42
   

Snowdon is a dummy

 
 
Frank Apisa
 
  0  
Mon 13 Jan, 2014 12:26 pm
@cicerone imposter,
cicerone imposter wrote:

Who's the phony here?


You!

I thought I had made that clear.


Quote:

I've adm itted when I've been wrong and even apologized to several people.


I have acknowledged on many occasions when I have been wrong.

Since you assert that you do it...why not do it here? You are totally incorrect about any contradictions in what I said.

Quote:
You're just a waste of time, and you're now on my Ignore list.

Oh my...how will I ever live with being on your Ignore List???? http://www.sherv.net/cm/emo/funny/1/vomit.gif

I will continue to read all the stuff you write, ci...and not pretend you are on an "Ignore List."

Let me know if you ever gain the maturity and ethics necessary for you to acknowledge that you were wrong in what you said to me. We can talk at that time.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  2  
Mon 13 Jan, 2014 12:39 pm
So this thread is back to Snowden again?
izzythepush
 
  1  
Mon 13 Jan, 2014 12:55 pm
@Walter Hinteler,
No, I think it's all about Holden Caulfield.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  4  
Mon 13 Jan, 2014 01:06 pm
From Wired: I Spent Two Hours Talking With the NSA’s Bigwigs. Here’s What Has Them Mad
Quote:
[...]
They really hate Snowden. The NSA is clearly, madly, deeply furious at the man whose actions triggered the biggest crisis in its history. Even while contending they welcome the debate that now engages the nation, they say that they hate the way it was triggered. The NSA has an admittedly insular culture — the officials described it as almost like a family. Morale suffers when friends and neighbors think that NSA employees are sitting around reading grandma’s email. Also, the agency believes that the Snowden leaks have seriously hurt national security (though others dispute this). NSA officials are infuriated that all this havoc was caused by some random contractor. They suggest that had Snowden been familiar with the culture and the ethos of the agency, understood the level of training undergone by its employees, seen the level of regulations and oversight, he would have been less likely to abscond with all those documents. (Snowden’s interviews indicate otherwise.) Still, they are stunned that someone “inside the fence” would do what Snowden did. Even if Snowden is eventually pardoned, he’d do well to steer clear of Fort Meade.
(Links are in the original article)
BillRM
 
  2  
Mon 13 Jan, 2014 01:15 pm
@Walter Hinteler,
The mob never like informers either and for the same reasons.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  3  
Mon 13 Jan, 2014 02:49 pm
According to a report in the Süddeutsche Zeitung, the USA won't tell how long they spied Merkel's phone. Additionally, they want to spy on other German top politicians as before.
The paper quotes sources from the German spy agency BND, saying, they want to stop the 'no-spy-talks'.
"Sources in the Chancellery" are quoted, saying that in the next three months or later still some positive results might be possible.
Frank Apisa
 
  2  
Mon 13 Jan, 2014 02:53 pm
@Walter Hinteler,
Walter Hinteler wrote:

According to a report in the Süddeutsche Zeitung, the USA won't tell how long they spied Merkel's phone. Additionally, they want to spy on other German top politicians as before.
The paper quotes sources from the German spy agency BND, saying, they want to stop the 'no-spy-talks'.
The spokesperson of the government is quoted, saying that in the next three months or later still some positive results might be possible.


Earlier you asked..."So this thread is back to Snowden again?"

Well, Walter, with all the respect in the world...this comment of yours is as much about Snowden as all that crap going on between ci and me!

No matter what...Snowden has been charged with stealing classified documents and releasing them to unauthorized parties.

He should be allowed a chance to clear himself of those charges...

...in a fair trial here in the United States.
izzythepush
 
  2  
Mon 13 Jan, 2014 03:15 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Frank Apisa wrote:
No matter what...Snowden has been charged with stealing classified documents and releasing them to unauthorized parties.

He should be allowed a chance to clear himself of those charges...

...in a fair trial here in the United States.


he's not the one who should be facing charges. That person should be whoever it was who authorised mass surveillance And yes, he should get,
FRANK wrote:
a fair trial here in the United States.
Frank Apisa
 
  2  
Mon 13 Jan, 2014 03:18 pm
@izzythepush,
izzythepush wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:
No matter what...Snowden has been charged with stealing classified documents and releasing them to unauthorized parties.

He should be allowed a chance to clear himself of those charges...

...in a fair trial here in the United States.


he's not the one who should be facing charges. That person should be whoever it was who authorised mass surveillance And yes, he should get,
FRANK wrote:
a fair trial here in the United States.



Sorry, Izzy...but here in the United States...the person who deserves a fair trial is someone who has been charged with a crime.

No one has been charged with the crime of authorizing mass surveillance...and it has not even been established that it is a crime.

So...the person who deserves the fair trial...is Edward Snowden.
izzythepush
 
  2  
Mon 13 Jan, 2014 04:14 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Frank Apisa wrote:
...but here in the United States...


