Snowdon is a dummy

@revelette,

By the UK government own actions they had proven that they should have a higher priority in reporting on their "sins".

Nothing wrong with taking that position in any way.

0 Replies

@JPB,

Did he repeat what he actually said in the language he said it in? Really, this is all kind of not a big deal in the grand scheme of things. Except now it seems he is accusing whoever reported what he said of lying...might be important to that person.

2 Replies

@revelette,

It's definitely more about the tone of the narrative than the substance of it.

I'm much more concerned about the House Intelligence Committee withholding documents prepared by DOJ for dissemination to all of Congress in advance of a vote on NSA reauthorization not being disseminated than I am about exactly what Glenn Greenwald said in Portuguese at 5:00 am.

1 Reply

The Independent Police Complaints Commission has written to the Guardian that it has "concerns" about schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act, the law used to detain David Miranda.

Quote:

The IPCC are not at this stage investigating any complaint about the stop at Heathrow of David
Miranda. No such complaint has been received. Your readers would, no doubt, not wish us to prejudge
any investigation and it cannot be right for your columnist to pre-judge any outcome.
In fact the IPCC is on record as having concerns about the use of Schedule 7 powers and since 1
July 2011 we have been supervising ALL complaints relating to Schedule 7. This was in direct
response to public concern on misuse of these powers. We are currently supervising 45 Schedule 7
complaints from across England and Wales.
The IPCC is committed to playing a significant role in making sure police use the powers properly and
proportionately. By way of example the IPCC recently threatened the Metropolitan Police with legal
action when they refused to provide details of why individuals were stopped under this power. We will
continue to pursue legal action if we are not provided with the information that we need to do our job
properly.
Deborah Glass
Deputy Chair
Independent Police Complaints Commission

0 Replies

@JPB,

Understood. I agree, if it was supposed to be shared and they didn't, then, that is a problem.

0 Replies

Any terrorists or opponents of democracy must be looking at the debate being conducted in the so-called “free world” and wondering if any of us as sane…and the giggling must be frequent.

Actually, I am sorta wondering about the sanity part myself.

The notions of freedom (of speech and privacy) were never meant to be significant components of a suicide pact. But that seems to be how we are treating them.

There was a time when a man or woman could demand personal privacy…and leave civilization behind. He or she could live in the wilderness in relative obscurity…and have all the personal privacy he or she wanted.

Now we live in a more complex society…and that kind of thing has become less and less available.

In order to live in a complex society and world; and in order to do so, we give up significant elements of personal freedom and privacy.

Obviously many of you think that what is being asked of us (in the area of give-ups to personal freedom and privacy) is simply way too much.

I don’t.

In any case, I respectfully suggest that the kinds of loss of personal freedom and privacy that will occur (by necessity) during the coming decades will make these insignificant give-ups seem like a joke.

You guys are fighting a losing battle against the inevitable…and for suspect reasons.

Just MY take on things.

4 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

being conducted in the so-called “free world”

You've hit the nail on the head and you don't even realize it, Frank.

You are being played for dupes, as you have been throughout your history and you are swallowing it hook, line and sinker.

It's amazing how a few guys can turn the people of the most powerful nation on the planet into frightened little children. And it's all largely a trick from your governments meant to help them continue to rape and pillage from the poor of the planet.

And Frank golfs.

0 Replies

@revelette,

Quote:

[...]I want to make one primary point about that. On Monday, Reuters did the same thing to me as they did last month: namely, they again wildly distorted comments I made in an interview - speaking in Portuguese, at 5:00 am at the Rio airport, waiting for my partner to come home after finally being released - to manufacture the sensationalizing headline that I was "threatening" the UK government with "revenge" journalism. That wasn't remotely what I said or did, as I explained last night in a CNN interview (see Part 2). [ http://www.mediaite.com/tv/glenn-greenwald-and-partner-speak-out-journalism-is-not-a-crime-and-its-not-terrorism/ ]
[...]

Source

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Yes mass spying on the whole population is going to be real helpful in dealing with a few terrorists that can used unbreakable encryption and untraceable means to communicate.

Terrorism is the excused not the reason for building up this many billions of dollars infrastructure to tap all our communications.

With hundreds of thousands of Snowden having access to all this information that they can sell to the highest bidders both foreign and domestic.

2 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Frank Apisa wrote:

In any case, I respectfully suggest that the kinds of loss of personal freedom and privacy that will occur (by necessity) during the coming decades will make these insignificant give-ups seem like a joke.

I've done some researches in the "STASI-archives" and have spoken to quite a few persons, whose names are on the files there.

All of those are glad that they survived the GDR and live now in a democracy.

1 Reply

I remember an amusing story where a government had set up a communication scanning system that would put NSA to shame and when the leader of a fifth column inside the country was ask how she was still able to get information across the border undetected she pull out a tourist post card.

