Snowdon is a dummy

@revelette2,

revelette2 wrote:

So do you think your government fabricated the leak to start with just to make the US look better?

it would certainly run true to form

0 Replies

Well, I guess everyone has their conspiracy theories. I personally would rather wait for the facts to lead me to my conclusions. Even if Snowden has something to do with it, not sure how he would, but anyway, even if he did, the US still looks incompetent because we were/are and have been ever since Snowden stole the files in the first place.

2 Replies

@revelette2,

You are jumping to conclusions. I pointed out the timing was suspicious, which it is, you were the one who started jumping to conclusions, calling me a conspiracy nut for not falling meekly in line with the official narrative.

2 Replies

@izzythepush,

The timing is very suspicious - that's what has been noted outside the UK, too. (It's UK-related.)

And the Sunday Times had changed the article after the first publication, additionally, on Monday, deleting the paragraph about Miranda having met Snowdon in Moscow before the UK detention.

0 Replies

@revelette2,

revelette2 wrote:

Well, I guess everyone has their conspiracy theories.

I believe the governments refer to it as cooperation.

1 Reply

@ehBeth,

ehBeth wrote:

revelette2 wrote:
Well, I guess everyone has their conspiracy theories.

I believe the governments refer to it as cooperation.

Snowden leak: governments' hostile reaction fuelled public's distrust of spies

Quote:

The hostile reaction of the British and US governments to the Snowden disclosures of mass surveillance only served to heighten public suspicion of the work of the intelligence agencies, according to an international conference of senior intelligence and security figures.

The recently published official account of a Ditchley Foundation conference last month says one of the event’s main conclusions was that greater transparency about the activities and capabilities of the security services would be essential if their credibility was to be preserved and enhanced around the world.
... ... ...

2 Replies

@izzythepush,

Quote:

All of which shows that America's hardball attitude has been totally counterproductive. Not only do they not have Snowden, but they've ensured the Russians and Chinese have got their hands on the files.

What this compounds in my mind, is that Edward Snowden was disloyal to his country by giving away US classified documents to unauthorized individuals. He signed an oath not to reveal confidential governmental classified secrets and he went ahead and did it anyway ensuring that China and Russia and others would be able to obtain US concealed information, that these countries are now, *possibly* in a position to harm America.

You act as if the US has a monopoly on spying. No country is perfect all participate in spying to the degree they are technology ready; varying countries do awful things which end up being "counterproductive" but I'm particularly concerned only with what Edward Snowden, an American citizen did; he absconded to another country, spilling US secrets which left him open to attack by foreign countries and America vulnerable through his lack of unforeseen knowledge.

0 Replies

@izzythepush,

Quote:

Because they're trying to blame Snowden instead of ineffective computer security.

Are you sure your bias isn't causing you to invent excuses to cast blame on the US for going after Snowden? - What makes you think US computer security was "ineffective"? Do you know something others do not know? If so, please share! Your conjecture, IMO, is completely unfounded. You do not really know what has transpired!

Quote:

What paints America in the best light, being betrayed by Snowden or having lax security?

Edward Snowden exposed himself and America to a state of powerlessness for computer attack when he hurriedly and secretly skipped the country for Hong Kong with classified encryption documents.

1 Reply

@izzythepush,

I am not aware of jumping to any conclusions. I don't know all the facts so I am waiting until I do.

If the timing is suspicious, what are the suspicions of the timing? Spell it out so I won't be accused of jumping to conclusions. I thought I understood you to say you thought the UK, British (not sure which is correct) leaked the information of the British having to remove their agents because of Snowden files just to make the US look like victims instead of merely incompetent which really makes no sense to me but I thought that is what you said in your own words of course. Correct me if I am wrong. If the British didn't fabricate the entire incident (I find it hard to believe they would for such a stupid reason), then I still don't see how that makes the US look any better, they/we are still incompetent and we have been victim of a theft from Snowden and now a victim from China and obviously our security is not very good and we need to work on it.

0 Replies

Korkamann...Revelette...

...in arguing with people like Izzy and Beth (to name two on this page) and to a slightly lesser extent, Walter...

...all you are doing is pissing into the wind, because they are motivated primarily by an intense dislike of America, Americans, and anything American. I would use the word "hate", but they are not worth the trouble.

Snowden deserves a fair trial on the charges that have been brought against him. That is all he deserves. If found not guilty...he should go free and live his life as best he can. If found guilty...he should be punished according to the laws governing the charges.

You will NEVER convince people like these that Snowden is not a hero. In their opinion, Snowden has brought dishonor on America...and for that, they consider him a hero. They want him lauded as a hero...and then they would discard him as just another American abomination.

Have fun trying, though.

1 Reply

@Walter Hinteler,

Probably die hard Snowden fans, they seem to have their innards all upset over this and see a big conspiracy between the UK and US. I think it is a little nuts myself.

