Edward Snowden

[JDavis]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I support his actions, and so far I don't see how he has endangered anyone's life. Far from being a traitor and a spy, perhaps in my eyes, so far, he has done the right thing. Obscure as much as they want, the USA and UK governments were breaking their own laws, and a good few international ones as well.

 

Diverting the plane of the President of a sovereign country, elected by his people, while on an official trip, was sheer bully tactics, and the reward of that is yet to be reaped. It shows desperation and only goes to raise international public support for Snowden.

 

He has information about our cyber war activities with China that he tried to peddle for his safety.   We do not know yet how much he gave them or will give them in the future.  Same holds true for every country he is begging to stay in.

 

And sadly, our governments didn't break their own laws, at least the US didn't.  With the passage of the PATRIOT Act and a couple other laws that were widely supported when they were passed,  the US government gave themselves the right to do these things.

 

They gave themselves the right to eavesdrop on Luxembourg? Or divert and harass a foreign presidents plane? If this had been Airforce One what would have been the result?

 

Bombing! The oft used US response.

 

I'm only trying to b e a voice of reason when I say the following:

 

NO ONE diverts Air Force One as it is not a commericail aircraft and is accompanied by U.S. fighter jets at all times.  And, gandolph, if the U.S. bombed everyone who made us mad, half the world would be smoldering ruins.  Let's be fair here. 

 

There's the prideful, bully boy attitude the whole of Latin America is this time, right about! The President of a sovereign South American nation has his "airforce one" diverted on Washington's "advice", and the nations he is flying over "comply". This is bordering on an act of war against a foreign president. 

 

NO ONE had the right to do this.

 

It is no wonder the Latin American countries have reacted as they have, and recalled ambassadors. 

 

Fez, the Bolivian President was flying commercially; that is why he could be diverted.  No one was looking for him, they were looking for Snowden.  And it wasn't the U.S. who diverted that plane, it was Austria.  I don't think it's prideful or 'bully boy' to state the truth about our President's plane either.  Why does everyone think our government bullies everyone else?  This whole Snowden thing shows that we do NOT force other countries to do things our way. 

 

Did you see the "commercial" jet? And no it wasn't Austria, or France (who has since apologized) that were looking for Snowden.

 

Only one country in the world cares enough about Snowden to divert a President flying from an official visit.

 

 

yes, it was a very nice commercial jet, but a commercial jet none the less.

 

and I disagree about who might care about Snowden.  We know that he has already come out with information about the UK, perhaps some others EU countries are worried on what they have on them.

Edited July 15, 2013 by JDavis

[JDavis]

 

 

 

 

 

do you not grasp the concept of the word "if" or is it that you don't comprehend the written words?

 

OK. So "if" Snowden has not disclosed issues of national security to the Russians/Chinese, what should happen to those in Government who have lied and deceived about what they have been up to? And what, also in that event, should happen to Snowden?

 

 

We're a nation of laws Gandolf, and whistle blowers do have some legal safeguards.  He should return home and let things proceed through the system.....   and all who have broken the law should be held accountable.  Snowden as well as the others.   One thing that many don't seem to understand is that to participate in civil disobedience, one must be prepared to shoulder the legal consequences.

 

Most everyone who signed our declaration of independence lost everything they had.

 

And what should happen to those in Government who have lied to and deceived the American people and arguably contravened the Constitution? Do they get off scott-free, because they have power, money and control of information?

 

 

Again, what they were doing, thanks to the PATRIOT Act and a couple other laws was legal.    It might be found to be unconstitutional, that is up to the Supreme Court to decide.

 

Right now our country is split on if the government has the right to do this or not?  Polls are showing a range of 45-50 percent approving of the NSA actions.  Just as much larger numbers supported, and still support, the PATRIOT Act, which gave the government power to do this.

 

For years I have been telling people about the NSA Data Center in Utah and have been told it was no big deal.  Now many of those same people are the ones up in arms about this. 

 

But sadly, thanks to the actions that Snowden has taken since this came out, Snowden is the bigger story than the actual actions of the NSA.  Snowden has made himself the story, instead of what should be.

[Gandalf]

I support his actions, and so far I don't see how he has endangered anyone's life. Far from being a traitor and a spy, perhaps in my eyes, so far, he has done the right thing. Obscure as much as they want, the USA and UK governments were breaking their own laws, and a good few international ones as well.

