Snowdon is a dummy

I share totally CI's view about the sorry state of the US democracy.* I don't share his frustration, perhaps because I never was very patriotic...

I think you misjudge ci completely as unpatriotic. I read him as having long been a patriot. He comes across not as a hater of the US (like JTT), but as a lover whose love has been betrayed. His present frustration is a result of his past idealism, in other words.


* The same or a similar diagnostic about how the elites are disconnected from reality and in many cases actively misinform the people about it, would befit France, and scores of other formal democracies. IMHO, democracy is under attack worldwide.

I'll be interested to see how the Edward Snowden story plays out. I do not think Russia will ever just "give him up" to the United States, but I also think the pleasure and utility of having him as a guest may have run its course.

I imagine Snowden's stay in Russia is not a particularly pleasant thing for him, either...and the prospect of spending the rest of his days there or in some other country is not high on his list of favorite things.

I actually feel sorry for him. He screwed up...big time. And there is no way out of what he has created for himself.

I'm not the one missing the point. Both you and Frank have thrown all manner of abuse at CI accusing him of hating his own country and telling him to get out. It's reminiscent of McCarthyism.

You claim Snowden would get a fair trial in America, but when Oliver points out one big flaw in American justice you refuse to discuss it. As for negative statements about the US, these are based on facts as opposed to your smears and innuendo. You claim all countries spy on their friends, but you can't provide any evidence of either France of Germany spying on the Obama regime. You then compare NATO allies to countries like Israel and Russia.

Throughout all of this you attack Snowden for disclosing the truth about criminal activity, for damaging America's reputation. You don't seem to care about the actual criminal activity itself, or trying to put things right. Snowden didn't damage America's reputation, America did. And protecting America's reputation seems more important than fixing what's wrong. Is that same attitude an aspect of your professional life? If a student came to you with a serious allegation about a member of staff, would your first thought be to protect the college's reputation?

I'm not convinced Snowden will get a fair trial in America, in fact I'm sure the exact opposite would happen despite your's and Frank's mixture of sneers and platitudes. For all your supposed desire for justice you've not called for a fair trial for the criminals who authorised the criminal activity disclosed by Snowden. We don't even know who these criminals are, but I bet they're either enjoying plum jobs or a cushy retirement.

You refuse to discuss Guantanamo, but its existence is central to any argument about the fairness of America's justice system, as is the recent use of torture by American officials. CI has even posted evidence that this torture continued under the Obama administration. America hasn't even tried to use reason to get Snowden but has thrown its weight about, bullying smaller nations with no regard for international law. The forced diversion and landing of Bolivian president Eva Morales' plane was a blatant attack on national security, and did far more to damage America's reputation than any of Snowden's disclosures. Beforehand we just knew America was a bit sneaky, now we knew America was a bully, intimidating not just countries like Bolivia, but NATO allies, and victims of spying, France and Germany.

Even putting aside the existence of Guantanamo Bay, the continued use of torture, the refusal to give either the residents of Guantanamo Bay or the criminals in the CIA who authorised illegal activity, a "fair trial," there's the general sense that American jurisprudence is excessively punitive compared to other Western democracies. In the UK we're still intensely aware of the case of Gary McKinnon, a vulnerable man with Asperger's, who hacked a US government website looking for evidence of UFOs. Despite never having set foot in America, America demanded his extradition, so he could get a "fair trial" in America. A trial that could have resulted in him spending the rest of his life in jail, but if he had been tried in the UK, where the crimes were committed, the harshest punishment would have been a four month custodial sentence. This vulnerable man's life was put on hold for seven years while he fought extradition until Theresa May had the courage to stand up to American intimidation and block his deportation once and for all.

