42
   

Snowdon is a dummy

 
 
oralloy
 
  0  
Thu 5 Jun, 2014 11:18 pm
@spendius,
spendius wrote:
oralloy wrote:
If anyone wishes to have a trade war with us, we should be able to accommodate them.

Should is one thing. Could you accommodate them if they did?

Yes.


spendius wrote:
The US is the main driver of globalisation and here you are playing the little isolationist for the numptie gallery.

An isolationist would favor isolation for its own sake.

I'm not in favor of a trade war. I'm just saying that we should fight back when a trade war is thrust upon us.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  0  
Thu 5 Jun, 2014 11:19 pm
@BillRM,
BillRM wrote:
oralloy wrote:
The fact that the US tries to prevent terrorism does not make the US responsible for Snowden betraying us to the terrorists.

Nonsense as there had been no showing that massive spying had been of any benefit in stopping terrorism.

No such showing is required.

The US is not responsible for the fact that Snowden betrayed us to terrorists.

Snowden is responsible for the fact that Snowden betrayed us to terrorists.


BillRM wrote:
oralloy wrote:
If anyone wishes to have a trade war with us, we should be able to accommodate them.

This is not for the most part driven by governments actions but by the fact that there is a lack of trust in regards to hardware and software and cloud services produce by American firms by both individuals and companies and that this distrust also extend to American citizens and American companies.

So for example given a choice between EU produce software or hardware and US produce software/hardware a wise firm even if American would buy from the EU not from the US.

That the US tries to hunt down terrorists is not something that should concern many corporations.

It certainly isn't a valid reason for avoiding American products, and we will be well within our rights to retaliate for such behavior.
oralloy
 
  0  
Thu 5 Jun, 2014 11:20 pm
@JLO1988,
JLO1988 wrote:
while everyone is talking about Snowdon who still enjoys what is left of his freedom and his growing celebrity everyday, who is doing anything for Chelsea Manning? If Snowdon is acquitted on all charges, will that have any impact on Chelsea Manning's fate?

The evidence is pretty clear that both Snowden and Manning committed the crimes that they are accused of.
oralloy
 
  0  
Thu 5 Jun, 2014 11:21 pm
@BillRM,
BillRM wrote:
Sorry but Snowden deserves the Nobel Peace Prize

Making the Nobel Peace Prize an award for supporting terrorism would demean it even more than it already is.


BillRM wrote:
General James Clapper deserves a fair trial for lying to congress and the courts along with a hell of a lot of other members of our out of control intelligence community.

Not very likely that courts were lied to.

The fact that our intelligence community tries to protect us from terrorists does not make them out of control.


BillRM wrote:
Just because the laws and constitution breakers are members of the administration does not mean that they should get away with breaking the laws themselves while bringing charges against the man who whistle blow on them.

Neither the NSA nor the Obama Administration have broken either the law or the Constitution.


BillRM wrote:
The secret acts was not design to be a tool to cover up high crimes and misdemeanors.

It was, however, designed to protect the American people from radicals who expose vital secrets to terrorists.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  0  
Thu 5 Jun, 2014 11:23 pm
@Olivier5,
Olivier5 wrote:
Obama and his police state are going to receive a fair trial. You should rejoice instead of whining about it.

We really need to come up with a new NATO, where we help the UK and the former Communist nations, but don't bother helping anyone in-between.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  2  
Fri 6 Jun, 2014 03:16 am
Going to the Frick today. Will try to respond later to the hysteria of the America and Obama haters.

Snowden is no dummy...but he is no hero either. He deserves a fair trial...not a Nobel Prize or accolades.
Frank Apisa
 
  2  
Fri 6 Jun, 2014 04:23 am
@Olivier5,
Olivier5 wrote:

Quote:
BOTTOM LINE: In my opinion, the guy deserves a fair trial no matter that so many of you think he not be allowed to get one.

Obama and his police state are going to receive a fair trial. You should rejoice instead of whining about it.


No...Obama and what you consider to be a police state....are not going to be tried, Olivier. You will have to indulge your anti-American nonsense some other way.

And you are doing the whining...not I. All I am doing is calling for a fair trial for someone accused of serious crimes.

