Snowdon is a dummy

@Walter Hinteler,

Walter Hinteler wrote:

Former vice-president argues whistleblower exposed 'violations of US constitution far more serious than crimes he committed'
Edward Snowden's NSA leaks 'an important service', says Al Gore

I hope he can use that endorsement to exonerate himself at the trial I hope he finally gets to clear his name.

1 Reply

I note that Al Gore also wrote:

"What he revealed in the course of violating important laws included violations of the US constitution that were way more serious than the crimes he committed."

Oh, boy. It doesn't look as though Al Gore's comments will be of much help.

Gore is saying point blank that Snowden violated important laws...and even refers to "the crimes (Snowden) committed."

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Frank Apisa wrote:

Oh, boy. It doesn't look as though Al Gore's comments will be of much help.

Gore is saying point blank that Snowden violated important laws...and even refers to "the crimes (Snowden) committed."

I don't think anyone here really said that he did all what he did lawfully.
And he might have violated laws , but like Gore said, "he also provided an important service".

Seems that the US might be in talks with Snowden about a possible plea deal (report byThe Washington Free Beacon)

2 Replies

@Walter Hinteler,

Breaking laws does not mean that you are surely going to be prosecuted for doing so as take note the US government have not charge the editors or the reporters of the New York Times over this matter nor for that matter the UK government had not charge the Guardian staff and reporters either.

Nor did the US government in the 1970s prosecuted Daniel Ellsberg for the Pentagon Papers.

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

I hope he can use that endorsement to exonerate himself at the trial I hope he finally gets to clear his name.

His name have no need to be clear as it is far far far clearer then such people as Clapper

1 Reply

@Walter Hinteler,

Walter Hinteler wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:
Oh, boy. It doesn't look as though Al Gore's comments will be of much help.

Gore is saying point blank that Snowden violated important laws...and even refers to "the crimes (Snowden) committed."

I don't think anyone here really said that he did all what he did lawfully.
And he might have violated laws , but like Gore said, "he also provided an important service".

Fine!

He should come back and stand trial...and mention that "he also provided an important service."

I have no problem with that.

Quote:

Seems that the US might be in talks with Snowden about a possible plea deal (report byThe Washington Free Beacon)

Fine with me.

Plea bargains are part of these kinds of things often.

All he has to do is make the bargain; come back to the US and plead guilty...and serve whatever sentence is agreed on in the plea bargain.

I have no problem with that at all.

0 Replies

@BillRM,

BillRM wrote:

Quote:
I hope he can use that endorsement to exonerate himself at the trial I hope he finally gets to clear his name.

His name have no need to be clear as it is far far far clearer then such people as Clapper

Good grief, Bill...reading your posts is enough to make one weep for the English language.

Anyway, if there is no need to clear his name...why doesn't he just come back to the US and set up residence?

Jeez!

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

Anyway, if there is no need to clear his name...why doesn't he just come back to the US and set up residence

I got to get off here, still waiting for that game, I really am beginning to think its never going to come. Anyway, don't you know he won't because he will be killed by the Obama administration if he sets foot outside the political asylum confines? They are just waiting to knock him on the head and drag him off to a black hole somewhere.

1 Reply

@revelette2,

revelette2 wrote:

Quote:
Anyway, if there is no need to clear his name...why doesn't he just come back to the US and set up residence

I got to get off here, still waiting for that game, I really am beginning to think its never going to come. Anyway, don't you know he won't because he will be killed by the Obama administration if he sets foot outside the political asylum confines? They are just waiting to knock him on the head and drag him off to a black hole somewhere.

It was Bill who suggested Snowden does not have to clear his name, Revelette. I was responding to that!

And if Snowden is in the danger you suggest, perhaps he should not have stolen those classified documents. But since he has...and since so many here consider him a HERO for doing it...recognize that there is a price to be paid. If a soldier throws himself on a grenade in order to save his buddies...he does not get to walk away from the gesture in stardom.

Anyway...if the hatred and distrust of the US government exhibited here in A2K is an accurate indicator of the hatred and distrust of the US government in general...

...we might just as well fold up our tent and head into the sunset.

I am appalled by what goes on here...but you people are free to hate your government as much as you like. It is a free country.

