Snowdon is a dummy

@spendius,

spendius wrote:

Quote:
Yo...Spendius. I'm glad you got some of that frustration out.

That's just something to say. You're obviously not educated enough to know that making efforts to please the punter was once a heresy. And when you view the spectacle of the advertising industry today, and the **** it has dropped us in, it is not hard to see why.

Oh, I am fairly well educated.

I'm happy you are venting your frustrations with life and with me with such vigor. I does you good.

Hope your day is going nicely otherwise!

2 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

and I think that is over-reaching on the government's part. There may be tactical reasons for including the "traitor" and "espionage" element right now...but I think at some point that will be dropped.

That's the whole point, Frank, and you are missing it big time. The US government always overreaches, it lies in a profligate fashion, it robs, it murders, it rapes, it tortures, it commits heinous war crimes, it is the leading terrorist group on the planet - are those good enough reasons to not trust it at all. [rhetorical question]

Snowden is one of the few American heroes. The vast majority of American heroes have been manufactured ones pumped out by the awesome US propaganda system.

You certainly don't come anywhere close to the category of hero. You're simply an apologist for criminals.

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

Oh, I am fairly well educated.

Yes, and top of the class in grade 6 English!!! Yeeeee doggies!

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

Earlier, you wrote: “It's becoming clear that the evedropping goes way beyond security issues and is use to gain confidential diplomatic and commercial information from allies. “

I am saying that is NOT becoming clear at all. That is negative wishful thinking on your part. And the fact that I have called that to your attention several times (including here again) seems to be the real reason you are bothered by my repeating it…not concern for how I am coming across

It's getting clearer to me, because I doubt spying on presidents and business people is for security reasons...

But that's just me. You are perfectly entitled to a different perception. You're even entitled to write it down on the fridge door so that you will remember what to write on A2K every morning... If it's not getting clearer to you, in your positive-yet-slightly-repetitive wishful thinking mode, then its' not getting clear to you!

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Olivier5 wrote:

Quote:
Earlier, you wrote: “It's becoming clear that the evedropping goes way beyond security issues and is use to gain confidential diplomatic and commercial information from allies. “

I am saying that is NOT becoming clear at all. That is negative wishful thinking on your part. And the fact that I have called that to your attention several times (including here again) seems to be the real reason you are bothered by my repeating it…not concern for how I am coming across

It's getting clearer to me, because I doubt spying on presidents and business people is for security reasons...

But that's just me. You are perfectly entitled to a different perception. You're even entitled to write it down on the fridge door so that you will remember what to write on A2K every morning... If it's not getting clearer to you, in your positive-yet-slightly-repetitive wishful thinking mode, then its' not getting clear to you!

Okay.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

But he did steal secret documents...and reveal the contents.

once upon a time when America was less barbaric prosecutors had discretion and they were instructed to charge only in those cases where prosecution would serve the public interest. in this case alerting the people that the government is committing illegal acts against is was in the public interests, if justice is to prevail then there can be no charge.

Cohen seems to have issues with the idea that Snowdens acts might result in harm but I dont see the problem. If a cop does something that causes harm he is not charged so long as he was pursuing good and took reasonable care to avoid harm. If you try to save someone on the side of the road and for some reason cause someone else to be harmed you will not be charged because you were acting as a good citizen, this stuff is so firmly held that it is written into law. Contrary to Obama's lies Snowden took the only road that was open to him to bring to light criminality, he was acting in the public's interest, he can not be charged if justice is to prevail.

and dont you dare tell me that he has an obligation to sit in a courtroom and let the state attempt to get an unjust charge signed off on by a jury. No citizen has a duty to capitulate to the state doing its level best to get him in spite of justice, a citizens duty is to do his best to see that justice is always done, to include in his own life.

2 Replies

@hawkeye10,

Well, hawk, good post. Mr. Green

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

hawkeye10 wrote:

Quote:

But he did steal secret documents...and reveal the contents.
once upon a time when America was less barbaric prosecutors had discretion and they were instructed to charge only in those cases where prosecution would serve the public interest. in this case alerting the people that the government is committing illegal acts against is was in the public interests, if justice is to prevail then there can be no charge.

