41
   

Snowdon is a dummy

Forums: Politics, Snowden, Asylum, Nsa, Snowdon
Email this Topic • Print this Page
 
 
BillRM
 
  2  
Reply Wed 30 Sep, 2015 10:59 am
@revelette2,
So tearing up his life and risking spending most of his remaining life in a small cell was done for an ego boast in your opinion?

An blowing the whistle on programs that even the rubber stamp secret court and other federal courts had found at least in part unconstitutional is wrong?

In other word, any level of government misdeeds should be allowed to be hidden if any of the persons behind the misdeeds happen to have a rubber secret stamp?.
Frank Apisa
 
  0  
Reply Wed 30 Sep, 2015 11:07 am
@BillRM,
BillRM wrote:

So tearing up his life and risking spending most of his remaining life in a small cell was done for an ego boast in your opinion?

An blowing the whistle on programs that even the rubber stamp secret court and other federal courts had found at least in part unconstitutional is wrong?

In other word, any level of government misdeeds should be allowed to be hidden if any of the persons behind the misdeeds happen to have a rubber secret stamp?.


I would answer those questions with a "no."

And if someone, like Edward Snowden, breaks any laws that deal with them...they should get a fair trial.

Don't you think people like that should get a fair trial, Bill?
BillRM
 
  2  
Reply Wed 30 Sep, 2015 11:43 am
@Frank Apisa,
Sorry but somehow I question if the federal courts would allowed the defense of necessity and without that defense being available there can not be a "fair: trial for Snowden.

Quote:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Necessity

In U.S. criminal law, necessity may be either a possible justification or an exculpation for breaking the law. Defendants seeking to rely on this defense argue that they should not be held liable for their actions as a crime because their conduct was necessary to prevent some greater harm and when that conduct is not excused under some other more specific provision of law such as self defense.


If Snowden for example had come across a plot for a military coup and one of the plotters had a secret stamp and mark their plotting paperwork with that stamp then to reveal the coup would without would question be illegal......

That the kind of logic you are handing out.
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Wed 30 Sep, 2015 11:54 am
@BillRM,
BillRM wrote:

Sorry but somehow I question if the federal courts would allowed the defense of necessity and without that defense being available there can not be a "fair: trial for Snowden.

Quote:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Necessity

In U.S. criminal law, necessity may be either a possible justification or an exculpation for breaking the law. Defendants seeking to rely on this defense argue that they should not be held liable for their actions as a crime because their conduct was necessary to prevent some greater harm and when that conduct is not excused under some other more specific provision of law such as self defense.


If Snowden for example had come across a plot for a military coup and one of the plotters had a secret stamp and mark their plotting paperwork with that stamp then to reveal the coup would without would question be illegal......

That the kind of logic you are handing out.


"I only robbed the bank because my kids needed food...and the bank had money to steal."

C'mon...get off that kind of thinking, Bill.

A "fair trial" for Edward Snowden would use defenses available right now.

You apparently do not want a fair trial. You want an unfair trial...one that will exonerate him no matter what.

The guy is charged with some serious offenses. He should come back to the United States to stand trial on them...or stay put where he is.

Either is fine with me.
BillRM
 
  2  
Reply Wed 30 Sep, 2015 05:24 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Quote:
"I only robbed the bank because my kids needed food...and the bank had money to steal."



I robbed the bank because my kids was being held hostage or I robbed the bank because they placed a remoter control bomb on me or I robbed the bank....

Footnote bank vaults was first equipped with time locks to keep robbers from seizing bank officers in the middle of the night at their homes and then forcing them to open the bank vaults.

In any case, I had hear that Snowden US lawyers had been in talks with the federal government over terms that he would consider turning himself in and I would bet one of the terms would be to allowed a necessity defense
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Thu 1 Oct, 2015 02:42 am
@BillRM,
BillRM



What I want to see...is for him to get a fair trial. If a fair trial includes a "necessity defense"...fine with me. If it doesn't...also fine with me.

If Snowden stays in Russia forever...fine with me.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Fri 2 Oct, 2015 08:58 am
Quote:
US surveillance in Germany has been depicted as normal by the former head of Germany's BND foreign intelligence agency. August Hanning says "everyone" must anticipate telephone eavesdropping.
[...]
"I wish to clarify that you must of course reckon that everyone who communicates openly will be wiretapped." "I am not surprised that German targets were spied upon," Hanning added. ... ... ...
[...]
Last month, the opposition Greens and Left parties filed a complaint with Germany's constitutional court in Karlsruhe on the grounds the parliamentarians had the right to control the secret services.
Source
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Fri 2 Oct, 2015 09:03 am
@Walter Hinteler,
Walter Hinteler wrote:

Quote:
US surveillance in Germany has been depicted as normal by the former head of Germany's BND foreign intelligence agency. August Hanning says "everyone" must anticipate telephone eavesdropping.
[...]
"I wish to clarify that you must of course reckon that everyone who communicates openly will be wiretapped." "I am not surprised that German targets were spied upon," Hanning added. ... ... ...
[...]
Last month, the opposition Greens and Left parties filed a complaint with Germany's constitutional court in Karlsruhe on the grounds the parliamentarians had the right to control the secret services.
Source


Obviously, I agree with Hanning on this.
BillRM
 
  2  
Reply Fri 2 Oct, 2015 09:32 am
@Frank Apisa,
Yes the whole west should expect that all our conversations are subject to massive spying by our own and other governments.

