Edward Snowden & The N.S.A Revelations

Byrnzie

"Everyone's worried about stopping terrorism. Well, there's really an easy way: Stop participating in it." - Noam Chomsky

Guitar92player

Byrnzie wrote:

Guitar92player wrote:

Well, if you are referring to me and whoever else posted here, we are not defending our government. I don't 100% trust them. However, I do know they are fighting off terrorists and this was one way to do so.

I am pissed about the whole thing, but I get it. If this surveillance thing doesn't happen, fighting terrorism is hard; there is no other way to do it unless this kind of crap happens.

And when election time comes around, I definitely know I am not voting any one of these pricks back in.

Terrorism didn't begin on 9/11.

Tell me something I don't know.

I'm a History major in college, so I know history.

Yes, it's been around a looong time, BUT since technology is getting better and better, we can better prepare for a terrorist attack.

All I am saying is that if we didn't use technology to fight terrorism, then those statistics don't mean shit because terrorists will just plan and plan and plan faster and be able to conduct some serious attacks.

Guitar92player

Byrnzie wrote:

London Bridge wrote:

I have nothing to hide, so spy away.

Good attitude. I wonder whether ethnic minorities, or legitimate protest movements feel the same way?

I'm sure that the majority of Germans in the 1930's felt quite comfortable too. Unfortunately, not all were so lucky. The point being: where do you draw the line? Just how far are you prepared to let your government go in the name of 'security' before it's too late, and they begin using their newly-won powers of control for nefarious ends?

Tell me this, if the American government is as powerful as both you and I know, why haven't they conducted their super-duper plans of controlling yet? What are they waiting for?

If they are sooooooo powerful and have this massive secret agenda, they can just do it. Why wait?

For one, the government can't do shit. Why? Because unless they can convince the whole military to control the people, then they can't do shit. I have many, many friends in the military and NONE would capture and help control citizens. People in the military have families, they would die than help control another person's family.

Sorry if all of what I said is not what you meant, but to me that's the outcome you made it seem to be.

(bye bye for now, watching movie on Netflix. Peace)

Byrnzie

Guitar92player wrote:

Tell me this, if the American government is as powerful as both you and I know, why haven't they conducted their super-duper plans of controlling yet? What are they waiting for?

If they are sooooooo powerful and have this massive secret agenda, they can just do it. Why wait?

For one, the government can't do shit. Why? Because unless they can convince the whole military to control the people, then they can't do shit. I have many, many friends in the military and NONE would capture and help control citizens. People in the military have families, they would die than help control another person's family.

The military will only become necessary when the media fail.

Make what you will of that one


Enjoy your movie. I think I'm gonna log off and stick a movie on too.

Guitar92player

Byrnzie wrote:

Guitar92player wrote:

Tell me this, if the American government is as powerful as both you and I know, why haven't they conducted their super-duper plans of controlling yet? What are they waiting for?

If they are sooooooo powerful and have this massive secret agenda, they can just do it. Why wait?

For one, the government can't do shit. Why? Because unless they can convince the whole military to control the people, then they can't do shit. I have many, many friends in the military and NONE would capture and help control citizens. People in the military have families, they would die than help control another person's family.

The media will only become necessary when the media fail.

Make what you will of that one


Enjoy your movie. I think I'm gonna log off and stick a movie on too.

I find it funny I happened to watch "The Dictator", kinda fits what we talked about. Didn't really realize it til a little bit ago. lol. I hope your movie is enjoyable as well.

Anyway, I just wonder what Snowden's plan is. I truly believe if he thinks he is innocent why keep hiding? Wouldn't you think since he keeps running he actually gave up important info to other countries?

This whole situation is just odd.

Byrnzie

Guitar92player wrote:

Anyway, I just wonder what Snowden's plan is. I truly believe if he thinks he is innocent why keep hiding? Wouldn't you think since he keeps running he actually gave up important info to other countries?

This whole situation is just odd.

NSA director, Keith Alexander is absolutely right:

"What Snowden has revealed has caused irreversible and significant damage to our country and to our allies."

It's just that what Alexander means by "country" is the ruling kleptocracy in the US and its allies. These people don't think too highly of whistleblowers, which is why Snowden wouldn't stand a snowballs chance in hell.

It seems clear that the ruling elites in the U.S wish to function in complete secrecy and with zero transparency, and will come down hard on anyone who threatens to lift the veil on their activities.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... ge-charges
'Prior to Barack Obama's inauguration, there were a grand total of three prosecutions of leakers under the Espionage Act (including the prosecution of Dan Ellsberg by the Nixon DOJ). That's because the statute is so broad that even the US government has largely refrained from using it. But during the Obama presidency, there are now seven such prosecutions: more than double the number under all prior US presidents combined. How can anyone justify that?

For a politician who tried to convince Americans to elect him based on repeated pledges of unprecedented transparency and specific vows to protect "noble" and "patriotic" whistleblowers, is this unparalleled assault on those who enable investigative journalism remotely defensible?'

Byrnzie

London Bridge wrote:

It's time for this administration to get control of the situation and get the traitor back on American soil

Traitor?

http://www.policymic.com/articles/47355 ... aked-prism
Greenwald: "If your motive had been to harm the United States and help its enemies, or if your motive had been personal material gain, were there things you could have done with these documents to advance those goals that you didn't end up doing?"

Snowden: "Oh absolutely. Anyone in the positions of access with the technical capabilities that I had could suck out secrets, pass them on the open market to Russia; they always have an open door as we do. I had access to the full rosters of everyone working at the NSA, the entire intelligence community, and undercover assets all over the world. The locations of every station, we have what their missions are and so forth."

