I believe there is a thread on the government spying on Americans.
Personally, I don't take issue with what they're doing.
So you have no respect for Democracy, and the rule of law. And you'd be perfectly happy living in a police State.
Thanks for sharing that with us.
Just because he says he doesn't mind it doesn't mean he has no respect for democracy.
That is like me saying since you live in China (despite not being Chinese), you love Communism.
But I'm sure you don't like Communism, just like London Bridge does have respect for Democracy.
~Carter~
You can spend your time alone, redigesting past regrets, oh
or you can come to terms and realize
you're the only one who can't forgive yourself, oh
makes much more sense to live in the present tense - Present Tense
I believe there is a thread on the government spying on Americans.
Personally, I don't take issue with what they're doing.
So you have no respect for Democracy, and the rule of law. And you'd be perfectly happy living in a police State.
Thanks for sharing that with us.
I agree with everything you are saying.......yet I was called paranoid......people that have information on this administration are dying! Americans that do not agree with Obama are having there homes raided......shit is happening right before our eyes and still people can not see.....example IRS
Some people need to venture off there liberal web sites ........
Because how dare anybody expose the crimes of your government, right?
A four-year-old disabled Chinese boy was put in a prison for over three years because his parents were protesters, his foster father has claimed.
Chen Ya, who is now eight, was taken away by officials in Sanzao county in the southern province of Guangdong in 2009, according to Chen Fengqiang, his foster father.
Despite being a toddler with developmental problems, the boy was kept alone in a windowless 40 sq ft cell until April, when he was finally released into Mr Chen's care.
Today, the boy "cannot walk very far and his head shakes," said Mr Chen.
"He cannot talk so I do not know what happened to him. But you can imagine what it is like for a four-year-old child to be taken and shut away," he said.
"There are no bruises on his body, so I do not know whether he was abused, but if you raise your hand, he curls into a ball afraid," he added.
Mr Chen could not explain why the authorities had chosen to put the boy in solitary confinement. On Monday he travelled to the regional capital, Guangzhou, to engage a new lawyer, Wu Kuiming, to seek redress.
"This is a cruel method that the government uses when it wants to control protesters," said Mr Wu. "But I do not know what they wanted to achieve by locking up a four-year-old boy," he added.
Both Mr Chen, 54, and his former partner, the boy's mother, Wei Lipei, 40, have been thorns in the side of the local government for over a decade.
1) I don't understand why people take it so personally when their government is criticized, especially since none of our governments represent their people very well.
2) The fourth amendment protects us from unreasonable search and seizure and guarantees us our right to be secure in our persons, paper, property, etc... Edward Snowden did not break the law, because the supreme law of the land forbids these type of practices taking place to begin with. The best point made against Snowden in this thread is that it took him this long to come forward.
3) Terrorism is awful, everyone agrees on that. Everyone wants this practice to stop, and everyone wants to stop the parties responsible for creating terror. However, let's not forget how few people in this world are actually terrorists. Searching for terrorists is like searching for needles in a haystack, and by spying on everyone, agencies like the NSA are just piling on the hay. It's counterproductive, a waste of time, money, and makes each and everyone of us less free and more afraid, which is exactly the end game of a terrorist.
Ecuador... interesting choice. I was thinking maybe somewhere in Scandinavia next, but I was wrong.
I'm glad that Snowden brought this obvious violation of the 4th Amendment to the world's attention.
As much as I agree with this, think about this for a second:
Say a major domestic terrorist attack took place. The person who did it is dead. A few days later his phone and computer is seized. The police find out he has been buying the ingredients on the internet, talked with bomb experts online and by phone, talked to others on phone about how he would like to attack people, etc etc. The police realize that this guy was planning it and they could have found out about it earlier if they used counter-technology.
See, as much as I hate what they are doing, you gotta admit you understand why and see how useful it is. As bullshit as it is, it has the potential to stop crimes and according to the government (which doesn't mean much to some) they have stopped some terrorist attacks.
