Snowdon is a dummy

@BillRM,

Thanks for the information Bill. Over and out.

0 Replies

@Olivier5,

Quote:

Momentum-in-Time wrote:
How, pray tell, is mass spying "dangerous for the US democracy and diplomacy" at this time?!

Quote:

Oliver5 wrote:
Isn't that obvious?

If it were obvious I would not have wasted words asking you, Oliver5.

Quote:

When NATO needs to be strong because of Putin or ISIS, Obama has nothing better to do than spying on Merkel?

Jeepers, I did not realize President Obama were himself spying on Merkel. I knew at one time NSA was involved but had not revealed this to the President. I realize Obama had apologized to Chancellor Angela Merkel for what NSA did. Are you inferring Obama is involved with this still?!

Quote:

And how is a democracy supposed to function if the (theoretically sovereign) people is spied on by its servants the politicians?

Spying by Americans, Germany, Russia, the UK, etc, has been going on since each country discovered how to do it; now it's more sophisticated. Countries spying on each other is a fact of life! It is reality. Personally, Oliver5, I don't think you have the capability to change this.

Quote:

Oliver5 wrote:
If the legislative and judiciary branches of government are spied on by the executive? The NSA can pick and chose your next president, if they want to...

Let's look at it this way, what you imply is a remote possibility, but in practice, I just don't believe such will occur simply because presidential elections are scrutinized too closely for any formal malapropos! In the case of the presidential election in 2000, GWB stole the election but a significant number of Americans realized this.....saw what was happening...... but were unable to do anything about it. GWB's Presidential parade down Pennsylvania Avenue in DC was marked by many Americans with protest signs displayed saying: "YOU STOLE THE ELECTION!" Yes indeed! The election was stolen by James Baker, former Secretary of State under the senior Bush. Baker interrupted the hand count as he saw GWB's small lead dissipating and stopped the count, taking the election to a partisan SCOTUS. Later, when the brouhaha had died down, an uninterrupted count took place and Al Gore was the winner! It was too late to do anything about it then as GWB was already installed and Cheney was well into his agenda to illegally invade Iraq.

The US media keeps track of whose up and who is down in presidential elections and it is the electorate, the body of persons entitled to vote in an election, who select the president. So in theory you might possibly have a so so point, Oliver5, but in practice I don't think it a realistic one. It looks to me as if you are grasping at straws to make an argument that appear untenable.

Meanwhile, we've beaten this horse to death and it's time to move on.

2 Replies

@RABEL222,

The difference is one is not true.

0 Replies

@revelette2,

Of course. The distinction you are trying to make is between various shades of Islamism. Just like there are both 'moderate' social-democrats and 'extreme' leftists under the same broad tent of Socialism, Islamists come in various shades. Some believe the constitution should make reference to Allah and accommodate some mullah council or another, while others want to usher in the Muslim end of times by violent means and ASAP. And yet other Muslims (preciously few) are secular, i.e. don't want to mix religion and politics at all.

So the term 'extremist' works, but is technically different from 'Islamist'. I meant both moderate and extreme Islamists. Now whether they would accept these categories is another matter...

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

Quote:

What do you call a christian extremist?

A nutcase.

0 Replies

@BillRM,

Quote:

Now given that they had in fact lied not only to the public but to congress a numbers of times over related matters, why are you so willing to give them the benefit of the doubt?

Obama did not lie to congress and he is the one said there will be no more spying on leaders of allies, he specified Merkel.

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

To be honest, I have no idea what you are getting at. My point is this: when referring to AQ and ISIS, it is better to simply say Muslim extremist to distinguish between extreme/militant Muslims and non-violent Muslims. Whether you agree or not, I can't really tell.

2 Replies

@revelette2,

I understand the importance of distinguishing our fellow men from those that prey upon our fellow men.

What I do not understand is why the people that were captured have not once showed any signs of fear. I felt like they were acting, but I could not help it; there wasn't any emotion in the people captured. I watched their body language. There wasn't a quiver.

1 Reply

@revelette2,

Quote:

Obama did not lie to congress and he is the one said there will be no more spying on leaders of allies, he specified Merkel.

Strange so the intelligence agencies will lied to congress in order to do what they wish to do but would not lied also to the President if need be?

To say nothing of trusting the word of this or any other president when it come to national security issues. I still can remember President Eisenhower telling the American people that the U2 the Russians had shot down over Russia was not a spy plane but an off course weather research plane.

Take note also that Obama did not do anything to the people who had been found out to had lied to congress.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

Quote:

Take note also that Obama did not do anything to the people who had been found out to had lied to congress.

Clapper was just on the news again today, inexplicably still in his job...."yes, we cant deny it any longer, we missed the boat completely on ISIS. SORRY!"

0 Replies

@Moment-in-Time,

Moment-in-Time wrote:

Spying by Americans, Germany, Russia, the UK, etc, has been going on since each country discovered how to do it; now it's more sophisticated. Countries spying on each other is a fact of life!

It is reported today that the CIA stopped spying in Germany (and perhaps some other West European countries) in response to the furor over a German caught selling secrets to the United States and the Edward Snowden revelations of classified information held by the National Security Agency.
AP report

Sources from the (German) Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (counterintelligence) are said to confirm this according to various media.

1 Reply

@Walter Hinteler,

Walter Hinteler wrote:

Moment-in-Time wrote:
Spying by Americans, Germany, Russia, the UK, etc, has been going on since each country discovered how to do it; now it's more sophisticated. Countries spying on each other is a fact of life!

