June 10, 2013
— Gabriel Malor Happy Monday.
Edward Snowden, the NSA leaker, claimed the name "Verax" for himself -- "truth teller" -- in his communications with the Washington Post.
In his interview with the Guardian, he paints himself as a very Manning-esque "whistleblower," although he takes pains to distinguish his own leak on the grounds that he carefully selected the classified information he released.
Snowden told the Guardian he doesn't fear the consequences of going public . . . which is why he fled to China, of course. Also, the term "whistleblower" doesn't seem to fit his case any more than it does Pfc. Manning's. Whistleblowing occurs when someone with inside knowledge of criminal wrongdoing brings it to the authorities -- but it doesn't seem like a crime occurred here. Some so-called whistleblowers occasionally run to the press instead, which -- in the case of leakers of classified information -- is itself a crime. No wonder he's running.
Slate, of all places, points out that in Snowden, we've been betrayed by the IT guy. And that is a parallel to the Manning case that should be noted. Disillusioned, idealistic computer geeks make all of our offices run. Someone on twitter pointed out that IT folks with "I support Online Rights: Electronic Frontier Foundation" stickers are about to have a rough week. Oh, and it looks like Snowden was a Ron Paul supporter. Naturally.
Also having a rough week will be the tech industry, which is having a crisis of confidence. I'm reminded of the movie 'Sneakers,' except this time, the corporate giant is working with NSA, instead of against it, and the lonely, honorable thief is just trying to set information free.
The Atlantic's Conor Freidersdorf raises a few nightmare scenarios with the NSA's trove, starting with: "what if China hacks it?" Indeed, the question of what China would do with the information -- or information like it -- is why we need to come to grips with whether we want this, what we want to do with it, or what we want our government to do with it. We can wish away the surveillance, but we can't wish away the technology. China, the Middle East, Russia are doing the same thing while we grapple with whether or not to unilaterally disarm.
Finally, a caution against making an idol out of Snowden or out of the idea of Snowden from my pal, the Anchoress, here and here.
The Anchoress has an insightful, witty, and important book out on this sort of idolatry in modern life -- which (full disclosure) she sent me weeks ago, but I haven't had a chance to write about yet. This Snowden event, and his startlingly fast canonization by certain sorts, might just be the hook I was looking for.
Posted by: Gabriel Malor at
02:53 AM
| Comments (533)
Post contains 467 words, total size 4 kb.
http://tinyurl.com/nxyldnf
Posted by: Vic at June 10, 2013 02:54 AM (lZvxr)
http://tinyurl.com/ozq6tfa
Posted by: Vic at June 10, 2013 02:54 AM (lZvxr)
http://tinyurl.com/kywj5tm
Posted by: Vic at June 10, 2013 02:55 AM (lZvxr)
http://tinyurl.com/llpwf4a
Posted by: Vic at June 10, 2013 02:55 AM (lZvxr)
http://tinyurl.com/ouus8au
Posted by: Vic at June 10, 2013 02:55 AM (lZvxr)
http://tinyurl.com/pva94hw
Posted by: Vic at June 10, 2013 02:56 AM (lZvxr)
http://tinyurl.com/qenkfl9
Posted by: Vic at June 10, 2013 02:56 AM (lZvxr)
http://tinyurl.com/pjpoj6a
Posted by: Vic at June 10, 2013 02:57 AM (lZvxr)
http://tinyurl.com/ogyvtz9
Posted by: Vic at June 10, 2013 02:57 AM (lZvxr)
http://tinyurl.com/ofxfv83
Posted by: Vic at June 10, 2013 02:57 AM (lZvxr)
http://tinyurl.com/lap44ma
Posted by: Vic at June 10, 2013 02:58 AM (lZvxr)
http://tinyurl.com/kqfv4ze
Posted by: Vic at June 10, 2013 02:58 AM (lZvxr)
http://tinyurl.com/nuwurrn
Posted by: Vic at June 10, 2013 02:59 AM (lZvxr)
Obsidian Blade is SF entry. They have had this for a “deal” before and I got it. It is not that good.
http://tinyurl.com/keb24mn
And thatÂ’s it for today. The weather here is the same as it has been for the past 2 weeks. Rain rain rain and more rain. I am sick of it.
Posted by: Vic at June 10, 2013 02:59 AM (lZvxr)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at June 10, 2013 02:59 AM (+98Gb)
BS, there were at least 3 federal laws broken, all felonies.
Posted by: Vic at June 10, 2013 03:00 AM (lZvxr)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at June 10, 2013 03:01 AM (+98Gb)
Posted by: Vic at June 10, 2013 03:02 AM (lZvxr)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at June 10, 2013 03:02 AM (+98Gb)
It's almost as if whistle-blowers are heroes....except when the target is Obama.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at June 10, 2013 03:03 AM (z4m16)
Posted by: Talibill at June 10, 2013 03:04 AM (WEWGu)
Posted by: I Work for Dick Jones at June 10, 2013 03:04 AM (MSrqi)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at June 10, 2013 07:01 AM (+98Gb)
I don't think there are but Ratfk Rubio says there are.
Posted by: Vic at June 10, 2013 03:04 AM (lZvxr)
You need a better class of dinner companion.
Of course I got into it with a hard-core unionist, who insisted that the Koch brothers were the devil incarnate.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at June 10, 2013 03:04 AM (z4m16)
http://tinyurl.com/m6rj4uk
Posted by: Vic at June 10, 2013 06:55 AM (lZvxr)
Whoreyweird has never written a bigger pile of shit than the Julia Roberts film of that loser. Maybe Lohan can play a more realistic bio pic.
Posted by: Dr. Captain Hate at June 10, 2013 03:05 AM (NliGE)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at June 10, 2013 07:02 AM (+98Gb)
We all (except one idiot) have been saying that for a long time. But AOS Morons are hardcore.
Posted by: Vic at June 10, 2013 03:05 AM (lZvxr)
http://tinyurl.com/nuwurrn
Posted by: Vic at June 10, 2013 06:59 AM (lZvxr)
If NRO stopped being mealy mouthed they'd have to fire almost all their writers.
Posted by: Dr. Captain Hate at June 10, 2013 03:07 AM (NliGE)
Posted by: Vic at June 10, 2013 03:08 AM (lZvxr)
Posted by: Pixy Misa at June 10, 2013 03:10 AM (2yngH)
Posted by: teapartydoc at June 10, 2013 03:10 AM (4U98b)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at June 10, 2013 03:10 AM (+98Gb)
Posted by: NSA - Naturally Snooping on Americans [/i] at June 10, 2013 03:11 AM (U2UQk)
Wasn't John Lewis the black Congressman that made the phony spitting charge?
Posted by: Dr. Captain Hate at June 10, 2013 03:12 AM (NliGE)
Posted by: kreplach at June 10, 2013 03:12 AM (49lPc)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at June 10, 2013 03:12 AM (+98Gb)
Posted by: rickb223 at June 10, 2013 03:13 AM (XCfYI)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at June 10, 2013 07:10 AM (+98Gb)
Sounds like you got an A in tolerance.
And good morning to you!
It's going to be a mess today. Try to stay inside, preferably with a bottle of good scotch.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at June 10, 2013 03:14 AM (z4m16)
Posted by: Admiral Marcus at June 10, 2013 03:15 AM (Jsiw/)
Posted by: I Work for Dick Jones at June 10, 2013 03:15 AM (MSrqi)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at June 10, 2013 03:15 AM (+98Gb)
Posted by: rickb223 at June 10, 2013 07:13 AM (XCfYI)
There's the rub.
The mandarins in DC don't see it as spying on ourselves. We are a different (and lower) class of people. We are "Other."*
*two internetz for anyone who gets the reference.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at June 10, 2013 03:16 AM (z4m16)
Posted by: sneaky little five-eyes at June 10, 2013 03:16 AM (SwHqo)
Posted by: Dr. Captain Hate at June 10, 2013 07:12 AM (NliGE)
I thought it was Elija but it could have been Lewis. Hell they are two peas in a pod.
Posted by: Vic at June 10, 2013 03:16 AM (lZvxr)
Posted by: Joethefatman™ (@joethefatman1) at June 10, 2013 03:17 AM (MnSla)
Posted by: Name Withheld Upon Request [/i] at June 10, 2013 03:18 AM (U2UQk)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at June 10, 2013 03:18 AM (+98Gb)
. That should be the big news story, even if he is full of shit, the idea of the FEC punishing candidates makes it very clear that we need to take the FEC behind the barn, and shoot it in the head. Now.
So this guy was disillusioned that barry didn't clean up things in 2008. I am not sure if I am more disturbed by the idea that he did not know barry was a crypto socialists, or that maybe he did not realize a crypto socialist would empower an oppressive, intrusive state. These people really do believe in skittle shitting unicorns. Posted by: Endeavor to Persevere at June 10, 2013 03:18 AM (zZJJp)
Posted by: Empire of Jeff at June 10, 2013 03:19 AM (JDIKC)
Morning, ‘rons and ‘ronettes, as well as you cocksucking NSA agents and you, you dog-eating POS preezy. What a way to start a Monday when you realize Iowahawk’s “spoiler” is the God’s-honest truth.
Anyway, hereÂ’s a Wizard of Oz story. I donÂ’t think IÂ’ve told it before, but if I have, please forgive me:
YouÂ’ll remember that as Dorothy, the Scarecrow and the Tin Man walk along the yellow brick road, they run into a fierce lion who turns out to be a coward. Well, it seems that the first time Judy Garland slapped Bert Lahr, he did a double-take that was so comical Garland burst into laughter and couldnÂ’t go on. Director Victor Fleming called another take, but again, Lahr was such an old ham that Garland simply couldnÂ’t help laughing.
Take three. Garland went behind a tree and muttered to herself, “I will not laugh. I will not laugh.” Out she went, but still couldn’t get through the scene without dissolving into laughter. After a few more takes, Garland’s laughter became hysterical – she literally could not stop.
At that point, Fleming got up and slapped Garland so hard across the face that the sound echoed around the cavernous Oz set. “Go back to your dressing room,” he ordered.
She did. A few minutes later, she returned, told Fleming, “OK,” and the scene went off perfectly.
Hope you all have a wonderful day. IÂ’ve got a lot of things to do, so I may not be around until tomorrow.
Posted by: Mary Poppins' Practically Perfect Piercing at June 10, 2013 03:19 AM (zF6Iw)
Therefore, he knows 'nothing', if he's wise, other than stuff like this, once he no longer has access to his network (i.e. via password.)
I can attest to this, this is one way us IT folks protect ourselves.
Posted by: RiverC at June 10, 2013 03:20 AM (KTytI)
However, fleeing there makes him vulnerable to give up under coercion (or not) the actual secrets that we do legitimately need to keep us safe.
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at June 10, 2013 07:15 AM (+98Gb)
My bet is that the CHN don't want him. He's low level and a contractor so his access to the full scope of the program was limited. He's played the only cards he had.
Posted by: Talibill at June 10, 2013 03:20 AM (WEWGu)
Posted by: Gabriel Malor at June 10, 2013 03:20 AM (jZUEZ)
Posted by: rickb223 at June 10, 2013 03:21 AM (XCfYI)
If I had been on that set when he slapper I would have knocked the shit out of him.
Posted by: Vic at June 10, 2013 03:22 AM (lZvxr)
You are operating under a fundamental misconception.
Snowden is a classic whistle-blower. The fact that our government, or at least some people within it, is aware of this activity does not make it legal.
The government is collecting and analyzing private information about American citizens. Citizens who have done nothing wrong. Citizens whose behavior has never been presented to a judge for a legal decision about whether this data collection is reasonable under the Constitution.
Try to cast off the blinders of law school and the DC cesspool, and remember why we are a country, and the motivations that drove the founders.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at June 10, 2013 03:22 AM (z4m16)
Posted by: Name Withheld Upon Request [/i] at June 10, 2013 03:22 AM (U2UQk)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at June 10, 2013 03:23 AM (+98Gb)
"What if China hacks it?"
Oh, good Lord, now I'm scared. Just imagine all our emails in the hands of Communists.
Oh, wait...
Posted by: Purveyor of Filth at June 10, 2013 03:23 AM (rxnpE)
Posted by: sneaky little five-eyes at June 10, 2013 03:23 AM (3X3ZR)
"whether we want this"?
Are you fucking kidding me?Jesus this country is fucked.I had this conversation with a bunch of people the other day.They just don't care.It ranged from "they brought this on themselves"(in regards to the IRS scandal)to"if your not doing anything wrong,bah,blah,blah"(in regards to NSA).
This is a direct result of letting the Clintons off the hook for all the shit they did.This government saw that it could get away with pretty much anything,up to and including the murder of its citizens.Its too far gone now.
Posted by: vae victus at June 10, 2013 03:23 AM (cpMdE)
Posted by: kreplach at June 10, 2013 03:24 AM (CofEF)
Posted by: waldo at June 10, 2013 03:25 AM (araOs)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at June 10, 2013 03:25 AM (+98Gb)
Posted by: blaster at June 10, 2013 03:28 AM (c28BI)
Posted by: Name Withheld Upon Request [/i] at June 10, 2013 03:28 AM (U2UQk)
Also, my comment had nothing to do with Gabe's apparent homosexuality, but rather to his attitude towards the subject, i.e. 'unilateral disarmament' -- comparing this to an old anti-communist sore spot.
That's a low blow; I guess since Romania used to surveil their own citizens constantly, America must have been crazy not to catch up on that hot tech and make sure ITS citizens weren't going to undermine its current government.