I am sure this will piss some people off, but I think as technology improves and the amount of hate American gains over the next 30 to 50 years, I believe the government and people will have to take steps in slowly changing the constitution. If you believe our constitution can last hundreds or even thousands of years (wish I hope it can), you truly are not seeing how the world is changing.
I am not saying change to communism or any bullshit like that, but no way can our current laws can keep us safe or stop future, more deadly attacks.
I love my country and love the constitution, but I understand that nothing lasts forever.
~Carter~
You can spend your time alone, redigesting past regrets, oh
or you can come to terms and realize
you're the only one who can't forgive yourself, oh
makes much more sense to live in the present tense - Present Tense
Ecuador... interesting choice. I was thinking maybe somewhere in Scandinavia next, but I was wrong.
I'm glad that Snowden brought this obvious violation of the 4th Amendment to the world's attention.
As much as I agree with this, think about this for a second:
Say a major domestic terrorist attack took place. The person who did it is dead. A few days later his phone and computer is seized. The police find out he has been buying the ingredients on the internet, talked with bomb experts online and by phone, talked to others on phone about how he would like to attack people, etc etc. The police realize that this guy was planning it and they could have found out about it earlier if they used counter-technology.
See, as much as I hate what they are doing, you gotta admit you understand why and see how useful it is. As bullshit as it is, it has the potential to stop crimes and according to the government (which doesn't mean much to some) they have stopped some terrorist attacks.
I am sure this will piss some people off, but I think as technology improves and the amount of hate American gains over the next 30 to 50 years, I believe the government and people will have to take steps in slowly changing the constitution. If you believe our constitution can last hundreds or even thousands of years (wish I hope it can), you truly are not seeing how the world is changing.
I am not saying change to communism or any bullshit like that, but no way can our current laws can keep us safe or stop future, more deadly attacks.
I love my country and love the constitution, but I understand that nothing lasts forever.
Excellent. We have a process to change the constitution.
However, as of right now, this is a violation of the law of the land. Want to make this country safer? Bring the troops home. Our occupation and aid to certain "allies" is what pisses terrorists off, you understand that right?
Excellent. We have a process to change the constitution.
However, as of right now, this is a violation of the law of the land. Want to make this country safer? Bring the troops home. Our occupation and aid to certain "allies" is what pisses terrorists off, you understand that right?
Trust me, I wish we just bring all troops home, especially from the Middle East. We have NO business over there, its a waste of time (especially the "war" on terrorism).
However, having the troops here won't make a difference. It will make their families happy (which is why I want them back) but it can't prevent terrorism. You need to use technology and get intel to do that.
But yes, at the moment this is a violation of the law of the land.
~Carter~
You can spend your time alone, redigesting past regrets, oh
or you can come to terms and realize
you're the only one who can't forgive yourself, oh
makes much more sense to live in the present tense - Present Tense
Excellent. We have a process to change the constitution.
However, as of right now, this is a violation of the law of the land. Want to make this country safer? Bring the troops home. Our occupation and aid to certain "allies" is what pisses terrorists off, you understand that right?
Trust me, I wish we just bring all troops home, especially from the Middle East. We have NO business over there, its a waste of time (especially the "war" on terrorism).
However, having the troops here won't make a difference. It will make their families happy (which is why I want them back) but it can't prevent terrorism. You need to use technology and get intel to do that.
But yes, at the moment this is a violation of the law of the land.
Agreed, it can't prevent terrorism entirely. There isn't enough surveillance in the world to completely curb terrorism. Freedom can have its consequences...
I suppose the answer is subjective, but I think it will ease pressure to bring the troops home on top of discontinuing our funding to Israel and other "allies" in the region. We have our own interests in mind in the middle east and it is, through my research and opinion, angering people and helping to propel terrorism.
I'd like to hear a dispassionate legal analysis of the spying program. My gut reaction to the NSA program is: (1) it's really, really scary, and (2) possibly legal.