 

Diverting the plane of the President of a sovereign country, elected by his people, while on an official trip, was sheer bully tactics, and the reward of that is yet to be reaped. It shows desperation and only goes to raise international public support for Snowden.

 

He has information about our cyber war activities with China that he tried to peddle for his safety.   We do not know yet how much he gave them or will give them in the future.  Same holds true for every country he is begging to stay in.

 

And sadly, our governments didn't break their own laws, at least the US didn't.  With the passage of the PATRIOT Act and a couple other laws that were widely supported when they were passed,  the US government gave themselves the right to do these things.

They gave themselves the right to eavesdrop on Luxembourg? Or divert and harass a foreign presidents plane? If this had been Airforce One what would have been the result?

Bombing! The oft used US response.

I'm only trying to b e a voice of reason when I say the following:

 

NO ONE diverts Air Force One as it is not a commericail aircraft and is accompanied by U.S. fighter jets at all times.  And, gandolph, if the U.S. bombed everyone who made us mad, half the world would be smoldering ruins.  Let's be fair here. 

There's the prideful, bully boy attitude the whole of Latin America is this time, right about! The President of a sovereign South American nation has his "airforce one" diverted on Washington's "advice", and the nations he is flying over "comply". This is bordering on an act of war against a foreign president. 

 

NO ONE had the right to do this.

 

It is no wonder the Latin American countries have reacted as they have, and recalled ambassadors.

Fez, the Bolivian President was flying commercially; that is why he could be diverted.  No one was looking for him, they were looking for Snowden.  And it wasn't the U.S. who diverted that plane, it was Austria.  I don't think it's prideful or 'bully boy' to state the truth about our President's plane either.  Why does everyone think our government bullies everyone else?  This whole Snowden thing shows that we do NOT force other countries to do things our way. 

Of course the US bullied Austria into grounding the plane! Lets not kid ourselves.

The US Government is miffed with China and Russia because they won't kow-tow to its requests. European Governments seem more compliant to the bully-boy tactics; shame on them!

[other one]

 

 

 

 

 

do you not grasp the concept of the word "if" or is it that you don't comprehend the written words?

 

OK. So "if" Snowden has not disclosed issues of national security to the Russians/Chinese, what should happen to those in Government who have lied and deceived about what they have been up to? And what, also in that event, should happen to Snowden?

 

 

We're a nation of laws Gandolf, and whistle blowers do have some legal safeguards.  He should return home and let things proceed through the system.....   and all who have broken the law should be held accountable.  Snowden as well as the others.   One thing that many don't seem to understand is that to participate in civil disobedience, one must be prepared to shoulder the legal consequences.

 

Most everyone who signed our declaration of independence lost everything they had.

 

And what should happen to those in Government who have lied to and deceived the American people and arguably contravened the Constitution? Do they get off scott-free, because they have power, money and control of information?

 

Do you even read my posts?

[JDavis]

 

Of course the US bullied Austria into grounding the plane! Lets not kid ourselves.

 

Fez, the Bolivian President was flying commercially; that is why he could be diverted.  No one was looking for him, they were looking for Snowden.  And it wasn't the U.S. who diverted that plane, it was Austria.  I don't think it's prideful or 'bully boy' to state the truth about our President's plane either.  Why does everyone think our government bullies everyone else?  This whole Snowden thing shows that we do NOT force other countries to do things our way. 

 

There's the prideful, bully boy attitude the whole of Latin America is this time, right about! The President of a sovereign South American nation has his "airforce one" diverted on Washington's "advice", and the nations he is flying over "comply". This is bordering on an act of war against a foreign president. 

 

NO ONE had the right to do this.

 

It is no wonder the Latin American countries have reacted as they have, and recalled ambassadors.

 

 

The US Government is miffed with China and Russia because they won't kow-tow to its requests. European Governments seem more compliant to the bully-boy tactics; shame on them!

 

 

do you have something other than your own bias against the US to support this claim?

[Gandalf]

Of course the US bullied Austria into grounding the plane! Lets not kid ourselves.

 

Fez, the Bolivian President was flying commercially; that is why he could be diverted.  No one was looking for him, they were looking for Snowden.  And it wasn't the U.S. who diverted that plane, it was Austria.  I don't think it's prideful or 'bully boy' to state the truth about our President's plane either.  Why does everyone think our government bullies everyone else?  This whole Snowden thing shows that we do NOT force other countries to do things our way. 