1 Reply

@Walter Hinteler,

Quote:

The hostile reaction of the British and US governments to the Snowden disclosures of mass surveillance only served to heighten public suspicion of the work of the intelligence agencies, according to an international conference of senior intelligence and security figures.

The recently published official account of a Ditchley Foundation conference last month says one of the event’s main conclusions was that greater transparency about the activities and capabilities of the security services would be essential if their credibility was to be preserved and enhanced around the world.

Right!!!

What the west needs to do is to let the world know is who its spies are; what they are doing and whom they are doing it to.

Then their "credibility" will be "preserved and enhanced around the world."

What on Earth would make any intelligent person think that crock of rose bush fertilizer makes any sense whatsoever?

It goes beyond idiocy.

When reported to the leaders of countries like Russia and China by the people they have monitoring the west's media...I cannot imagine the kind of laughter it evokes.

Yeah...there are people around the world stupid enough to demand greater transparency of their intelligence agencies.

Seems incredible...but there are.

Ya gotta get a laugh at them along with those leaders I mentioned.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

To quote from that conference (see link in report above):

Quote:

At the same time, we also thought it was important that overseers should see their task as including the preservation of the legitimate interests of the agencies and of national security, as well as the protection of the public. Their actions had to be about striking the right balance between the two – a balance which might vary from time to time in a particular country, for example because of increases or decreases in threats or public anxiety levels.

Our general view was that elected politicians and ministers were better-placed to provide the necessary warrants and authorisations for intelligence activities than lawyers or judges. They could take a broader look at the justification of the proposed activities, taking into account their wisdom, their political and other risks, and their proportionality, as well as their legality. They could and should also be able to defend and justify their decisions in parliament and other public fora, in ways which would be more difficult for, say, judges.

So that really "goes beyond idiocy"?

The chair of that conference, Sir John Scarlett KCMG OBE, was chief of Secret Intelligence Service 2004-09; the German member has been president of our Office for the Protection of the Constitution (domestic secret service). Just to name two ... idiots.

1 Reply

@Walter Hinteler,

The part you thought important enough to quote earlier, Walter...is beyond idiocy. It is the kind of thinking naive toddlers should offer.

And frankly, the crap in that second quote barely rises above, "We all have to get along."

It is all well and good to use phrases like "legitimate interests of the agencies and of national security, as well as the protection of the public" and " (t)heir actions had to be about striking the right balance between the two"...but that is a pleasure reserved to people like the ones making this report. Actually implementing what is being talked about...is a much more difficult thing.

The intelligence community of the United States and Great Britain think they have been doing that...striking the right balance. The general public seems to be more on their side than the shrill detractors. A segment of dissatisfied people who seem to disagree with whatever government is doing...obviously feels differently. Some of the politicians, seeking the best voting posture, agree at various times with one faction and then the others.

Edward Snowden was not elected by anyone to make a decision on this matter. He chose to do so...and as he said, he risked his freedom.

Time to step forward and be the hero he thinks he is...and some of you think he is.

Fact the music. Face a fair trial.

Okay?

2 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Frank Apisa wrote:

The intelligence community of the United States and Great Britain think they have been doing that...striking the right balance. The general public seems to be more on their side than the shrill detractors. A segment of dissatisfied people who seem to disagree with whatever government is doing...obviously feels differently. Some of the politicians, seeking the best voting posture, agree at various times with one faction and then the others.

When you had lokked at who took part at that conference, you would have noticed that the participants from the UK were part of the "intelligence community". (The chairman and author of the second quote [you called it "crap"], Sir John McLeod Scarlett, was Chief of the British Secret Intelligence Service [MI6] from 2004 to 2009. Prior to this appointment, he had chaired the Cabinet Office Joint Intelligence Committee [JIC].)

1 Reply

@Walter Hinteler,

Whatever. And who knows what pressures were brought to bear on any of the participants.

In any case, it is my opinion that making the decisions is tougher than the pap that was being spread in that report.

2 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Frank Apisa wrote:

And who knows what pressures were brought to bear on any of the participants.

Well, you could be right - I do think, one of the current governors of the Ditchley Foundation, a certain David Cameron, MP. Prime Minister of the United Kingdom and Conservative Member of Parliament for Witney, could be the main person to have used such pressure.

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

I agree, It does seem to defeat the purpose of intelligence gathering if you let everyone know how you are going to gather that intelligence because then the terrorist will just go around whatever has been set up.

In the report did they happen to have advice on how to be both transparent and still have the intelligence gathering capabilities?

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Frank Apisa wrote:

Fact the music. Face a fair trial.

Okay?

Looking at this chart from a recent Gallup survey ...

Quote:

... some US-citizens seem to have some doubts in the US criminal justice system

Quote:

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

3 Replies

@Walter Hinteler,

I am not surprised, there has been a lot of shootings by the police and they get away with it.

2 Replies

Snowdon is a dummy

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know