Off the top of my head, people cite the 4th Amendment, without realizing exactly what it means. The 4th Amendment protects us from unreasonable searches and seizures by requiring a warrant before said search or seizure can happen. The idea is that if the government wants to search my house, they have to convince a detached and neutral judge or magistrate to sign a warrant authorizing that search. There are limits to the 4th Amendment's protection though. One limitation is that the 4th Amendment doesn't apply to things that are in plain-view or that are public or things that are disclosed or shared etc. Consider how much of what people do on the internet is likely public and shared information (95%?). In short, much of what is on the internet is likely not "private," thus meaning the 4th Amendment's warrant requirement may not be implicated for much of the internet content that would be subject to this surveillance program as people think.
That leaves arguably private communications like email, Facebook messages etc. ("arguably" because if you use a shared computer and don't sign out -- ask IT guys how common this is -- its probably not private). A sort-of catchall exception to the 4th Amendment's warrant requirement is the exigent circumstances exception (might sound familiar from all the DWI talk lately), which dispenses with the warrant requirement for a search or seizure in the event that circumstances exist making getting a warrant unfeasible (think of: officer chases murder suspect on foot through yards and suspect heads into someone's private home; timing to get a warrant + danger to others if officer stops pursuit = exigent circumstances --> no warrant required to enter private person's home).
IF, as the administration has implied since the leak, the program used in circumstances where there are impending threats or other circumstances attending the surveillance that might justify not getting a warrant (remember: exigent circumstances; bomb threats?), then the program, love it or hate it, is possibly legal.
IF, as some may rightly suspect, the program is used in those circumstances AND in many, many others, then the program is probably used illegally as well, and hence, very, very scary.
I'm not defending the program by any means, and I admittedly, don't know all the details. I can understand the cause for concern and the fear that this program's existence (which, frankly, I assumed existed for years anyway) is just the front edge of broader governmental programs with tenuous legality.
But I think a discussion needs to be had about the legality/illegality of this issue, as a lot of the bluster about it seems predicated on unproven assumptions about the law (from both sides). There's a big difference between something being illegal or unconstitutional, and something simply being scary. Whether this program is legal or not shouldn't trump the fact that abuse of such a far-reaching power is a scary thing, making governmental transparency all the more important. (Wow, does that phrase sound hollow).
1998-06-30 Minneapolis
2003-06-16 St. Paul
2006-06-26 St. Paul
2007-08-05 Chicago
2009-08-23 Chicago
2009-08-28 San Francisco
2010-05-01 NOLA (Jazz Fest)
2011-07-02 EV Minneapolis
2011-09-03 PJ20
2011-09-04 PJ20
2011-09-17 Winnipeg
2012-06-26 Amsterdam
2012-06-27 Amsterdam
2013-07-19 Wrigley
2013-11-21 San Diego
2013-11-23 Los Angeles
2013-11-24 Los Angeles
2014-07-08 Leeds, UK
2014-07-11 Milton Keynes, UK
2014-10-09 Lincoln
2014-10-19 St. Paul
2014-10-20 Milwaukee
2016-08-20 Wrigley 1
2016-08-22 Wrigley 2 2018-06-18 London 1 2018-08-18 Wrigley 1 2018-08-20 Wrigley 2 2022-09-16 Nashville 2023-08-31 St. Paul 2023-09-02 St. Paul 2023-09-05 Chicago 1
1) I don't understand why people take it so personally when their government is criticized, especially since none of our governments represent their people very well.
2) The fourth amendment protects us from unreasonable search and seizure and guarantees us our right to be secure in our persons, paper, property, etc... Edward Snowden did not break the law, because the supreme law of the land forbids these type of practices taking place to begin with. The best point made against Snowden in this thread is that it took him this long to come forward.
3) Terrorism is awful, everyone agrees on that. Everyone wants this practice to stop, and everyone wants to stop the parties responsible for creating terror. However, let's not forget how few people in this world are actually terrorists. Searching for terrorists is like searching for needles in a haystack, and by spying on everyone, agencies like the NSA are just piling on the hay. It's counterproductive, a waste of time, money, and makes each and everyone of us less free and more afraid, which is exactly the end game of a terrorist.
