View Full Version : Snowden interview 05.28.14
crashdown
05-29-2014, 09:42
Surprised there isn't already a thread on last nights interview..... at least that I could find.
If half of what he said last night is true.... he is the definition of a patriot and a true American.
Snowden was articulate, intelligent, and ready to show his perspective in a way that couldn't be misrepresented by the liberal media.
Aloha_Shooter
05-29-2014, 09:52
Treasonous f-tard posing as a patriot.
funkymonkey1111
05-29-2014, 10:13
Treasonous f-tard posing as a patriot.
interesting that the polar opposite positions immediately manifest themselves. on one hand, there's the analysis that he's a patriot, and then there's your pro-state, pro-NSA, pro-government up your ass position. frankly, sir, if you are pro-NSA and their programs spying on Americans, it is you that is posing as a patriot.
kidicarus13
05-29-2014, 10:20
Pick a side. I support Snowden's actions. If the US Gov't wasn't always breaking the law...
OneGuy67
05-29-2014, 10:40
Arrogant little prick.
Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk
Rooskibar03
05-29-2014, 10:46
Personally after just watching some clips I have a new found respect for the guy. He is calm, composed, not arrogant. He brought up a good point,he won't get a fair public trial. His story would never be told and they'd put him away and we'd never hear more from him.
The interesting point to me is after seeing the ACTUAL people who started the whole program on PBS Frontline showing how they tried to work in the system and through propper channels, then the people in the DOJ and Congress did the same, with the result being both were hung out to dry trying to fight a secret letter that the executive branch created itself as a "Get out of Jail" card nobody ever gets to see.... They litterally went to a critically ill mans bed to harrass him into OKing it and when he refuses, they bypass the HEAD of the DOJ to then replace him with the same guy harrassing him in his hospital bed. Ya, nothing off here. If Snowden is such a traitor, while others that tried to stop the program were summarily gagged/threatened/arrested/etc, now ALL the branches are admitting to some extent that the program(s) went too far and finally the concensous of the American People in this Democracy (where it is supposed to be the will of the people) are saying it went to far........... and ALL of this would clearly have never seen the light of day unless there was a Snowden........... What else would those of you calling him a traitor suggest he have done differently?
I would also be interested in how many of you calling him a traitor are in "Law Enforcement" meaning you are simply protecting your own interests? Please standup and be counted.
ZERO THEORY
05-29-2014, 11:44
Treasonous f-tard posing as a patriot.
Care to explain that one?
I watched the second installment of the Frontline "United States of Secrets" feature this morning. It was rather hard to stomach the government officials (current and former) coming right out on camera and admitting they trampled parts of the constitution. Doesn't much seem to bother them though...
crashdown
05-29-2014, 18:59
So nobody can comment in more than a few words why he isn't a hero?
I would like to hear that side of it.
funkymonkey1111
05-29-2014, 19:06
So nobody can comment in more than a few words why he isn't a hero?
I would like to hear that side of it.
it's easy. Just listen to John Kerry. The folks calling him a traitor here would agree with the secretary
blacklabel
05-29-2014, 19:17
So nobody can comment in more than a few words why he isn't a hero?
I would like to hear that side of it.
He threatened national security. He should have gone through proper channels. He's a traitor. There's the short version for the hang him crowd. I couldn't be further on the opposite end of the spectrum. His actions won't lead to a damn thing changing but I commend him for trying in the biggest way possible.
I kind of enjoyed how Kerry said he was a traitor etc for exposing all the things we have done with surveillance but.................. the fact that we did it was widely seen as a violation of privacy laws, illegal search and supposedly many of the collection methods he exposed have been stopped and policies have changed. Supposedly changed of course.
So its OK to break the law but when someone exposes you, its not OK?
kidicarus13
05-29-2014, 19:20
He should have gone through proper channels.
I think I understand you better now.
I suspect the history books will be very kind to Snowden. It's certainly not like the U.S. government over the past dozen years has cared (in the slightest) about the privacy laws that once governed the snooping on the citizenry.
blacklabel
05-29-2014, 19:23
You're joking right?