Hawk...were you appointed the arbiter of what is or isn't "in the public interests?"

If you were...by whom?

I might add that I personally do not feel the release served the public interests...and may very well be extremely harmful to the public interests.

We'll see.

But until that is determined...the defense you are offering here doesn't seem to apply.

2 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

Hawk...were you appointed the arbiter of what is or isn't "in the public interests?"

Quote:

Hawk...were you appointed AN arbiter of what is or isn't "in the public interests?

fixed

yes, by virtue in my citizenship in The United States of America.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

cicerone imposter wrote:

Well, hawk, good post.

thanks, but as i recall you did not like as well that this same line of reasoning got me to the conclusion that charges against George Zimmerman constituted abuse and that Roman Polanski has no obligation to come back and face again a California court.

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

hawkeye10 wrote:

Quote:
Hawk...were you appointed the arbiter of what is or isn't "in the public interests?"

Quote:
Hawk...were you appointed AN arbiter of what is or isn't "in the public interests?

fixed

yes, by virtue in my citizenship in The United States of America.

Cute.

But that is a road we'd best not travel, Hawk.

Once it becomes fashionable to allow people to break laws because they see the breaking of those laws to be "in the interests of the public"...you invite mayhem and anarchy.

I do not expect to convince you of this...and of course you are free to feel as you will in the matter.

My guess: Edward Snowden will be apprehended and tried...and I see that as being in the best interests of the public.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

My guess: Edward Snowden will be apprehended and tried...and I see that as being in the best interests of the public.

through yet another illegal act by this government, not that this is a problem for them natch.

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

This isn't about the Zimmerman trial. The topic of this thread is "Snowden is a dummy."

Going into tangents is your worst enemy.

0 Replies

@hawkeye10,

hawkeye10 wrote:

Quote:
My guess: Edward Snowden will be apprehended and tried...and I see that as being in the best interests of the public.

through yet another illegal act by this government, not that this is a problem for them natch.

Why is apprehending a fugitive...an illegal act?

2 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

Why is apprehending a fugitive...an illegal act?

If it's done illegally, without jurisdiction for instance.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

Why is apprehending a fugitive...an illegal act?

violating the sovereignty of another nation to kidnap people is a violation of international law.

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Olivier5 wrote:

Quote:
Why is apprehending a fugitive...an illegal act?

If it's done illegally, without jurisdiction for instance.

Any done illegally...is illegal. Stealing classified documents is illegal.

I said nothing about the apprehension being done illegally.

I think Edward Snowden will be apprehended legally...and brought to trial. And I think that IS in the public's interest. I appreciate that some people will disagree--and that is their right.

0 Replies

@hawkeye10,

hawkeye10 wrote:

Quote:
Why is apprehending a fugitive...an illegal act?
violating the sovereignty of another nation to kidnap people is a violation of international law.

So is stealing classified documents and causing them to be distributed.

But I said nothing about kidnapping anyone.

As I said to Olivier...I think Snowden will be apprehended legally.

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

I'm happy you are venting your frustrations with life and with me with such vigor. I does you good.

I dare guess that you have spent the whole of your adult life using that infantile response to anything you can't deal with. It is very tempting I know seeing as how easy it is and how little thought is necesasary once you have got it off pat.

The all-purpose face-saver which flags up your underestimation of viewers here in that there's an assumption that they will be influenced by it in some strange way.

It's ridiculous when a saucy young lady does it, which is every time the need arises, but in a 77 year old bloke it's pathetic.

The psychologists say that golf is ideal for venting frustration and for getting free of her indoors for a while.

1 Reply

@JTT,

Quote:

Yes, and top of the class in grade 6 English!!! Yeeeee doggies!

Has he ever been known to try a figure of speech? He's as bad as a Speak Your Weight machine.

0 Replies

Snowdon is a dummy

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know