Excellent. We have a process to change the constitution.
However, as of right now, this is a violation of the law of the land. Want to make this country safer? Bring the troops home. Our occupation and aid to certain "allies" is what pisses terrorists off, you understand that right?
3) Terrorism is awful, everyone agrees on that. Everyone wants this practice to stop, and everyone wants to stop the parties responsible for creating terror. However, let's not forget how few people in this world are actually terrorists. Searching for terrorists is like searching for needles in a haystack, and by spying on everyone, agencies like the NSA are just piling on the hay. It's counterproductive, a waste of time, money, and makes each and everyone of us less free and more afraid, which is exactly the end game of a terrorist.
Actually, there are 1000s of terrorist groups, but many are not major and only terrorize local places (and this all mainly takes place in the Middle East).
Although that is a good point you made, and I'm not arguing against it, but even a few terrorists can cause a lot of harm.
~Carter~
You can spend your time alone, redigesting past regrets, oh
or you can come to terms and realize
you're the only one who can't forgive yourself, oh
makes much more sense to live in the present tense - Present Tense
this is a little strange story...btw,i dont think who is in the goverment has to do how usa will react...
usa has stronge policy when comes to spies,and for sure cant hide for ever..if want to find him,they will find him
"...Dimitri...He talks to me...'.."The Ghost of Greece..".
"..That's One Happy Fuckin Ghost.."
“..That came up on the Pillow Case...This is for the Greek, With Our Apologies.....”
this is a little strange story...btw,i dont think who is in the goverment has to do how usa will react...
usa has stronge policy when comes to spies,and for sure cant hide for ever..if want to find him,they will find him
He's not a spy.
do you think matters how me or you calling him.?.he is wanted from usa..u know what that means..
"...Dimitri...He talks to me...'.."The Ghost of Greece..".
"..That's One Happy Fuckin Ghost.."
“..That came up on the Pillow Case...This is for the Greek, With Our Apologies.....”
do you think matters how me or you calling him.?.he is wanted from usa..u know what that means..
He's a whistle blower, not a spy. Big difference.
Exactly.
"Often the best source of information about waste, fraud, and abuse in government is an existing government employee committed to public integrity and willing to speak out. I will strengthen whistleblower laws to protect federal workers who expose waste, fraud, and abuse of authority in government."
do you think matters how me or you calling him.?.he is wanted from usa..u know what that means..
He's a whistle blower, not a spy. Big difference.
i agree..wait to see how media will make him look like...
"...Dimitri...He talks to me...'.."The Ghost of Greece..".
"..That's One Happy Fuckin Ghost.."
“..That came up on the Pillow Case...This is for the Greek, With Our Apologies.....”
do you think matters how me or you calling him.?.he is wanted from usa..u know what that means..
He's a whistle blower, not a spy. Big difference.
As a general rule, whistle blowers do not steal classified top secret info and then take that info to China and then Russia. This falls under the term known as espionage at this point in time.
do you think matters how me or you calling him.?.he is wanted from usa..u know what that means..
He's a whistle blower, not a spy. Big difference.
Exactly.
"Often the best source of information about waste, fraud, and abuse in government is an existing government employee committed to public integrity and willing to speak out. I will strengthen whistleblower laws to protect federal workers who expose waste, fraud, and abuse of authority in government."
"Often the best source of information about waste, fraud, and abuse in government is an existing government employee committed to public integrity and willing to speak out. I will strengthen whistleblower laws to protect federal workers who expose waste, fraud, and abuse of authority in government."
----Barack Obama 2008
And now he was prosecuted more whistleblowers then every other POTUS combined.
As a general rule, whistle blowers do not steal classified top secret info and then take that info to China and then Russia. This falls under the term known as espionage at this point in time.