But I guess that is tough for you to see.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  2  
Fri 6 Jun, 2014 05:08 am
@Frank Apisa,
Frank Apisa wrote:
Will try to respond later to the hysteria of the America and Obama haters.
I don't know exactly, if I'm included. But suppose so.
However, just because I think that laws should be followed doesn't make me an America hater. (And just for the record: I don't hate any of the American countries, be there in the north, centre or south of America.)

To remember: spying done by foreign agency on Germans is a criminal delict. Spying on the chancellor could be "an especially serious case" with imprisonment up to 10 years. - Spying is a crime which the public prosecution has to investigate ex officio.
0 Replies
 
revelette2
 
  1  
Fri 6 Jun, 2014 05:25 am
@Walter Hinteler,
Quote:
They are investigating against "unknown persons". Since Tuesday.

Who are the unknown persons? How can you investigate unknown persons? At the end of the investigation, what is the next step? I mean, in the end, what good will it do against these unknown persons in the US intelligence agency? It is kind of mind boggling trying to figure out how you investigate against unknown persons.
BillRM
 
  1  
Fri 6 Jun, 2014 05:48 am
@oralloy,
Quote:
That the US tries to hunt down terrorists is not something that should concern many corporations.

It certainly isn't a valid reason for avoiding American products, and we will be well within our rights to retaliate for such behavior.


Having back doors in your software and your hardware so the US government can at it whim spy on your firm in secret is one hell of a large concern for not only foreign but also American firms.

No firm is going to welcome such extra legal spying and few if any is going to buy into the idea that such spying is only focus on some terrorist threats as in the spying we now know was done in trade negotiations.

Nor is there any guarantee that once back doors are in your software and hardware other actors other then the US intelligent community will not find them and then made use of those back doors.
BillRM
 
  1  
Fri 6 Jun, 2014 06:02 am
@oralloy,
Quote:
It certainly isn't a valid reason for avoiding American products, and we will be well within our rights to retaliate for such behavior.


You are also going to retaliate against American firms that are also buying foreign hardware and software for the same reason as foreign firms or are you going to made it illegal not to buy non US government backdoor hardware and software for US firms?

Quote:


http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/22/business/fallout-from-snowden-hurting-bottom-line-of-tech-companies.html

SAN FRANCISCO — Microsoft has lost customers, including the government of Brazil.

IBM is spending more than a billion dollars to build data centers overseas to reassure foreign customers that their information is safe from prying eyes in the United States government.

And tech companies abroad, from Europe to South America, say they are gaining customers that are shunning United States providers, suspicious because of the revelations by Edward J. Snowden that tied these providers to the National Security Agency’s vast surveillance program.

Even as Washington grapples with the diplomatic and political fallout of Mr. Snowden’s leaks, the more urgent issue, companies and analysts say, is economic. Technology executives, including Mark Zuckerberg of Facebook, raised the issue when they went to the White House on Friday for a meeting with President Obama.


"IBM said in January that it would spend $1.2 billion to build 15 new data centers, including in London, Hong Kong and Sydney, Australia, to...

It is impossible to see now the full economic ramifications of the spying disclosures — in part because most companies are locked in multiyear contracts — but the pieces are beginning to add up as businesses question the trustworthiness of American technology products.


Walter Hinteler
 
  2  
Fri 6 Jun, 2014 06:05 am
@revelette2,
revelette2 wrote:
Who are the unknown persons?
That's what the investigation is about.
revelette2 wrote:
How can you investigate unknown persons?
Well, I suppose that more than 90% of all investigations are against unknown persons. (At least in the beginning of the investigation.) At least here, criminals mostly don't confess to the prosecution or police after their crime that they did it.
revelette2 wrote:
It is kind of mind boggling trying to figure out how you investigate against unknown persons.
Our criminals must be totally different to those in the USA.
Frank Apisa
 
  2  
Fri 6 Jun, 2014 06:21 am
@BillRM,
BillRM wrote:

Quote:
That the US tries to hunt down terrorists is not something that should concern many corporations.

It certainly isn't a valid reason for avoiding American products, and we will be well within our rights to retaliate for such behavior.


Having back doors in your software and your hardware so the US government can at it whim spy on your firm in secret is one hell of a large concern for not only foreign but also American firms.

No firm is going to welcome such extra legal spying and few if any is going to buy into the idea that such spying is only focus on some terrorist threats as in the spying we now know was done in trade negotiations.