Read the rest of my reply.
blacklabel
05-29-2014, 19:24
I suspect the history books will be very kind to Snowden. It's certainly not like the U.S. government over the past dozen years has cared (in the slightest) about the privacy laws that once governed the snooping on the citizenry.
Freedom has to win for the history books to show in a good light.
Read the rest of my reply.
He did. You need to watch the Frontline series on this. It is not biased, these are the words of the people who were doing the spying and the ones that were trying to do the right thing. These are the people that DID USE THE PROPER CHANNELS and got in real trouble for their attempt. Bush almost lost over 2 dozen top appointees over this. The only reason they did not is that he lied and said it was stopped. These are the AG, you know, the guys that are the lawyers of the gov. If anybody can watch the full show and still think nothing was wrong..... They have NO understanding of the Constitution, why it was written, what a Land of the Free is or what a democracy is.
To be clear, the reason we are even having this discussion is because of the change he has already made. Business is already changing, Governments are changing (around the world), if you don't see that you are blind.
blacklabel
05-29-2014, 19:58
He did. You need to watch the Frontline series on this. It is not biased, these are the words of the people who were doing the spying and the ones that were trying to do the right thing. These are the people that DID USE THE PROPER CHANNELS and got in real trouble for their attempt. Bush almost lost over 2 dozen top appointees over this. The only reason they did not is that he lied and said it was stopped. These are the AG, you know, the guys that are the lawyers of the gov. If anybody can watch the full show and still think nothing was wrong..... They have NO understanding of the Constitution, why it was written, what a Land of the Free is or what a democracy is.
To be clear, the reason we are even having this discussion is because of the change he has already made. Business is already changing, Governments are changing (around the world), if you don't see that you are blind.
Jesus. I'll color code it for you guys.
He threatened national security. He should have gone through proper channels. He's a traitor. There's the short version for the hang him crowd. I couldn't be further on the opposite end of the spectrum. His actions won't lead to a damn thing changing but I commend him for trying in the biggest way possible.
Our government is out of control, and these leaks have clearly demonstrated that fact. I'd like to see some proof that they aren't trampling the Constitution at every opportunity.
I simply cannot fathom on how he threatened national security... I remember him stating that there was no way possible to go through the proper channels, his proper channels were deep in the program, I am sure if he tried to, he would had been locked in some dark hole, like many before him.
So far of what we know, he exposed our gov on how they are spying and collecting data on US, not the enemy, but on US. No secrets were sold, no names were given out, granted he made it harder for our gov to make face to other countries and policy making, but other than that...
Sure we all have our point of views, but telling us that our gov is breaking the constitution that many gave their lives for it and may still do, I do not see it as a national security breach, he did it for the people...
More research has to be done.
And I am not so sure on the " his actions won't lead to a damn thing" They already have, don't you see our top politicians sweating bullets, every time he comes out to talk ?
If it was that bad, they would had him killed, long time ago...
Just my 2 cents.
blacklabel
05-29-2014, 20:12
And I am not so sure on the " his actions won't lead to a damn thing" They already have, don't you see our top politicians sweating bullets, every time he comes out to talk ?
You, as well as Hound, make great points on the change that he's caused. I was looking at the full picture when I stated that. The change that I'd like to see is the deconstruction of the surveillance state but it's also the change that I don't see happening.
KestrelBike
05-29-2014, 20:28
Jesus. I'll color code it for you guys.
LOL thank you for the laugh. (I haven't made up my mind about Snowden, I find it extremely discouraging that I really can't trust any source of news out there on him. My instinct, however, is to agree with you).
snowmen should have stayed and faced the music. it not only gives him significant credence, but it allows it to stay in the spotlight as there would be a lot of people pissed if he doesn't get a fair trial or is jus thrown in jail or whatever. thats a true hero. does what is right regardless of the consequences. to tuck tail and go to our enemies? you can't help but expect that to raise some eye brows about motives. did russia and china open their doors out of the goodness of their hearts? i kind of doubt it.
did the founding fathers oppose the crown then tuck tail and skirt off to some distant land? no. they said do your worst.
jerrymrc
05-29-2014, 20:53
I am not at liberty to express my views but I do understand both sides. I will ask that the gang keep it civil when dealing with a polarizing subject as this.