For me...I recognize there are faults, but a society does not overcome faults...or correct them to any significant degree...by self-immolation.

Enjoy the angst...and enjoy the fact that you are playing into the hands of people who want to destroy you.

2 Replies

Government agents breaking both the laws and more important the constitution using the secret act to cover up their ongoing crime, would give any whistle blower the following defense.

Quote:

In English law, the defence of necessity recognises that there may be situations of such overwhelming urgency that a person must be allowed to respond by breaking the law.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

Enjoy the angst...and enjoy the fact that you are playing into the hands of people who want to destroy you.

Yes indeed daring to demand that the constitution is follow is a road to ruin in your eyes.

Those are some damn powerful terrorists that in order to fight them we need to surround our freedoms.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

BillRM wrote:

Government agents breaking both the laws and more important the constitution using the secret act to cover up their ongoing crime, would give any whistle blower the following defense.

Quote:
In English law, the defence of necessity recognises that there may be situations of such overwhelming urgency that a person must be allowed to respond by breaking the law.

Great.

Snowden should come back and stand trial and bring that piece of wisdom into the proceedings also.

0 Replies

@BillRM,

BillRM wrote:

Quote:
Enjoy the angst...and enjoy the fact that you are playing into the hands of people who want to destroy you.

Yes indeed daring to demand that the constitution is follow is a road to ruin in your eyes.

Problem with your mangling of the English language, Bill...is that I have no idea of what you tried unsuccessfully to communicate there. See if you can get a fifth grader to help you with your compositions.

Quote:

Those are some damn powerful terrorists that in order to fight them we need to surround our freedoms.

ANYONE...please help me to understand what Bill was attempting to say here.

0 Replies

@revelette2,

Quote:

Well, you could have at least named the law suits. But whatever.

No he couldent. He only knew that Lush Limbaugh said this and quoted his god' small g.

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Actually, I may not have made it clear, but I was kidding.

1 Reply

@revelette2,

revelette2 wrote:

Actually, I may not have made it clear, but I was kidding.

Ya had me wondering.

It seemed like a radical departure from where you had been earlier in discussions on this. But things are getting so muddled in this thread, I treated it as a change of mind.

My bad.

0 Replies

For those who do not wish to be like Frank and just pull their opinions out of their rear ends on the subject of internet security and the ability to lock out NSA and others from spying on your communications the weekly podcasts of"Security Now" at twit.tv/sn would be worthwhile to check out.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

BillRM wrote:

For those who do not wish to be like Frank and just pull their opinions out of their rear ends on the subject of internet security and the ability to lock out NSA and others from spying on your communications the weekly podcasts of"Security Now" at twit.tv/sn would be worthwhile to check out.

Still haven't found a quote you can link to, huh, Bill?

And still haven't found the ethical wherewithal to acknowledge that you were wrong.

Everything on that issue went just the way I thought it would!

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Sorry dear but once more you are forgetting that thousands of people read this thread and a not small percent of them know that you are using the fact that the search engines do a poor job of indexing this website to denial your own past positions.

Shame on you.............

footnote this week podcast of security now is covering Google's plans to offer end to end encrypted emails.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

BillRM wrote:

Sorry dear but once more you are forgetting that thousands of people read this thread and a not small percent of them know that you are using the fact that the search engines do a poor job of indexing this website to denial your own past positions.

Shame on you.............

I'm not your dear, Bill.

You ought to cruise Chelsea in NYC if you are looking for a dear.

I defied you to find any quote from me that says what you suggest I have said. You cannot do it...and now you are blaming it on the fact that the "search engines do a poor job of indexing this website."

You could search this forum with the greatest search engine ever devised...and you will not find anything to corroborate your accusations, Bill, because I have never said anything like what you are suggesting.

I have never suggested that I am technically proficient. In fact, I have stated emphatically that I am not.

You cannot find a quote of mine suggesting that I am...or that I consider my technical proficiency (or opinions about technical details) to be on a par those of the CEO's of the industry.

You were incorrect...and you are not ethical enough to acknowledge that you were.

Fine! No problem, in fact.

It is what I expected.

Glad you proved me correct about your ethical lack. Wink

0 Replies

Snowdon is a dummy

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know