The hell with the US constitution and the other nations laws and constitutions.

PS the way to end this nonsense is to used strong ciphers for all of our communications no matter how innocent they happen to be.

Thank god for Snowden the Paul Revere of our times.
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Fri 2 Oct, 2015 09:38 am
@BillRM,
BillRM wrote:

Yes the whole west should expect that all our conversations are subject to massive spying by our own and other governments.

The hell with the US constitution and the other nations laws and constitutions.

PS the way to end this nonsense is to used strong ciphers for all of our communications no matter how innocent they happen to be.

Thank god for Snowden the Paul Revere of our times.



Did Paul Revere actually go to Russia for protection?

Spying happens...and will continue to happen.

What the countries of the world have to do...is to contact you, Bill...because you know how to eliminate the problem all those other dummies have not been able to solve!
RABEL222
 
  1  
Reply Fri 2 Oct, 2015 03:41 pm
@Frank Apisa,
Paul Revere no. Benedict Arnold yes. He even moved to Briton just as Snowden moved to Russia.
BillRM
 
  2  
Reply Fri 2 Oct, 2015 05:29 pm
@RABEL222,
Quote:
Paul Revere no. Benedict Arnold yes. He even moved to Briton just as Snowden moved to Russia.


It was not Snowden who was bending to the breaking point and beyond the US constitution in secret at that.

Quote:


Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.

B. Franklin

BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Fri 2 Oct, 2015 07:19 pm
@RABEL222,
Quote:
Benedict Arnold yes. He even moved to Briton just as Snowden moved to Russia.


You do know by the way that the Tories was the ones supporting the "legal" government of the colonies at the time and the foundering fathers was the revolutionaries?

That Franklin son was in fact on the Brits side and was the governor of PA.
BillRM
 
  2  
Reply Sat 3 Oct, 2015 01:59 am
@RABEL222,
Footnote it is my opinion from Frank strong and blind supported for almost any actions of the government that if Frank had been born in the era of the revolutionary war he would had been a Tory and a loyal supporter of his king.
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Sat 3 Oct, 2015 04:12 am
@BillRM,
Quote:
It was not Snowden who was bending to the breaking point and beyond the US constitution in secret at that.


Okay...this comment of yours has got to mean something.

I sure wish I could figure out what that is.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Sat 3 Oct, 2015 04:15 am
@BillRM,
BillRM wrote:

Footnote it is my opinion from Frank strong and blind supported for almost any actions of the government that if Frank had been born in the era of the revolutionary war he would had been a Tory and a loyal supporter of his king.


I do not give government "strong and blind" support on anything...and have written extensively in op ed pieces in many, many newspapers throughout the country of opposition to many governmental actions.

Nice try at an insult...and written as though someone helped you with it.

My bet: Someone did.

Too bad you don't get help with all your posts.
izzythepush
 
  2  
Reply Sat 3 Oct, 2015 05:46 am
@Frank Apisa,
Frank Apisa wrote:
Nice try at an insult...and written as though someone helped you with it.


Someone who'd just had a stroke.
BillRM
 
  2  
Reply Sat 3 Oct, 2015 08:14 am
@izzythepush,
Quote:
Someone who'd just had a stroke.


LOL does your family name happen to be Arnold?

izzythepush
 
  1  
Reply Sat 3 Oct, 2015 08:49 am
@BillRM,
No, is yours Savile?
0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  2  
Reply Sat 3 Oct, 2015 09:38 am
@RABEL222,
Footnote Arnold did his thing for the money and social position that the Brits had offer/promise him and that does not apply to Snowden who actions was clearly motivated by his love of both his country and the constitution.

His actions cost him a nice comfortable life and surely did not result in him being granted a large pot of gold as in Arnold case.
 

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
AMERICAN CONSERVATISM IN 2008 AND BEYOND - Discussion by Foxfyre
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Fellow Bostonians: How many of us wished we had an assault weapon last night? - Question by maxdancona
What should be first on the agenda of the winner in November? - Discussion by Frank Apisa
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Snowdon is a dummy
  3. » Page 661
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.07 seconds on 04/29/2024 at 05:26:33
▲ ▼