Thank you,
The staff.
jhood001
05-29-2014, 20:59
snowmen should have stayed and faced the music. it not only gives him significant credence, but it allows it to stay in the spotlight as there would be a lot of people pissed if he doesn't get a fair trial or is jus thrown in jail or whatever. thats a true hero. does what is right regardless of the consequences. to tuck tail and go to our enemies? you can't help but expect that to raise some eye brows about motives. did russia and china open their doors out of the goodness of their hearts? i kind of doubt it.
did the founding fathers oppose the crown then tuck tail and skirt off to some distant land? no. they said do your worst.
That is one way to look at it.
It might also be possible that he didn't want to be a short blip on the 24 hour news cycle. The type of news that flares and burns out and is long forgotten when the next big thing is hitting - regardless of how important it was.
Now, over the long course of his story, he is becoming a household name. I think he wants to return to the US and I think he might do it. And if and when he does, the weeks of pundits trying to tell us what exactly he was (patriot or traitor) will have passed and the real facts will be out. If he is, in fact a patriot, it will be difficult for our government to mistreat him once public opinion is properly and fully formed.
I'm still undecided as to what he is or isn't. But I do believe that anything that is against our personal rights, no matter how effective of a tool it is against our enemies, is wrong. And anyone who brings it to light regardless of the 'channels', is a friend of mine.
Rooskibar03
05-29-2014, 21:07
I beleive during the interview he discussed how he did "go through the proper channels" and was politely told the STHU.
KestrelBike
05-29-2014, 21:24
So nobody can comment in more than a few words why he isn't a hero?
I would like to hear that side of it.
Besides the *derp* "he's a traitor" line, the most concrete negative reason that I have heard is that he seriously damaged the intelligence gathering techniques or something like that. I think this was in reference to the international communications dragnet, and if so: duh. How could any of those jihadists possibly believe that they could ever securely communicate with cell/satellite methods?
But I do believe that anything that is against our personal rights, no matter how effective of a tool it is against our enemies, is wrong. And anyone who brings it to light regardless of the 'channels', is a friend of mine.
Agreed.
crashdown
05-29-2014, 21:27
snowmen should have stayed and faced the music. it not only gives him significant credence, but it allows it to stay in the spotlight as there would be a lot of people pissed if he doesn't get a fair trial or is jus thrown in jail or whatever. thats a true hero. does what is right regardless of the consequences. to tuck tail and go to our enemies? you can't help but expect that to raise some eye brows about motives. did russia and china open their doors out of the goodness of their hearts? i kind of doubt it.
did the founding fathers oppose the crown then tuck tail and skirt off to some distant land? no. they said do your worst.
He made it very clear why he couldn't of stayed and "faced the music" in the interview last night.
Pretty hard to win a case if all of your evidence is classified and can not be discussed in any court.
I'm still undecided as to what he is or isn't. But I do believe that anything that is against our personal rights, no matter how effective of a tool it is against our enemies, is wrong. And anyone who brings it to light regardless of the 'channels', is a friend of mine.
This is where it comes out. I have worked as, for and with those in these areas of concern. Many are still friends. The vast majority of them are hard working, decent, law abiding, Constitution loving people. Many in the NSA and other 3 letter groups took it very personal that 911 happened on their watch. They would do ANYTHING to turn back the clock but they can't and they know it. The problem is not with the general agencies, it is with the leadership that does not understand that the ends do not always justify the means as this is how tyrannies start..... on a road of the best intentions. When the secret being protected is only secret to protect a wrong doing it is the oath of every member of the Government that takes it to protect us from our enemies foreign and domestic. This is what happened during Deep Throat (which was ANOTHER channel that was attempted here... only to fail) and Nixon that setup many of the rules that were trampled by what Snowden brought out. Was DeepThroat a traitor or patriot?
