General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forums"Edward Snowden broke the law by releasing classified information. This isn't under debate"
https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2013/06/prosecuting_sno.html
Aug 8, 2013
“News reports about my interview with The Guardian are misleading, and they do not reflect my complete opinion. Let me be clear. I do not agree with what Mr. Snowden did. He has damaged American international relations and compromised our national security. He leaked classified information and may have jeopardized human lives. That must be condemned.
“ I never praised Mr. Snowden or said his actions rise to those of Mohandas Gandhi or other civil rights leaders. In fact, The Guardian itself agreed to retract the word “praise” from its headline.
“At the end of an interview about the 50th anniversary of the March on Washington, I was asked what I thought about Mr. Snowden’s actions. I said he has a right as an individual to act according to the dictates of his conscience, but he must be prepared to pay the price for taking that action. In the movement, we were arrested, we went to jail, we were prepared to pay the price, even lose our lives if necessary. I cannot say and I did not say that what Mr. Snowden did is right. Others will be the judge of that.”
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023427908
President Obama: Mr. Snowden has been charged with three felonies.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023436454
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
LondonReign2
(5,213 posts)This isn't under debate.
Where are your hundreds of OPs and tens of thousands of posts calling for him to be prosecuted?
ProSense
(116,464 posts)"Clapper broke the law by lying to Congress"
You're free to start "hundreds of OPs and tens of thousands" of threads on that topic.
Also, there is no way that charge sticks. First, it was a hearing from March, long before the leak. Secondly, nothing revealed shows any deliberate targeting of Americans and nothing illegal.
Finally, Wyden isn't pushing the charge that Clapper lied. He keeps talking about misleading statements, and it's likely because he knows that the information was classified. He himself refuses to discuss the details.
"
Sen. Wyden) on Edward Snowden, how the NSA misled Congress, and reining in the massive collection"
http://upload.democraticunderground.com/10023381665
LondonReign2
(5,213 posts)"First, it was a hearing from March, long before the leak" It doesn't matter when he lied, it doesn't matter when Snowden revealed the information. I suspect you know that, though.
"Secondly, nothing revealed shows any deliberate targeting of Americans and nothing illegal." It doesn't matter what Snowden's information revealed,we are talking about the lie Clapper admitted he told. I suspect you know that, though.
"He himself refuses to discuss the details." He himself(Wyden) isn't ALLOWED to discuss the details. I suspect you know that, though.
And here is my OP on the subject: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023422069
ProSense
(116,464 posts)From the article linked to in your OP:
None of this is meant to exonerate the damaging acts and poor judgment of the two leakers targeted by the government for espionage. Manning in particular has harmed innocent people around the world with his indiscriminate exposure of thousands of diplomatic cables. His subsequent mistreatment by the Army was a disgrace, but he — and his dubious sponsors at WikiLeaks — did no favors to the cause they supposedly wanted to advance.
The author suggests that the Senate "ought to perform its own probe" so Wyden should do something. That's oversight.
As I said, the problem is that I don't believe the Senate can make the charge stick given the circumstances.
blackspade
(10,056 posts)Manning in particular has harmed innocent people around the world with his indiscriminate exposure of thousands of diplomatic cables.
In fact in court, it was shown to be hyperbole.
but he — and his dubious sponsors at WikiLeaks — did no favors to the cause they supposedly wanted to advance.
Manning was not sponsored by Wikileaks. Wkikileaks was the news organization that released the documents that he leaked.
And Manning curtainly advanced the cause that he wanted to advance; Transparency and the exposure of lawlessness by the government.
But you knew this already. You just haven't been able to move beyond the fact that the narrative that you've been pimping about Manning was not supported by the results of his trial.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)blackspade
(10,056 posts)But you posted that particular excerpt because it fits with your now discredited narrative about Manning.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)"But you posted that particular excerpt because it fits with your now discredited narrative about Manning."
...because it shows that opinions vary. People seem to think that someone can't be for reform and critical of Snowden. As for a "narrative" about Manning, WTF are you talking about?
blackspade
(10,056 posts)
ProSense
(116,464 posts)blackspade
(10,056 posts)ProSense
(116,464 posts)blackspade
(10,056 posts)You seem a bit wound up, maybe you should take a break.
AnotherMcIntosh
(11,064 posts)
MrMickeysMom
(20,453 posts)You are a member of DU and everything, therefore, is DEBATABLE.