"If I had just wanted to harm the US? You could shut down the surveillance system in an afternoon. But that's not my intention. I think for anyone making that argument they need to think, if they were in my position and you live a privileged life, you're living in Hawaii, in paradise, and making a ton of money, 'What would it take you to leave everything behind?'"

"The greatest fear that I have regarding the outcome for America of these disclosures is that nothing will change. People will see in the media all of these disclosures. They'll know the lengths that the government is going to grant themselves powers unilaterally to create greater control over American society and global society. But they won't be willing to take the risks necessary to stand up and fight to change things to force their representatives to actually take a stand in their interests."

"And the months ahead, the years ahead it's only going to get worse until eventually there will be a time where policies will change because the only thing that restricts the activities of the surveillance state are policy. Even our agreements with other sovereign governments, we consider that to be a stipulation of policy rather then a stipulation of law. And because of that a new leader will be elected, they'll find the switch, say that 'Because of the crisis, because of the dangers we face in the world, some new and unpredicted threat, we need more authority, we need more power.' And there will be nothing the people can do at that point to oppose it. And it will be turnkey tyranny."

Byrnzie

Guitar92player wrote:

I truly believe if he thinks he is innocent why keep hiding? Wouldn't you think since he keeps running he actually gave up important info to other countries?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/ju ... 25b2ebf321

Edward Snowden: '...1) [...] the US Government, just as they did with other whistleblowers, immediately and predictably destroyed any possibility of a fair trial at home, openly declaring me guilty of treason and that the disclosure of secret, criminal, and even unconstitutional acts is an unforgivable crime. That's not justice, and it would be foolish to volunteer yourself to it if you can do more good outside of prison than in it.

Second, let's be clear: I did not reveal any US operations against legitimate military targets. I pointed out where the NSA has hacked civilian infrastructure such as universities, hospitals, and private businesses because it is dangerous. These nakedly, aggressively criminal acts are wrong no matter the target. Not only that, when NSA makes a technical mistake during an exploitation operation, critical systems crash. Congress hasn't declared war on the countries - the majority of them are our allies - but without asking for public permission, NSA is running network operations against them that affect millions of innocent people. And for what? So we can have secret access to a computer in a country we're not even fighting? So we can potentially reveal a potential terrorist with the potential to kill fewer Americans than our own Police? No, the public needs to know the kinds of things a government does in its name, or the "consent of the governed" is meaningless.

2) All I can say right now is the US Government is not going to be able to cover this up by jailing or murdering me. Truth is coming, and it cannot be stopped.

Smellyman

I find it strange that the same people who want small government and transparency are the ones defending the government.

they don't want to pay taxes on the people but don't mind spending a few billion spying on them and killing others.

unsung

Byrnzie wrote:

There are real indications of tyranny emerging:

1) Rules don’t apply to or are suspended for Government.
2) Government will make up the rules to suit our purposes.
3) If anyone attempts to hold us to account we will crush them.


Meanwhile, it may just transpire that U.S Politicians come to realise that the World does not revolve around them.

Tyranny doesn't exist you paranoid anti-government crazy person you.

Byrnzie

President Obama once said “In the face of impossible odds, people who love this country can change it.”
I believe Edward Snowden is one of those people. Shame the American President is such a hypocrite. But then, he is a politician after all.

Byrnzie

My guess is, he never went to Russia, but is now in Hanoi, Vietnam, in the presence of the Ecuadorian Foreign Minister Patino, and will probably fly back to Ecuador with him.

I mean, why fly West, over Nato Airspace, when you could simply fly over the Pacific instead?

The latest: Ricardo Patiño Aroca, Ecuador’s foreign minister, is holding a press conference in Hanoi now.

unsung

Isn't the Dept of Homeland Security's motto "If you see something, say something"?

He did.

Jason P

Byrnzie wrote:

Looks like the U.S may have to come to terms with the fact that the rest of the World is not willing to put up with it's bullshit any longer.

Ecuador's number one trade partner is the U.S.

34% of their exports go to the U.S.

31% of their imports are from the U.S.

Just like Venezuela, the hypocrisy reeks. Call us the devil and then do all your business with us.

:fp:

Byrnzie

Jason P wrote:

Byrnzie wrote:

Looks like the U.S may have to come to terms with the fact that the rest of the World is not willing to put up with it's bullshit any longer.

Ecuador's number one trade partner is the U.S.

34% of their exports go to the U.S.

31% of their imports are from the U.S.

Just like Venezuela, the hypocrisy reeks. Call us the devil and then do all your business with us.

:fp:

There's a difference between doing trade with a country, and allowing that same country to spy on you, and exploit your resources.
But then you know that already.

London Bridge

unsung wrote:

Isn't the Dept of Homeland Security's motto "If you see something, say something"?

He did.

He didn't say anything when he first knew it was happening. How many years did he know about it?

Yep, that's your hero. Savior of the American Constitution. Praise the Lord. Edward Snowden has arrived.

gimmesometruth27

so wait, the guy who told you that your government is spying on you is the bad guy? what about the fucking government doing the spying?

Jason P

Byrnzie wrote:

There's a difference between doing trade with a country, and allowing that same country to spy on you, and exploit your resources.
But then you know that already.

That I do. That difference is called Cuba. A country that stands behind their words. A place where people drive cars from the 50's and duct tape 55 gallon barrels together in hopes that ocean currents drift them to America.

gimmesometruth27

why would he fly over nato airspace where the possibility exists that a random "accident" could happen to his plane?

wouldn't that be some shit? a summary execution via missile to a plane?

London Bridge

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

so wait, the guy who told you that your government is spying on you is the bad guy? what about the fucking government doing the spying?

The charges being brought against him are legit.

I believe there is a thread on the government spying on Americans.
Personally, I don't take issue with what they're doing.