What do you do when the group you are with is doing something against the people you are trying to protect and all the paths are closed?
BTW: Snowden has also been calling out Putin. Like him or not the guy has balls of steel. It will be a major miracle if he hits his next decade BDay.
I don't so much support Snowden as condemn the actions of those above him. In the end they created him.
I did watch the nbc last night. That was the only fun stuff on tv (do not have cable). I do not know who to believe anymore.
He made it very clear why he couldn't of stayed and "faced the music" in the interview last night.
Pretty hard to win a case if all of your evidence is classified and can not be discussed in any court.
Interestingly enough...... Its not so classified now. I wonder if the courts would allow it now as a submission in his court case. That actually makes what he is doing more self serving.
funkymonkey1111
05-29-2014, 21:42
I beleive during the interview he discussed how he did "go through the proper channels" and was politely told the STHU.
snowmen should have stayed and faced the music. it not only gives him significant credence, but it allows it to stay in the spotlight as there would be a lot of people pissed if he doesn't get a fair trial or is jus thrown in jail or whatever. thats a true hero. does what is right regardless of the consequences. to tuck tail and go to our enemies? you can't help but expect that to raise some eye brows about motives. did russia and china open their doors out of the goodness of their hearts? i kind of doubt it.
did the founding fathers oppose the crown then tuck tail and skirt off to some distant land? no. they said do your worst.
Interestingly enough...... Its not so classified now. I wonder if the courts would allow it now as a submission in his court case. That actually makes what he is doing more self serving.
it's not? are you certain he's been offered a trial in open court with all the information for the public to see? and if so, do you have a source?
Ask William Binney how 'sticking around" worked for him.
Just got done watching the interview in it's entirety, seems very edited (it would have been better to just go straight through instead of NBC editing it). I will say this, having been in the intelligence community, he did break the law (sort of), he did violate the rules of classified material... HOWEVER, is it so bad when he's breaking the law to show that certain programs and actions conducted by various agencies within the government went against the constitution? I see PFC Manning doing more harm to national security than Snowden. Is he a traitor? I think not. Is he a hero? Jury is still out on that, but he does make some great points, and I do feel like he won't receive a fair trail in the slightest.
Hero and Patriot.. Even if in the end it only temporarily slows down big brother..
sent from a soup can and some string..
Mick-Boy
05-29-2014, 22:44
Interestingly enough...... Its not so classified now. I wonder if the courts would allow it now as a submission in his court case. That actually makes what he is doing more self serving.
No. It's still classified. Just because it's on the news doesn't mean that's changed.
If you don't believe me, file a freedom of information act request to see the data that's been collected on you... spoiler alert. You'll get a letter that says something to the effect of "we can't comment on whether or not the information you're requesting exists because to do so would be damaging to national security".
No. It's still classified. Just because it's on the news doesn't mean that's changed.
If you don't believe me, file a freedom of information act request to see the data that's been collected on you... spoiler alert. You'll get a letter that says something to the effect of "we can't comment on whether or not the information you're requesting exists because to do so would be damaging to national security".
The stuff that has been released is in the public domain and so is considered public but unconfirmed. The burden of proof goes from Snowden having to prove XYZ exists to the Gov having to prove it doesn't... but you are right from a technical standpoint. These types of arguments are what I was alluding to. If he does come back it will be very interesting how it is handled. A good example of this are the Iran Contra trials during Reagan. Everything was classified and yet a lot of it came out.
Whistler
05-30-2014, 06:51
Had a judge tell me once "If you are looking for justice you won't find it in my courtroom! You will find the LAW!" I remember at the time hearing Sylvester Stallone in my head... "I never broke the law! I AM the law!" though Rico was probably more insightful - "Guilt, and innocence, is a matter of timing."
