Snowdon is a dummy

@Olivier5,

Olivier5 wrote:

Quote:
Quote:
What difference would it make?

Nothing...

My point entirely. To take a risk for no good reason is not ballsy, it's stupid.

Interesting way you truncated my comment...considering all the crap you just gave to Revelette for what you perceive of as her doing it.

In my opinion, it is closer to being cowardly than stupid.

Quote:

Quote:
I already have 3182 on my clip board for tonight...

Took me 30 mn to crack. I found it easier than regular sudoku at the level I play it (fiendish), but it's a nice variant.

If you did that puzzle in 30 minutes...my congratulations.

1 Reply

@revelette2,

Your position has been wavering or at least contradictory. You say you don't like mass spying but also that you don't like Snowden's effort to curtail mass spying... Guess you need to decide what is the largest problem here. Are you happy with a society where each and every move you make is spied on and recorded, including your political leaning and porn habits? If yes, then Snowden is trying to prevent that so he is a problem. If no, then Snowden is a potential solution to the problem.

2 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Courage has to have a purpose. To take risks for no good reason is not courageous, but silly. Especially risks about one's children...

I actually failed in my first try at the "killer" grid: made a mistake somewhere in the midst of it and couldn't trace it back. So I started anew, went along more cautiously and solved it in 30 mn. But it was just my first puzzle. I'll try another one at a higher difficulty level when I get some time.

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Olivier5 wrote:

Courage has to have a purpose. To take risks for no good reason is not courageous, but silly. Especially risks about one's children...

Courage is in the eyes of the beholder...although "Courage has to have a purpose" makes a better bumper sticker than a logical, sustainable point in discussion.

To suggest that it would be risky to be more open than you are here in A2K is debatable. To suggest that greater openness is silly or stupid, both of which you have used to describe a position that does not deserve either...is over the line.

Quote:

I actually failed in my first try at the "killer" grid: made a mistake somewhere in the midst of it and couldn't trace it back.

I did the same thing, Olivier. Thought I was going strong...and that I would solve it in short order. When bang...up against a "cannot be."

But I was tired, so I have left the re-try for this evening. Already printed...and already on the clipboard.

Quote:

So I started anew, went along more cautiously and solved it in 30 mn. But it was just my first puzzle. I'll try another one at a higher difficulty level when I get some time.

If you did that puzzle in 30 minutes...even as a re-try...my congratulations.

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

First off, I didn't say I didn't like mass spying, what I have said several different ways is that I consider it the lesser of two evils. I don't think we should spy on allies. The reason I do not condone Snowden stealing US classified document irrespective of the spying issue is that in doing so he took so much information and took it out of the country to be shared with foreign newspapers. We don't know the dangers that action caused and anyone who says otherwise is saying stuff without evidence. But it was a risk he had no right to take. He should have tried to go other avenues even if it didn't work.

I don't think the government has time or inclination to spy on my political leanings and I don't have porn habits but if I did, I do not believe I am important enough to be spied on. If some employee at NSA gets his jollies spying on random people, then that is a problem that happens in other situations and not necessarily a government problem but something that needs to be taken care of internally.

I may not articulate well what I am tying to say, I have a habit of rambling at times and leaving out words, nevertheless, my position has remained the same. If you don't agree, I really don't care. To be honest, I really don't like you enough to bother too much with you. Sorry to be blunt.

2 Replies

@revelette2,

You wrote,

Quote:

We don't know the dangers that action caused and anyone who says otherwise is saying stuff without evidence.

You're also assuming there are dangers. If you can't prove it, you're doing the same thing our government is doing. You can't have it both ways when these kind of issues arises. Have 'we' been told by our government how much damage the revelations have caused? They said "profound damage," but the government hasn't really identified anything specific. That's what one expects when the government breaks the laws of our land; play defense.

In the world of intelligence, any weakness in our system that needs improvement is what's needed. When hackers go into banks and huge companies that are penetrated, they don't cry wolf, but find ways to secure their system.

I've yet to hear what real damage Snowden did to our security. If secrets were revealed, why hasn't the government charged the media with spreading secrets to the world? Don't you find that questionable or at least a dilemma for the government?

1 Reply

@revelette2,

Don't let ci's nonsense bother you, Revelette. All this has been explained to him and the others many times...and reasonably.

The government cannot document any of this stuff being demanded, because it would further compromise the intelligence efforts that are being used to keep us as safe as possible in a very unsafe world.

Let him babble on about lightening strikes and volcanoes being more dangerous. He is myopic...and you are seeing clearly.

People like ci will be one of the first to post excoriating comments after any attack...damning the government for not doing enough to protect us.

He has the right to live here...but one still has to wonder why he doesn't have the spine to simply move away to some place more to his liking...or at least, to consider such a move.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Frank Apisa wrote:

The government cannot document any of this stuff being demanded, because it would further compromise the intelligence efforts that are being used to keep us as safe as possible in a very unsafe world.

Well, which such a sentence you could explain even the worst what any government worldwide can/could do.