Do you have to use that phrase as if it's something unique to America? It's really quite condescending.

The law may be one thing, but ethically Snowden is in the right whilst the person or persons who get the go ahead are in the wrong. With a legal system that supports the opposite, is it any wonder Snowden believes he won't get a fair trial.
Frank Apisa
 
  2  
Mon 13 Jan, 2014 05:29 pm
@izzythepush,
izzythepush wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:
...but here in the United States...


Do you have to use that phrase as if it's something unique to America? It's really quite condescending.


I certainly do not mean to be condescending, Izzy, but you appeared not to realize the procedure.

Quote:
The law may be one thing, but ethically Snowden is in the right whilst the person or persons who get the go ahead are in the wrong. With a legal system that supports the opposite, is it any wonder Snowden believes he won't get a fair trial.


Ethically, Snowden allegedly stole government classified documents (which you seem to be taking for granted) and released them to unauthorized people.

"The law" is important here...and your considerations about Snowden's ethics are not.

Many people who are charged with crimes "believe" they will not get a fair trial.

My guess is that the very last thing Edward Snowden wants...is a fair trial.
izzythepush
 
  1  
Mon 13 Jan, 2014 05:40 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Frank Apisa wrote:
I certainly do not mean to be condescending, Izzy, but you appeared not to realize the procedure.


I didn't think the discussion was about procedure, but whether or not Snowden did the right thing.

You can debate law ad infinitum, but it comes down to whether or not Snowden was justified in doing what he did. So far the release of information through respected media outlets doesn't seem to have harmed national security despite what the naysayers say.

Freedom has always had to play a balancing act with national security, and during times of war fair enough. This isn't a time of war, and the ramping up of paranoia and portraying a disparate bunch of criminals as some global terrorist group doesn't make it so.

The law is wrong, some sort of whistleblower legislation needs to be passed to protect people like Snowden. Once that's done, he'll get a fair trial but not before because the law is clearly skewed against whistleblowers.
spendius
 
  1  
Mon 13 Jan, 2014 06:17 pm
@izzythepush,
Apisa doesn't understand common sense izzy. He can't move a muscle without a ******* dictionary for comfort.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  3  
Mon 13 Jan, 2014 07:02 pm
@izzythepush,
izzythepush wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:
I certainly do not mean to be condescending, Izzy, but you appeared not to realize the procedure.


I didn't think the discussion was about procedure, but whether or not Snowden did the right thing.

You can debate law ad infinitum, but it comes down to whether or not Snowden was justified in doing what he did. So far the release of information through respected media outlets doesn't seem to have harmed national security despite what the naysayers say.

Freedom has always had to play a balancing act with national security, and during times of war fair enough. This isn't a time of war, and the ramping up of paranoia and portraying a disparate bunch of criminals as some global terrorist group doesn't make it so.

The law is wrong, some sort of whistleblower legislation needs to be passed to protect people like Snowden. Once that's done, he'll get a fair trial but not before because the law is clearly skewed against whistleblowers.


I disagree, Izzy...completely.

He is accused of stealing government classified documents.

That is a serious charge...and to dismiss any need for a trial to determine if it was justified is an absurdity in my mind.

Sorry, but we have to disagree.
BillRM
 
  0  
Mon 13 Jan, 2014 10:35 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Sorry Frank but you can not have a free nation when not only are the american people being lied to but congress is also.

Those papers needed to be released in order to help safe guard our freedoms from a run away intelligence community that is far more of a danger to our freedoms and our society then all the terrorists in the middle east.
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Mon 13 Jan, 2014 11:08 pm
@BillRM,
Quote:
Sorry Frank but you can not have a free nation when not only are the american people being lied to but congress is also.

according to Robert Gates, whom I greatly respect, Congresscritters are almost universally as incompetent as they appear to be.....telling them the truth will not help much if at all.
BillRM
 
  1  
Mon 13 Jan, 2014 11:26 pm
@hawkeye10,
Quote:
.telling them the truth will not help much if at all.


So a nice police state with a rubber stamp congress is to be prefer?
hawkeye10
 
  0  
Mon 13 Jan, 2014 11:29 pm
@BillRM,
my point is more that we got to where we are because everyone failed, I dont think that there are any good guys, except maybe for Snowden.
0 Replies
 
izzythepush
 
  1  
Tue 14 Jan, 2014 02:37 am
@Frank Apisa,
Frank Apisa wrote:

Sorry, but we have to disagree.


I didn't think I'd be able to turn you around with a couple of sentences.
0 Replies
 
Olivier5
 
  2  
Tue 14 Jan, 2014 06:26 am
@Frank Apisa,
At least, Nelson Mandela got his fair trail. George Washington didn't and that's a pity. The guy deserved death for being such a traitor.
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Snowdon is a dummy
  3. » Page 235
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.07 seconds on 09/16/2024 at 06:03:15