While I certainly understand the statement it seems to contradict the spirit (and intent) of the "Justice" system and one reason I view as dubious the comments advocating "take it to court" as the ultimate remedy to oppression and injustice, especially as perpetrated by those in official capacity.
BPTactical
05-30-2014, 07:14
Our government is out of control, and these leaks have clearly demonstrated that fact. I'd like to see some proof that they aren't trampling the Constitution at every opportunity.
And this post nails it.
IF our .gov was not running loose on the reins there would be no need for Snowden.
As far as jeopardizing our national security, the actions of this administration have jeopardized us far more than one individual could.
Immigration
Fast n Furious
No ID to vote
Selective enforcement of laws
I see these things as far more dangerous than what Snowden has revealed to the American Public.
Our government is out of control, and these leaks have clearly demonstrated that fact. I'd like to see some proof that they aren't trampling the Constitution at every opportunity.
Yes it is and yes they are...at all levels.
I'm glad Snowden exposed this, the "national security" implication is bullshit, just a cover to sway people over the government's side.
hollohas
05-30-2014, 07:56
did the founding fathers oppose the crown then tuck tail and skirt off to some distant land? no. they said do your worst.
They were already in some distant land. They certainly didn't go back to England to face trial.
If he stayed here, He would have been locked up and the trial would have been closed door...for national security of course. You wouldn't have any nationally televised interviews with him, you wouldn't see him at all. He would not be labeled a hero, he would simply be called a terrorist and none of us would be allowed to hear his story...all we would get is the "official" story.
ZERO THEORY
05-30-2014, 08:43
I find it curious that 'we' all demand that the government be brought back to reason and limited power. We complain about unconstitutional laws, bureaucratic red tape, and the failure of our system. Then someone circumvents the corrupt government and exposes their illegal, dangerous, treasonous, and careless actions. What do 'we' do? Yell about how he's a criminal and should've stayed within the confines of the very system we keep acknowledging is broken.
Are 'we' really that loyal to the letter of the law, even when the law tramples on our rights? Why should he play by rules that serve only to violate his life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness? Why should we obey or observe laws that allow the administration to literally perform extrajudicial executions of American citizens, perform surveillance without precedent, and nullify our land/assets?
Not only did he try to send it up and get told to tow the line, but even assuming he had "gone through the proper channels", how long do you think he'd have a pulse afterwards? There's a reason he was hiding in a Russian hotel room, afraid to even step out into the hall. And it wasn't schizophrenia or conspiracy theories.
did the founding fathers oppose the crown then tuck tail and skirt off to some distant land? no. they said do your worst.
Seriously? This one literally made me lol.
In case the irony is lost on you... where did they fight the crown from again? A block or two away in England? ROFL
They were already in some distant land. They certainly didn't go back to England to face trial.
If he stayed here, He would have been locked up and the trial would have been closed door...for national security of course. You wouldn't have any nationally televised interviews with him, you wouldn't see him at all. He would not be labeled a hero, he would simply be called a terrorist and none of us would be allowed to hear his story...all we would get is the "official" story.
Beat me to it. Makes me wonder if people even read what they write these days. They want to demonize him SO badly (for reasons unknown to me) that they will contradict themselves in their own statements trying to do so. Oh the ironing.
funkymonkey1111
05-30-2014, 09:32
So, Aloha Shooter and OneGuy, aside from your Obama/Kerry talking points, do you have anything else to back up your pro-state, anti-freedom position?
I find it curious that 'we' all demand that the government be brought back to reason and limited power. We complain about unconstitutional laws, bureaucratic red tape, and the failure of our system. Then someone circumvents the corrupt government and exposes their illegal, dangerous, treasonous, and careless actions. What do 'we' do? Yell about how he's a criminal and should've stayed within the confines of the very system we keep acknowledging is broken.
Are 'we' really that loyal to the letter of the law, even when the law tramples on our rights? Why should he play by rules that serve only to violate his life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness? Why should we obey or observe laws that allow the administration to literally perform extrajudicial executions of American citizens, perform surveillance without precedent, and nullify our land/assets?
