Snowdon is a dummy

@Frank Apisa,

If you are interested in how much privacy one has spend the money to get a credit report on almost anyone. But this is private business not government so its ok, right?

0 Replies

@Olivier5,

This free man is using this information to make a mint. By holding back information he is increasing the monetary value of whats left for his benefit, not ours. He is just another business man.

0 Replies

@izzythepush,

Only if you have access to more money than the business you are suing.

0 Replies

@Walter Hinteler,

You trust them to respect your decision? I thought you were more intelligent than that.

1 Reply

@izzythepush,

Quote:

While not admitting that it constituted evidence of destruction, McKinnon did admit leaving a threat on one computer:
"US foreign policy is akin to Government-sponsored terrorism these days … It was not a mistake that there was a huge security stand down on September 11 last year … I am SOLO. I will continue to disrupt at the highest levels … "[5]

US authorities claim that McKinnon is trying to downplay his own actions. A senior military officer at the Pentagon told The Sunday Telegraph: "US policy is to fight these attacks as strongly as possible. As a result of Mr McKinnon's actions, we suffered serious damage. This was not some harmless incident. He did very serious and deliberate damage to military and Nasa computers and left silly and anti-America messages. All the evidence was that someone was staging a very serious attack on US computer systems."[6]

Central to all this is the fact, here completely ignored as it always is, that these messages, while they might have been a bit silly, constituted the truth;

Who in their right mind can dispute;

"US foreign policy is akin to Government-sponsored terrorism these days",

except to note that it is hardly limited to "these days".

0 Replies

@RABEL222,

RABEL222 wrote:

You trust them to respect your decision? I thought you were more intelligent than that.

Well, do I trust the label on food? A green traffic light? The advice of my doctor? ... ... ...

Questions, questions and no 100% safety in sight on the horizon ...

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

Is objecting to something against the laws of free speech?

Are you for or against free speech?

2 Replies

@Olivier5,

It depends on the free speech. Try shouting FIRE in a theater, and see if it protects your free speech. Also, any speech that incites a riot can be charged with a crime.

3 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

Quote:

Try shouting FIRE in a theater, and see if it protects your free speech.

Wow, you remembered something from your grade 8 civics class, CI.

0 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

Quote:

Try shouting FIRE in a theater, and see if it protects your free speech.

Wow, you remembered something from your grade 8 civics class, CI.

Quote:

Also, any speech that incites a riot can be charged with a crime.

OmSig is gonna be all over your ass on this one.

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Miss you too, frank.

But, my god man, this makes NO sense...

Quote:

By the way, Bernie…Assange, in my opinion, wants to be a dictator…to decide what can and cannot be kept secret

You're upside down. How could it be the case that a greater release of information to citizens is more dictatorial than a suppression of the release of data to citizens? How can it be that greater transparency is more dictatorial than less transparency? That's kind of nuts.

What you seem to be saying is that we ought to trust the existing powers at NSA/CIA etc more than anyone else. And that is equally nuts. Or more. Sheesh, have we learned so little in our years?

There's a cogent argument to make against Assange's project but you're nowhere near it.

Please, I beg you on arthritic knee, read Rosen's piece on The Snowden Effect (google) and Aaron Bady (zunguzungu) on Assange's project (again, easy to find on google). Seriously good thinking.

2 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

Hi CI

A conception of "control" defined and limited to you being in prison seems rather barren. Are women seeking an abortion in Texas free of control when not peering out from behind bars? etc etc etc etc

1 Reply

@blatham,

Also true is the fact that the CIA performed waterboarding under GW Bush - which we "all" know is illegal under domestic and international laws.

It is scary what the government will do in the name of "secrecy."

They start illegal wars that ends up killing tens of thousands of innocent people's lives, and our country spends billions of dollars that could be spent for much better use at home and abroad.

One would think Vietnam and Iraq would be enough evidence of what our government is capable of, but most citizens seem uninterested in the truth - and to change our government.

Even Obama increased our troops in Afghanistan by 50,000 troops which I complained to him about to no avail.

What I find more realistic is that governments will do what they do regardless of its citizen's interests.