Posted by: RiverC at June 10, 2013 03:29 AM (KTytI)
Oh, and it looks like Snowden was a Ron Paul supporter. Naturally.
The report I read stated that he was an Obama supporter. Can't be both.
Posted by: Decaf at June 10, 2013 03:29 AM (AAOE/)
http://tinyurl.com/kqfv4ze
Posted by: Vic at June 10, 2013 06:58 AM (lZvxr)
Of course the election was rigged but the GOP just says tsk-tsk and moves on rather than address anything that looks sketchy to us poor fools whom they count on to support their dogshit candidates. What a party.
Posted by: Dr. Captain Hate at June 10, 2013 03:30 AM (NliGE)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at June 10, 2013 03:32 AM (+98Gb)
He did not vote for Obama, but it says he hoped that he would live up to his claims of respecting privacy. Many left-of-center libertarians did not vote for him but still hoped he'd live up to that part of his platform.
Cynics, cynics everywhere.
That I have to defend this guy is absurd. These days we can have a 'rational' and 'level headed' discussion about whether to flagrantly ignore our 4th amendment, but when it comes to discussing a person, *damn* - it's all piss and vinegar.
Posted by: RiverC at June 10, 2013 03:32 AM (KTytI)
Posted by: Sherry McEvil, Stiletto Corsettes C'est Magnifique at June 10, 2013 03:33 AM (Qks/I)
The report I read stated that he was an Obama supporter. Can't be both.
Posted by: Decaf at June 10, 2013 07:29 AM (AAOE/)
Most people supporting Paul in the primaries turned around and voted for Obama, which is why I never gave much thought to our supposed alliance with the supposed libertarians.
Posted by: Purveyor of Filth at June 10, 2013 03:33 AM (rxnpE)
Posted by: NCKate at June 10, 2013 03:34 AM (nVCJW)
Posted by: waldo at June 10, 2013 03:34 AM (araOs)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at June 10, 2013 03:34 AM (+98Gb)
Posted by: HoboJerky, Hash Hunter at June 10, 2013 03:34 AM (X4HxX)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at June 10, 2013 03:35 AM (+98Gb)
Posted by: Name Withheld Upon Request [/i] at June 10, 2013 03:35 AM (U2UQk)
Posted by: Gem at June 10, 2013 03:35 AM (zw+pb)
There was one overriding principle at Meade when I was stationed there.
You do NOT spy on US Citizens. Get caught doing that and you would be court martialed.
What changed? And when did it change?
Posted by: AZ Hi Desert (All my Hate cannot be found) at June 10, 2013 03:36 AM (ial2b)
I don't think he thinks he's going to be working any more. If he's right, he will be dead soon.
Posted by: RiverC at June 10, 2013 03:36 AM (KTytI)
Posted by: HoboJerky, Hash Hunter at June 10, 2013 03:36 AM (X4HxX)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at June 10, 2013 03:37 AM (+98Gb)
Posted by: HoboJerky, Hash Hunter at June 10, 2013 03:38 AM (X4HxX)
Posted by: Cretin, a high-grade moron at June 10, 2013 03:38 AM (c9aNZ)
One reason why Ron Paul was kicked out of the convention; why no one but an Establishment will get to run in the general.
They don't trust 'wacko birds' with their machine.
Posted by: RiverC at June 10, 2013 03:39 AM (KTytI)
Posted by: @johntant at June 10, 2013 03:40 AM (9FsE3)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at June 10, 2013 03:40 AM (+98Gb)
Posted by: Sb at June 10, 2013 03:40 AM (rfbdX)
Posted by: RiverC at June 10, 2013 03:41 AM (KTytI)
Posted by: HoboJerky, Hash Hunter at June 10, 2013 03:41 AM (X4HxX)
Posted by: Cretin, a high-grade moron at June 10, 2013 03:41 AM (c9aNZ)
George Zimmerman is in deep doo doo. I just listened to Fox News reporter Melissa Monteo (not sure of the spelling) say, "there's 500 potential jurors. Somehow today they have to get it down to that jury of 6..."
Hey lady! you need 12 jurors not 6 pall bearers.
Posted by: Ohio Dan at June 10, 2013 03:41 AM (JKNDp)
Are you seriously saying that he should have just reported his concerns to .... who ? Holder ? Some IG who will do an 'audit' and sit on the report for a year or two ? The foreign press, sad to say, is about the only place that wouldn't a.) supress the information b.) rat him out for prosecution / disappearment.
No words for how gobsmacked I am by the widespread echoing of the presidential pablum by people who would want me to think they are principled constitutionalists on any other issue.
"They're not actually listening / just metadata"
"It's probably legal, anyway"
"What have you got to hide ?"
CRAP !
Here are my views:
a.) DO NOT WANT
b.) should be shredded, then burned (metaphorically)
c.)government should implode new Utah data center with all contents inside and then make the rubble bounce for a few weeks as a show of good faith.
Posted by: sneaky little five-eyes at June 10, 2013 07:16 AM (SwHqo)
Yes , the nativity in on how to beat tyranny is astounding.
"Give the information to Eric Holder!"
Posted by: Temper Tantrum at June 10, 2013 03:42 AM (AWmfW)
Of course they were arrogant about it, just looking at Snowden's bio - 200K contractor living in Hawaii, you see privilege and detachment. Politically, Snowden looks like he's agnostic at this point, but can you imagine if he were run by far left agents like we have in the IRS...is that really so hard to imagine? Who's to say this didn't happen already?
Posted by: Tocquevillian at June 10, 2013 03:42 AM (iuY0Y)
Posted by: Cretin, a high-grade moron at June 10, 2013 03:43 AM (c9aNZ)
I don't support all of this guys politics (I never trusted Obama) but how doesn't it make sense that this is a crime? Have we become so legalistic that we can't see moral and ethical wrong when it stares us in the face?
Posted by: RiverC at June 10, 2013 03:43 AM (KTytI)
The key is the scale. I saw a headline that said Beck said there wouldn't be a Jew left if Hitler had what Ogabe has. He's right.
Big Government Republicans like Big Data? I wonder why?
Posted by: Cretin, a high-grade moron at June 10, 2013 07:41 AM (c9aNZ)
It kills all the wacko birds...
Posted by: Temper Tantrum at June 10, 2013 03:43 AM (AWmfW)
This gave me a good, hearty cynical chuckle. If this douche isn't already in the pay of the ChiComs, I'm sure their military intelligence folks will grab him for an "interview" soon enough...him being conveniently within their satrapy and all.
Posted by: Stu-22 at June 10, 2013 03:44 AM (k4bdL)
Hey lady! you need 12 jurors not 6 pall bearers.
Posted by: Ohio Dan at June 10, 2013 07:41 AM (JKNDp)
Only 6 jurors needed in Florida.
Posted by: Tami[/i][/b][/u][/s] at June 10, 2013 03:44 AM (X6akg)
Posted by: @johntant at June 10, 2013 03:44 AM (9FsE3)
Posted by: Tocquevillian at June 10, 2013 07:42 AM (iuY0Y)
The Petraus take down shows it already happened.
Posted by: Temper Tantrum at June 10, 2013 03:45 AM (AWmfW)
Apparently Snowden was pulling 200k a year and living in Hawaii.
Interesting. A soldier is paid what? $25K and is in real danger of losing his life and this guy was paid almost ten times as much and has the luxury of rebellion. What was he doing in that industry if he found it distasteful?
Posted by: Decaf at June 10, 2013 03:45 AM (AAOE/)
Posted by: Name Withheld Upon Request [/i] at June 10, 2013 03:45 AM (U2UQk)
Posted by: @johntant at June 10, 2013 07:44 AM (9FsE3)
He's not the problem , and he wants to survive.
Stop blaming the messenger.
Posted by: Temper Tantrum at June 10, 2013 03:45 AM (AWmfW)
Posted by: Empire of Jeff at June 10, 2013 03:46 AM (JDIKC)
Posted by: Cretin, a high-grade moron at June 10, 2013 03:46 AM (c9aNZ)
Posted by: @johntant at June 10, 2013 03:47 AM (9FsE3)
Thank Gabe.
Posted by: BurtTC at June 10, 2013 03:48 AM (BeSEI)
I'd feel a whole lot more comfortable about this if any leftist just once gave a shit about actual terrorism. We are the enemy to them, that's the problem.
Its like guns- Data doesn't oppress people, people oppress people. The snooping is a red flag on their intentions.
Posted by: Purveyor of Filth at June 10, 2013 03:48 AM (rxnpE)
I'm also convinced that 'Edward Snowden' is a moniker and not his real name. I don't think we can rule out the idea that he has done a few things in his own defense, including falsifying these details.
It does seem like he really worked for Booz, though.
Posted by: RiverC at June 10, 2013 03:48 AM (KTytI)
Of course I wasn't trying to buy real estate there either. My undestanding at that time was that you could not actually "buy" real estate, you could only lease it for a maximum of 99 years.
Posted by: Vic at June 10, 2013 03:49 AM (lZvxr)
Posted by: panzernashorn at June 10, 2013 03:49 AM (MhA4j)
Posted by: Cretin, a high-grade moron at June 10, 2013 03:50 AM (c9aNZ)
Posted by: HoboJerky, Hash Hunter at June 10, 2013 03:50 AM (X4HxX)
Posted by: 'Dolf at June 10, 2013 03:50 AM (MMC8r)
Posted by: Beto at June 10, 2013 03:50 AM (VWfCN)
The conversation is now about him, not what he leaked. Pretty interesting turn for a guy who supposedly only wanted the truth to get out.
Posted by: @johntant at June 10, 2013 07:47 AM (9FsE3)
It's you making it about him.
Posted by: Temper Tantrum at June 10, 2013 03:50 AM (AWmfW)
Yesterday's post on stupid things liberals say - proved how useless it is to try to argue facts to liberals. Don't argue - offer the facts to them as wagers.
Put your money where your mouth is; even stupid liberals get serious when hard cash is on the line. Make the wagers large enough that it is painful for them to lose and tempting enough to sucker them in at the prospect of taking your money.
Pretty soon they'll learn not to wager with you.
Posted by: [/i] An Observation at June 10, 2013 03:51 AM (ylhEn)
, then after primaries, she had an Obama sticker put on the other side.I asked her how she squared that particular circle, and she gave me some convoluted answer that I'm sure made some amount of sense to her, but I couldn't tell you what it was, because I don't speak Klingon, or whatever language she was using.
Nice gal, a bit of a tragic history. Good looking... but that's no excuse.
Posted by: BurtTC at June 10, 2013 03:51 AM (BeSEI)
It's like y'all do it on purpose to get a reaction, ya trolls
Posted by: RiverC at June 10, 2013 03:51 AM (KTytI)
Posted by: HoboJerky, Hash Hunter at June 10, 2013 03:51 AM (X4HxX)
Posted by: Cretin, a high-grade moron at June 10, 2013 03:51 AM (c9aNZ)
Posted by: panzernashorn at June 10, 2013 03:52 AM (MhA4j)
Posted by: RiverC at June 10, 2013 03:52 AM (KTytI)
Posted by: Empire of Jeff at June 10, 2013 07:46 AM (JDIKC)
He knows that any lie he makes will be exposed by NSA.
Posted by: Temper Tantrum at June 10, 2013 03:53 AM (AWmfW)
I don't disagree with you. No way I want people like this running around doing whatever they please, once their "consciences" get the better of them, but Gabe's contention that there was no crime involved is so silly, it's even unbecoming of HIM.
Posted by: BurtTC at June 10, 2013 03:53 AM (BeSEI)
Posted by: Beto at June 10, 2013 03:53 AM (VWfCN)
Posted by: PRISM at June 10, 2013 03:53 AM (X4HxX)
Posted by: PRISM at June 10, 2013 03:54 AM (X4HxX)
This is like Bradley Manning exactly to the extent that the average American is properly viewed by the US government as an enemy combatant. Unfortunately, it seems that's exactly what it views us as, and we are supposed to think that's OK.
Posted by: billo at June 10, 2013 03:54 AM (bBB2L)
Posted by: Cretin, a high-grade moron at June 10, 2013 03:55 AM (c9aNZ)
Am I the only one here who doesn't care whether or not a crime was committed?
Theses datacenters need to be destroyed and the Establishment run out on a rail.
Posted by: HoboJerky, Hash Hunter at June 10, 2013 07:51 AM (X4HxX)
Yes, they way "crime" and "law" are defined these days.
Posted by: Temper Tantrum at June 10, 2013 03:56 AM (AWmfW)
Posted by: mindful webworker having a not good day already at June 10, 2013 03:57 AM (eYLgD)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at June 10, 2013 03:57 AM (+98Gb)
And on the other hand, the fellow who blew the whistle seems to be another repellent traitor-douche, and has fled into enemy territory. And he is being aided and abetted by repellent traitor-douche organizations like the WaPo and the Guardian.
So I don't know what to think anymore. LiB, I guess.
Posted by: Stu-22 at June 10, 2013 03:58 AM (k4bdL)
Seriously? The NSA, which is mandated to NOT spy on Americans is now spying on Americans? You're calling that some sort of technicality?
Posted by: BurtTC at June 10, 2013 03:58 AM (BeSEI)
I signed an oath of my own free will to be a guard at a government re-education camp stating that I would not speak to anyone about my activities inside the camp. I soon found out that there were government approved activities inside the camp that violated fundamental natural rights of humanity and these actions were actually supported by rulings from a secret court empowered by the ruling class.
Naturally, I decided my oath, not the transgressions against humanity I observed, was the most important thing and so I never told anyone about my work experience.