 

There's the prideful, bully boy attitude the whole of Latin America is this time, right about! The President of a sovereign South American nation has his "airforce one" diverted on Washington's "advice", and the nations he is flying over "comply". This is bordering on an act of war against a foreign president. 

 

NO ONE had the right to do this.

 

It is no wonder the Latin American countries have reacted as they have, and recalled ambassadors.

 

 

The US Government is miffed with China and Russia because they won't kow-tow to its requests. European Governments seem more compliant to the bully-boy tactics; shame on them!

 

do you have something other than your own bias against the US to support this claim?

The words and actions of the US Government on this issue speak for themselves. They need no bias!

[Gandalf]

 

do you not grasp the concept of the word "if" or is it that you don't comprehend the written words?

 

OK. So "if" Snowden has not disclosed issues of national security to the Russians/Chinese, what should happen to those in Government who have lied and deceived about what they have been up to? And what, also in that event, should happen to Snowden?

 

We're a nation of laws Gandolf, and whistle blowers do have some legal safeguards.  He should return home and let things proceed through the system.....   and all who have broken the law should be held accountable.  Snowden as well as the others.   One thing that many don't seem to understand is that to participate in civil disobedience, one must be prepared to shoulder the legal consequences.

 

Most everyone who signed our declaration of independence lost everything they had.

And what should happen to those in Government who have lied to and deceived the American people and arguably contravened the Constitution? Do they get off scott-free, because they have power, money and control of information?

Do you even read my posts?

Sorry, can't find a response that answers this specific question. Could you possibly repeat it for me? The issue is lying and deceiving over what they were up to, not specifically over whether it explicitly illegal to do the surveillance.

[other one]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

do you not grasp the concept of the word "if" or is it that you don't comprehend the written words?

 

OK. So "if" Snowden has not disclosed issues of national security to the Russians/Chinese, what should happen to those in Government who have lied and deceived about what they have been up to? And what, also in that event, should happen to Snowden?

 

 

We're a nation of laws Gandolf, and whistle blowers do have some legal safeguards.  He should return home and let things proceed through the system.....   and all who have broken the law should be held accountable.  Snowden as well as the others.   One thing that many don't seem to understand is that to participate in civil disobedience, one must be prepared to shoulder the legal consequences.

 

Most everyone who signed our declaration of independence lost everything they had.

 

And what should happen to those in Government who have lied to and deceived the American people and arguably contravened the Constitution? Do they get off scott-free, because they have power, money and control of information?

 

Do you even read my posts?

 

Sorry, can't find a response that answers this specific question. Could you possibly repeat it for me? The issue is lying and deceiving over what they were up to, not specifically over whether it explicitly illegal to do the surveillance.

 

[JDavis]

 

 

Do you even read my posts?

 

Sorry, can't find a response that answers this specific question. Could you possibly repeat it for me? The issue is lying and deceiving over what they were up to, not specifically over whether it explicitly illegal to do the surveillance.

 

 

But if what they were up to, i.e. the surveillance was legal, justified and constitutional, then the lying and deceiving was too.   Governments keep secrets all the time, and they should.    Look up the history of the SR-71 Blackbird.  The US government lied and deceived for half a decade on the very existence of the aircraft.  And I am glad they did.

 

The issue is not lying and deceiving, it is whether the actions by the NSA were justified and constitutional.   Anything else is just a smokescreen.

[other one]

 

 

 

Do you even read my posts?

 

Sorry, can't find a response that answers this specific question. Could you possibly repeat it for me? The issue is lying and deceiving over what they were up to, not specifically over whether it explicitly illegal to do the surveillance.

 

 

But if what they were up to, i.e. the surveillance was legal, justified and constitutional, then the lying and deceiving was too.   Governments keep secrets all the time, and they should.    Look up the history of the SR-71 Blackbird.  The US government lied and deceived for half a decade on the very existence of the aircraft.  And I am glad they did.

 

The issue is not lying and deceiving, it is whether the actions by the NSA were justified and constitutional.   Anything else is just a smokescreen.

 

 

If that is the case they have not broken any laws.....   so what is so difficult to understand?