RTB Posted December 28, 2013 Posted December 28, 2013 Even if what you say is true (debatable), check out the re-election statistics for incumbents seeking re-election in the House. It all comes back to the people. We (as in the vast majority of the population) are the problem and the politicians are just the large symptom. What is debatable? If you and I elect a new member to Congress (because the incumbent sucked ass) based on a promise never to take away from military retirement, for example, and they start voting to cut benefits, who is to blame? They don't get a pass just because we made the choice to believe them. If we leave them in office a second longer than required though, we are definitely to blame. Yes, I've seen the incumbent reelection statistics many times and they are an embarrassment. Hard to believe how often we put them back in office.
SurelySerious Posted January 2, 2014 Posted January 2, 2014 NYT/Guardian Want Clemency For Snowden: He has done 'a great service' GFY NYT.
Vertigo Posted January 2, 2014 Posted January 2, 2014 (edited) NYT/Guardian Want Clemency For Snowden: He has done 'a great service' GFY NYT. Yeah! Fuck the Constituion and the 4th amendment! Who the fuck really needs freedom? Give me Orwell's 1984 any day over privacy. Edited January 2, 2014 by Vertigo 10 1
SurelySerious Posted January 2, 2014 Posted January 2, 2014 Liberal douchebagism Snowden is a criminal. 2 4
Fuzz Posted January 2, 2014 Posted January 2, 2014 Snowden is a criminal. Fat fingered that was supposed to be a down vote. Yeah you're right he's a criminal for exposing criminal conduct by the government that's responsible for policing itself and only authority capable of enforcing laws. Wrap your brain around that one, just what the hell was he supposed to do? I'm not a fan of his intelligence dumps and the amount of stuff he took, but it was an insurance policy considering instead of fixing the criminal conduct the government fought to keep doing it and made him a marked man. 50 year old man has sex with unconscious neighbor in order to save her life Seems legit. 1 1
Day Man Posted January 2, 2014 Posted January 2, 2014 Snowden is a criminal. Have you ever sped on the way to work? You are too. I have little problem with Snowden's actions (Manning is a different story). I would be hesitant to call him a hero, but what he did was very important (albeit probably fruitless in the long run.) 2 2
SurelySerious Posted January 3, 2014 Posted January 3, 2014 Have you ever sped on the way to work? You are too. That's a retarded argument. The penalties for speeding versus intentionally disclosing classified information clearly show they're not the same. Whether or not the NSA was wrong doesn't make Snowden correct for doing so. 2 2
Champ Kind Posted January 3, 2014 Posted January 3, 2014 Have you ever sped on the way to work? You are too. I have little problem with Snowden's actions (Manning is a different story). I would be hesitant to call him a hero, but what he did was very important (albeit probably fruitless in the long run.) Are you freakin serious? Tell me you're trolling...
HeloDude Posted January 3, 2014 Posted January 3, 2014 Snowden is a criminal. How is what Vertigo said "Liberal douchebagism"? I might not agree with how Snowden released the information, but I fully agree with Vertigo (by reading through his sarcastic remarks) in that the 4th Amendment is definitely worth protecting and that from what Snowden has done, we have learned a great deal about how our government wants to restrict our freedoms even further vs protecting those freedoms. Just out of curiosity--do you (and this can be answered by anybody) agree with the end result of what Snowden did or do you believe that the law should never be broken, even to protect and defend The Constitution?
Day Man Posted January 3, 2014 Posted January 3, 2014 That's a retarded argument. The penalties for speeding versus intentionally disclosing classified information clearly show they're not the same. Whether or not the NSA was wrong doesn't make Snowden correct for doing so. Never said anything about penalties. It was hyperbole. You break a law, you are a criminal. Are you freakin serious? Tell me you're trolling... Yes and no. Why do you disagree?
