- uploaded: Jun 22, 2013
- Hits: 34
http://truthstreammedia.com/?p=3283Yes, things have come this far. There is open talk in the media of killing National Security Agency whistleblower Edward Snowden via a drone strike. The online version of the magazine Popular Science had point and counterpoint articles debating all the reasons why the U.S. government might or might not consider drone striking Snowden in Hong Kong, the city he ran to fearing federal retribution for leaking information regarding the NSA's PRISM program, a vast spying operation that has been turned against the American people at large at the expense of their constitutional rights.Not only did these writers discuss the logistics, they also talked about collateral damage and one asked, "So why wouldn't the U.S. government just send a guy with a gun to kill Snowden?" as if federal assassination of anyone who speaks out against the government is so commonplace, it's *expected*.Scarier still is the fact that it is plausible enough to garner such casual banter. The thought of permanently silencing dissenters through targeted strikes would not only eliminate embarrassing disclosure from government employees and contractors like Edward Snowden, but effectively freeze free speech by intimidating anyone else from coming forward, all while skirting the real issue at hand in this case systematic, wholesale spying by the NSA.Remember that saying "Don't kill the messenger?" This is the ultimate form of doing just that.