Posted by: Weimar Republican at June 10, 2013 03:58 AM (Cnqmv)
Posted by: Empire of Jeff at June 10, 2013 03:58 AM (JDIKC)
Posted by: Beto at June 10, 2013 03:59 AM (VWfCN)
Posted by: Gran at June 10, 2013 07:53 AM (mw0FO)
Thanks, I have been back for a few days now.
Posted by: Vic at June 10, 2013 04:01 AM (lZvxr)
Posted by: zsasz at June 10, 2013 04:01 AM (MMC8r)
I signed an oath of my own free will to be a guard at a government re-education camp stating that I would not speak to anyone about my activities inside the camp. I soon found out that there were government approved activities inside the camp that violated fundamental natural rights of humanity and these actions were actually supported by rulings from a secret court empowered by the ruling class.
Naturally, I decided my oath, not the transgressions against humanity I observed, was the most important thing and so I never told anyone about my work experience.
Posted by: Weimar Republican at June 10, 2013 07:58 AM (Cnqmv)
Following orders , it's the right thing to do.
Posted by: Josef Mengele at June 10, 2013 04:02 AM (AWmfW)
Posted by: HoboJerky, Hash Hunter at June 10, 2013 04:02 AM (X4HxX)
Posted by: Ian S. at June 10, 2013 04:04 AM (OevbG)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at June 10, 2013 04:04 AM (+98Gb)
Posted by: Vic at June 10, 2013 04:04 AM (lZvxr)
"Most people supporting Paul in the primaries turned around and voted for Obama..."
I've seen some moronic bullshit spewed here but this might be the Acme of that pile.
Posted by: Beto
Stick around, it's just Monday.
Seems pretty accurate actually. If you look at the Reason round-up of who was getting their vote, in 2008 it was Obama in a walk, because not Bush and drugs.
2012 it was a close run between the Libertarian and Purity Non-Voting.
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at June 10, 2013 04:04 AM (kdS6q)
My friends, you have nothing to fear from an NSA gathering "meta-data" against you and letting only select Obama administration officials have access to it.
Posted by: Juan Valdez McShame at June 10, 2013 04:04 AM (Cnqmv)
l'm addressing Snowden's stated motive for leaking this. Since so much of what he says about himself doesn't seem to match up, how much do we accept his stated motive for leaking? Snowden's character being the subject of Gabe's post and all.
Empire of Jeff at June 10, 2013 07:58 AM (JDIKC)
-----------
What are the main motives for, pardon the term, betrayal? Seems to have some relevance here.
Some people turn just for the money. I don't think that's the case here.
Some people turn out of genuine principle or ideology. That may have some relevance here, obviously, which would tend to explain the original leak.
But then other people turn in order to stoke their egos, address self-esteem issues, or because they've watched too many James Bond movies and relish the life of an International Man of Mystery. I would have written this motive off last week, but when Snowden decided to make his statement I'm thinking this is the major force behind it. For that reason I don't accept the martyr-for-freedom schtick that he's selling.
One can certainly make a case that this needed to air, although I really disagree with the way he went about it.
Posted by: @JohnTant at June 10, 2013 04:05 AM (eytER)
Posted by: Cretin, a high-grade moron at June 10, 2013 04:05 AM (c9aNZ)
Posted by: blaster at June 10, 2013 04:06 AM (c28BI)
Posted by: panzernashorn at June 10, 2013 04:06 AM (MhA4j)
Posted by: Name Withheld Upon Request [/i] at June 10, 2013 04:07 AM (U2UQk)
It's worth a read.
[link in nic]
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at June 10, 2013 04:07 AM (z4m16)
Posted by: deadrody at June 10, 2013 04:07 AM (osIoP)
Posted by: @JohnTant at June 10, 2013 08:05 AM (eytER)
So how should he have done it?
Think about all the stories media have spiked to protect Obama.
Posted by: Temper Tantrum at June 10, 2013 04:09 AM (AWmfW)
Posted by: blaster at June 10, 2013 04:09 AM (c28BI)
Posted by: Cretin, a high-grade moron at June 10, 2013 04:09 AM (c9aNZ)
Posted by: Skip Tracer at June 10, 2013 04:09 AM (2+bRt)
Posted by: kreplach at June 10, 2013 04:10 AM (wLibB)
Posted by: waldo at June 10, 2013 07:34 AM (araOs)
Agreed. There are plenty of places to run to that don't have extradition to the US without having to spend the rest of your life in a third-world Communist shithole.
MICE ==
Money
Ideology
Coercion
Ego
I think if as more of the details of Mr. Snowden's life history come to light we will find the elements of one or more of these playing a heavy role. The story of the idealistic young whistleblower up against the vast forces of The Darkness is inspiring, but it is just a story.
Posted by: Nighthawk at June 10, 2013 04:10 AM (OtQXp)
Temper Tantrum at June 10, 2013 08:09 AM (AWmfW)
There are many avenues that don't involve leaking to the press. They are detailed to you in the course of getting a security clearance.
Alas, those courses aren't as sexy as the notoriety of getting your name in the papers.
Posted by: @JohnTant at June 10, 2013 04:11 AM (eytER)
Posted by: JackStraw at June 10, 2013 04:12 AM (g1DWB)
It is pretty well known that the 1960 election of JFK was stolen in Chicago. Nobody ever made much of that - except for the Democrats who learned they could get away with it.
Posted by: [/i] An Observation at June 10, 2013 04:13 AM (ylhEn)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at June 10, 2013 04:13 AM (+98Gb)
Alas, those courses aren't as sexy as the notoriety of getting your name in the papers.
Posted by: @JohnTant at June 10, 2013 08:11 AM (eytER)
If not to the press , how would the public be informed?
Posted by: Temper Tantrum at June 10, 2013 04:14 AM (AWmfW)
Oh well, today is a new day....
Posted by: Vlad the Impaler at June 10, 2013 04:14 AM (wtvvX)
I'll separate the aforementioned from what's been disclosed- which if completely true is not only disturbing, but perhaps unconstitutional under the Fourth Amendment and perhaps criminal by statute. Anybody knowingly involved, including FISA judges, needs to be exposed and prosecuted. That includes the technology companies feigning ignorance either because their agreements with the government force them to be or they've created internal walls for plausible deniability's sake. These are companies who have marched goose-step with the Obama administration and supported it politically. So you'll forgive me if I find their denials unauthentic and disingenuous. They realize their entire business and credibility is on the line and will lie through their teeth to save it.
Posted by: Marcus at June 10, 2013 04:14 AM (GGCsk)
Hong Kong isn't a shit-hole, and it certainly isn't third-world.
And...Snowden isn't the important part of this story. It's the government's fundamental overreach, and the violation of our constitutional rights.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at June 10, 2013 04:15 AM (z4m16)
Posted by: mindful webworker now with caffeine at June 10, 2013 04:15 AM (eYLgD)
Posted by: rickl at June 10, 2013 04:15 AM (sdi6R)
Posted by: blaster at June 10, 2013 08:10 AM (c28BI)
Of course not! But if he did.......
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at June 10, 2013 04:16 AM (z4m16)
Posted by: Empire of Jeff at June 10, 2013 04:17 AM (JDIKC)
Posted by: Beto at June 10, 2013 04:17 AM (VWfCN)
"If Snowden were sincere in his belief that this was something that needed to air, he wouldn't have come out of the shadows and allowed his name to be attached to this. "
Yes, I know. He should have just resigned and then anonymously fed the info to sympathetic media. That's if a) he could find any, and b) if they'd handle the Obama juggernaut rolling over them without some damn good corroboration to derail the wheels. But it's all moot anyway - he knows that there's NO WAY to remain anonymous anymore. They'd catch him no matter how he tried to hide. So he either had to just wash his hands of the matter (resigning might preserve his own self-respect but it would do nothing to stop the crime) or do what he did - go public, knowing that there was no way to avoid that anyway, but take precautions to protect himself.
Posted by: Dr. Mabuse at June 10, 2013 04:18 AM (FkH4y)
Posted by: typo dynamofo at June 10, 2013 04:19 AM (WVMUQ)
What gets me is Snowden's claim to be shocked, SHOCKED!, at what the NSA was doing after being in their employ a few years.
'The Puzzle Palace' was published a year before he was born and has been in print continuously all that time. You'd think it was required reading for anyone weighing a job offer with the NSA or a contractor to the NSA.
Maybe I've been living with the idea for too long but the idea that the NSA ever limited themselves from domestic intel gathering and this is just a recent development seems laughable.
Posted by: epobirs at June 10, 2013 04:19 AM (kcfmt)
Given that Obama and Hillary are in the process of walking away scot-free on Benghazi and the other scandals are likely to also be papered over, anyone who's paying attention in this regime isn't gonna go through channels for anything that might embarrass TFG.
Posted by: Ian S. at June 10, 2013 04:19 AM (OevbG)
OK, I can get behind not making him an idol - but I'm not cool with condemning him, either. How fucking much information does the government "need to know" about the people "for their own safety and protection?"
I'm sick of this paternalism. If whistleblowers are what we need - even if they are Ronulans - then perhaps that's what we need.
I'm good with "we'll see," but let's see
Posted by: RobM1981 at June 10, 2013 04:20 AM (lV1tZ)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at June 10, 2013 04:20 AM (+98Gb)
Posted by: Vote Lord Humungus 2016 at June 10, 2013 04:20 AM (HEa5q)
Posted by: rdbrewer at June 10, 2013 04:20 AM (Iyg03)
Posted by: rickl at June 10, 2013 08:15 AM (sdi6R)
Word.
Posted by: IRS at June 10, 2013 04:21 AM (AWmfW)
Posted by: typo dynamofo at June 10, 2013 08:19 AM (WVMUQ)
He wasn't the average lawyer, he was a DA.
Posted by: Vic at June 10, 2013 04:21 AM (lZvxr)
Uhh, no. Put down the crack pipe.
Posted by: Ian S. at June 10, 2013 04:21 AM (OevbG)
Posted by: rdbrewer at June 10, 2013 08:20 AM (Iyg03)
Pick a target..
Posted by: Alinsky at June 10, 2013 04:22 AM (AWmfW)
Posted by: HoboJerky, Hash Hunter at June 10, 2013 04:22 AM (X4HxX)
Which means we'll hear something stupid from Megatons probably today.
Posted by: Ian S. at June 10, 2013 04:22 AM (OevbG)
Posted by: Snarky the Bear at June 10, 2013 04:23 AM (/b8+5)
I suppose the thing to keep a focus on is the fact that this government is no longer legitimate and is, in fact, a tyranny.
Every instrument of government is being used against the citizenry. We have no recourse and essentially no one (the Cruz's and Gowdy's notwithstanding) to stand in opposition in Congress.
I think this is the tipping point. We cannot go on like this.
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at June 10, 2013 08:20 AM (+98Gb)
It should be the tipping point.
Posted by: Temper Tantrum at June 10, 2013 04:24 AM (AWmfW)
Posted by: Jean at June 10, 2013 04:24 AM (CMlD4)
Temper Tantrum at June 10, 2013 08:14 AM (AWmfW)
Why start from that assumption? If the goal is to get the activity stopped, or at least reined in, there is a defined chain. And if he doesn't like that, he could possibly call up a Congressman (ideally one on either Intelligence Committee) and level concerns there. Congress does have oversight responsibilities, after all.
And if he doesn't like the chain, then he's in the wrong line of work.
However, what is factually true is that folks very rarely see the entire picture. They may see only one part of it which outrages them, but there are other parts unknown to them because they aren't cleared for it (either need to know or clearance level) which mitigates the piece they *do* know.
For example, a guy with a TS clearance comes across a record of a drone strike in the ME against a civilian house. He's outraged, leaks it, etc. But there is a bit of information under SCI that shows the house was actually an AQ meeting location, disclosure of which would burn a HUMINT source. Suddenly the original fact has a new dimension.
Did Snowden have the complete picture here? I don't know but I doubt it. That's not to say there are or aren't mitigating facts here, but I'm genuinely curious how hard he tried to raise his concerns before leaking to the press.
Posted by: @JohnTant at June 10, 2013 04:24 AM (eytER)
Posted by: panzernashorn at June 10, 2013 04:24 AM (MhA4j)
Posted by: Overwatch Unit GF3245T at June 10, 2013 04:25 AM (qrHMp)
Posted by: HoboJerky, Hash Hunter at June 10, 2013 04:25 AM (X4HxX)
Posted by: Empire of Jeff at June 10, 2013 04:25 AM (JDIKC)
"11 Meanwhile almost all of congress has not read it"
This is my single biggest bitch with congress: We hire people to represent us and they pass shit without knowing what it is.
Posted by: Cicero Kid at June 10, 2013 04:25 AM (jz0+s)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at June 10, 2013 04:26 AM (9Bj8R)
Posted by: Snarky the Bear at June 10, 2013 04:26 AM (/b8+5)
Posted by: HoboJerky, Hash Hunter at June 10, 2013 04:27 AM (X4HxX)
Posted by: Phinn at June 10, 2013 04:28 AM (oFH2D)
Posted by: Lazy chique at June 10, 2013 04:28 AM (r+7wo)
Posted by: MTF at June 10, 2013 04:29 AM (+GpbP)
Posted by: AZ Hi Desert (All my Hate cannot be found) at June 10, 2013 04:29 AM (ial2b)
Posted by: HoboJerky, Hash Hunter at June 10, 2013 04:30 AM (X4HxX)
Posted by: Jean at June 10, 2013 04:31 AM (CMlD4)
A land of law is hard to turn against its citizens, but one way to do it is to 'reinterpret' those laws internally. An instance of this is the Speed Limit. The speed limit is 55 along the 295 corridor, but given that most people drive 60-80 on the road even passing cops who don't bat an eye, the sign is for all practical purposes incorrect. The inner law, or shadow law, goes something like this: the speed limit is usually 70, but may be 65 and down to 55 depending on the need of the police. In other words, the real, operative law is up to the interpretation of the police. This shadow law means that power rests in the police to decide, based on their OWN need, who is a criminal and who is not (within the bounds of the outer law.)
