42
   

Snowdon is a dummy

 
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  2  
Thu 11 Sep, 2014 02:52 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Frank Apisa wrote:
So you think that is the only solution the United States could up with???? To shoot it down?
No. They could enforce some kind of pressure on Switzerland. (I would prefer the solution someone wrote in a letter-to-the-editor in a Geneva paper: use a Red Cross plane Very Happy )
Frank Apisa
 
  2  
Thu 11 Sep, 2014 03:06 pm
@Walter Hinteler,
Walter Hinteler wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:
So you think that is the only solution the United States could up with???? To shoot it down?
No. They could enforce some kind of pressure on Switzerland. (I would prefer the solution someone wrote in a letter-to-the-editor in a Geneva paper: use a Red Cross plane Very Happy )


Some would prefer Air Malaysia.

But whatever is chosen...do not think that Snowden takes the trip with no trouble.

If he does end up in Switzerland, however...he lives fine with a good government and freedom and privacy...lots of privacy.

Okay with me for him to live there. His family can visit him...or move there with him.


revelette2
 
  3  
Thu 11 Sep, 2014 03:08 pm
@Walter Hinteler,
Let him live in Switzerland, it would be interesting to see if Russia lets him even if the US don't manage to pressure Switzerland in some way. Besides, I thought Snowden gave all of his documents to Glen Greenwald and Laura Poitras when they were in Hong Kong before going to Russia. Shouldn't Switzerland be asking them for the information they seek?
Walter Hinteler
 
  2  
Thu 11 Sep, 2014 03:11 pm
@revelette2,
revelette2 wrote:
Besides, I thought Snowden gave all of his documents to Glen Greenwald and Laura Poitras when they were in Hong Kong before going to Russia. Shouldn't Switzerland be asking them for the information they seek?
I do think that he still is the owner - he didn't sell them nor give them away as a present to all I know.
Walter Hinteler
 
  2  
Thu 11 Sep, 2014 03:12 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Frank Apisa wrote:
Some would prefer Air Malaysia.
Now you're down with your cheap jokes.
revelette2
 
  3  
Thu 11 Sep, 2014 03:13 pm
@Walter Hinteler,
So you think Glen Greenwald is just going to hand them back to him?
Frank Apisa
 
  2  
Thu 11 Sep, 2014 03:15 pm
@Walter Hinteler,
Walter Hinteler wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:
Some would prefer Air Malaysia.
Now you're down with your cheap jokes.


That wasn't cheap, Walter...

...it was free.
One Eyed Mind
 
  4  
Thu 11 Sep, 2014 03:15 pm
@Walter Hinteler,
Walter, the man has turned his brain into a slave, rather than an archive. He forces it to demonize Snowden, for what exactly you may ask? It's quite simple - fear. What drew the fear? Frank having to see his own country's secrets and lies exposed to the whole world. Hence why he wrote "I do not believe the government has done anything illegal" - when it has a thousand times already.

Who would say something along the lines of a young girl who doesn't want to see her father as an abusive drunk?

Frank is traumatized and he's taking it out on Snowden.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  2  
Thu 11 Sep, 2014 03:16 pm
@revelette2,
revelette2 wrote:

So you think Glen Greenwald is just going to hand them back to him?


Are you starting to appreciate the humor in all this, Revelette?
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  3  
Thu 11 Sep, 2014 03:20 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Frank Apisa wrote:

Walter Hinteler wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:
Some would prefer Air Malaysia.
Now you're down with your cheap jokes.


That wasn't cheap, Walter...

...it was free
I don't get jokes related to terrible incidents/accidents with hundreds of dead passengers.
Frank Apisa
 
  3  
Thu 11 Sep, 2014 03:21 pm
@Walter Hinteler,
Walter Hinteler wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:

Walter Hinteler wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:
Some would prefer Air Malaysia.
Now you're down with your cheap jokes.


That wasn't cheap, Walter...

...it was free
I don't get jokes related to terrible incidents/accidents with hundreds of dead passengers.


There is a lot you don't get, Walter.

Sounds like something you should take up with the Chaplain.
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Thu 11 Sep, 2014 03:22 pm
@revelette2,
revelette2 wrote:
So you think Glen Greenwald is just going to hand them back to him?
Why should Greenwald do so? If Snowden tells so, he hands the related over to the Swiss authorities ... similar, like all newspapers get the documents.
Walter Hinteler
 
  2  
Thu 11 Sep, 2014 03:27 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Frank Apisa wrote:
There is a lot you don't get, Walter.

