IGX

Terry B. wrote:If Snowden returned to the US, he would be locked up and never see the light of day for more than an hour each day.

That, or he would be shot in the back of the head during questioning.

After "attacking" an FBI agent with a knife...er...a pole....er...a broomstick.

nafod wrote:So you think going to China and Russia, a couple of countries that between them have over billion and a half people living in big brother police states, and strengthening them while weakening us by giving away secrets on foreign collection and serving as their useful idiot propaganda puppet, is a stroke for freedom and liberty? Really?

Would you be happier if Snowden and his 4 laptops were in Finland, or Iceland, or Canada, or New Zealand?

Do you have any evidence he's "aiding and abetting" China and Russia beyond simply releasing information from within their borders?

protobuilder wrote:

nafod wrote:So you think going to China and Russia, a couple of countries that between them have over billion and a half people living in big brother police states, and strengthening them while weakening us by giving away secrets on foreign collection and serving as their useful idiot propaganda puppet, is a stroke for freedom and liberty? Really?

Would you be happier if Snowden and his 4 laptops were in Finland, or Iceland, or Canada, or New Zealand?

Do you have any evidence he's "aiding and abetting" China and Russia beyond simply releasing information from within their borders?

No Apparent Fear of Drones went on record saying that he wants Snowden shot (through the eye, I believe). His tenure as a government employee has given him great faith in the benevolence of our overlords.

Blaidd Drwg wrote:The chinaman is not the issue here, Dude. I'm talking about drawing a line in the sand, Dude.

Where would you draw it? If anything, NSA use of domestic spying is not like it used to be.

Turdacious wrote:

Blaidd Drwg wrote:The chinaman is not the issue here, Dude. I'm talking about drawing a line in the sand, Dude.

Where would you draw it? If anything, NSA use of domestic spying is not like it used to be.

I'd say, if there was a line, Hoover was well over it.

protobuilder wrote:Would you be happier if Snowden and his 4 laptops were in Finland, or Iceland, or Canada, or New Zealand?

Definitely.

When I was flying off the carrier, we never in a million years contemplated using an airfield in China, Russia, NK, Iran, etc. as a divert field in an emergency, because we knew they'd exploit the plane in a heartbeat. You take your chances ditching, bailing out, or ejecting.

When that surveillance P-3 was rammed by the Chinese pilot and he diverted to Hainan Island, the Chinese picked that thing clean. The crew was celebrated in public, but within the professional community the consensus is he should have ditched or bailed out rather than taking that asset and gifting it to the chinks, in spite of the fact that lives likely would have been lost.

We lost some 40 reconnaissance aircraft during the cold war. People died protecting this sort of information.

Snowden, while on his commie world tour, has gifted to them access to what others risked their lives even died in order to prevent access to similar info. You don't do that if you're a whistleblower trying to strengthen our country through your actions.

nafod wrote:

protobuilder wrote:Would you be happier if Snowden and his 4 laptops were in Finland, or Iceland, or Canada, or New Zealand?

Definitely.

When I was flying off the carrier, we never in a million years contemplated using an airfield in China, Russia, NK, Iran, etc. as a divert field in an emergency, because we knew they'd exploit the plane in a heartbeat. You take your chances ditching, bailing out, or ejecting.

When that surveillance P-3 was rammed by the Chinese pilot and he diverted to Hainan Island, the Chinese picked that thing clean. The crew was celebrated in public, but within the professional community the consensus is he should have ditched or bailed out rather than taking that asset and gifting it to the chinks, in spite of the fact that lives likely would have been lost.

We lost some 40 reconnaissance aircraft during the cold war. People died protecting this sort of information.

Snowden, while on his commie world tour, has gifted to them access to what others risked their lives even died in order to prevent access to similar info. You don't do that if you're a whistleblower trying to strengthen our country through your actions.

Blaidd Drwg wrote:

Turdacious wrote:

Blaidd Drwg wrote:The chinaman is not the issue here, Dude. I'm talking about drawing a line in the sand, Dude.