SurelySerious Posted January 3, 2014 Posted January 3, 2014 How is what Vertigo said "Liberal douchebagism"? I might not agree with how Snowden released the information, but I fully agree with Vertigo (by reading through his sarcastic remarks) in that the 4th Amendment is definitely worth protecting and that from what Snowden has done, we have learned a great deal about how our government wants to restrict our freedoms even further vs protecting those freedoms. Just out of curiosity--do you (and this can be answered by anybody) agree with the end result of what Snowden did or do you believe that the law should never be broken, even to protect and defend The Constitution? Distracting from the fact that the disclosure is criminal by crying about how bad the NSA is. What end result? Are you under the impression that the NSA has stopped or isn't figuring out a new way of doing the same thing?
HeloDude Posted January 3, 2014 Posted January 3, 2014 Distracting from the fact that the disclosure is criminal by crying about how bad the NSA is. What end result? Are you under the impression that the NSA has stopped or isn't figuring out a new way of doing the same thing? So do you believe it's always criminal to take actions to support and defend The Constitution...even if the actions go against standing law? I am under the impression that the NSA violates The Constitution in how they gather information. But please, answer my question.
SurelySerious Posted January 3, 2014 Posted January 3, 2014 So do you believe it's always criminal to take actions to support and defend The Constitution...even if the actions go against standing law? I am under the impression that the NSA violates The Constitution in how they gather information. But please, answer my question. If the end result is that really, nothing had changed, then what was the point? The constitution can be protected and defended without violating the protection of classified information.
17D_guy Posted January 3, 2014 Posted January 3, 2014 If the end result is that really, nothing had changed, then what was the point? The constitution can be protected and defended without violating the protection of classified information. So.. if your actions aren't guaranteed to effect a change, better to just do nothing at all? Nice... Yea, he could have used the NSA whistleblower program. I'm sure they're as independent as our IG. Not to mention the NSA has had to go back to the FISA many times with a "Oh.. well.. we weren't exactly truthful/complete with our last report/request." Your overlords must love you. If the end result is that really, nothing had changed, then what was the point? The constitution can be protected and defended without violating the protection of classified information. So.. if your actions aren't guaranteed to effect a change, better to just do nothing at all? Nice... Yea, he could have used the NSA whistleblower program. I'm sure they're as independent as our IG. Not to mention the NSA has had to go back to the FISA many times with a "Oh.. well.. we weren't exactly truthful/complete with our last report/request." Your overlords must love you.
SurelySerious Posted January 3, 2014 Posted January 3, 2014 So you recommend going nuclear first? Nice...
HeloDude Posted January 3, 2014 Posted January 3, 2014 If the end result is that really, nothing had changed, then what was the point? Nothing has been changed? Are you unaware that people are now discussing the issue where not much was being discussed before the leak? Is this not going to be an issue in the upcoming 2014 and 2016 election? Has there not been Congressional hearing on the issue? The constitution can be protected and defended without violating the protection of classified information. That's not what I asked you. You either didn't read what I wrote or you're dodging the question...so what you say: Do you believe it's always criminal to take actions to support and defend The Constitution...even if the actions go against standing law? I'll also raise you with another question: Do you believe what the NSA is doing (as from what we know from Snowden) to be Constitutional?
SurelySerious Posted January 3, 2014 Posted January 3, 2014 That's not what I asked you. You either didn't read what I wrote or you're dodging the question...so what you say: Do you believe it's always criminal to take actions to support and defend The Constitution...even if the actions go against standing law? No, I just don't find the nebulous nature of your question interesting, so I answered within the context of what I did find interesting. It seems it was too invasive and could be done more effectively by working within the limits of the constitution.
HeloDude Posted January 3, 2014 Posted January 3, 2014 No, I just don't find the nebulous nature of your question interesting, so I answered within the context of what I did find interesting. Lame and weak...I interpret your response as you being afraid to answer the question. I've had shitty commanders do a better job in dodging questions. It seems it was too invasive and could be done more effectively by working within the limits of the constitution. Too bad we would have never had known if it wasn't for Snowden. The NSA Director flat out lied to the Senate when they asked him if this was going on. You're far too trusting when it comes to your government.