Now, imagine the police have record of all of the speeds you've driven for the past 10 years.
You're going to court to resist a ridiculous fine, like say the 500 dollar fine for parking at a handicap spot. When you get to court, the judge confers with the policeman who brings forth records from the past 10 years of the number of times you've been speeding and calculates the fines you owe. So you can either pay whatever ridiculous fine they tag on a given act, or go to court and be faced with 10,000 dollars or more in fines.
There is a statute of limitations, as I recall, but it is not predicated on this 'complete information awareness'. The shadow law becomes not just a nuisance, but a monster.
Posted by: RiverC at June 10, 2013 04:31 AM (KTytI)
Posted by: Doc Merlin at June 10, 2013 04:31 AM (8MymY)
--->He wasn't the average lawyer, he was a DA.
So was nifong and that wildebeast in florida. Cmon, Vic.
Posted by: typo dynamofo at June 10, 2013 04:31 AM (WVMUQ)
Posted by: Doc Merlin at June 10, 2013 04:31 AM (8MymY)
Posted by: HoboJerky, Hash Hunter at June 10, 2013 04:31 AM (X4HxX)
And...Snowden isn't the important part of this story. It's the government's fundamental overreach, and the violation of our constitutional rights.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at June 10, 2013 08:15 AM (z4m16)
========
Hong Kong may not be a shithole, but Mr. Snowden's final residence will be the decision of the CCP, and once his usefulness to them is exhausted I doubt he will enjoy his accommodations.
Agree that the misuse of intelligence assets is a major story and one that needs to be brought to light, but Snowden is not helping his credibility by the convoluted way he is going about his so-called "whistleblowing".
Posted by: Nighthawk at June 10, 2013 04:32 AM (OtQXp)
Posted by: zsasz at June 10, 2013 04:32 AM (MMC8r)
I disagree. These Ron Paul supporters are 99.% exclusively the anti-establishment TEA party that came out of nowhere in 2006.
Saying they would vote for someone like Obama is like saying people allergic to bees would put hives in their living rooms.
Posted by: Beto
Let's go to the bookmarks!
Reason does election "who voting for" round-ups for the staff writers and for contributors. Here's their summary for the staff picks in 2004, 2008 and 2012.
http://tinyurl.com/b37bx76
And the 2008 contributor's round-up:
http://tinyurl.com/m7g82bu
Seriously, "Free Minds and Free Markets" really does reduce to just Drugs and Isolationism.
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at June 10, 2013 04:32 AM (kdS6q)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at June 10, 2013 04:33 AM (+98Gb)
Posted by: Snarky the Bear at June 10, 2013 04:33 AM (/b8+5)
Posted by: JackStraw at June 10, 2013 04:33 AM (g1DWB)
Most of our congressmen and senators are lawyers, some were businessmen and a few doctors.
In this day and age, wouldn't it be nice if some of our representatives came from the IT community? Of course, this isn't going to happen. Using Snowden as an example, here's a 29 year old, politically aware guy knocking down 200K a year and living in Hawaii.
Even if money isn't the biggest factor in his life, how do you convince him (and a wife if he had one) to give up his position and run for a job that pays less and has a million times more problems?
As long as we keep the present system, only bored, power hungry millionaires will run for office.
Posted by: jwest at June 10, 2013 04:34 AM (u2a4R)
Posted by: Jean at June 10, 2013 04:34 AM (CMlD4)
He did the only thing he could have done. The official channels are useless - the corruption is in the official channels. He couldn't have released to US media - they would have killed the story. Stay in the United States afterwards? What makes you think he wouldn't have been shot trying to escape from the FBI? He went from a fledgling Marxist state to a place where Marxism is grinding down like it did in the USSR.
He is not important to the story. What is important is the trillions of counts of felony wiretapping law violations.
Posted by: [/i] An Observation at June 10, 2013 04:35 AM (ylhEn)
That's the problem of entrusting Constitutional rights to Lawgivers-In-Black who see themselves as the end-all, be-all, loot-all.
For those of you who don't know why I included the "loot-all", go look up the Japanese Three Alls Policy (no, not the Wikipedia entry which changes the "burn" to "destroy" and moves it to the end).
Posted by: steveegg at June 10, 2013 04:35 AM (o44nj)
Posted by: panzernashorn at June 10, 2013 04:35 AM (MhA4j)
Posted by: Empire of Jeff at June 10, 2013 08:17 AM (JDIKC)
=======
I suspect that my manual is an older edition and is probably out of date.
Posted by: Nighthawk at June 10, 2013 04:35 AM (OtQXp)
Posted by: RWC at June 10, 2013 04:36 AM (fWAjv)
Posted by: Empire of Jeff at June 10, 2013 04:36 AM (JDIKC)
"And for the support of this Declaration with a firm reliance on the protection of divine providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor."
Remember that they, too, were traitors to England. I found this interesting write up by Rush Limbaugh on what happened to the signers of The Declaration Of Independence:
http://jaredstory.com/limbaugh.html
Posted by: GnuBreed at June 10, 2013 04:37 AM (ccXZP)
Posted by: Jean at June 10, 2013 08:34 AM (CMlD4)
They have the information already. Not from him though.
Posted by: Temper Tantrum at June 10, 2013 04:37 AM (AWmfW)
Posted by: HoboJerky, Hash Hunter at June 10, 2013 04:37 AM (X4HxX)
Posted by: panzernashorn at June 10, 2013 04:37 AM (MhA4j)
Posted by: Jean at June 10, 2013 04:38 AM (CMlD4)
The Atlantic's Conor Freidersdorf raises a few nightmare scenarios with the NSA's trove, starting with: "what if China hacks it?" Indeed, the question of what China would do with the information -- or information like it -- is why we need to come to grips with whether we want this, what we want to do with it, or what we want our government to do with it. We can wish away the surveillance, but we can't wish away the technology. China, the Middle East, Russia are doing the same thing while we grapple with whether or not to unilaterally disarm.
This is why I find it rather laughable that Snowden fled to China of all places. Does he honestly think they're just going to let him walk around free with all that NSA and CIA info inside his head? They'll either wine him and dine him OR they'll disappear him before he can take off to Iceland and claim the Americans snatched him back.
Posted by: MWR, Proud Tea(rrorist) Party Assault Hobbit [/s][/b][/u][/i] at June 10, 2013 04:38 AM (4df7R)
Posted by: Snarky the Bear at June 10, 2013 04:38 AM (/b8+5)
>>We can wish away the surveillance, but we can't wish away the technology. China, the Middle East, Russia are doing the same thing while we grapple with whether or not to unilaterally disarm.
We're also behind them or torture and political murder. .We can't fall behind or unilateraly disarm on those items either I reckon.
Posted by: Ben at June 10, 2013 04:38 AM (C2Y4l)
Posted by: Jean at June 10, 2013 04:38 AM (CMlD4)
Posted by: SarahW at June 10, 2013 04:39 AM (LYwCh)
This is an honest to God true story.
About a year ago, I was texting back and forth with my brother. He is way more right wing than me, sends me links to Free Republic, InfoWars, Pam Gellar, WND, etc. all the time. He has been an alarmist about Obama and his pals for a long time, to the point where I do delete his texts sometimes and I don't read half the crap he sends me. Anyway, we were chatting about food stamps and such, and we mentioned federal disability and how many people were getting on it.
About 30 minutes later, he forwarded to me an email he received at his home email address, which is an AOL address. It was from the federal government, inviting him to apply for disability benefits. He is 62 years old, never been disabled or had a serious illness or injury, and has been stably employed for many years.
At the time, we both laughed and said what a weird coincidence it was.
Now, I am not so sure. Perhaps this really is how Obama won reelection. The government is mining everything and using it like a business to get people hooked on government benefits.
Posted by: rockmom at June 10, 2013 04:39 AM (Ea7Up)
Posted by: panzernashorn at June 10, 2013 04:40 AM (MhA4j)
First on the Willard band wagon too, Ayotte is a puss hole.
Posted by: Hunker down and L.I.B. at June 10, 2013 04:40 AM (Cs2tJ)
Even if it isn't a crime, even if some lawyer can construe some legal justification, I don't want us to be doing this.
I don't care if that means we "fall behind" China and Russia.
I don't want to live in a quasi-police state where I'm treated like a criminal.
If we have forfeit sections of the bill of rights to win, then I'm not sure I want us to "win".
Posted by: Ben at June 10, 2013 04:42 AM (C2Y4l)
Posted by: HoboJerky, Hash Hunter at June 10, 2013 04:43 AM (X4HxX)
Posted by: President For Life Obama at June 10, 2013 04:43 AM (+GpbP)
That is a pretty standard spam item. I'd look it over for the phishing aspects but my initial reaction would be to doubt it was legit.
Posted by: epobirs at June 10, 2013 04:43 AM (kcfmt)
Posted by: FenelonSpoke at June 10, 2013 04:43 AM (iwHSQ)
Posted by: Ben at June 10, 2013 08:38 AM (C2Y4l)
The tyranny gap must be closed!
Posted by: Temper Tantrum at June 10, 2013 04:44 AM (AWmfW)
Gabe gives a gratuitous caution about making a hero out of "this guy" - ( notice I don't use his name - avoiding a keyword ). I don't need the caution - have you seen a picture of this twerp? His value is just keeping the story out there.
Posted by: tubal at June 10, 2013 04:44 AM (BoE3Z)
Posted by: T. at June 10, 2013 04:45 AM (M+r/x)
We need to accept Oblablas declaration of the end of hostilities and use it to shut down as much Government as possible, outside of the pointy tip of the spear and its support.
We are not prosecuting the war properly anyway.
Posted by: typo dynamofo at June 10, 2013 04:46 AM (WVMUQ)
I'm just glad the UK is still printing newspapers. Otherwise, we wouldn't know what the hell is going on with our own government.
Posted by: JackStraw at June 10, 2013 08:33 AM (g1DWB)
A happy unintended consequence of Teh SCOAMT's attempts at wrecking the special relationship.
Posted by: steveegg at June 10, 2013 04:46 AM (o44nj)
These are companies who have marched goose-step with the Obama administration and supported it politically. So you'll forgive me if I find their denials unauthentic and disingenuous. They realize their entire business and credibility is on the line and will lie through their teeth to save it.
I read a few months ago that Facebook provided technical assistance to the Obama campaign so factually they probably don't know about PRISM. They didn't need to be nudged, they provided the data voluntarily.
Posted by: Decaf at June 10, 2013 04:47 AM (AAOE/)
Posted by: JackStraw at June 10, 2013 08:33 AM (g1DWB)
MFM: Are you saying there is more important news than the Kardashians?
Posted by: TheQuietMan at June 10, 2013 04:47 AM (1Jaio)
Everyone should be outraged about it, not just Ron Paul supporters.
And good morning to the rest of y'all.
Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at June 10, 2013 04:47 AM (UTq/I)
Posted by: zsasz at June 10, 2013 04:47 AM (MMC8r)
Posted by: Skandia Recluse at June 10, 2013 04:48 AM (VVh+D)
Mrs. EC is obviously giving you too much free time.
Posted by: Sean Bannion at June 10, 2013 04:48 AM (JpC1K)
Posted by: Gabriel Malor at June 10, 2013 04:48 AM (kFAPP)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at June 10, 2013 04:48 AM (9Bj8R)
Posted by: phoenixgirl@phxazgrl..back home at June 10, 2013 04:49 AM (8JJ6O)
And it will all depend on the judge who decides to block him from defending himself based on the hero theory. He once swore and oath to "defend the Constitution from all enemies, foreign and domestic". The people in power, and the POS judge they will find, will try to keep that oath out of the ears of the jury.
Posted by: Smarty at June 10, 2013 04:50 AM (llVl9)
I read a few months ago that Facebook provided technical assistance to the Obama campaign so factually they probably don't know about PRISM. They didn't need to be nudged, they provided the data voluntarily.
Posted by: Decaf at June 10, 2013 08:47 AM (AAOE/)
I would believe that these lefty tech companies knew exactly what they were doing. I wouldn't trust that turd Suckerberg as far as I could throw him.
Posted by: TheQuietMan at June 10, 2013 04:50 AM (1Jaio)
Posted by: zsasz at June 10, 2013 04:50 AM (MMC8r)
Posted by: Sean Bannion at June 10, 2013 08:48 AM (JpC1K)
Hey, I'm a hard working man and I need my moron time when I get home.
Posted by: EC at June 10, 2013 04:50 AM (GQ8sn)
>>>Win what, Ben? I do believe you couldn't find a war in which our executive branch has not violated the Bill of Rights. Those were exceptions in dire times. Now they are no longer exceptions.
Yeah, and isn't it convenient that we're at war with no declared enemy. Gee whiz, we're going to be in a perpetual state of warfare with an unidentified enemy for the rest of our lives. We can't win this war since there is no one to declare victory over. It'll just keep going on and every President from here on out will have the powers of a war time executive. Awesome, ain't it?
