There are all different kinds of mental illnesses. They have all kinds of names, from schizophrenia, borderline personality, sociopath, obsessive compulsive, etc.
The person who assassinated Abraham Lincoln believed in his cause. The same for the assasinator of Kennedy, the attacker of Reagan and the numerous other attempts on other Presidents lives.
Snowden is just another form of terrorist, hiding behind his narcissistic personality and grandiose inflated ego who is probably looking to write a book, make a movie and be crowned Emperor.
If more and more people would decide that the rule of law was not to be followed whenever they believed that their illegal views took precedence over lawful procedures there would be no where to hide, the anarchy would be so pervasive.
The argument is made that if it wasn't for the brave, such as Rosa Parks, Nelson Mandela, Women Suffragettes, and Gorbachev, tyranny would prevail and necessary changes would never have taken place. But none of these people committed treason!
Many of these dilemmas could be included under the banner "the clash of absolutes".
Snowden set himself up at as the ultimate decider of the what's in the best interest of national security. He did this against the law and I'm sure with absolutely no knowledge of the catastrophic risks the nation is facing from world wide terrorism.
It seems pretty safe to conclude that the elected government believes that extraordinary risks require extraordinary actions. There is no question that an enormous number of problems will develop from the information gathering that the Federal Government has now undertaken.
Each of us should carefully weigh realistically which is the greater risk to our freedoms. Privacy protection or terrorism protection.
The person who assassinated Abraham Lincoln believed in his cause. The same for the assasinator of Kennedy, the attacker of Reagan and the numerous other attempts on other Presidents lives.
Snowden is just another form of terrorist, hiding behind his narcissistic personality and grandiose inflated ego who is probably looking to write a book, make a movie and be crowned Emperor.
If more and more people would decide that the rule of law was not to be followed whenever they believed that their illegal views took precedence over lawful procedures there would be no where to hide, the anarchy would be so pervasive.
The argument is made that if it wasn't for the brave, such as Rosa Parks, Nelson Mandela, Women Suffragettes, and Gorbachev, tyranny would prevail and necessary changes would never have taken place. But none of these people committed treason!
Many of these dilemmas could be included under the banner "the clash of absolutes".
Snowden set himself up at as the ultimate decider of the what's in the best interest of national security. He did this against the law and I'm sure with absolutely no knowledge of the catastrophic risks the nation is facing from world wide terrorism.
It seems pretty safe to conclude that the elected government believes that extraordinary risks require extraordinary actions. There is no question that an enormous number of problems will develop from the information gathering that the Federal Government has now undertaken.
Each of us should carefully weigh realistically which is the greater risk to our freedoms. Privacy protection or terrorism protection.
No comments:
Post a Comment