Nor is there any guarantee that once back doors are in your software and hardware other actors other then the US intelligent community will not find them and then made use of those back doors.


You are kidding yourself if you think the spying is not going to be done.

Nothing wrong with kidding yourself. Do it as much as you want. But no matter how fervently you kid yourself...

...it will still be kidding yourself.
revelette2
 
  1  
Fri 6 Jun, 2014 06:21 am
@Walter Hinteler,
So their investigation is not that the fact the US spied, but who in the NSA did the spying? Individuals in the NSA who work for the NSA? At then end, are they going to be arresting Americans who work for NSA when NSA spied on Germany?

I mean, the Obama administration and NSA is not unknown persons, if Germany know spying was done during the Obama administration, then the persons were not unknown. So you must mean individuals who work for the NSA agency.
Walter Hinteler
 
  2  
Fri 6 Jun, 2014 06:26 am
@Walter Hinteler,
The USA isn't the only country in the world. Other countries have different political systems, different court systems, different legal systems, different ...

A German prosecutor has formal responsibility for investigation, and the police are considered to be a subordinate helping agency.
We have a single national criminal code, a single national code of criminal procedure, and a unified court system.
A prosecutor is not an elected official, but a civil servant operating within a hierarchical system, appointed for life like all civil servants of the "Beamten category".
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Fri 6 Jun, 2014 06:30 am
@revelette2,
revelette2 wrote:
So their investigation is not that the fact the US spied, but who in the NSA did the spying? Individuals in the NSA who work for the NSA? At then end, are they going to be arresting Americans who work for NSA when NSA spied on Germany?

I mean, the Obama administration and NSA is not unknown persons, if Germany know spying was done during the Obama administration, then the persons were not unknown. So you must mean individuals who work for the NSA agency.
It is unknown who did the spying.
If someone is investigated, she/he is not at all automatically arrested but interviewed by the police.
The prosecution will decide what to do when they get to know the person/the persons who did that espionage.
revelette2
 
  1  
Fri 6 Jun, 2014 06:42 am
@Walter Hinteler,
But its not unknown who did the spying, the US government did, Obama as the President of the US is certainly not unknown.
Walter Hinteler
 
  2  
Fri 6 Jun, 2014 06:57 am
@revelette2,
revelette2 wrote:
But its not unknown who did the spying, the US government did, Obama as the President of the US is certainly not unknown.
The investigation is against persons or a person.

Even if (!) the investigation would get the result that Obama did it - he has as head of state diplomatic immunity.
But I seriously doubt that anyone thinks, the president of the U.S.A. was sitting in a dark room in his Berlin embassy and listening to Merkel talking on the phone.
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Fri 6 Jun, 2014 07:18 am
@Walter Hinteler,
Walter Hinteler wrote:

revelette2 wrote:
But its not unknown who did the spying, the US government did, Obama as the President of the US is certainly not unknown.
The investigation is against persons or a person.

Even if (!) the investigation would get the result that Obama did it - he has as head of state diplomatic immunity.
But I seriously doubt that anyone thinks, the president of the U.S.A. was sitting in a dark room in his Berlin embassy and listening to Merkel talking on the phone.


Remember the words, "Just following orders."
BillRM
 
  1  
Fri 6 Jun, 2014 07:19 am
@Frank Apisa,
Quote:
You are kidding yourself if you think the spying is not going to be done.

Nothing wrong with kidding yourself. Do it as much as you want. But no matter how fervently you kid yourself...

...it will still be kidding yourself.


Of course spying is being done that fact does not mean that you should just roll over and not mount the greatest defenses you can against spying and with special note when it come to businesses and individuals that have fiduciary obligations to guard data such as lawyers and banks and so on.

Given what is currently known about the massive spying of the US government it would not be meeting those obligations to buy and use hardware and security software or services from any firm that can be order in secret by the US government to placed back doors in their produces as long as there are alternatives.

To me one of the best means of stopping this nonsense of massive spying is to cut the budget of NSA by 90 percents or so and by doing so force them to focus on real security threats and not just gathering every bit of information they can and for no better reason then they have the ability to do so.
 

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 381
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.14 seconds on 01/11/2025 at 04:52:14