It is reported today that the CIA stopped spying in Germany (and perhaps some other West European countries) in response to the furor over a German caught selling secrets to the United States and the Edward Snowden revelations of classified information held by the National Security Agency.
AP report

Sources from the (German) Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (counterintelligence) are said to confirm this according to various media.

The opening sentence (and many sentences like it in the text) was:

Quote:

The CIA has curbed spying on friendly governments in Western Europe in response to the furor over a German caught selling secrets to the United States and the Edward Snowden revelations of classified information held by the National Security Agency, according to current and former U.S. officials.

Yeah...according to "current and former U.S. officials"...they have made that change.

Frankly, I hope the current and former U.S. officials are lying.

Spying is going on. We are being spied on...and we are spying on others. To exempt certain countries from these measures because they are "allies" is, in my opinion, wrong-headed.

I understand that reasonable, intelligent people can strongly disagree with me on that.

2 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Frank Apisa wrote:

Spying is going on. We are being spied on...and we are spying on others. To exempt certain countries from these measures because they are "allies" is, in my opinion, wrong-headed.

The reasen given was a bit different: not because they are allies, but whether spying on allies is worth running the risk of discovery.

AP wrote:

The pause in decades of espionage, which remains partially in effect, was designed to give CIA officers time to examine whether they were being careful enough and to evaluate whether spying on allies is worth running the risk of discovery, said a U.S. official who has been briefed on the situation

1 Reply

@Walter Hinteler,

Walter Hinteler wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:
Spying is going on. We are being spied on...and we are spying on others. To exempt certain countries from these measures because they are "allies" is, in my opinion, wrong-headed.

The reasen given was a bit different: not because they are allies, but whether spying on allies is worth running the risk of discovery.

AP wrote:
The pause in decades of espionage, which remains partially in effect, was designed to give CIA officers time to examine whether they were being careful enough and to evaluate whether spying on allies is worth running the risk of discovery, said a U.S. official who has been briefed on the situation

You are absolutely correct on that, Walter.

But I am saying, "Damn the risks."

Tell everyone out-front that if we think spying is appropriate...we will do it...perceived allies or perceived enemies.

Who are we kidding...it almost certainly is being done anyway. Why the pretense?

In any case, I would not particularly put much credence in the AP report...the people upon whom the report is based...or anyone else.

If the intelligence community thinks needed intelligence can be gained by data gathering anywhere...I want to see them do it.

I realize many will disagree.

0 Replies

By the way, Walter...here is something you might find interesting.

Quote:

ROME, Sept 20 —Security has been tightened in Saint Peter's Square after intelligence services intercepted a possible plan to attack the Vatican, Italian media reported today, increasing fears Pope Francis could be in danger.
A foreign security service alerted Italy this week after intercepting a conversation between two Arab speakers which referred to "a demonstrative act, Wednesday, at the Vatican," Il Messaggero daily reported.
Wednesday is the day the pope holds his weekly general audience in the square in front of Saint Peter's Basilica.
Checks by Italy's anti-terrorism unit revealed that one of the speakers passed through the country eight months ago, heightening concerns the threat may be real.

http://www.themalaymailonline.com/world/article/vatican-on-high-alert-after-threat-says-report

"A foreign security service" intercepted a conversation.

Not sure which service...or what kind of data gathering in which they were engaged in order to have accomplished the inerception...but...something to consider.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Frank Apisa wrote:

By the way, Walter...here is something you might find interesting.

Has been reported last weekend here.

Seems that the knowledge of Italian isn't the best at Malay Mail Online:
Iraq's ambassador to the Holy See gave this bomb alarm, which he said would be done by ISIS

Original report from last week (13.09.14)
Today's report

1 Reply

@Walter Hinteler,

Walter Hinteler wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:
By the way, Walter...here is something you might find interesting.

Has been reported last weekend here.

Seems that the knowledge of Italian isn't the best at Malay Mail Online:
Iraq's ambassador to the Holy See gave this bomb alarm, which he said would be done by ISIS

Original report from last week (13.09.14)
Today's report

Malay Mail Online mentions that in its report, Walter.

Quote:

In an interview with Italy's La Nazione daily this week, Iraq's ambassador to the Holy See, Habib Al Sadr, said "what has been declared by the self-declared Islamic State is clear. They want to kill the pope. The threats against the pope are credible."

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

Frankly, I hope the current and former U.S. officials are lying.

Don't worry Frank, I am sure Bill and/or others will come along soon and say with absolute certainty "they are lying."

2 Replies

@One Eyed Mind,

I am not sure who the people are to which you are referring to. If it is terrorist who are caught and we see them on tv briefly in trails or something? If it is, I am not an expert, but it seems to me, when you consider suicide bombers going blithely to their deaths, the terrorist are pretty stoic individuals who seem to frantically believe in their causes to the point of either their own deaths or whatever fate has in store or whoever stands in their in way or innocent bystanders deaths or destructions.

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Frank Apisa wrote:

Malay Mail Online mentions that in its report, Walter.
Quote:
In an interview with Italy's La Nazione daily this week, Iraq's ambassador to the Holy See, Habib Al Sadr, said "what has been declared by the self-declared Islamic State is clear. They want to kill the pope. The threats against the pope are credible."

I referred to the report in Il Messaggero, not the later interview in La Nazione.

Yesterday's (the above linked report is updated today) Il Messaggero report is just about the Italian security due to a "bomb alarm". It doesn't mention what is done in Vatican City by the Corps of Gendarmerie of Vatican City.

1 Reply

Snowdon is a dummy

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know