Not only did he try to send it up and get told to tow the line, but even assuming he had "gone through the proper channels", how long do you think he'd have a pulse afterwards? There's a reason he was hiding in a Russian hotel room, afraid to even step out into the hall. And it wasn't schizophrenia or conspiracy theories.
THIS! Any law that violates the Constitution is not a legitimate law.
crashdown
05-30-2014, 09:56
So, Aloha Shooter and OneGuy, aside from your Obama/Kerry talking points, do you have anything else to back up your pro-state, anti-freedom position?
What I keep asking and why I started this thread.... Can't seem to find any reason why this guy shouldn't be a national hero.
kidicarus13
05-30-2014, 10:00
I find it curious that 'we' all demand that the government be brought back to reason and limited power. We complain about unconstitutional laws, bureaucratic red tape, and the failure of our system. Then someone circumvents the corrupt government and exposes their illegal, dangerous, treasonous, and careless actions. What do 'we' do? Yell about how he's a criminal and should've stayed within the confines of the very system we keep acknowledging is broken.
Are 'we' really that loyal to the letter of the law, even when the law tramples on our rights? Why should he play by rules that serve only to violate his life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness? Why should we obey or observe laws that allow the administration to literally perform extrajudicial executions of American citizens, perform surveillance without precedent, and nullify our land/assets?
Not only did he try to send it up and get told to tow the line, but even assuming he had "gone through the proper channels", how long do you think he'd have a pulse afterwards? There's a reason he was hiding in a Russian hotel room, afraid to even step out into the hall. And it wasn't schizophrenia or conspiracy theories.
Well stated.
OneGuy67
05-30-2014, 10:34
Funky, I've not mentioned one Obama/Kerry statement at all. Quit trying to drag others into your discussion. I watched the interview and in my opinion, snowden is arrogant. That is the extent of my public comment.
Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk
Amazing how these days intelligence is perceived as arrogance by those threatened by said intelligence.
ZERO THEORY
05-30-2014, 10:50
Arrogance I can deal with. Ted Cruz is arrogant. Chesty Puller was arrogant. I don't agree with your assessment, but even if he is arrogant (subjective), so what? He could wear extra small, bedazled Ed Hardy shirts and have a guido blowout haircut for all I care. The fact of the matter is that he exposed the dangerous precedent the US government is setting. Let's focus on that.
DavieD55
05-30-2014, 18:08
I find it curious that 'we' all demand that the government be brought back to reason and limited power. We complain about unconstitutional laws, bureaucratic red tape, and the failure of our system. Then someone circumvents the corrupt government and exposes their illegal, dangerous, treasonous, and careless actions. What do 'we' do? Yell about how he's a criminal and should've stayed within the confines of the very system we keep acknowledging is broken.
Are 'we' really that loyal to the letter of the law, even when the law tramples on our rights? Why should he play by rules that serve only to violate his life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness? Why should we obey or observe laws that allow the administration to literally perform extrajudicial executions of American citizens, perform surveillance without precedent, and nullify our land/assets?
Not only did he try to send it up and get told to tow the line, but even assuming he had "gone through the proper channels", how long do you think he'd have a pulse afterwards? There's a reason he was hiding in a Russian hotel room, afraid to even step out into the hall. And it wasn't schizophrenia or conspiracy theories.
This^^^^^^^^ The fact is we don't know who Snowden is or what he is all about. We only know what the MSM wants us to believe.
<MADDOG>
05-30-2014, 19:29
I haven't really followed this gentlemen closely, and I just watched the interview, so please excuse my ignorance. That being said, I don't qualify him as a patriot or a traitor. From what I gathered, he just stated what most of us already suspected: the government can tell where and when you farted via your electronic devices & communication.
Our supposed trade partners and allies have done much more damaging intelligence gathering on the US than this.
Am I missing something?