And actually, it is done, today, yesterday and all the periods before.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

BillRM wrote:

Snowden on the other hand acted at great personal cost to himself not as an agent for a foreign power but as an agent for the American people by exposing secret misdeeds of their government.

Snowden did not expose any misdeeds.

BillRM wrote:

No Snowden is a damn hero with every bit of the standing of MLK.

Snowden made it easier for terrorists and dictators to thwart the efforts of the US to oppose them. He may have even gotten good people killed.

0 Replies

@BillRM,

BillRM wrote:

Does anyone think that from the President on down our elected officers are not being spy on in the same manner that Hoover did during his hay days opening them all up to being secretly blackmail as President Kennedy happen to had been over his "love" life.

Snowden uncovered no evidence of such activity.

What you're suggesting is that, because Snowden did not actually uncover any wrongdoing, we should imagine that there was wrongdoing and then persecute the NSA for what we've imagined.

0 Replies

@BillRM,

BillRM wrote:

To say nothing of the intelligence agencies being in a position to blackmail a large percent of them if need be or at least have them in fear of that happening as congressmen used to be in fear of Hoover and his secret files.

If you wish to argue that there is grave risk of future abuses, that is one thing.

But when you add in untrue accusations of present misdeeds, you sabotage your argument.

0 Replies

@lmur,

lmur wrote:

Can someone on the anti-Snowden side please clarify if they are happy with their' Secuity Services carrying out mass-surveillance on their own citizens? Is this not the antithesis of what true lovers of democracy would wish for their country?

I don't know. Every time I take the time to respond to a seemingly-polite question from the Left, I come to regret it.

I don't think there is much point of talking to the Left anymore. Maybe just ship them all down to Guantanamo.

0 Replies

@Olivier5,

Olivier5 wrote:

I am just not convinced that you are saying the truth about your motivations. There's no reason to care for one particular case of document theft and not for the scores of other leaks that have marked the US political life since the Watergate scandal... What's so special about Snowden? Did you write hundreds of letters about the Watergate scandal on how "Deep Throat" deserved a fair trial???

Deep Throat exposed actual crimes. And he did not damage national security.

Snowden uncovered no crimes. And he damaged national security.

0 Replies

@Walter Hinteler,

Walter Hinteler wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:
The government cannot document any of this stuff being demanded, because it would further compromise the intelligence efforts that are being used to keep us as safe as possible in a very unsafe world.

Well, which such a sentence you could explain even the worst what any government worldwide can/could do.

Huh???

I do not understand what you are asking here...or even if it is a question. If it is not...and is instead an assertion...I do not know what you are asserting.

Quote:

And actually, it is done, today, yesterday and all the periods before.

Same thing.

0 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

This is so annoying, all we are doing is going round and round saying the same things. It wasn't that long ago we had this discussion, there were a few articles from NSA officials about the damage post-Snowden leaks. You guys aren't going to believe it, will brush it off as something government always says, so why bother to keep going down this same road which has already been covered?

CI, you keep talking about charging the media, we have a free press, they were only reporting from a source. Snowden is the one who stole the information to give to them so he is the one who committed the crime. Personally I hope he stays in Russia. If he came back, it would just be a circus after all this time, might as well let sleeping dogs lay in other words.

0 Replies

@Olivier5,

Olivier5 wrote:

Except of course the NSA has never been able to show any case in which they help fend off a terrorist threat.

Well duh. We're dealing with classified information here.

And some dynamics may be so complicated that it is impossible to tell whether Snowden's damage resulted in some ultimate effect or not.

That does not change the reality that telling our enemies all our tactics is highly damaging.

Olivier5 wrote:

But there are many cases where they spied on allies, private firms such as Siemens or Airbus, UNICEF and the likes...

Spy on allies, yes. But the US does not engage in industrial espionage the way France and China do.

Olivier5 wrote:

The anti-terrorism justification is just a front.

That is goofy.

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Olivier5 wrote:

They don't even know what he leaked. The accusation that the leak put people at risk is phony too, unsubstantiated. that's what they always say, e.g. they said the same last time with the wikileaks diplomatic cables.

Hardly phony. Exposing our tactics to our enemies allows our enemies to counter them.

What if you were one of the democracy activists who died because of those wikileaks exposures?

0 Replies

@Olivier5,

Olivier5 wrote:

revelette2 wrote:
You don't know what you are talking about, just repeating stuff you hear.

Nope, that's what YOU do. Prove it to me Rev, prove that any life has been endangered by Snowden. You can't. You're just repeating what your handlers are telling you to believe.

We're talking about secret information here. Just because you aren't going to get proof does not mean there hasn't been serious damage.

0 Replies

@oralloy,

You wrote,

Quote:

Well duh. We're dealing with classified information here.

But that's the conclusion from the committee that performed an audit on the NSA, and THEY FOUND NOTHING.

Double duh!

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Olivier5 wrote:

And good American boys and girls getting pissed at the messenger for telling them what they don't want to know about their country... Yep, the whole debate is about the tarnished US image abroad and at home... A very futile issue to concern oneself with.

Our image is hardly tarnished, except among those who simply hate us to begin with.

0 Replies

Snowdon is a dummy

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know