No it doesn't. He revealed that the U.S government has been spying on it's own citizens, in breach of the U.S Constitution, and has also been spying on the citizens of other countries. That's not espionage, it's whistle-blowing. Although I can see how desperate you are to paint him as a traitor and spy, because you love your government so much, and will defend them even when they commit crimes against the American people.
Edward Snowden:'...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.'
Was Daniel Ellsberg also a traitor for revealing the Pentagon Papers to the World, and showing us that the U.S government had been consistently lying about the Vietnam war?
You know what? As much as the technology doesn't really freak me out... the process by which the government is operating does. It's hard to get behind this administration and their bullying tactics that attempt to silence journalism which exposes them.
The scathing bit (regarding what journalists are allowed to see and report on... and what they are not): That's not independently verifiable information. What that is is propaganda.
As a general rule, whistle blowers do not steal classified top secret info and then take that info to China and then Russia. This falls under the term known as espionage at this point in time.
No it doesn't. He revealed that the U.S government has been spying on it's own citizens, in breach of the U.S Constitution, and has also been spying on the citizens of other countries. That's not espionage, it's whistle-blowing. Although I can see how desperate you are to paint him as a traitor and spy, because you love your government so much, and will defend them even when they commit crimes against the American people.
[/i]
I'm not desperate to paint him as anything until I see the facts lay themselves out.
OK, good for him. He told us what Will Smith and Gene Hackman told us in 1998. Shocking.
But taking classified US intel info to China and then Russia is either espoinage or extreme stupidity. I still hold my right to make of this case what it is as more info is revealed.
You know what? As much as the technology doesn't really freak me out... the process by which the government is operating does. It's hard to get behind this administration and their bullying tactics that attempt to silence journalism which exposes them.
This is where my head is at as well. I do not care so much about the "spying". Much of it seems like logical standard operating procedure in today's world. That said...there is a heavy handedness to the way the government is acting that is cause for concern.
Comments
Just because he says he doesn't mind it doesn't mean he has no respect for democracy.
That is like me saying since you live in China (despite not being Chinese), you love Communism.
But I'm sure you don't like Communism, just like London Bridge does have respect for Democracy.
You can spend your time alone, redigesting past regrets, oh
or you can come to terms and realize
you're the only one who can't forgive yourself, oh
makes much more sense to live in the present tense - Present Tense
:thumbup:
ditto? not sure of the correlation here??
1) I don't understand why people take it so personally when their government is criticized, especially since none of our governments represent their people very well.
2) The fourth amendment protects us from unreasonable search and seizure and guarantees us our right to be secure in our persons, paper, property, etc... Edward Snowden did not break the law, because the supreme law of the land forbids these type of practices taking place to begin with. The best point made against Snowden in this thread is that it took him this long to come forward.
3) Terrorism is awful, everyone agrees on that. Everyone wants this practice to stop, and everyone wants to stop the parties responsible for creating terror. However, let's not forget how few people in this world are actually terrorists. Searching for terrorists is like searching for needles in a haystack, and by spying on everyone, agencies like the NSA are just piling on the hay. It's counterproductive, a waste of time, money, and makes each and everyone of us less free and more afraid, which is exactly the end game of a terrorist.
I'm glad that Snowden brought this obvious violation of the 4th Amendment to the world's attention.
As much as I agree with this, think about this for a second:
Say a major domestic terrorist attack took place. The person who did it is dead. A few days later his phone and computer is seized. The police find out he has been buying the ingredients on the internet, talked with bomb experts online and by phone, talked to others on phone about how he would like to attack people, etc etc. The police realize that this guy was planning it and they could have found out about it earlier if they used counter-technology.
See, as much as I hate what they are doing, you gotta admit you understand why and see how useful it is. As bullshit as it is, it has the potential to stop crimes and according to the government (which doesn't mean much to some) they have stopped some terrorist attacks.
I am sure this will piss some people off, but I think as technology improves and the amount of hate American gains over the next 30 to 50 years, I believe the government and people will have to take steps in slowly changing the constitution. If you believe our constitution can last hundreds or even thousands of years (wish I hope it can), you truly are not seeing how the world is changing.