So we'll always be at war with East Asia.
Posted by: Ben at June 10, 2013 04:50 AM (C2Y4l)
Posted by: T. at June 10, 2013 04:50 AM (M+r/x)
Posted by: HoboJerky, Hash Hunter at June 10, 2013 04:50 AM (X4HxX)
You also cannot obey illegal orders. So what to do?
Posted by: typo dynamofo at June 10, 2013 04:51 AM (WVMUQ)
Did anyone *not* have a light go on over their head about Petraeus when this PRISM stuff got out?
As Mark Steyn noted, they're doing a shitty job of finding actual terrorists with all this data. But apparently they're quite adept at finding things to help prop up Obama.
Posted by: Ian S. at June 10, 2013 04:51 AM (OevbG)
Posted by: typo dynamofo at June 10, 2013 04:52 AM (WVMUQ)
Posted by: RWC at June 10, 2013 04:52 AM (fWAjv)
Posted by: maddogg at June 10, 2013 04:52 AM (OlN4e)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at June 10, 2013 08:48 AM (9Bj8R)
How else to bring down a full blown tyranny?
Posted by: Temper Tantrum at June 10, 2013 04:52 AM (AWmfW)
Also, I don't particularly care who Snowden is or his reasons. It's the content of his leaks that interest me.
Mark Felt ratted on the Nixon admin because he felt he was being passed over. He did it for selfish reasons. That doesn't/shouldn't taint the content of the information he leaked.
Posted by: Ben at June 10, 2013 04:53 AM (C2Y4l)
Ever notice how it's only people under the age of 40 doing this shit?
The Specialest Snowflake Generation.
This is what happens when you tell toddlers everything they do is awesome...
Posted by: Sean Bannion[/i][/b][/s][/u] at June 10, 2013 04:53 AM (JpC1K)
Posted by: Weew at June 10, 2013 04:53 AM (oFvKj)
You can not have people with Security Clearances taking it upon themselves to reveal Secret information.
Posted by: Nevergiveup
Whistle-blower laws would argue that there is a greater service in disclosure, depending on the circumstances.
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at June 10, 2013 04:53 AM (kdS6q)
The real question is has Prism given the administration enough information on the Republican congressmen in the House to blackmail amnesty by them also?
We live in a fledgling Marxist state - enjoy your last gasps of the air of freedom while you can.
Posted by: [/i] An Observation at June 10, 2013 04:54 AM (ylhEn)
The "uneasy" part on the relationship is the heavy thumb of the PLA on the city. The native HKers aren't going to stick their necks out for him. Spectacularly poor choice of a spooker.
Posted by: Jean at June 10, 2013 08:38 AM (CMlD4)
The only poor choice is Snowden thinking he'll be allowed to leave the "hospitality" of the ChiComs. Red China, and perhaps Russia, offer the only places he can't be touched by Team SCOAMT.
Odds are it will take the ChiComs about 8 months to pick his brain clean, at which point his next of kin will be billed for one bullet.
Posted by: steveegg at June 10, 2013 04:54 AM (o44nj)
Posted by: MTF at June 10, 2013 04:55 AM (+GpbP)
We're at war with an abstract concept. Those have always worked out so well, as seen in the War on Poverty.
I always found that one baffling. Was this why the ghettos looked bombed out?
Posted by: epobirs at June 10, 2013 04:55 AM (kcfmt)
Posted by: Bawney Fwank at June 10, 2013 04:55 AM (qrHMp)
Posted by: Snarky the Bear at June 10, 2013 04:56 AM (/b8+5)
Posted by: Vic at June 10, 2013 04:56 AM (lZvxr)
This is what happens when you tell toddlers everything they do is awesome...
So we can put you down for "reconsidering the Fourth Amendment" then?
Posted by: Ian S. at June 10, 2013 04:56 AM (OevbG)
Posted by: Ian S. at June 10, 2013 08:51 AM (OevbG)
Yes, Russia hand delivers two jihadis, but FBI fails.
Then FBI finds and leaks Gen Betrayus organ activities.
Posted by: Temper Tantrum at June 10, 2013 04:56 AM (AWmfW)
Posted by: EC at June 10, 2013 08:46 AM (GQ8sn)
Don't feel bad. Mike Hammer made BOTH lists.
Posted by: Tami[/i][/b][/u][/s] at June 10, 2013 04:57 AM (X6akg)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at June 10, 2013 04:57 AM (9Bj8R)
Posted by: Clozapine at June 10, 2013 04:57 AM (Vl8+i)
Posted by: HoboJerky, Hash Hunter at June 10, 2013 04:57 AM (X4HxX)
Posted by: Vic at June 10, 2013 08:56 AM (lZvxr)
You must have been a hoot on the playground.
Posted by: Tami[/i][/b][/u][/s] at June 10, 2013 04:58 AM (X6akg)
What does the hoard think?
Posted by: Vic at June 10, 2013 04:58 AM (lZvxr)
Posted by: HoboJerky, Hash Hunter at June 10, 2013 04:59 AM (X4HxX)
Posted by: Tami at June 10, 2013 08:58 AM (X6akg)
Only when I cornered the little girls and the "merry-go-round" mohahahahahaha.
Posted by: Vic at June 10, 2013 05:00 AM (lZvxr)
Posted by: HoboJerky, Hash Hunter at June 10, 2013 05:00 AM (X4HxX)
Posted by: zsasz at June 10, 2013 05:00 AM (MMC8r)
Posted by: Snarky the Bear at June 10, 2013 05:00 AM (/b8+5)
Posted by: Ian S. at June 10, 2013 05:01 AM (OevbG)
As Mark Steyn noted, they're doing a shitty job of finding actual terrorists with all this data. But apparently they're quite adept at finding things to help prop up Obama.
Posted by: Ian S. at June 10, 2013 08:51 AM (OevbG)
As intended all along, yes even going back to 2007 (though I bet Bush was thinking he would be helping Clinton with the first grease of the skids to have a Rat succeed him).
Posted by: steveegg at June 10, 2013 05:01 AM (o44nj)
Posted by: HoboJerky, Hash Hunter at June 10, 2013 09:00 AM (X4HxX)
If it gets "cloture" it WILL pass just on Democrats alone. We need to look out for that. Once again a vote for cloture is a vote for the bill. They like to hide behind that vote.
Posted by: Vic at June 10, 2013 05:01 AM (lZvxr)
Is our intel gathering pointed inward more than outward?
Are our fences for keeping citizens in and not invaders out?
Sheesh.
Posted by: typo dynamofo at June 10, 2013 05:02 AM (WVMUQ)
No, not at all.
But just like Allen West, if you're going to do the crime - and this was a crime - then be prepared to do the time. Don't run to China like a fucking pussy. At least West had the balls to take responsibility. Snowden? Yeah, not so much.
And...wouldn't a Republican Senator, I'm thinking Cruz and not McCain, have been a better place to dump this than Slate? I mean, his argument is that he and he alone of the purest motive was qualified to pick what was leaked and what was not. Sorry, I don't trust anyone at work under 30 to even sharpen a pencil for me, but I'm going to let this guy make National Security decisions?
Here's my real point...he did not this not for a pure motive, he did this because he's a grandstander convinced in his own superiority - you know, like most liberals are. Sure, exposing this is a good result. But there was a better way to do it, and he didn't pick that way.
He picked the way that was going to get him a book contract and some fame.
Posted by: Sean Bannion[/i][/b][/s][/u] at June 10, 2013 05:02 AM (6T8Ay)
Posted by: Mr. Dave at June 10, 2013 05:02 AM (uQ3AR)
Posted by: Ian S. at June 10, 2013 09:01 AM (OevbG)
Evidently he "changed his mind".
Posted by: Vic at June 10, 2013 05:02 AM (lZvxr)
The Senate is voting on the Amnesty Bill today. Ratfk Rubio says he has the votes. Others say he doesn't unless they add some major border controls that go in place BEFORE the amnesty.
What does the hoard think?
Posted by: Vic at June 10, 2013 08:58 AM (lZvxr)
As Monty would say, we're terminally boned.
Posted by: steveegg at June 10, 2013 05:02 AM (o44nj)
Posted by: panzernashorn at June 10, 2013 05:03 AM (MhA4j)
Posted by: Snarky the Bear at June 10, 2013 05:03 AM (/b8+5)
Good point.
Posted by: rdbrewer at June 10, 2013 05:04 AM (Iyg03)
little time for comments early this morn, but I assume that was roundly booed.
And I doubt any conservative is making an idol out of the guy, but releasing knowledge of a vast criminal electronic spying network on American citizens is a good thing.
Anyway, have a good day people (not you NSA, you fuckity fucks).
Posted by: Guy Mohawk at June 10, 2013 05:04 AM (g5YAm)
You did not think over this post well.
There is a key and clear difference between himself and Manning. Manning released day to day information, which all had to do with the classified nature of the US gov's day to day activities and nothing to do with an abuse of the people's rights.
Are you seriously telling me that you don't see the importance of keeping things like:
"---US AMB to Russia to WAS, DC----"
Met with counterpart today. Wants us to let the RUS mil to do training exercises in Arizona. How long should I lead this idiot on before telling him no"
And that that is no different than:
The US government has the ability to spy on your using every internet search engine, the computer you use and most likely the video game console you own, your phone, and your phone company to spy on you.
Oh, and you know about that conversation you had with Aunt Judy last Sunday? Yea, the gov does too. They can even tell you where Aunt Judy was when you called her.
Posted by: Stone at June 10, 2013 05:04 AM (4sMhD)
Posted by: sneaky little five-eyes at June 10, 2013 05:05 AM (3X3ZR)
What am I missing? How is this guy not a Chinese agent?
How do we know he's really in Hong Kong? If I knew the CIA might come a knock, knock, knocking on my door, I wouldn't make it easy for them by telling them where I was.
Posted by: Sticky Wicket at June 10, 2013 05:05 AM (0IhFx)
Posted by: Vic at June 10, 2013 09:02 AM (lZvxr)
Funny how that happens. But, then again, we don't want to beat this surveillance thing to death.
Posted by: tubal at June 10, 2013 05:05 AM (BoE3Z)
Which is more important, the security clearance or the oath you take to preserve and protect the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic?
When they conflict you have to violate one or the other.
The simple advice to just obey the laws so you won't get in trouble fails at two boundary conditions:
1: When you are falsely accused of a crime.
2: When two laws contradict each other and you can't obey both.
Posted by: [/i] An Observation at June 10, 2013 05:05 AM (ylhEn)
Posted by: panzernashorn at June 10, 2013 05:05 AM (MhA4j)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at June 10, 2013 05:06 AM (9Bj8R)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at June 10, 2013 05:07 AM (9Bj8R)
Posted by: Ian S. at June 10, 2013 08:51 AM (OevbG)
This is, I think, the real story. Yesterday on FNS, General Hayden did a convincing job of stating that the data that's being collected is no different than that which was done after the passage of the Patriot Act and that the only difference between then and now is that there's more Congressional oversight of it. So the problem isn't so much what is available as what is being done with it. Nobody has ever said that the FBI shouldn't be allowed to prepare files on people; but when Slick was in office Rodham and company had a slough of these files, all on Republicans, for a prolonged period of time. I just don't trust pols like Clenis or the JEF to use data in accordance with the terms under which collecting it was justified.
The question of what exactly is Congressional oversight is a valid one. If it means just rubber stamping everything and not being able to draw the line on something where boundaries are being crossed then that's not oversight at all and would then call for the elimination of the program. The thing that bothers me about this is that it could be something that is being used to bring about the dismantling of a program which has caught terrorist plots before when being run by people who had a clear idea of who the "enemy" is, ie not law abiding US citizens. Even then it had a problematic existence in libertarian terms as far as privacy versus security. That's why it should be of primary importance to keep that balance from being tilted to either extreme, particularly under an administration who doesn't seem to care about protecting the country against terrorism.
Posted by: Dr. Captain Hate at June 10, 2013 05:07 AM (NliGE)
--
If it's bad for the country, it will pass the Senate. What's unconscionable to me are the R senators that absolutely could care less there is no strict border security first. Do they actually believe DHS will follow through and actually get this done? If so, they are dumber than humanly possible. But I don't personally believe that. I believe they don't want the border secure. They all just want amnesty. Suicide-style.
Posted by: Lady in Black at June 10, 2013 05:07 AM (ovWeo)
http://tinyurl.com/moxjq5x
http://tinyurl.com/l6a9pst
Posted by: Vic at June 10, 2013 05:08 AM (lZvxr)
^^^THIS.
I'd trust a Republican on the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence - you know, guys who are actually cleared for this shit - before I trust some twenty-something douchebag and Glenn Greenwald.
Posted by: Sean Bannion[/i][/b][/s][/u] at June 10, 2013 05:08 AM (6T8Ay)
Whistleblowing occurs when someone with inside knowledge of criminal wrongdoing brings it to the authorities -- but it doesn't seem like a crime occurred here.
_________________
Seriously? The federal government deliberately violating the 4th Amendment rights of every American with a cell phone, computer, or credit card is not a crime in your view?
Posted by: enraged citizen at June 10, 2013 05:08 AM (/sohm)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at June 10, 2013 09:06 AM (9Bj8R)
In other words, nothing would change.
Posted by: tubal at June 10, 2013 05:09 AM (BoE3Z)
He picked the way that was going to get him a book contract and some fame.
Posted by: Sean Bannion at June 10, 2013 09:02 AM (6T8Ay)
========
THIS!