So to sum up, if America is serious about giving Snowden a "fair trial," it needs to show a willingness to live by the rule of law itself. Stop the use of torture, close down Guantanamo Bay, and give the occupants a "fair trial," and arrest those criminals in the CIA, and give them a "fair trial." Finally adopt a system of justice less punitive and more in keeping with that of a Western democracy. Personally I don't think Europe should extradite anyone to a country that still practices capital punishment, because that, and an overly punitive justice system, is an anathema to the concept of a fair trial.

Maybe my comments are negative, but they're factual, and, unlike yours, don't rely on sneers and innuendo.

More sneers and histrionics, as to be expected when the facts don't support your argument. Here's another fact for you, the only country ever to exercise the NATO charter when attacked was America, straight after 9/11. We have proven that we will come to your defence when it became necessary, and it Britain we went beyond that, fighting your illegal war in Iraq, and suffering the terrorist attacks of 7/7 as a consequence.

So drop the holier than thou bullshit, it really doesn't suit you.

I've never contended spying was right....never in a million years. I am against spying, especially by those who spy on their country.

So why aren't you demanding that those criminals in government who authorised said spying stand trial?

Your exaggeration appear to know no limits, izzythepush. I have tried to make excuses for why CI hurls witheringly scornful criticism at the US and Obama; I believe it's because he might be painfully distressed, frustrated by his inability to do anything to make things right. However, one can readily understand how one might reach the conclusion CI hates the US if only by his hyperbolical statements regarding the US. In one of CI and my initial intense exchanges, I suggested to him if he were so incensed with Obama's performance, why not try to impeach this president. Later on in my mind, I rationalized that CI was just letting off steam, that he harbored strong feelings and was venting on the board. I could very well identify with CI's strong feelings. I feel this way many times towards the Israeli government.

You have a bizarre personality, izzythepush. I do not like this side of you which appear angry, twisting people's statements. I really have nothing else to say to you. BTW, are you a heavy drinker?!

Ciao

When you don't have facts to back up your statements you rely on sneers, innuendo and downright insults. That demonstrates the strength of your argument. It also indicates your incredible hubris, in that you are unable to conceive the possibility that someone who is cold stone sober might disagree with you.

Our intelligence and military agencies are the people who prevent the bad guys from killing us.

I'd prefer that they remain secure and effective.

Trials are not applicable for POWs who are being held until the end of a war.

Sound reasoning. Where an institution has been created to produce a positive social end, then no matter what levels of corruption it achieves or what crimes it commits or how dangerous it becomes to our other institutions, it must stand beyond reproach, criticism and correction.

Snowden did not expose any wrongdoing of any sort.

All he did was make it easier for terrorists to murder Americans.

Guantanamo has nothing to do with the US justice system. You're going to have to keep blaming your distrust on your anti-American bigotry.



No torture or illegality at Guantanamo.

If you want to find torture and illegality in Cuba, you're going to have to look in the dungeons where your buddy Castro keeps the people who dare to disagree with him.



Are you suggesting that we start treating POWs as a form of criminal?

If we do start doing such a thing, we will demand that our own soldiers still be treated as a traditional POW upon capture.

Snowden exposed that the director of the NSA directly lied to Congress.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/10/15/1247400/-NSA-Director-Admits-He-Lied-About-Surveillance-Thwarting-54-Terror-Plots#

If a person does not qualify as a POW, he or she would then be a "civilian person" according to the provisions of Geneva Convention IV.

I do not agree that the NSA has committed any crime or participated in any corruption.

I can see some of the arguments as to how their power is potentially dangerous, but I also see those arguments balanced by the need to defend ourselves from the present threat. Further, I don't see the mere argument that "the power is potentially dangerous" as justification for Snowden's actions.

Do you agree that the NSA directly lied to the government body in charge of monitoring its activities about the scope and effectiveness of those activities? How does Congress monitor the NSA if the NSA lies to Congress about its activities?

Everyone lies to Congress. That is hardly evidence of wrongful activity on the NSA's part.

I haven't examined the charge in detail, but it seems reasonable given that everyone always lies to Congress.



They muddle through as best they can.