Oh, and I think some of the members have went full tilt to the left with name calling with zero substantiation! :)
Limited GM
05-31-2014, 09:12
It's difficult to come to a conclusion when you never know if anything you're seeing is true. OJ walked because all the facts weren't allowed to be viewed.
confidence is similar to arrogance. I've known many of each who were thought to be the other.
The fact is we don't know who Snowden is or what he is all about. We only know what the MSM wants us to believe.
The same can be said for the guy that was elected to the most powerful position in American government.
I find it amusing that any thread Snowden gets mentioned in suddenly turns into a patriot or traitor argument [handbags].
Aloha explains more of his position here: https://www.ar-15.co/threads/125255-Edward-Snowden-Interview?highlight=Snowden
henpecked
05-31-2014, 13:36
Some folks are de facto above the law, others are simply below its radar screen, and then there are the milkable masses in the middle.
and
Corruption is the abuse of power by a public official for private gain or any organized, interdependent system in which part of the system is either not performing duties it was originally intended to, or performing them in an improper way, to the detriment of the system's original purpose. The abuse of public offices for private gain is paradigmatic of corruption.
A common belief is that corruption is a judge taking bribes. The definition exceeds this theory. Corruption describes any organized, interdependent system in which part of the system is either not performing duties it was originally intended to, or performing them in an improper way, to the detriment of the system's original purpose.
Corrupt judicial systems not only violate the basic right to equality before the law but deny procedural rights guaranteed by the United States Constitution.
While corruption may facilitate criminal enterprise such as drug trafficking (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drug_trafficking), money laundering (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Money_laundering), and mail fraud.; it is not restricted to these activities. In this country, corruption is so common that it is expected when ordinary businesses or citizens interact with government officials. The end-point of political corruption is a kleptocracy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kleptocracy), literally "rule by thieves".
more to think about
American judges are very devious, and use all sorts of techniques to prevent a victim from getting justice. Lots of judges issue gag orders, and bans on freedom of speech, to help prevent other people from finding out what is going on. Judges set up a trial in all sorts of ways, giving orders that all sorts of evidence be hidden from a jury, for example. The judge may declare, for example, that the evidence that proves you are innocent or right, will not be allowed at the trial.
The truth is that, inside America, a nightmare has begun. The lawyers and judges and courts, "playing the game", regularly trample upon the freedoms that Americans thought they had.
Just my 2 cents........
funkymonkey1111
06-01-2014, 08:11
Have you guys seen that Joe Nacchio claims he was targeted because he refused to allow Qwest to participate in an NSA intelligence program?
kidicarus13
06-01-2014, 21:18
Have you guys seen that Joe Nacchio claims he was targeted because he refused to allow Qwest to participate in an NSA intelligence program?
Link?
funkymonkey1111
06-01-2014, 21:43
Link?
here's one from last year, actually:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2013/09/30/a-ceo-who-resisted-nsa-spying-is-out-of-prison-and-he-feels-vindicated-by-snowden-leaks/
more recent
http://www.foxbusiness.com/business-leaders/2014/03/27/former-qwest-ceo-joe-nacchio-tells-story-fight-against-nsa-sec/
The problem is we have no way to say either way. I don't put it past the Gov but I also think Qwest had questionable character as a company to begin with. Who knows....
here's one from last year, actually:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2013/09/30/a-ceo-who-resisted-nsa-spying-is-out-of-prison-and-he-feels-vindicated-by-snowden-leaks/
more recent
http://www.foxbusiness.com/business-leaders/2014/03/27/former-qwest-ceo-joe-nacchio-tells-story-fight-against-nsa-sec/
I feel like all the people who don't actually understand what data was being collected doesn't understand the possible implications of such data... Say we retrieve data that indicates that you poop at X location. We also collect the data that time stamps it. So now we know how often you move and when you take restroom breaks. So we can now calculate how often you leave the house and how much you interact with the rest of the population. After tracking your metadata associated with your cell phone. We know where you shop, poop, common routes, etc... I don't feel like I need to go on.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.