Terrorist Appeaser Peter King Blasts NY Times For Supporting 'Terrorist Appeaser' And 'Traitor' Ed Snowden
from the King-officially-out-of-stuff-to-add-to-the-'debate' dept
As we noted here earlier, the New York Times editorial board posted a piece in support of granting clemency to Ed Snowden. No sooner had the print dried than the usual suspects began shouting into the nearest open mic about how evil Snowden is. Rep. Peter King, presumably acting on behalf of his constituents, took to Fox News' airwaves to blast the New York Times for supporting the NSA whistleblower.
“Edward Snowden is either a traitor, or a defector, or both, and The New York Times is an accomplice,” King said in an appearance on Fox News. “They’re a disgrace. Their editors are a disgrace, and I wish they cared more about America than they did about the rights of terrorists’ appeasers.”Well, if anyone has the background to be considered an expert on appeasing terrorists, it's Peter King. Of course, he delivered these remarks without any intended irony, but his intentions hardly matter given his past.
Here's a refresher.
Peter King worries about terrorists... but only if they're Muslim. He's perfectly fine with white Irish terrorists, seeing as he went on record during the 80s stating his support for the IRA, which notably bombed a shopping center during the Christmas season, killing six and injuring 90. He was very concerned about their civil rights. Those were his kind of terrorists. These ones, not so much.King doesn't mind appeasing terrorists if they're white and Irish, but woe be unto those that cross his beloved intelligence agencies. King cares so much about America that he's willing to help turn it into a surveillance state. He'll continue to aid and abet the NSA in its overreach, civil liberties be damned. Why? Because the wrong kind of terrorists might otherwise find an opening to attack.
Realistically, the odds of being killed in a terrorist attack in the US are far lower than they are in other nations, even without the NSA compiling mountains of irrelevant data. It's even safer here than it is in the UK where King's favorite terrorists did their damage.
But that's not all King had to say. For seemingly the hundredth time, he repeated lies about the NSA's integrity.
“No one has found any violations [by the NSA} ... no phone calls are being listened to, no emails are being read,” he said, adding that close monitoring only applies to a handful of individuals following an “exhaustive” court process.Hahahahahaha!!!
Oh, wait. He's serious. I wonder who this "no one" is who found all of these violations. In some cases, "no one" is the agency itself, which admitted to so many violations the "exhaustive" court temporarily yanked its metadata-hoovering privileges. Another "no one" caught analysts tracking love interests and listening in on military members' "pillow talk" during their phone conversations with loved ones back home. Oh, and then there was that one time when a certain "no one" dropped thousands of pages of documents into the hands of journalistic entities that offered proof that the NSA had done everything from scoop up location data (which it previously swore it never did) to intercept hardware in order to install backdoors and exploits. It also helped itself to pre-encryption content by siphoning data from overseas fiber cables, using the "not in the US" excuse to justify grabbing US citizens' data and communications. No abuse here, no sir. Just tons of extra-judicial exploration of the "edges of the box."
The NSA's defenders seem to have reached the limits of their imaginations. Every subsequent revelation makes it that much harder to defend the agency. At this point, many defenders are verging on self-parody. Many others (Michael Hayden, Peter King, Mike Rogers) have long since left that tipping point behind.
Honestly, who truly believes Peter King cares about America more than those who have exposed the treacherous actions of an agency whose oversight has failed to hold it accountable for years? Americans still have ideals, even if their supposed representatives don't. King, who spent years stumping for terrorists when not applying layer after layer of black paint to his prized pot now apparently envies the blackness of his imaginary foes' kettles.
There are many ways to care for America, most of which involve challenging the powers that be. King is one of those "powers," and his love of his country is the most insincere of all. His "love" asks for subservience from its countrymen, rather than accountability from its leaders. These leaders can make our country stronger, but that means they have to stop crippling their constituents and diluting their rights. We need courage, not bombastic flag-waving from a man so blinded by irrational hate he can't even see his own hypocrisy.