Why get upset about things we cannot control?

The citizens of this country will continue to reelect their representatives; there's no way to "fight that."

What, me worry? Shocked

1 Reply

@blatham,

Hi blatham, How you been? See my post after yours. I think it pretty much responds to your post.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

I liked the "lots of Americans have guns" part.

Very easy to imagine a truck-load of dudes heading out from the trailer park in their camo outfits and with their cool-ass m-16s and doing a fancy drift into a Kentucky hillside, leaping out and doing the movie-star crawl through the scenic ferns hoping to come up against redcoats in turbans as a couple of choppers (like that one in the Assange video release) arrive over the hillside with their load of missiles and machine gun bullets the size of cantaloupes. If there are any humans more disconnected from reality than guys and girls like that, I'm not sure who they'd be even if I expect to be housed with them in the coming years.

1 Reply

@blatham,

Wow! Long time no read!

It's been awhile since I've seen your posts here. Nice to see you back.

0 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

cicerone imposter wrote:

What I find more realistic is that governments will do what they do regardless of its citizen's interests.

Since our chancellor has made her oath of office ... ("I swear that I will dedicate my efforts to the well-being of the German people, promote their welfare, protect them from harm, uphold and defend the Basic Law and the laws of the Federation, perform my duties conscientiously, and do justice to all.") ... and she (resp her office, since there's where the co-ordination of the secret services is located) perhaps didn't follow it, there are good chances ... ... ...

On the other hand: it's pre-election time. So all from the opposition parties and the junior coalition party might just be temporary canon rumbling.

1 Reply

@engineer,

engineer wrote:

But he is also a whistleblower who revealed unethical actions by his employer at very great person risk to himself.

Hardly unethical.

engineer wrote:

So far, he was revealed that:
- The NSA is intercepting large quantities of electronic traffic from US citizens without probable cause.
- The NSA is collecting phone call information about many US citizens without probable cause.

Gathering the data, yes, but that data is then only accessed with probable cause, with appropriate judicial oversight.

engineer wrote:

- Judicial oversight is a joke.

Nonsense.

engineer wrote:

- The US is spying on our allies during trade negotiations.
- The US is monitoring the electronic traffic of a large number of foreign citizens who are not in any way suspected of a crime.

Business as usual. And said allies do the very same thing to us.

I sort of agree with the position that he didn't reveal huge secrets. I haven't seen a single revelation from him that wasn't already known. So I can see not giving him the death penalty.

But 30 or so years in prison might be in order, just because we can't have silly idealists going off and releasing classified information like this every time they suddenly realize in horror that we're actually firing real bullets at the terrorists.

engineer wrote:

The guy is a hero. Funny how we look at the guy who released the Pentagon Papers as a hero but this guy is a stupid lawbreaker.

I don't look at the guy who released the Pentagon Papers as a hero. What business did he have publicizing classified information in the middle of a war?

0 Replies

@Olivier5,

Olivier5 wrote:

Quote:
Is objecting to something against the laws of free speech?

Are you for or against free speech?

That was a question...not an answer.

You answer first.

1 Reply

@blatham,

blatham wrote:

Miss you too, frank.

But, my god man, this makes NO sense...

Quote:
By the way, Bernie…Assange, in my opinion, wants to be a dictator…to decide what can and cannot be kept secret

You're upside down. How could it be the case that a greater release of information to citizens is more dictatorial than a suppression of the release of data to citizens? How can it be that greater transparency is more dictatorial than less transparency? That's kind of nuts.

What you seem to be saying is that we ought to trust the existing powers at NSA/CIA etc more than anyone else. And that is equally nuts. Or more. Sheesh, have we learned so little in our years?

There's a cogent argument to make against Assange's project but you're nowhere near it.

Please, I beg you on arthritic knee, read Rosen's piece on The Snowden Effect (google) and Aaron Bady (zunguzungu) on Assange's project (again, easy to find on google). Seriously good thinking.

You have your opinions...I have mine.

What Assange and Manning have done, in my opinion, are a net negative to peace and safety. Whatever can be done to discourage what they have done...makes sense to me.

2 Replies

Snowdon is a dummy

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know