Where would you draw it? If anything, NSA use of domestic spying is not like it used to be.

I'd say, if there was a line, Hoover was well over it.

Ok. What Hoover over his long career was in the context of a:
1. Legit fifth column threat (Communists)
2. World War
3. Cold War
Where is the line between unreasonable intrusion into affairs that should be private and national security? FWIW I like the Hoover example because he definitely crossed the line, although we might disagree about where the line was.

Turdacious wrote:

Blaidd Drwg wrote:

Turdacious wrote:

Blaidd Drwg wrote:The chinaman is not the issue here, Dude. I'm talking about drawing a line in the sand, Dude.

Where would you draw it? If anything, NSA use of domestic spying is not like it used to be.

I'd say, if there was a line, Hoover was well over it.

Ok. What Hoover over his long career was in the context of a:
1. Legit fifth column threat (Communists)
2. World War
3. Cold War
Where is the line between unreasonable intrusion into affairs that should be private and national security? FWIW I like the Hoover example because he definitely crossed the line, although we might disagree about where the line was.

Hoover is the perfect test, clearly there were real*ish threats, yet most would agree he crossed the line. There are those, who only seem willing to acknowledge there is a line in retrospect. Hoover should have been checked, in real time...where exactly is a worthy subject.

The NSA was/is over the line. Full Stop. Where exactly? That too is a worthy discussion. Personally, I don't think there's a solution outside of an explicit Constitutional amendment that addresses privacy.

The right of privacy is based on the principle that “a person belongs to himself and not others nor to society as a whole.”
It embodies a sense of “personhood”—an “autonomy of self”—that should remain free from intrusion or coercion by society or the government. It comprehends that there are certain personal decisions concerning one’s life that an individual should be able to make for oneself free from interference by the state. Flowing from respect for personal dignity, the right of privacy allows an individual to define his or her own life

http://org.law.rutgers.edu/publications ... Shaman.pdf

Personally I think the concept of liberty is better than that of privacy-- more context.

Turdacious wrote:Personally I think the concept of liberty is better than that of privacy-- more context.

They are compatible parallel constructs in several State Constitutions.

nafod wrote:

protobuilder wrote:Would you be happier if Snowden and his 4 laptops were in Finland, or Iceland, or Canada, or New Zealand?

Definitely.

When I was flying off the carrier, we never in a million years contemplated using an airfield in China, Russia, NK, Iran, etc. as a divert field in an emergency, because we knew they'd exploit the plane in a heartbeat. You take your chances ditching, bailing out, or ejecting.

When that surveillance P-3 was rammed by the Chinese pilot and he diverted to Hainan Island, the Chinese picked that thing clean. The crew was celebrated in public, but within the professional community the consensus is he should have ditched or bailed out rather than taking that asset and gifting it to the chinks, in spite of the fact that lives likely would have been lost.

We lost some 40 reconnaissance aircraft during the cold war. People died protecting this sort of information.

Snowden, while on his commie world tour, has gifted to them access to what others risked their lives even died in order to prevent access to similar info. You don't do that if you're a whistleblower trying to strengthen our country through your actions.

^^^Agree.

I agree that Snowden deserves to be locked up for passing secrets to the Chinese. If he went beyond what he's said in interviews and actually gave them access to top secret files, he should never see the light of day again.

But I'm also very happy that he released information on the NSA's domestic spying efforts.

Pinky wrote:I agree that Snowden deserves to be locked up for passing secrets to the Chinese. If he went beyond what he's said in interviews and actually gave them access to top secret files, he should never see the light of day again.

But I'm also very happy that he released information on the NSA's domestic spying efforts.

He's a Yin-Yang case.

As much as I hope a Black Mamba crawls up Obama's ass in Africa (not the kind that DL commie likes)If what you said is the truth, I'd shed not a tear if Snowden was brought to trial and then executed or if he continues to play musical enemies, hunted down and whacked.