Posted by: Nighthawk at June 10, 2013 05:10 AM (OtQXp)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at June 10, 2013 09:06 AM (9Bj8R)
We have mayhem already.
The federal government is spying on the citizens of the United States without benefit of warrants. That is illegal and unconstitutional.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at June 10, 2013 05:10 AM (z4m16)
Posted by: Y-not at June 10, 2013 05:10 AM (5H6zj)
But in its current form it will not pass the House. The bad thing is that "something" will pass the House then they will compromise. Compromise always involve Republicans giving ground and getting nothing.
Posted by: Vic at June 10, 2013 05:11 AM (lZvxr)
Given how frequently the Horde has done 180s on previous movement heroes (hi Rubio!) how would someone less politically savvy know what Senator to trust? Several Congressmen already were briefed about this and didn't lift a finger.
Posted by: Ian S. at June 10, 2013 05:11 AM (OevbG)
I'd trust a Republican on the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence - you know, guys who are actually cleared for this shit - before I trust some twenty-something douchebag and Glenn Greenwald.
Posted by: Sean Bannion at June 10, 2013 09:08 AM (6T8Ay)
You would, especially when one of the first conversations after the summer of 2010 likely was, "You saw what happened to Bob Bennett, right? What if we told you we could prevent that from happening to you?"?
Posted by: steveegg at June 10, 2013 05:12 AM (o44nj)
Posted by: Jeffrey Quick at June 10, 2013 05:12 AM (g9neE)
Posted by: Jean at June 10, 2013 05:12 AM (CMlD4)
At least some of "those guys" already knew about PRISM and found nothing wrong with it, allegedly.
Posted by: Ian S. at June 10, 2013 05:12 AM (OevbG)
What better way? Going to his superiors? Going to the justice department?
I don't give a rat's ass about this guy. So he got his 15 minutes of fame. So what?
The important thing is that a massive breach of our Constitutional rights has been exposed.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at June 10, 2013 05:12 AM (z4m16)
Even the Democraps have admitted that the only reason they want amnesty is a bunch of new Democrat voters.
Posted by: Vic at June 10, 2013 05:12 AM (lZvxr)
Watching people talk about PRISM this weekend was like watching a group of children find out Santa isn't real. OF COURSE the NSA saves and analyzes every piece of digital information out there. The internet was set up specifically to do just that.
With the correct PR and spin, most retards will mentally embrace being spied on if it mean's they are "winning". This didn't start this in 2007 folks, it's started when the first email was sent. The NSA is pissed off because now their data stream just got cut significantly, worldwide.
The issue here is, which most of you morons probably already know, is that if you tie this NSA data mining into the IRS and then into 0baamacare, then there's a really big fucking problem. Do you want the NSA and the IRS to openly share information about you with each other?
Posted by: TimmaY at June 10, 2013 05:13 AM (TXgfr)
Posted by: sneaky little five-eyes at June 10, 2013 05:13 AM (3X3ZR)
The guy could be a genuine whistleblower. Or a spy for the Chinese. Or a fake giving Obama the excuse to investigate and purge certain people from the NSA.
I just don't know. I see both sides of the argument, and am at a loss as to make a good judgement.
Posted by: Miss Marple at June 10, 2013 05:14 AM (GoIUi)
Is a free society compatible with mass-scale data mining technologies?
This is in many ways simply a variation of the classic question "who watches the watchers?"
Posted by: filbert. Just filbert. at June 10, 2013 05:14 AM (7vimm)
Bingo.
Good looking AND smart...all in one package.
Typical moronette.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at June 10, 2013 05:14 AM (z4m16)
Once you answer the "what's in it for him" question you know who to pick.
I'm pretty cool with giving Cruz - or Trey Gowdy in the House - a stick to beat the Obama administration.
Posted by: Sean Bannion[/i][/b][/s][/u] at June 10, 2013 05:15 AM (6T8Ay)
Posted by: MSM at June 10, 2013 05:15 AM (fWAjv)
I'd find this unacceptable even then, but yes, the part where they've been useless bumblefucks at finding e.g. the Tsarnaevs doesn't help.
Posted by: Ian S. at June 10, 2013 05:16 AM (OevbG)
Posted by: Empire of Jeff at June 10, 2013 05:17 AM (FQwwk)
Posted by: HoboJerky, Hash Hunter at June 10, 2013 05:17 AM (X4HxX)
Posted by: Dr. DangerGirl, Ph.F.D, B @deadlyestrogen at June 10, 2013 05:17 AM (TLokJ)
Posted by: Sticky Wicket at June 10, 2013 09:05 AM (0IhFx)
He didn't have much choice. He's not a James Bond type spy, obviously he bought a plane ticket and registered at a hotel in his own name because he didn't have the wherewithal to manufacture another identity, get a passport, etc. That shit only happens in the movies and TV, and for people inside the CIA. He knew the authorities would figure out where he was in about 5 minutes, so he might as well tell everyone and hope the sunlight protects him.
Will be interesting to see if any country grants him asylum. For he will surely be prosecuted under the Espionage Act if he returns to the US, and that is a death-penalty statute. Most countries do not extradite to the US in death penalty cases, I believe, and would consider a potential execution reason enough to grant asylum.
Posted by: rockmom at June 10, 2013 05:17 AM (Ea7Up)
Posted by: joncelli at June 10, 2013 05:18 AM (RD7QR)
1: When you are falsely accused of a crime.
2: When two laws contradict each other and you can't obey both.
3: When the law is itself illegal (i.e. unconstitutional).
Posted by: filbert. Just filbert. at June 10, 2013 05:18 AM (7vimm)
Posted by: Mr. Feverhead at June 10, 2013 05:18 AM (SzAZ7)
Posted by: HoboJerky, Hash Hunter at June 10, 2013 05:18 AM (X4HxX)
OK, well then I guess the solution is to have no secrecy laws and all and let people just do whatever the fuck they want. Information wants to be free, amirite? Free Manning!
In case you missed it above, I was saying that we got a good result through the wrong vehicle. If Snowden was half the White Knight he thinks he is, then he'd come back, testify, and take his 10 years in a minimum security Federal prison.
Since he's a sackless fuck that's not going to happen.
Posted by: Sean Bannion[/i][/b][/s][/u] at June 10, 2013 05:19 AM (6T8Ay)
Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Mmmm. Blondies with whipped cream. at June 10, 2013 05:19 AM (VtjlW)
Posted by: TimmaY at June 10, 2013 09:13 AM (TXgfr)
This is the key part; this NSA data mining can't let the IRS abuses quietly go away as if it isn't part and parcel of the same fucking thing. Imo the organized crime family called the Democrat party is petrified that its arm breakers in the IRS are going to be rendered relatively impotent if the outrage of what they've been doing is permitted to develop. They are key to the enforcement of JEFcare along with every future statist fantasy and having them being taken down a major notch has to have the donks shitting bricks.
Posted by: Dr. Captain Hate at June 10, 2013 05:19 AM (NliGE)
Posted by: JackStraw at June 10, 2013 05:19 AM (g1DWB)
We're at war with an abstract concept. Those have always worked out so well, as seen in the War on Poverty.
I always found that one baffling. Was this why the ghettos looked bombed out?
_____________________________
What I find baffling about the "War on Poverty" is why our government, if it truly believes it is at "war" with poverty, insists on importing so much more of it at every possible opportunity. (See, for example, the current push to enact a "comprehensive immigration reform" bill, in which millions of poor Third-World foreigners will be given the right to live in the U.S. and will further be given the right to chain-migrate in millions more of their poor and elderly family members).
Almost seems as if this "war" is rigged against the prospect of ever winning it, doesn't it?
Posted by: enraged citizen at June 10, 2013 05:20 AM (/sohm)
Posted by: Jean at June 10, 2013 05:20 AM (CMlD4)
Exactly. That is what I very clearly said above.
Absofrickinlutely.
.....
/ sarc
Posted by: Sean Bannion[/i][/b][/s][/u] at June 10, 2013 05:21 AM (6T8Ay)
Yes, King Putt did just do that in your mouth, after doing that in your backside.
I know he promised you he wouldn't.
Posted by: DocJ at June 10, 2013 05:21 AM (zrsn3)
Posted by: Miss Marple at June 10, 2013 09:14 AM (GoIUi)
Yeah - being conflicted - I've got it too. You know, like, being a Libertarian and thinking most people are too damned stupid to get out of the rain, let alone being trusted with my little secrets.
On another note - you saw a picture of the whistleblower guy, right? Do you think he needs a makeover? New glasses, a Tommy Bahama shirt, maybe? Maybe his appearance is something we can all rally around, form a nice consensus about.
Posted by: tubal at June 10, 2013 05:22 AM (BoE3Z)
In case you missed it above, I was saying that we got a good result through the wrong vehicle. If Snowden was half the White Knight he thinks he is, then he'd come back, testify, and take his 10 years in a minimum security Federal prison.
Since he's a sackless fuck that's not going to happen.
Posted by: Sean Bannion at June 10, 2013 09:19 AM (6T8Ay)
Why should he sit in prison? He exposed a crime.
Posted by: Temper Tantrum at June 10, 2013 05:22 AM (AWmfW)
Can I have one too?
I can see we're going to go all eleventy today so I'm going to need it.
Posted by: Sean Bannion[/i][/b][/s][/u] at June 10, 2013 05:22 AM (6T8Ay)
Posted by: HoboJerky, Hash Hunter at June 10, 2013 05:22 AM (X4HxX)
Posted by: blaster[/i][/b][/s] at June 10, 2013 05:22 AM (W6bkf)
http://tinyurl.com/kn8nnfg
In the face of government spying, “Oh, well” is not the correct response.
Posted by: Leo Sayer at June 10, 2013 05:23 AM (aDwsi)
Posted by: HoboJerky, Hash Hunter at June 10, 2013 05:23 AM (X4HxX)
That's crazy talk. I'm outta here.
Posted by: andycanuck at June 10, 2013 05:23 AM (9+vDU)
Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Mmmm. Blondies with whipped cream. at June 10, 2013 05:23 AM (VtjlW)
Posted by: enraged citizen at June 10, 2013 09:20 AM (/sohm)
Write a book.
Posted by: G.Orwell at June 10, 2013 05:24 AM (AWmfW)
So I was thinking.
Remember DHS saying that veterans and patriots and Cosntitutional types were likely to be terrorists? And this NSA stuff is directed at terrorists, and/but it is collecting all this info on Americans?
Posted by: blaster at June 10, 2013 09:22 AM (W6bkf)
Ring-a-fucking-ding-ding.
Posted by: steveegg at June 10, 2013 05:25 AM (o44nj)
What was the better way? Tell John McCain? Don't make me laugh.
Legally the correct way to Blow the Whistle is to tell federal law enforcement about criminal actions. If he had done that he would have joined Nakoula in the gulag of silence and you would have never heard about anything.
You say he betrayed the USA? No he didn't - he gave up state secrets of the USSA. The country you love no longer exists, and he gave you the proof of that.
Posted by: [/i] An Observation at June 10, 2013 05:25 AM (ylhEn)
Posted by: Y-not at June 10, 2013 05:25 AM (5H6zj)
Posted by: Sean Bannion at June 10, 2013 09:19 AM (6T8Ay)
The method of exposure is a triviality. Did he break some laws? Absolutely. Do I care? Absolutely not.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at June 10, 2013 05:26 AM (z4m16)
Posted by: [/i][/b]akula_51 at June 10, 2013 05:26 AM (Vgn84)
Well, punishment is generally what tends to happen when you break the law, regardless of how pure your motives are. (see West, Allen LTC,USA (Ret.))
Now, if you're saying that we should ex post facto change the laws people break if we really, really like what they did - well then no, he should not sit in prison.
Last I checked though, we can't do that.
....
Oh, what the fuck! Let's just have a party. He's innocent. Free Snowden!
Posted by: Sean Bannion[/i][/b][/s][/u] at June 10, 2013 05:26 AM (6T8Ay)
Posted by: zsasz at June 10, 2013 05:26 AM (MMC8r)
Posted by: Jean at June 10, 2013 05:26 AM (CMlD4)
Posted by: Empire of Jeff at June 10, 2013 05:27 AM (FQwwk)
Posted by: JackStraw at June 10, 2013 05:27 AM (g1DWB)
Well, at least you're consistent - and this is a virtue.
We should be very selecting in laws we enforce - or not enforce.
You know, like Eric Holder.
Posted by: Sean Bannion[/i][/b][/s][/u] at June 10, 2013 05:27 AM (6T8Ay)
Really? Do they have the ability to make buttons that would allow one to italicize, underline or bold selected ranges of text? How about the ability to insert a hyperlink into say, a comment box? Do you know any of these Masters of the Universe and could you introduce us?
Posted by: Empire of Jeff at June 10, 2013 07:19 AM (JDIKC)
Pixy would, but the breed of hamsters required to power that properly have government-mandated webcams installed.
Posted by: steveegg at June 10, 2013 05:27 AM (o44nj)
He didn't have much choice. He's not a James Bond type spy, obviously he bought a plane ticket and registered at a hotel in his own name because he didn't have the wherewithal to manufacture another identity, get a passport, etc. That shit only happens in the movies and TV, and for people inside the CIA. He knew the authorities would figure outwhere he was in about 5 minutes, so he might as well tell everyone and hope the sunlight protects him.
I don't mean to suggest cloak and dagger subterfuge on any such level. A simple lie to buy himself some time, a lie the Guardian agreed to pass on in exchange for the scoop he offered them. It does not make a lot of sense to me that he would spend a total of three weeks camped out in a hotel room in Hong Kong.