I am not saying change to communism or any bullshit like that, but no way can our current laws can keep us safe or stop future, more deadly attacks.
I love my country and love the constitution, but I understand that nothing lasts forever.
You can spend your time alone, redigesting past regrets, oh
or you can come to terms and realize
you're the only one who can't forgive yourself, oh
makes much more sense to live in the present tense - Present Tense
Excellent. We have a process to change the constitution.
However, as of right now, this is a violation of the law of the land. Want to make this country safer? Bring the troops home. Our occupation and aid to certain "allies" is what pisses terrorists off, you understand that right?
Trust me, I wish we just bring all troops home, especially from the Middle East. We have NO business over there, its a waste of time (especially the "war" on terrorism).
However, having the troops here won't make a difference. It will make their families happy (which is why I want them back) but it can't prevent terrorism. You need to use technology and get intel to do that.
But yes, at the moment this is a violation of the law of the land.
You can spend your time alone, redigesting past regrets, oh
or you can come to terms and realize
you're the only one who can't forgive yourself, oh
makes much more sense to live in the present tense - Present Tense
Agreed, it can't prevent terrorism entirely. There isn't enough surveillance in the world to completely curb terrorism. Freedom can have its consequences...
I suppose the answer is subjective, but I think it will ease pressure to bring the troops home on top of discontinuing our funding to Israel and other "allies" in the region. We have our own interests in mind in the middle east and it is, through my research and opinion, angering people and helping to propel terrorism.
Off the top of my head, people cite the 4th Amendment, without realizing exactly what it means. The 4th Amendment protects us from unreasonable searches and seizures by requiring a warrant before said search or seizure can happen. The idea is that if the government wants to search my house, they have to convince a detached and neutral judge or magistrate to sign a warrant authorizing that search. There are limits to the 4th Amendment's protection though. One limitation is that the 4th Amendment doesn't apply to things that are in plain-view or that are public or things that are disclosed or shared etc. Consider how much of what people do on the internet is likely public and shared information (95%?). In short, much of what is on the internet is likely not "private," thus meaning the 4th Amendment's warrant requirement may not be implicated for much of the internet content that would be subject to this surveillance program as people think.
That leaves arguably private communications like email, Facebook messages etc. ("arguably" because if you use a shared computer and don't sign out -- ask IT guys how common this is -- its probably not private). A sort-of catchall exception to the 4th Amendment's warrant requirement is the exigent circumstances exception (might sound familiar from all the DWI talk lately), which dispenses with the warrant requirement for a search or seizure in the event that circumstances exist making getting a warrant unfeasible (think of: officer chases murder suspect on foot through yards and suspect heads into someone's private home; timing to get a warrant + danger to others if officer stops pursuit = exigent circumstances --> no warrant required to enter private person's home).
IF, as the administration has implied since the leak, the program used in circumstances where there are impending threats or other circumstances attending the surveillance that might justify not getting a warrant (remember: exigent circumstances; bomb threats?), then the program, love it or hate it, is possibly legal.
IF, as some may rightly suspect, the program is used in those circumstances AND in many, many others, then the program is probably used illegally as well, and hence, very, very scary.
I'm not defending the program by any means, and I admittedly, don't know all the details. I can understand the cause for concern and the fear that this program's existence (which, frankly, I assumed existed for years anyway) is just the front edge of broader governmental programs with tenuous legality.
But I think a discussion needs to be had about the legality/illegality of this issue, as a lot of the bluster about it seems predicated on unproven assumptions about the law (from both sides). There's a big difference between something being illegal or unconstitutional, and something simply being scary. Whether this program is legal or not shouldn't trump the fact that abuse of such a far-reaching power is a scary thing, making governmental transparency all the more important. (Wow, does that phrase sound hollow).