0 Replies

@BillRM,

Quote:

Terrorism is the excused not the reason for building up this many billions of dollars infrastructure to tap all our communications.

Careful, Bill, you have been coming awfully close to admitting way too many truths for this crew.

Next you'll be filling them all in that the terrorist actions against the US are simply blowback for the over half a century of terrorism against Middle East and Far East countries.

0 Replies

@Walter Hinteler,

I am pretty hard of hearing, unless the video is closed captioned I can't really tell what they are saying. (taught myself to read lips, not that good at it)

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Frank Apisa wrote:

Obviously many of you think that what is being asked of us (in the area of give-ups to personal freedom and privacy) is simply way too much.

I don’t.

Frank, how would you even know what's being asked of us? The surveillance apparatus intruding on our privacy operates in secret, supervised by secret courts that practically never say "no", increasingly relieved from requirements to even obtain warrants, shielded by laws that make it illegal for anyone to disclose that they are being surveilled or forced to cooperate in the surveillance of others.

You say our sacrifice in privacy is insignificant. Maybe it is. The point is, you have no factual basis for saying that. You have no way of knowing what you're talking about. Neither do we. And until we do, we have a serious problem.

4 Replies

@Thomas,

We've had secret courts since the 70's.
Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court

Parts of congress sees all what we have been talking about. Perhaps what Frank meant is that on what has been revealed so far, he is ok with it, he is also OK with having a good of it secret..

I am too, to a certain extent, I think more reforms with real teeth need to be implemented.

1 Reply

@revelette,

revelette wrote:

Parts of congress sees all what we have been talking about.

The secrecy of the entire FISA system makes it just as difficult for members of Congress to raise questions. Two senators said last week that they had concerns about the surveillance order ... ... ... but they could not speak up because the whole process is secret.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

BillRM wrote:

Yes mass spying on the whole population is going to be real helpful in dealing with a few terrorists that can used unbreakable encryption and untraceable means to communicate.

Terrorism is the excused not the reason for building up this many billions of dollars infrastructure to tap all our communications.

With hundreds of thousands of Snowden having access to all this information that they can sell to the highest bidders both foreign and domestic.

Right...right. There is a huge conspiracy by the government to take away your freedom.

And Santa is making a list...so you'd better be nice.

0 Replies

@Walter Hinteler,

Walter Hinteler wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:

In any case, I respectfully suggest that the kinds of loss of personal freedom and privacy that will occur (by necessity) during the coming decades will make these insignificant give-ups seem like a joke.

I've done some researches in the "STASI-archives" and have spoken to quite a few persons, whose names are on the files there.

All of those are glad that they survived the GDR and live now in a democracy.

Good for them.

And their personal privacy is going to take the same kinds of hits that all of us are regarding our so-called "personal personal."

The world is changing. There was a time when people demanded the right to have a horse to take them from place to place...and they railed against the incursions of the automobile.

We'll see, Walter. But my money is that "personal privacy" of the kind we seem to want...is gone. And frankly, I think its loss is not going to be the horror story some of your folk want to make it to be.

0 Replies

@Thomas,

Thomas wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:
Obviously many of you think that what is being asked of us (in the area of give-ups to personal freedom and privacy) is simply way too much.

I don’t.

Frank, how would you even know what's being asked of us? The surveillance apparatus intruding on our privacy operates in secret, supervised by secret courts that practically never say "no", increasingly relieved from requirements to even obtain warrants, shielded by laws that make it illegal for anyone to disclose that they are being surveilled or forced to cooperate in the surveillance of others.

You say our sacrifice in privacy is insignificant. Maybe it is. The point is, you have no factual basis for saying that. You have no way of knowing what you're talking about. Neither do we. And until we do, we have a serious problem.

You are quite correct, Thomas...I do not know the exact amount now gone.

But I am saying that whatever it is...it is just about unavoidable...and a hell of a lot more will be gone next year...and even more the year after that.

Personal privacy simply cannot be maintained any more...and it is time for humanity to get use to that.

We will. Future generarations will live comfortably and happily with much less personal privacy...and will wonder what the big fuss was all about.

Or at least, that is my opinion.

In any case, however much privacy is now gone...NO MATTER HOW MUCH IT IS...is okay with me.

You are entitled to feel differently...and I acknowledge that.

1 Reply

@Thomas,

I agree; what any government does in secret is usually because they are themselves breaking the laws. It shouldn't be that difficult to tell everybody how they're performing their surveillance. Terrorists already know that they're under surveillance, and are taking every precaution.

It scares me when governments break the laws of our country in the guise of "protecting us." They're doing no such thing; they're gathering private information that's illegal under our Constitution.

Somebody needs to pay for this illegal activity - including the president and members of congress who allows this to happen.

0 Replies

Snowdon is a dummy

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know