Posted by: Sticky Wicket at June 10, 2013 05:27 AM (0IhFx)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at June 10, 2013 05:27 AM (+98Gb)
Posted by: caustic at June 10, 2013 05:29 AM (/b8+5)
Part B makes sure nobody will ever do anything like this in the future; your part B is not consequence free either.
Posted by: [/i] An Observation at June 10, 2013 05:29 AM (ylhEn)
Posted by: J.J. Sefton at June 10, 2013 09:27 AM (+98Gb)
Shit, this reality thing, it's hard.
Posted by: tubal at June 10, 2013 05:29 AM (BoE3Z)
Posted by: dscott at June 10, 2013 05:29 AM (PQhpg)
Yup. It's also where the "people who actually believe this shit" vs. "people who just are along for the POWA!" split shows in the Democrats.
Posted by: Ian S. at June 10, 2013 05:29 AM (OevbG)
If they are, was that excellent product placement for Google, or a warning to them that he knows stuff?
Posted by: Miss Marple at June 10, 2013 05:30 AM (GoIUi)
Posted by: phoenixgirl@phxazgrl..back home at June 10, 2013 05:30 AM (8JJ6O)
That's beck making a joke, right?
Posted by: caustic at June 10, 2013 05:30 AM (/b8+5)
Posted by: phoenixgirl@phxazgrl..back home at June 10, 2013 05:31 AM (8JJ6O)
Posted by: Jean at June 10, 2013 05:31 AM (CMlD4)
No doubt, love, but as long as people are still leaking classified programs while having promiscuous sex with many anonymous partners without protection while at the same time experimenting with mind-expanding drugs in a consequence-free environment, I'll be sound as a pound!
Posted by: Austin Powers IV[/i][/b][/s][/u] at June 10, 2013 05:31 AM (6T8Ay)
Think about that for a moment.
Posted by: EC at June 10, 2013 05:31 AM (GQ8sn)
Posted by: Y-not can't cut and paste at June 10, 2013 05:31 AM (5H6zj)
Posted by: Sean Bannion at June 10, 2013 09:26 AM (6T8Ay)
I'm usually not this combative until my second or third bourbon.
Why do you have difficulty with the idea that what he did was good for the country?
That doesn't mean that he should be exonerated. It means that he broke the law for a greater good.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at June 10, 2013 05:31 AM (z4m16)
The Snowden/NSA issue is a symptom. It is not the problem.
The problem is, precisely, the unlimited power that the federal government has arrogated to itself. This arrogation occurring with (at best) lip-service to the Constitution and (at worst) blatant gainsaying of the Constitution's plain meaning and intent.
The arrogation occurs under Republicans. It occurs under Democrats. (You can argue that the Democrats either do it worse, or do it better, depending on your point of view, but that's a side argument.)
If you look at American history, this arrogation has been occurring since before the ink was even dry on the Constitution.
So, when do we stop beating up each other, arguing about the symptoms and start talking about the problem?
Posted by: filbert. Just filbert. at June 10, 2013 05:32 AM (7vimm)
Posted by: [/i][/b]akula_51 at June 10, 2013 05:33 AM (Vgn84)
Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Mmmm. Blondies with whipped cream. at June 10, 2013 05:33 AM (VtjlW)
Posted by: T. at June 10, 2013 05:33 AM (M+r/x)
Posted by: caustic at June 10, 2013 05:33 AM (/b8+5)
Posted by: [/i][/b]akula_51 at June 10, 2013 05:34 AM (Vgn84)
Why do you have difficulty admitting that I didn't say that when I've already pointed it out 3 times?
That doesn't mean that he should be exonerated. It means that he broke the law for a greater good.
WHICH IS MY FUCKING POINT AND HAS BEEN SINCE I STARTED THIS. To recap: That doesn't mean that he should be exonerated.
THAT
Posted by: Austin Powers IV[/i][/b][/s][/u] at June 10, 2013 05:34 AM (6T8Ay)
We should be very selecting in laws we enforce - or not enforce.
You know, like Eric Holder.
Posted by: Sean Bannion at June 10, 2013 09:27 AM (6T8Ay)
So you think he should expose himself to Holder, you're fucking idiot.
Posted by: Temper Tantrum at June 10, 2013 05:35 AM (AWmfW)
Posted by: Nevergiveup at June 10, 2013 05:35 AM (9Bj8R)
Posted by: franksalterego at June 10, 2013 05:36 AM (omVzF)
Posted by: Sean Bannion at June 10, 2013 09:27 AM (6T8Ay)
I said that I don't care that he broke the law. I did not say that he should be let off without punishment. My point is that he is not the story. He is unimportant.
You seem more interested in the security breach than in the reality of a massive violation of our rights as Americans.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at June 10, 2013 05:36 AM (z4m16)
I didn't know Holder was gay!?!
Posted by: filbert. Just filbert. at June 10, 2013 05:36 AM (7vimm)
Posted by: zsasz at June 10, 2013 05:36 AM (MMC8r)
When Holder wrote the brief to the FISA Court for the NSA to spy on us all, what was the probable cause and the supposed charges leveled against all of us?
Posted by: dscott at June 10, 2013 09:29 AM (PQhpg)
Seeing it doesn't matter now if I tell you, I will. The probable cause was the rise of the Tea Party, and the charge is high treason.
Posted by: Eric Holder at June 10, 2013 05:37 AM (o44nj)
78
Oh, and it looks like Snowden was a Ron Paul supporter. Naturally.
The report I read stated that he was an Obama supporter. Can't be both.
Posted by: Decaf at June 10, 2013 07:29 AM (AAOE/)
Posted by: Pyrocles at June 10, 2013 05:37 AM (cv5Iw)
Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at June 10, 2013 05:38 AM (NvZnr)
Posted by: no good deed at June 10, 2013 05:38 AM (mjR67)
How do you remain outraged that the gov't is spying on you, at the same time you're outraged that someone told you about it?
Posted by: franksalterego at June 10, 2013 09:36 AM (omVzF)
A lot of folks have a "two Americas" conflict going on in their heads right now. As time passes, I think this conflict will be resolved.
Posted by: tubal at June 10, 2013 05:38 AM (BoE3Z)
Posted by: Y-not can't cut and paste at June 10, 2013 09:31 AM (5H6zj)
If you want the overreach stopped , you want more Snowdens to come out.
They wont if they're fried.
Posted by: Temper Tantrum at June 10, 2013 05:38 AM (AWmfW)
You REALLY have a reading comprehension problem. But if you keep pointing you things you THINK I said instead of what I actually said, I foresee that problem continuing.
Please point to the post where I said he should expose himself to Eric Holder. By all means. Please do.
When you find that non-existent post, please then ignore the sum total of ALL the other posts where I said we got a good result through a flawed method, by a greatly flawed human being.
Posted by: Sean Bannion[/i][/b][/s][/u] at June 10, 2013 05:39 AM (6T8Ay)
Posted by: Sock Puppet at June 10, 2013 05:39 AM (gwr6i)
Posted by: Y-not can't cut and paste at June 10, 2013 05:39 AM (5H6zj)
Sure it can. I'm sure you've noticed that the human capacity for cognitive dissonance is nearly infinite.
Posted by: filbert. Just filbert. at June 10, 2013 05:39 AM (7vimm)
Posted by: zsasz at June 10, 2013 05:39 AM (MMC8r)
Posted by: HoboJerky, Hash Hunter at June 10, 2013 09:22 AM (X4HxX)
-
I think the 4th amendment is absolute.
Posted by: Vashta Nerada at June 10, 2013 05:39 AM (naHyH)
Posted by: Empire of Jeff at June 10, 2013 05:39 AM (FQwwk)
Posted by: caustic at June 10, 2013 09:29 AM (/b8+5)[/}
He's an IT guy. We rule the world.
Posted by: trainer says HI to the NSA at June 10, 2013 05:39 AM (K5X44)
In a perfect world he would have been able to go through channels to expose what he saw as illegal behavior.
Do you believe that "channels" would have done anything other than sweep it under the rug?
People tend not to violate oaths when the work they are doing is not in violation of that oath.
Does spying on every American without benefit of a warrant support the "protect and defend the Constitution of The United States" part of the oath?
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at June 10, 2013 05:40 AM (z4m16)
I'm guessing this is where the Libertarian/FiCon split shows in the party.
Posted by: HoboJerky, Hash Hunter at June 10, 2013 09:23 AM (X4HxX)
Actually, it's the Libertarian/SecCon (Security Conservative) split.
Posted by: steveegg at June 10, 2013 05:40 AM (o44nj)
Posted by: Mr. Feverhead at June 10, 2013 05:40 AM (SzAZ7)
Ah, the key word in that sentence is the word "seem"
C'mon CBD, when did you turn into Carnac the Magnificent?
What am I thinking right now?
Posted by: Sean Bannion[/i][/b][/s][/u] at June 10, 2013 05:41 AM (6T8Ay)
Posted by: Largely Irrelevant Assault Undocumented Foreigner Anachronda at June 10, 2013 05:41 AM (U82Km)
Posted by: JackStraw at June 10, 2013 05:42 AM (g1DWB)
Posted by: Sean Bannion at June 10, 2013 08:53 AM (JpC1K)
I told my wife last night, I don't expect anyone under 30 to get a security clearance for a long long time.
I'm a bit of two minds about this thing.
On the one hand, clearly something was amiss in NSA land, the public needed to know. And contrary to Gabe's assertion, going to the media is actually part of the long history of "whistleblowing" especially when you believe those in the oversight role are being willfully ignorant.
Having said that, the idea that there were 0 people he could trust in congress seems wrong. Horrifically wrong. And (sometimes Kantian that I am) I hold promises to a high ideal. Whether he likes it or not, he's a low level employee, and low level employees are not decision makers. So "what's right" isn't his decision to make.
One of his big reveals was that we set some dude up for blackmail.
Last I checked this is intelligence 101 (and Ace says we can't do humanint. Sheesh.)
Whether that was right, wrong, or justified is not really his call (in part because he doesn't have all the information. If it turned out the guy we set up also murdered puppies in his spare time, I think people would care less that he set him up.)
And note: This isn't the "I was just following orders case" he was free to resign at any time. And as I stressed, one wonders how hard he worked to find a member of congress that could have helped him (if you turn over classified info to someone in congress non on the appropriate committee, I'm less likely to be concerned, because...well that's democracy.)
This brings us to a second point though. Congress is far to compartmentalized on these things. This gives far to many people "plausible deniability." Do you know how many congresscritters I've seen on the news say "I didn't know about this because I wasn't on X committee, but if I had, I would have stopped it."
BULLSHIT. You'd have panicked too, and now you're just retconning for votes. We need to make sure that all of congress is accountable for these type of actions. If that means briefings take longer so be it.
Posted by: tsrblke at June 10, 2013 05:43 AM (GaqMa)
Posted by: Vic at June 10, 2013 06:56 AM (lZvxr)
*********************
Inevitable once she allowed herself to be bookended by McCain/Graham. Disappointment big time -- Rubio, my Senator, -- big lesson learned.
Posted by: gracepmc at June 10, 2013 05:43 AM (rznx3)
Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Mmmm. Blondies with whipped cream. at June 10, 2013 05:43 AM (VtjlW)
Posted by: Sean Bannion at June 10, 2013 09:39 AM (6T8Ay)
Do you need my address?
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at June 10, 2013 05:44 AM (z4m16)
Close.
Bourbon.
Boobs are a very close second though. Very close.
Posted by: Sean Bannion[/i][/b][/s][/u] at June 10, 2013 05:44 AM (6T8Ay)
Posted by: Mr. Feverhead at June 10, 2013 05:44 AM (SzAZ7)
Posted by: [/i][/b]akula_51 at June 10, 2013 05:44 AM (Vgn84)
Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at June 10, 2013 05:44 AM (NvZnr)
Posted by: Y-not can't cut and paste at June 10, 2013 05:44 AM (5H6zj)
Wait, what dipshit Snowden did was for the betterment of a country?
China? Russia? Sure as shit not the U S of A.
Posted by: akula_51 at June 10, 2013 09:34 AM (Vgn84)
You misspelled "ObamiNation", though that only covers the initial leak. His continued presence in Red China benefits them at the expense of both ObamiNation and the US.
Posted by: steveegg at June 10, 2013 05:45 AM (o44nj)
No, but Patti Anne Browne would work.
Those selfies are for you, my Queen. I could not rob you of this joy.
Posted by: Sean Bannion[/i][/b][/s][/u] at June 10, 2013 05:45 AM (6T8Ay)
Posted by: Empire of Jeff at June 10, 2013 05:45 AM (FQwwk)
Hey, I don't know if she told you but Vendette actually picked up the Special Order form for you for the Virginia ABC stores.
All they get is Pappy's 20-Year old though. I'll pick it up for you if you order.
Posted by: Sean Bannion[/i][/b][/s][/u] at June 10, 2013 05:47 AM (6T8Ay)
Posted by: zsasz at June 10, 2013 05:47 AM (MMC8r)
Given how frequently the Horde has done 180s on previous movement heroes (hi Rubio!)
The Horde did not do 180 on Rubio, he did 180 on his positions.
Posted by: Decaf at June 10, 2013 05:47 AM (AAOE/)
Posted by: Empire of Jeff at June 10, 2013 09:45 AM (FQwwk)
I know this is sarc, but it brings around the giant point again. Politicians have zero principles.
Wyden claims to be all about "freedom" and "privacy" but wants government run healthcare. Basically he sells whatever people are buying at any given moment, even it it's a combination of matter and anti-matter only separated by a thin layer of glass.