2003-06-16 St. Paul
2006-06-26 St. Paul
2007-08-05 Chicago
2009-08-23 Chicago
2009-08-28 San Francisco
2010-05-01 NOLA (Jazz Fest)
2011-07-02 EV Minneapolis
2011-09-03 PJ20
2011-09-04 PJ20
2011-09-17 Winnipeg
2012-06-26 Amsterdam
2012-06-27 Amsterdam
2013-07-19 Wrigley
2013-11-21 San Diego
2013-11-23 Los Angeles
2013-11-24 Los Angeles
2014-07-08 Leeds, UK
2014-07-11 Milton Keynes, UK
2014-10-09 Lincoln
2014-10-19 St. Paul
2014-10-20 Milwaukee
2016-08-20 Wrigley 1
2016-08-22 Wrigley 2
2018-06-18 London 1
2018-08-18 Wrigley 1
2018-08-20 Wrigley 2
2022-09-16 Nashville
2023-08-31 St. Paul
2023-09-02 St. Paul
2023-09-05 Chicago 1
Right.
Actually, there are 1000s of terrorist groups, but many are not major and only terrorize local places (and this all mainly takes place in the Middle East).
Although that is a good point you made, and I'm not arguing against it, but even a few terrorists can cause a lot of harm.
You can spend your time alone, redigesting past regrets, oh
or you can come to terms and realize
you're the only one who can't forgive yourself, oh
makes much more sense to live in the present tense - Present Tense
http://www.thestar.com/news/world/2013/ ... _cuba.html
"Life Is What Happens To You When Your Busy Making Other Plans" John Lennon
this is a little strange story...btw,i dont think who is in the goverment has to do how usa will react...
usa has stronge policy when comes to spies,and for sure cant hide for ever..if want to find him,they will find him
"..That's One Happy Fuckin Ghost.."
“..That came up on the Pillow Case...This is for the Greek, With Our Apologies.....”
He's not a spy.
"..That's One Happy Fuckin Ghost.."
“..That came up on the Pillow Case...This is for the Greek, With Our Apologies.....”
He's a whistle blower, not a spy. Big difference.
Exactly.
"Often the best source of information about waste, fraud, and abuse in government is an existing government employee committed to public integrity and willing to speak out. I will strengthen whistleblower laws to protect federal workers who expose waste, fraud, and abuse of authority in government."
----Barack Obama 2008
"..That's One Happy Fuckin Ghost.."
“..That came up on the Pillow Case...This is for the Greek, With Our Apologies.....”
Forward.
No it doesn't. He revealed that the U.S government has been spying on it's own citizens, in breach of the U.S Constitution, and has also been spying on the citizens of other countries. That's not espionage, it's whistle-blowing. Although I can see how desperate you are to paint him as a traitor and spy, because you love your government so much, and will defend them even when they commit crimes against the American people.
Edward Snowden: '...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.'
Was Daniel Ellsberg also a traitor for revealing the Pentagon Papers to the World, and showing us that the U.S government had been consistently lying about the Vietnam war?
The Most Dangerous Man in America: Daniel Ellsberg and the Pentagon Papers: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eEKGZk3OjHM
This is a good contribution.
You know what? As much as the technology doesn't really freak me out... the process by which the government is operating does. It's hard to get behind this administration and their bullying tactics that attempt to silence journalism which exposes them.
The scathing bit (regarding what journalists are allowed to see and report on... and what they are not): That's not independently verifiable information. What that is is propaganda.
Spider senses are tingling now.
OK, good for him. He told us what Will Smith and Gene Hackman told us in 1998. Shocking.
But taking classified US intel info to China and then Russia is either espoinage or extreme stupidity. I still hold my right to make of this case what it is as more info is revealed.
This is where my head is at as well. I do not care so much about the "spying". Much of it seems like logical standard operating procedure in today's world. That said...there is a heavy handedness to the way the government is acting that is cause for concern.
"...I changed by not changing at all..."
It's neither. And the effects of his revelations would have been exactly the same if he'd taken the info to Guadalupe and Tierra Del Fuego.