M2 Posted January 3, 2014 Posted January 3, 2014 Have you ever sped on the way to work? You are too. I have little problem with Snowden's actions (Manning is a different story). I would be hesitant to call him a hero, but what he did was very important (albeit probably fruitless in the long run.) Really? Most traffic crimes are civil infractions, the Espionage Act of 1917 added the possibility of death penalty for those convicted of that crime. Still think they're the same?
Fuzz Posted January 3, 2014 Posted January 3, 2014 Distracting from the fact that the disclosure is criminal by crying about how bad the NSA is. What end result? Are you under the impression that the NSA has stopped or isn't figuring out a new way of doing the same thing? No but there are now investigations and lawsuits, and a judge recently declared their actions unconstitutional. Let's also not forget there is now a steadying stream of info to the public about the extent of their work, to include intercepting purchased electronics to load a back door in the software, no warrant needed. I'm not ready to put Snowden on the hero pedestal yet, however, what he did blew wide open a door to illegal activity. Do I think it's stopped? No, especially with those currently in power in the executive and legislative branches providing top cover. However, it significantly pissed off a lot of people in all corners of the political spectrum. I do not advocate the mass dumping of classified data like Bradley Manning did, however, Snowdens initial release was targeted to specific illegal activity. His later ones I believe were out of self preservation, to get the U.S. government to leave him alone, since they were obviously more interested in protecting their power than the legality of their program. I had a little more faith that officers still held their oaths to the constitution above the emotional "security" actions that brought us the patriot act, DHS and TSA. 1
magnetfreezer Posted January 3, 2014 Posted January 3, 2014 His later ones I believe were out of self preservation, to get the U.S. government to leave him alone. If self preservation was a valid reason to disclose classified info, we wouldn't need SERE school. Also, much of the fanfare/discussion with the later releases was to paint America as the enemy and appease those who think we shouldn't spy on anyone ever.
Day Man Posted January 3, 2014 Posted January 3, 2014 (edited) Really? Most traffic crimes are civil infractions, the Espionage Act of 1917 added the possibility of death penalty for those convicted of that crime. Still think they're the same? Again...never said they're the same (see above: hyperbole). Who benefited from Snowden's leak? I refuse to believe our military near-peers had no clue about the extensive data-mining our govt uses to hunt our enemies. The only people surprised by the reports were Americans that put too much trust in their government. Edited January 3, 2014 by day man
Fuzz Posted January 3, 2014 Posted January 3, 2014 If self preservation was a valid reason to disclose classified info, we wouldn't need SERE school. Also, much of the fanfare/discussion with the later releases was to paint America as the enemy and appease those who think we shouldn't spy on anyone ever. Agreed however in SERE school you aren't a man without a country or being hunted by the most powerful country on the planet. I'm not saying what he did was right with the later leaks, and whatever the discussion was I still think they were to get the U.S. government to stop pursuing him. The more they pushed the more damaging information he released, its an international poker game. I'm surprised that some of you place so much blame on Snowden, what about those in the government that instead of correcting the problem decided to pursue him. This thing blew up in the governments face because they weren't willing to uphold the law in the first place or after they were expose. Snowden should have been offered whistleblower protection and the government should have shutdown the illegal programs. Now instead we have a person sitting in a not so friendly country with massive amounts of classified data. *****Break Break***** Admins, perhaps this is better moved/continued in the Liberty and Rights thread? 1
Vertigo Posted January 3, 2014 Posted January 3, 2014 SurelySerious also likes it when TSA agents grope his kids at the airport.
SurelySerious Posted January 3, 2014 Posted January 3, 2014 SurelySerious also likes it when TSA agents grope his kids at the airport. Is that wrong?
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now