Fuck paying for a 30 year old traitor the rest of his life in protective custody, fucker might live 50 more years!
Him!

Teee..Heee. Principled Stands don't get enough airplay.

Ecuador unilaterally canceled its trade deal with the United States on Thursday and offered to provide $23 million a year to help the country with its “human rights” education, the latest twist in a showdown over NSA leaker Edward Snowden.

http://thehill.com/blogs/global-affairs ... z2XQgmvD9m

How is this a "principled stand?" It's pure Small Man Syndrome, at a national level.

johno wrote:How is this a "principled stand?" It's pure Small Man Syndrome, at a national level.

That's a good spin on the .just doing it for attention response I expected..Kudos. You rarely surprise me.

You know how I know it's principled? Money.

Admittedly the principle may just be, Fuck You because Fuck You...but still. Nice work Ecuador.

Blaidd Drwg wrote:

johno wrote:How is this a "principled stand?" It's pure Small Man Syndrome, at a national level.

...You rarely surprise me.

Mutual. BD: "The US = The Worst Place Evah"

Blaidd Drwg wrote: know how I know it's principled? Money.

Naive, too. Power is the primary motivation for nation states. Or ego.

Blaidd Drwg wrote: the principle may just be, Fuck You because Fuck You...but still. Nice work Ecuador.

Yay! Fuck the US. Things will be so much better when China is Top Dog.

Blaidd Drwg wrote:

johno wrote:How is this a "principled stand?" It's pure Small Man Syndrome, at a national level.

That's a good spin on the .just doing it for attention response I expected..Kudos. You rarely surprise me.

You know how I know it's principled? Money.

Admittedly the principle may just be, Fuck You because Fuck You...but still. Nice work Ecuador.

Equador's more likely more pissed about a different principle-- http://www.chevron.com/ecuador/

The Panopticon is a type of institutional building designed by English philosopher and social theorist Jeremy Bentham in the late 18th century. The concept of the design is to allow a watchman to observe (-opticon) all (pan-) inmates of an institution without their being able to tell whether they are being watched or not.

The design consists of a circular structure with an “inspection house” at its centre, from which the managers or staff of the institution are able to watch the inmates, who are stationed around the perimeter. Bentham conceived the basic plan as being equally applicable to hospitals, schools, sanatoriums, daycares, and asylums, but he devoted most of his efforts to developing a design for a Panopticon prison, and it is his prison which is most widely understood by the term.

Bentham himself described the Panopticon as “a new mode of obtaining power of mind over mind, in a quantity hitherto without example.”[1] Elsewhere, he described the Panopticon prison as “a mill for grinding rogues honest”.[2]

Turdacious wrote:

Blaidd Drwg wrote:

johno wrote:How is this a "principled stand?" It's pure Small Man Syndrome, at a national level.

That's a good spin on the .just doing it for attention response I expected..Kudos. You rarely surprise me.

You know how I know it's principled? Money.

Admittedly the principle may just be, Fuck You because Fuck You...but still. Nice work Ecuador.

Equador's more likely more pissed about a different principle-- http://www.chevron.com/ecuador/

The push back against the oil companies in Ecuador (and booting out the US military drug bases) certainly has played a role in Correa's ascendancy and Ecuador's growing mistrust of the US. but it's incredibly reductionist to dismiss all the other balls in play. Correa is an interesting and complicated character.

Turdacious wrote:Personally I think the concept of liberty is better than that of privacy-- more context.

This makes very little sense. Perhaps none.

baffled wrote:

Turdacious wrote:Personally I think the concept of liberty is better than that of privacy-- more context.

This makes very little sense. Perhaps none.

The concept of liberty encompasses the freedom vs. security argument, as well as individual vs government responsibilities and rights. Privacy not so much.

There is plenty of context in the case law about liberty and it hasn't prevented this shit blizzard. There's not enough with "context" regarding privacy except at the state level where rights to privacy are articulated in some state constitutions. . Ergo..we don't need another amendment WRT liberty, we do regarding privacy.