tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15922397.post113647051596511034..comments2023-12-11T19:22:40.772-05:00Comments on HazZzMat: Risen Shines—NOTWonkerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00053889926910488416noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15922397.post-1136837245294453652006-01-09T15:07:00.000-05:002006-01-09T15:07:00.000-05:00Welcome, left!Indeed, we do have laws that allow w...Welcome, left!<BR/><BR/>Indeed, we do have laws that allow whistleblowing. But you fail to distinguish between whistleblowing and treasonous activity as defined in the Constitution and undertaken here by the so-called whistleblowers and their accomplices in the Fourth Estate. Al Quaeda is already adapting its communications strategies as a result of the detailed info provided to them from our "patriotic" leakers via Risen et. al. Ergo, these leakers are arguably treasonous operatives, not whistleblowers. <BR/><BR/>The left seems to regard treason as some kind of quaint, antiquated notion, but it's still right there in the Constitution and hadn't been amended out last time I looked. Of course, the Marxist-Leninists of the American left doctrinally don't believe in the legitimacy of the U.S. government anyway. Thus, they transmogrify the very notion of treason into a theoretical impossibility. A nice dialectical trick, but its sun is rapidly setting as people in all political spectra catch on to the language slights-of-hand that are a crucial part of the left's astonishingly successful propaganda toolbag.<BR/><BR/>In the intelligence community, operatives are free to contact Congressional oversight committees to share their concerns if they feel someone is going awry. The only intent of the current leakers in running to the NYT as opposed to the legitimate path afforded them by Congressional oversight was to damage this administration, not to protect civil liberties. As I am sure you know, one's stated intent and one's actual intent can and often are at variance. <BR/><BR/>I am not certain how closing our borders and assuring health care have anything to do with "protecting" us from the kind of guys who blow up skyscrapers or lie awake nights trying to figure out how to drop a dirty bomb on the Superbowl. However, I'm sure no one on the left is in favor of running a fence along our border with Mexico, right? But this diversion is a nice way of changing the argument.<BR/><BR/>Risen, a patriot? Please. The Rosenbergs were "patriots," too, just exercising their "constitutional right" of free speech to transfer U.S. nuclear secrets to their benevolent comrades in Moscow. This and related Marxist-inspired verbal arabesques are getting a little old. The "patriot" dodge is a time-honored trick frequently employed by my friends on the hard left to smudge the already indistinct dividing line between First Amendment rights on one hand, and treason and sedition on the other. It's not working any more.Wonkerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00053889926910488416noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15922397.post-1136506596361712032006-01-05T19:16:00.000-05:002006-01-05T19:16:00.000-05:00We have laws on the books that ALLOW intelligence ...We have laws on the books that ALLOW intelligence operatives the ability to whistleblow. It's a good thing to. never know when Some loose cannon will declare executive privilige, and trample the constitution. Dont by into the "I'm trying to protect you" line. If the Bush White house wanted to protect us we would close our borders and make sure everyone had health care. Risen is a couragious man, and a true Patriot.Yukkionehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06390144712253455513noreply@blogger.com