Sounds like something you should take up with the Chaplain.
Thanks for that advice - I do hope, it was free as well.
One Eyed Mind
 
  3  
Thu 11 Sep, 2014 03:30 pm
@Walter Hinteler,
Walter, I know Frank is frustrating you, but please if you want to stand for your message, do not get sucked up by his tautology - it's the eternal eye not producing anything and it attacks everyone's eternal eyes that have produced something. Frank is traumatized and envious of you, Walter. Do not let him derail your meaning, because you feel inclined in trying to beat him at his own tautological games - you will never beat him. He already lost, just keep winning. Victim is only half of a victory, Walter! You just went against your own word by not taking these people's lives seriously, by taking Frank seriously and personally - you're losing this way, not to him, but to yourself.
0 Replies
 
revelette2
 
  3  
Thu 11 Sep, 2014 03:52 pm
@Walter Hinteler,
Quote:
If Snowden tells so, he hands the related over to the Swiss authorities


So, Glen Greenwald is basically a puppet at Snowden strings? He is not charge of what happens to documents? Greenwald has been making a lot of money off of these documents, I am not sure he would just hand over documents because Snowden says so. After all, legally, Snowden can't do anything about it because neither one should even have it.

One thing I agree with Bill about, if Snowden is charged, Glen Greenwald should be charged also for being in possession of stolen property. Kind of like Pawn brokers or fences and stolen jewelry and what not.
izzythepush
 
  -1  
Thu 11 Sep, 2014 04:07 pm
@revelette2,
revelette2 wrote:
One thing I agree with Bill about, if Snowden is charged, Glen Greenwald should be charged also for being in possession of stolen property. Kind of like Pawn brokers or fences and stolen jewelry and what not.


Quote:
Theft of government material is one of the three charges brought against Snowden, but it would be unheard of for it to be applied to journalists who handled the same material since they are ordinarily protected under the first amendment for “reporting true, newsworthy information”.


http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/feb/04/us-congressman-mike-rogers-glenn-greenwald-thief-snowden-nsa
Olivier5
 
  1  
Thu 11 Sep, 2014 04:30 pm
@revelette2,
Quote:
Greenwald has been making a lot of money off of these documents,

Another phony accusation... But who is counting them?
Olivier5
 
  1  
Thu 11 Sep, 2014 04:33 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Quote:
Quote:
I don't get jokes related to terrible incidents/accidents with hundreds of dead passengers.

There is a lot you don't get, Walter.

Do you have some jokes about 9/11, Frank? On this day of remembrance, it would be nice to crack a few...
BillRM
 
  5  
Thu 11 Sep, 2014 05:23 pm
@izzythepush,
Quote:
but it would be unheard of for it to be applied to journalists who handled the same material since they are ordinarily protected under the first amendment for “reporting true, newsworthy information”.


Where oh where is there a SC ruling that a journalist can break the espionage laws with immunity?

If so then Snowden should have gotten himself a part time journalist job.
BillRM
 
  4  
Thu 11 Sep, 2014 05:50 pm
@BillRM,
Quote:


http://www.nbcnews.com/id/40653249/ns/us_news-wikileaks_in_security/t/us-v-wikileaks-espionage-first-amendment/#.VBIzfsJdVNg


Stephen I. Vladeck, law professor, American University: Legally, at least, I don’t think it matters whether or not Assange is a journalist or WikiLeaks is a news organization.
The Supreme Court has long resisted the invitation to recognize special constitutional protections for journalists, at least largely because it is so difficult to draw the line between the “mainstream media” and those private citizens who seek to publish information through other means, including blogs, Twitter feeds, or, if they still exist, pamphlets. In that sense, Assange may not be that different from The New York Times or other media outlets that have republished the cables. (Indeed, this will surely be one of his arguments.)
And I think this point goes a long way to explaining why this case is potentially so momentous. Although the U.S. government has never prosecuted a reporter or a newspaper for publishing classified information, the text of the Espionage Act would seem to permit such a prosecution, and several of the Supreme Court justices who decided the Pentagon Papers case in 1971 specifically suggested that The Times and The Washington Post could be prosecuted after the fact for publishing the Pentagon Papers, even while ruling that they couldn’t be enjoined from publication.
So the real question is whether any prosecution of Assange would set a dangerous precedent for potential future prosecutions of the press, or whether the government would rely upon a novel theory that draws a clearer distinction between what Assange did here and what any number of newspapers have done both recently and in the past.
0 Replies
 
 

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
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Snowdon is a dummy
  3. » Page 531
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.08 seconds on 07/06/2025 at 01:00:28