jcd11235 0
Recommended Posts
We don't know, do we? We don't. We have no idea what else is going on. That's kind of the point.
Remember Jon Stewart commenting that the burden has shifted from the tin foil hat wearing kooks to the government to demonstrate it ISN'T acting up? We're getting there with this.
We don't know what else is out there. And is there anything that is off limits in the name of "security?"
My wife is hotter than your wife.
Remember Jon Stewart commenting that the burden has shifted from the tin foil hat wearing kooks to the government to demonstrate it ISN'T acting up? We're getting there with this.
We don't know what else is out there. And is there anything that is off limits in the name of "security?"
My wife is hotter than your wife.
jcd11235 0
lawrocketWe don't know, do we? We don't. We have no idea what else is going on. That's kind of the point.
You'll forgive me for not being outraged that there are some aspects of national security that are classified.
I'll ask you the same thing I asked Kelpdiver. You're a pretty intelligent guy. If you were going to blow the whistle on an organization, don't you think you would first gather some evidence supporting the most serious allegations you planned to make?
lawrocketAnd is there anything that is off limits in the name of "security?"
Actual violations of rights, as they are guaranteed by the Constitution, as it is interpreted by the judicial branch.
Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!
QuoteYou'll forgive me for not being outraged that there are some aspects of national security that are classified.
The administration is going full force against a guy who said that the US government is logging all phone calls. This is a sin against national security because, well, the People just should not know that their calls are being logged?
Note that this comes on the heels of reporters being snooped, calls logged, etc. Note that it also comes a few months after the President announced that he wanted to removed the right to privacy *as codified by HIPAA) because it was an "unnecessary legal obstacle" to the government being able to gather intelligence on people in order to provide for more security for the population.
QuoteIf you were going to blow the whistle on an organization, don't you think you would first gather some evidence supporting the most serious allegations you planned to make?
Depends. We'll see what else comes out. You're closing the door rather quickly, aren't you?
My wife is hotter than your wife.
jcd11235 0
lawrocketYou're closing the door rather quickly, aren't you?
Not at all. He already spoke to two newspapers, making the accusations and supplying them with classified documents.
Snowden's most serious allegations don't pass the smell test. I need some actual evidence before taking him seriously.
Edit to add: Google to DOJ: Let us prove to users that NSA isn't snooping on them
How likely is it that Google would seek authorization to disclose more information about how they disclose data if they actually gave NSA the direct server access they have publicly denied providing?
Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!
QuoteI need some actual evidence before taking him seriously.
It's still early. Hang in there. I'm fairly sure the smoking gun you are looking for will make itself known.
Until then, even if the only evidence is circumstantial, it's enough to convict. Untold numbers of people have been convicted just on circumstantial evidence.
As an aside, funny how all these issues are popping up; each of which is distracting from all the previous crap being exposed under this administration. Spreading the opposition thin.
My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239
jcd11235
Cowden's most serious allegations don't pass the smell test. I need some actual evidence before taking him seriously.
Cowden? Did you join the mentally challenged people of this forum?
What you're saying here is that since you don't think he's proven the most serious allegations, you don't care about all the others that have been confirmed?
Channman 2
lawrocket[Reply] Snowden wasn't a CIA or NSA employee when he leaked the classified intel, so we shouldn't lend him any more credibility than the reporters who presented his unsubstantiated story.
Because what he has put out there so far has been confirmed. The government isn't pissed that he told lies. They are pissed that he told the truth. It's like the IRS story coming out: it was believeable because the IRS admitted it before the story broke.
It he was spreading lies and untruths, then there wouldn't be talk of charging him with violating the Espionage Act.
Sen. Saxby Chambliss has said, "He's already exposed part of it and I guess he's going to expose the rest of it." Has Edward Snowden in fact taken and transferred Highly Classified documents to media sources or foreign nationals? Or has he simply expressed in an interview what the NSA / US Government and other agencies were doing in gathering personal information on private US citizens...much like they are doing now monitoring this very site and possibly monitoring my ever key stroke.
jcd11235 0
kelpdiverCowden? Did you join the mentally challenged people of this forum?
Oops. Sorry. Fixed.
kelpdiverWhat you're saying here is that since you don't think he's proven the most serious allegations, you don't care about all the others that have been confirmed?
The ones that have been verified have been legal. Pointing out that the NSA uses legally the tools at their disposal isn't whistle blowing.
Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!
jcd11235
The ones that have been verified have been legal. Pointing out that the NSA uses legally the tools at their disposal isn't whistle blowing.
lawrocket already covered the distinction between legal and constitutional. We could also talk about the FISC oversight where no request goes denied.
And if this were indeed the case, why do we have Congressmen wanting to indict the guy for treason? Is the ACLU high too, in your estimation?
ryoder 1,590
Bruce Schneir's take on the issue: http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2013/06/11/in-nsa-leak-case-a-whistle-blower-or-a-criminal/before-prosecuting-snowden-investigate-the-government
"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.
jcd11235 0
kelpdiverAnd if this were indeed the case, why do we have Congressmen wanting to indict the guy for treason?
Treason might be a stretch, based on its definition in the Constitution, but it is quite understandable that there are calls for Snowden's prosecution for leaking classified information regarding legal practices of the NSA. He should be prosecuted for the leaks.
Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!
jcd11235He should be prosecuted for the leaks.
That has been a trademark of the current Administration.
jcd11235 0
kelpdiver***He should be prosecuted for the leaks.
That has been a trademark of the current Administration.
Prosecuting criminals? Previous administrations also did that.
Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!
Show me the confirmation of the biggest claim, that the government has direct access to data servers of companies like Google and Facebook. That looks to be the big lie that kills Snowden's credibility completely. Without that, it appears that he hasn't uncovered any wrongdoing or illegal activities. He just leaked classified intel. It's wasn't honorable. It wasn't heroic. It wasn't admirable. It was criminal.
Directing outrage at the administration because the government is using legally the very tools provided by the electorate (indirectly) speaks much more poorly of the electorate than the government.
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites