42
   

Snowdon is a dummy

 
 
Frank Apisa
 
  2  
Wed 10 Jun, 2015 06:38 pm
@Olivier5,
Give him what?
Frank Apisa
 
  2  
Wed 10 Jun, 2015 06:39 pm
@hawkeye10,
hawkeye10 wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:

Snowden deserves a fair trial...so he has the opportunity to clear his name.

That is what I want to see him get...a fair trial.

THere cant be a fair trial with the laws this fucked up, this much working against the interests of the citizens. What he needs, and what we need, is a fair deal, which may more may not include awarding him a metal.


He deserves a fair trial...not your idea of a "fair deal."

He has been charged with crimes...and he should be allowed a fair trial.
hawkeye10
 
  2  
Wed 10 Jun, 2015 06:53 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Quote:
He has been charged with crimes...and he should be allowed a fair trial


By the government that lied to us, and violated our rights. The government has no standing to put Snowden in its "justice" system. If this government now wants to do something productive then #1 on the todo list is to apologize to us and the rest of the world for what it did, then #2 is to promise to try to do better in the future.
Frank Apisa
 
  2  
Wed 10 Jun, 2015 06:57 pm
@hawkeye10,
hawkeye10 wrote:

Quote:
He has been charged with crimes...and he should be allowed a fair trial


By the government that lied to us, and violated our rights. The government has no standing to put Snowden in its "justice" system.


Yeah...it does.

That is why he is not coming back to the US.
hawkeye10
 
  2  
Wed 10 Jun, 2015 07:02 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Quote:


Yeah...it does.

That is why he is not coming back to the US.

If your wife tells you to jump off a bridge because she has another guy in mind and wants the insurance money are you morally unfit if you dont? Because for a lot of guys who sound like you this is what they act like they expect out of Snowden. I am going with that this is an unreasonable request of a man. Sorry.
oralloy
 
  0  
Wed 10 Jun, 2015 08:16 pm
@InfraBlue,
InfraBlue wrote:
oralloy wrote:
InfraBlue wrote:
After having implemented this surveillance program in complete secrecy

The program was authorized by public legislation.

Not explicitly. The regime justifies its surveillance program, PRISM, by way of its 2008 amendment to the, Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978, but it isn't in that amendment.

That may be the case with PRISM, but the program that was just eviscerated was explicitly authorized by the PATRIOT Act.

And given the fact that the program that was explicitly authorized by law has just been eviscerated for no good reason, there seems to be a good argument for going the route of just implementing these programs without any legal authorization.


InfraBlue wrote:
oralloy wrote:
InfraBlue wrote:
and circle-jerk collusion throughout all of the branches of government

Was it bad that they got warrants from judges before they accessed the data???

It's bad that the judiciary won't even consider this program's legality on the basis that no one has demonstrated that they've been directly harmed by this program. They're issuing warrants through a program of dubious, to say the least, legality.

Are we talking about PRISM or the phone metadata?

The phone metadata program was legal as far as I can see.

It is noteworthy that the explicitly legal program was just destroyed, while the not-so-legal program continues unabated.
oralloy
 
  0  
Wed 10 Jun, 2015 08:17 pm
@McTag,
McTag wrote:
A terrorist is a man with a bomb but no air force.

A guerrilla is a man with a bomb but no air force.

A terrorist is a war criminal who intentionally targets civilians.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  0  
Wed 10 Jun, 2015 08:18 pm
@Olivier5,
Olivier5 wrote:
Their jobs is on the line, so they would say that whether or not it's true. I don't expect anyone to say the truth if doing so involves professional suicide.

I doubt their jobs are at risk. We will continue to have them spy on the world no matter what happens.

We might stop providing them with judicial oversight because of Snowden, but we won't stop them from spying.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -1  
Wed 10 Jun, 2015 08:19 pm
@hawkeye10,
hawkeye10 wrote:
no one has pointed out to me a more moral response than what Snowden did.

It would be more moral for him to not have damaged our national security for no good reason.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -1  
Wed 10 Jun, 2015 08:19 pm
@ehBeth,
Quote:
Earlier this week, Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) said the new law makes our country stronger, not weaker, in the face of terrorism and security.

Eviscerating intelligence programs does not make us stronger.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -1  
Wed 10 Jun, 2015 08:57 pm
@Olivier5,
Olivier5 wrote:
What if your country is betraying its values and its people? What if it is betraying humanity?

The United States is not doing any such thing.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -1  
Wed 10 Jun, 2015 08:57 pm
@Olivier5,
Olivier5 wrote:
Thanks. Worth quoting some more.
Quote:
Two years on, the difference is profound. In a single month, the N.S.A.’s invasive call-tracking program was declared unlawful by the courts and disowned by Congress. After a White House-appointed oversight board investigation found that this program had not stopped a single terrorist attack, even the president who once defended its propriety and criticized its disclosure has now ordered it terminated.

Whatever article you are quoting is pretty sloppy regarding its accuracy. The program was not invasive. Phone records were only accessed with the permission of a search warrant.

The program was not declared unlawful by the courts. It was declared unlawful by a court. There was little chance that higher courts would share the radical agenda of those lower judges.

The idea that intelligence is only useful if it can be definitively shown to have stopped an attack is profoundly ignorant.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -1  
Wed 10 Jun, 2015 08:58 pm
@hawkeye10,
hawkeye10 wrote:
By the government that lied to us, and violated our rights.

Governments always lie. However, I am not aware of any serious lies in this case.

There is also not much of a case to be made that there were any civil rights violations.


hawkeye10 wrote:
If this government now wants to do something productive then #1 on the todo list is to apologize to us and the rest of the world for what it did, then #2 is to promise to try to do better in the future.

Apologize for trying to stop terrorism?

Fat chance.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -2  
Wed 10 Jun, 2015 08:58 pm
@hawkeye10,
hawkeye10 wrote:
THere cant be a fair trial with the laws this fucked up, this much working against the interests of the citizens.

It is in the interest of the citizens to be protected from terrorists.


hawkeye10 wrote:
What he needs, and what we need, is a fair deal, which may more may not include awarding him a metal.

Fair to who? To the terrorists that he helped teach how to evade US security?
hawkeye10
 
  0  
Wed 10 Jun, 2015 10:48 pm
@oralloy,
Quote:
To the terrorists that he helped teach how to evade US security?


With as bad as our intel community has been and for as long as it has I am not all all sure that terrorists and foreign governments need any help in evading US Security. These motherfuckers are so dumb that they decided to try to collect every bit of data just assuming that their fancy computers and ultra geeky geek squad would figure it out. And if the operation is illegal who gives a ****, just dont tell anyone. "
SAFETY!SAFETY!SAFETY!SAFETY!SAFETY!SAFETY!SAFETY!SAFETY!
SAFETY!SAFETY!SAFETY!SAFETY!SAFETY!SAFETY!SAFETY!SAFETY!
SAFETY!SAFETY!SAFETY!SAFETY!SAFETY!SAFETY!SAFETY!SAFETY!
SAFETY!SAFETY!SAFETY!SAFETY!SAFETY!SAFETY!SAFETY!SAFETY!
SAFETY!SAFETY!SAFETY!SAFETY!SAFETY!SAFETY!SAFETY!SAFETY!
SAFETY!SAFETY!SAFETY!SAFETY!SAFETY!SAFETY!SAFETY!SAFETY!
SAFETY!SAFETY!SAFETY!SAFETY!SAFETY!SAFETY!SAFETY!SAFETY!
SAFETY!SAFETY!SAFETY!SAFETY!SAFETY!SAFETY!SAFETY!SAFETY!
SAFETY!SAFETY!SAFETY!SAFETY!
"
oralloy
 
  0  
Wed 10 Jun, 2015 11:28 pm
@hawkeye10,
hawkeye10 wrote:
And if the operation is illegal who gives a ****, just dont tell anyone.

There is now a strong argument for doing it illegally.

They made the phone metadata program legal, having Congress expressly authorize it in legislation, and only accessing data after getting a warrant from a judge.

For all their trouble of making the program legal, they got a bunch of untrue accusations that it was somehow illegal, and now the program has been eviscerated.

Programs that were implemented in complete secrecy with no Congressional or judicial oversight are still doing fine today.

Lesson learned I suspect.
0 Replies
 
Olivier5
 
  1  
Thu 11 Jun, 2015 02:51 am
@Frank Apisa,
A fair trial. What else?
Olivier5
 
  1  
Thu 11 Jun, 2015 02:53 am
@hawkeye10,
Not only was it the moral thing to do, it was the EFFECTIVE thing to do. It worked.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  3  
Thu 11 Jun, 2015 03:14 am
@hawkeye10,
You stated:
Quote:
The government has no standing to put Snowden in its "justice" system.


I responded:
Quote:
Yeah...it does.


If you want to respond to that...fine. If you want to talk about jumping off bridges...I'm not interested.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  2  
Thu 11 Jun, 2015 03:17 am
@Olivier5,
Olivier5 wrote:

A fair trial. What else?


What I have said many, many times in this thread.

After a fair trial...

...if found not-guilty, to be set free to live his life as purposefully and contentedly as he can.

...if found guilty, to be punished as the law determines.


If
 

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
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Snowdon is a dummy
  3. » Page 633
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.07 seconds on 09/19/2024 at 05:54:10