admit the war on terror is a farce.
“According to the Council on Foreign Relations, 33 U.S. citizens were killed worldwide in 2008 from terrorism,” writes Washington’s Blog. “There were 301,579,895 Americans living on U.S. soil in 2008, so the risk of dying from terrorist attacks in 2008 was 1 in 9,138,785.”
Despite the astronomical odds of not being victimized by a terrorist attack, millions of Americans have reached the conclusion it represents a dire threat, so they are willing to forfeit the protection afforded to them by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
In addition to an effective, decade-plus propaganda campaign relentlessly terrorizing citizens on the nearly nonexistent threat of terrorism, Americans have suffered through public mis-education over the past fifty years, a concerted effort that has dumbed them down to the point where they no longer recognize or understand the Constitution, natural rights, the threat of unaccountable government and its historical propensity to abuse them.
“Every American should realize what 9/11 enabled federal officials to accomplish — it gave them the ability to do things to both Americans and foreigners that our ancestors feared they would in the absence of a Constitution and a Bill of Rights, the ability to take people into custody and punish them, without having to concern themselves with procedural due process,” writes Jacob G. Hornberger. “By wielding the option to treat people accused of terrorism as either criminal defendants or as combatants — an option which, by the way, violates the principles of equal treatment under law and the rule of law — the federal government and its military have upended their relationship with the citizenry, enabling the former to gain supremacy and control over the latter.”
Like hapless millions of Germans living under the authoritarian rule of Hitler and the Nazis, the average American, brainwashed by corporate television and the public education system, will ultimately pay the price for his lackadaisical ignorance and irrationality.
NSA surveillance is merely a symptom of a larger and far more menacing situation – the parasitical presence of a bloated and militarized federal government that considers millions of Americans as the enemy.
In Nazi Germany and Stalin’s Soviet Union, the Gestapo and the State Political Directorate, or GPU (formerly Cheka), were allowed a free hand to hunt down, arrest, disappear, torture, throw in concentration camps and gulags, and ultimately mass murder millions upon millions of citizens considered “counter-revolutionaries” or enemies of the state.
Acquiescence and indifference to the latest revelations demonstrate that America is now ready to openly accept fascist rule, as did millions of Germans after Hitler took over the German government in 1933.
Millions of Americans, likely a substantial majority, are so politically naive and ignorant of history they are incapable of realizing what is about to happen to them.
The original Washington Post story can be found here:http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/most-americans-suppor…
The summarized poll results can be found here:http://www.washingtonpost.com/page/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/…
On the top the page, we see “Complete results over time available: http://wapo.st/190ROTE”.
Well, let’s look at each question from the actual poll results provided by Pew Research Center.
Question 1. As I read a list of some stories covered by news organizations this past week, please tell me if you happened to follow each news story very closely, fairly closely, not too closely, or not at all closely.
b. The government collecting records about Verizon phone calls for national security purposes:
Very Closely: 27%
Fairly Closely: 21%
Not Too Closely: 17%
Not At All Closely: 35%
So, we see that 52% of those being asked these questions are ill-informed to accurately respond to questions regarding government collection of phone records. These folks SHOULD NOT have been asked
Question 9 (see below).
c. The government collecting emails and other online activities directly from large internet companies to track foreign suspects in terror investigations.
Very Closely: 26%
Fairly Closely: 24%
Not Too Closely: 17%
Not At All Closely: 33%
So, with these results we see that 50% of those polled were ill-informed regarding the NSA collection of user data from websites like Google, Yahoo, Facebook, Microsoft, Apple, etc. and they should not have been asked Question 8 or 10 (see below).
The next sequence of questions is the “meat” used in all the news stories and TV propaganda shows. Pay careful attention to the language and the gradual shift in sentiments among those polled (even those ill-informed on the subject matter).
Question 8. What do you think is more important right now – (for the federal government to investigate possible terrorist threats, even if that intrudes on personal privacy); or (for the federal government not to intrude on personal privacy, even if that limits its ability to investigate possible terrorist threats)?
Investigate threats: 62%
Don’t intrude on privacy: 34%
No opinion: 4%
Look at the wording. It talks about intruding on personal privacy, but does not mention violating the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution. Do you think the question would have received a different result if it was worded: What do you think is more important right now – (for the federal government to investigate possible terrorist threats without obtaining a warrant after establish probable cause, even if it involves violating the Fourth Amendment rights of people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects) or (for the federal government to abide by the law of the land and not violate Fourth Amendment rights of the people)?
Question 9. As you may know, it has been reported that the National Security Agency has been getting secret court orders to track telephone call records of MILLIONS of Americans in an effort to investigate terrorism. Would you consider this access to telephone call records an acceptable or unacceptable way for the federal government to investigate terrorism?
Strongly Acceptable: 30%
Somewhat Acceptable: 26%
Somewhat Unacceptable: 14%
Strongly Unacceptable: 27%
Noticed what they did with the possible answers. It wasn’t a straight “acceptable or unacceptable,” but tiered. I would imagine more people would have said unacceptable if there were only two options. It’s possible I’m wrong. Still, look at the overall results. For those who said it would be somewhat or strongly acceptable, the total was 56% (down 6% from Question 8) and those who said it would be somewhat unacceptable or strongly unacceptable totals 41% (up 7% from Question 8).
Question 10. Do you think the U.S. government should be able to monitor everyone’s email and other online activities if officials say this might prevent future terrorist attacks?
No opinion: 3%
I think the last question is of most importance for the entire poll. Why? Because of the word “everyone”. People recognize that they are included in “everyone”. The questions are structured in such a way to get the desired result. If Questions 10 and 8 were reversed in the order asked, do you think the results may have skewed differently?
I recommend everyone who reads articles about poll results to dig deeper into the actual polling questions, the order of the questions, and the language of the questions.
For anyone wondering, the missing questions were regarding sexual assaults in the military.