Posted by: tsrblke at June 10, 2013 05:48 AM (GaqMa)
Of course the law also requires imprisonment for all the conspirators in Prism - the RICO statutes apply - there are trillions of felony counts of warrant-less wiretapping involved, the people who financed this in the Congress are also co-conspirators. There are also counts against the President and other administration authorities for official oppression under color of authority and violation of oath of office. The crimes involved here are so vast that basically anyone who knew anything about this belongs in prison.
Do you think that is going to happen?
Well no, but Snowden belongs in prison for 10 years to make sure he never does anything like this in the future.
As Rand said " If a ray of light falls into a pigsty, it is the ray that shows us the muck and it is the ray that is offensive"
Posted by: [/i] An Observation at June 10, 2013 05:48 AM (ylhEn)
Posted by: Mr. Feverhead at June 10, 2013 05:49 AM (SzAZ7)
Posted by: Empire of Jeff at June 10, 2013 09:17 AM (FQwwk)
You don't have to analyze it all, you just have to have access to it for when you need to blackmail someone.
Posted by: Decaf at June 10, 2013 05:49 AM (AAOE/)
Posted by: Sean Bannion at June 10, 2013 09:41 AM (6T8Ay)
Aside from imagining this? http://tinyurl.com/l9dpzxa
"Seem" is an appropriate word to describe my impression of your statements on this thread.
Sean Bannion, I think that your focus on the behavior of the whistleblower and his illegal actions (not debatable -- he broke the law) is misplaced. While he did violate his oath, he exposed a massive, fundamental and perhaps existential attack on our rights as citizens of this country.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at June 10, 2013 05:50 AM (z4m16)
Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at June 10, 2013 05:50 AM (NvZnr)
Posted by: [/i][/b]akula_51 at June 10, 2013 05:51 AM (Vgn84)
The quotes I read put a different light on that: "I understand that I will be made to suffer for my actions"..."Snowden is well aware that the United States government will almost certainly arrest and prosecute him"..."The only time he became emotional during the many hours of interviews was when he pondered the impact his choices would have on his family"..."All my options are bad"
Posted by: pst314 at June 10, 2013 05:52 AM (T4dRn)
So, I am going to go clean the house and ponder the entire situation. Maybe I will have a blinding flash of inspiration.
Or not.
Have a great morning, everyone! I will catch up with you this afternoon.
Posted by: Miss Marple at June 10, 2013 05:52 AM (GoIUi)
Posted by: Mr. Feverhead at June 10, 2013 05:52 AM (SzAZ7)
Posted by: Mr. Feverhead at June 10, 2013 09:49 AM (SzAZ7)
Yeah, there's a certain part of me that says "running is what makes me concerned."
If you really are breaking a law for the greater good, shouldn't you follow the example of the greats and do your jail time for it (making your cause even more visible.)
If it was a good great enough, you could probably net a jury nullification at trial too.
Posted by: tsrblke at June 10, 2013 05:52 AM (GaqMa)
Posted by: Sean Bannion at June 10, 2013 09:47 AM (6T8Ay)
Tempting...very tempting. And thank you!
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at June 10, 2013 05:53 AM (z4m16)
I'm staggered that we're all for the "rule of law" until we like the result of a an actual law being broken. Then we're all Foghorn Leghorn like, "Whoa! Now hold on 'dere boy!"
I'm fine if Snowden gets 3 hours, 12 minutes, and 7 seconds in prison - and then we change the law. The point is, he broke the law, and a penalty is attached to doing so. Period. Anything less, and we're not a nation of laws.
Of course we stopped being a nation of laws on January 20, 2009. But I digress....
But follow that "let's ignore the law if we like the result" logic train all the way to the end and then tell me what you get.
Posted by: Sean Bannion[/i][/b][/s][/u] at June 10, 2013 05:53 AM (6T8Ay)
Posted by: HoboJerky
----------------------
There are a couple of issues, no?
If I believed that the collection of data resulted only in the apprehension of those who were engaged in activities that are manifestly a physical threat to the U.S. or U.S. citizens, and I believed that the data was absolutely secure, then I might be in favor of it.
The above assumes a lot...., a hell of a lot. Ironically, the fact that a kid (sorry, that's what he is) was able to compromise the system (much as Manning did) is indicative of the fact that my criteria can not be met.
The IRS is certainly a case in point. A frightening case in point. There will always be those who, driven by a strong personal philosophy, will place that philosophy above the practical well-being of The Republic, or rationalize that philosophy as being critical to the well-being of the Republic, or possibly just themselves. Consider Benedict Arnold.
Does anyone here believe that Hillary/Craig Livingston 'accidentally' brought about Filegate?
Personally, I can not bring myself to admire Snowden. He has done the right thing, but in the wrong manner.
Posted by: Mike Hammer at June 10, 2013 05:55 AM (aDwsi)
Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at June 10, 2013 05:55 AM (NvZnr)
Posted by: T. at June 10, 2013 05:56 AM (fBJt1)
but it doesn't seem like a crime occurred here.
------------------
According to who? A secret judge, in a secret court hearing, per a secret order? A prior decision "interpreted" to allow it? I don't recall receiving a Notice of Hearing in the mail advising me of when I could show up and contest this before it was implemented. Did you?
/"Then I will make it legal.”
Posted by: Saltydonnie at June 10, 2013 05:59 AM (i6shs)
Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at June 10, 2013 05:59 AM (OCBPC)
This is true. VERY true.
But in this case it was also illegal. I say, yet again, we got the right result through the wrong vehicle.
He was morally correct, but that doesn't mean he escapes punishment.
For an expert opinion on that state of affairs, just ask Jesus Christ.
Posted by: Sean Bannion[/i][/b][/s][/u] at June 10, 2013 05:59 AM (6T8Ay)
----------------------------
According to who? A secret judge, in a secret court hearing, per a secret order? I don't recall receiving a notice of hearing in the mail. Did you?
/”Then I will make it legal.”
Posted by: Saltydonnie at June 10, 2013 05:59 AM (i6shs)
Posted by: MtTB at June 10, 2013 06:00 AM (8E9QA)
Because, you know, people like Darrell Issa have demonstrated how worthwhile it is for politicians to blow the lids off of major scandals.
Posted by: Michael at June 10, 2013 06:00 AM (Y/HG5)
Revealing abuses of the Constitution is a MORALLY CORRECT act.
Claptrap.
How and where matter. The question here is, did he take the proper steps to notify people in power to change it (like Cruz) first, or did he go to the media too soon (and compromise the perfectly legitimate parts of the program?)
The action itself is not isolated, if he had bought an ad in a Chinese newspaper, he would have accomplished the same "revealing abuses" action, by completely illicit means.< (NvZnr)[ AM 09:55 2013 10, June at Lemelisk Bevel by:>
Posted by: tsrblke at June 10, 2013 06:00 AM (GaqMa)
Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at June 10, 2013 06:01 AM (OCBPC)
Posted by: [/i][/b]akula_51 at June 10, 2013 06:02 AM (Vgn84)
Last time I checked, the British handed Hong Kong back over to the Chicoms.
Posted by: Snerk at June 10, 2013 06:05 AM (FvyJS)
And as Nuremberg showed, we expect humans to refuse to follow unjust laws.
Nuremberg is a bad example though.
We expect people to not follow unjust orders/laws, it does not necessarily follow that we expect them to unilaterally undo those laws.
Posted by: tsrblke at June 10, 2013 06:10 AM (GaqMa)
1. Violate my security clearance.
2. Violate my oath to preserve and protect the Constitution.
He had to do one or the other. It was not his actions which placed him in this dilemma - which is a point everyone is missing; it was criminal actions by others that thrust the choice onto him. Everyone else who knew about this had decided to take door number two. They deserve huge amounts of contempt and prison sentences for doing so.
Is it a violation of security clearance to report criminal actions when you have every reason to believe that everyone above you in the chain of command is corrupt?
Posted by: [/i] An Observation at June 10, 2013 06:12 AM (ylhEn)
Posted by: Mr. Feverhead at June 10, 2013 06:15 AM (SzAZ7)
Posted by: CTD at June 10, 2013 06:20 AM (CVBNI)
This is not an "End justifies means" situation - it is a resolution of a legal dilemma problem that he faced.
Posted by: [/i] An Observation at June 10, 2013 06:21 AM (ylhEn)
Anyway, maybe this guy's salary isn't a big deal in the story, but if he and/or Greenwald are lying about that... I think people are going to regret making him out to be a hero. I would bet big money that the more we find out about him, it will turn out he is a major league jackass scumbag. 2:1 odds that he lied on his resume to get the Booz Allen job. Even though it is a relatively junior or mid-level employee, that is still a pretty good position as a 29-year old, and much higher than would be expected to qualify for without a college degree.
Posted by: Matt93 at June 10, 2013 06:22 AM (ljiM/)
Posted by: CTD at June 10, 2013 06:23 AM (CVBNI)
Posted by: [/i][/b]akula_51 at June 10, 2013 06:24 AM (Vgn84)
Posted by: sneaky little five-eyes at June 10, 2013 06:26 AM (3X3ZR)
Posted by: sneaky little five-eyes at June 10, 2013 10:26 AM (3X3ZR)
Right, obviously.
Now about those noncitizens in foreign countries who now know our technical capabilities....
Posted by: tsrblke at June 10, 2013 06:29 AM (GaqMa)
In any case, she said prettymuch what I thought: "doesn't look like a crime occurred" in layman's terms is prettymuch = a legal 'argument.' I am a layman, plus, I play one on teh infrawebz.Posted by: mindful webworker - why? because we like you! at June 10, 2013 06:30 AM (Ynbgq)
Posted by: baldilocks at June 10, 2013 06:30 AM (Su0W2)
Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at June 10, 2013 09:38 AM (NvZnr)
___________________
And as we've seen from the IRS example, he's more than willing to illegally use it.
Posted by: enraged citizen at June 10, 2013 06:49 AM (/sohm)
Not only were crimes committed by NSA in operating Prism - there were literally trillions of felonies committed by them.
Their claim to have only read meta-data is specious; how do you know what is in a TCP-IP packet without reading it?
Our enemies already knew about the NSA's capabilities - did they think that giant building in Utah was an enormous Tivo for recording broadcast TV?
The only people that Prism was being hidden from were the people being spied upon - the innocent people of the United States.
Posted by: [/i] An Observation at June 10, 2013 06:58 AM (ylhEn)
Posted by: Shoey at June 10, 2013 07:08 AM (m6OUa)
Posted by: mindful webworker for truth, justice, and the Spirit of '76 way at June 10, 2013 07:09 AM (3gtAk)
The answer to that question has to do with legal cases: come into court with wire-tap evidence and no warrant and the defendant's lawyer might raise a stink. So the DOJ applied for warrants on data they already had - just to make things look legal.
Posted by: [/i] An Observation at June 10, 2013 07:10 AM (ylhEn)
Perhaps he'll get what John Kerry got for his acts of treason.
Posted by: [/i] An Observation at June 10, 2013 07:15 AM (ylhEn)
Posted by: ss at June 10, 2013 07:39 AM (m2RwJ)
i got a bad feeling this Snowden guy is bit of an attention whore or he might have misperceived something about the prism thing out of his own idealism about internet privacy, etc.
I think we might see this guy as bit of Joe Wilson / Valerie plame person if he did this during the bush years.
Posted by: Tom Sawyer at June 10, 2013 07:59 AM (7zSvv)
Posted by: Bufalobob at June 10, 2013 08:03 AM (WTrU5)
Posted by: Tom Sawyer at June 10, 2013 08:04 AM (7zSvv)
Posted by: Tom Sawyer at June 10, 2013 08:07 AM (7zSvv)
Posted by: secretary of state at June 10, 2013 08:30 AM (e45Km)
Posted by: MostlyRight at June 10, 2013 08:31 AM (w9AQ4)
If even some/a decent numember of the Horde are against this guy and think what the Admin is doing is just peachy...
we've lost.
As clear as day to me, this man is a patriot and what he did was right, as gone over in my last comment. I'm shocked.
Posted by: Stone at June 10, 2013 08:38 AM (4sMhD)
This is not even remotely funny but Maxine Waters spoke with Roland Martin on February 7th 2013 and said these words:
"The President has put in place an organization with the kind of database that no one has ever seen before in life,” said Representative Waters. “That’s going to be very, very powerful,” Waters said. “That database will have information about everything on every individual on ways that it’s never been done before and whoever runs for President on the Democratic ticket has to deal with that. They’re going to go down with that database and the concerns of those people because they can’t get around it. And he’s [President Obama] been very smart. It’s very powerful what he’s leaving in place.”
But nobody was paying attention---the Liberals commenting on a thread a month ago could not believe how we were picking on the President!! Are. you. fucking. kidding. me???
Posted by: DefendUSA at June 10, 2013 08:51 AM (S0aj8)
Consider that a similarly situated unscrupulous person can easily use that same level of access for personal gain, either be selling the personal data of any individual to the highest bidder..... or tampers with your data to implicate you in wrong doing.
Posted by: 2nd Amendment Mother at June 10, 2013 01:34 PM (L4CWX)
Posted by: BarneyOffal at June 10, 2013 02:50 PM (ul4Lc)
No, I don't get out much, actually - why do you ask?
Posted by: Ray Van Dune at June 10, 2013 06:01 PM (qIFL7)
Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top
64 queries taking 0.4672 seconds, 661 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
Posted by: Vic at June 10, 2013 02:53 AM (lZvxr)