You would have a hell of a lot more credibility if you wouldn't start every response to an OP with cut and paste of what someone's just written, followed by denials, and things that are "likely".
After guessing you won't take that advice, I'll just avoid trying with you further.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)even the point in the OP.
Do you disagree that Snowden broke the law? If so, say so and stop making demands about things you have no control over, specifically what I chose to post and how.
MrMickeysMom
(20,453 posts)Stop making demands that we interpret through YOURS EYES all WE ALREADY KNOW ABOUT LAW BREAKING. I've explained this months back with examples of how civil disobedience has been necessary throughout American history.
YOU take a proverbial pair of tweezers and pick out a said law that clearly was broken to make a point of how we must ALL know how wrong this one breaker of laws WAS.
YOU point out what YOU select to support what YOU shovel as unacceptable over and beyond any other patriot in history who felt they had no choice BUT to break a law. You avoid the conversation we all should be having, or are willing to discuss about Snowden, who IMO used the only option left to CALL ATTENTION TO THE BIGGEST MOTHER-FUCKER OF LAW BREAKING WE ARE LIVING THROUGH... as defined throughout the Bill of Rights.
Bill of WHA? HUH???
ProSense
(116,464 posts)"YOU point out what YOU select to support what YOU shovel as unacceptable over and beyond any other patriot in history who felt they had no choice BUT to break a law. You avoid the conversation we all should be having, or are willing to discuss about Snowden, who IMO used the only option left to CALL ATTENTION TO THE BIGGEST MOTHER-FUCKER OF LAW BREAKING WE ARE LIVING THROUGH... as defined throughout the Bill of Rights."
...bullshit. You are harboring issues. Don't like what I fucking post? Ignore it. No one is forcing you to participate in any thread I post.
Your screaming seems to imply that you think this issue is the most important thing in everyone's life. Guess what: It isn't.
Not everyone buys into the hyperbole and misinformation. Reform is important. Bullshit isn't.
MrMickeysMom
(20,453 posts)My screaming about how the Bill of Rights have eroded to the point where this person's breaking the law took place implies that I think this issue is most important?
And your response is.... "Guess what: It isn't."
I see, said the blind poster 
ProSense
(116,464 posts)And your response is.... "Guess what: It isn't."
I see, said the blind poster
The Bill of Rights was trampled when Bush illegally spied on Americans. The Bill of Rights has been in jeopardy for decades, as the recent articles about the DEA's SOD unit reveals.
That does't mean this debate isn't frought with hyperbole and misinformation. This is not the most important issue in people's lives.
Whatever President Obama does may or may not have an impact on the actions of a future President. The same goes for Congress, which is likely to act, but unlikely to come to any agreement on any sea change.
Access to health care, better paying jobs and increasing the minimum wage, stopping the assault on women's rights, attacks on the poor and aid to vulnerable Americans, gun and prison reform and a host of other issues are critical in millions of people's everyday lives.
Reforming the NSA is an important issue, but it's absurd to believe that it is the most important issue in people's lives.
MrMickeysMom
(20,453 posts)All the access to health care, jobs and wage, assault on women's rights and the poor are DIRECTLY impacted by the erosion of what is constitutionally guaranteed.
You amaze me with your previous statement's ABUNDANT ignorance of these facts.
Like I said, ProSense... 
ProSense
(116,464 posts)You amaze me with your previous statement's ABUNDANT ignorance of these facts.
Like I said, ProSense...
..."WTF" all you want to, but the fact is that what you just said is fear mongering (http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023407292). People can't eat, NSA reforms. Reforming the NSA does nothing for chronic unemployment.
I mean, let's say the NSA continues to operate exactly as it is doing today (or even if some reforms are put in place) and with the increased awareness, should access to health care, better paying jobs and increasing the minimum wage, stopping the assault on women's rights, attacks on the poor and aid to vulnerable Americans, gun and prison reform take a back seat to pushing for NSA reform?
How many people are affected if the job market stays exactly where it is today or slips back into a recession?
What about the states that are rolling back aid to the poor and services for women. How long can such depraved policies go unchecked?
Yeah, I get the point you're attempting to make, but at this point it pure hyperbole.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)It's a flea fart in comparison to the horrific crime letting Americans know that our Constitutional rights are kaput.
Terra! Terra!
Cryptoad
(8,254 posts)their has not been any evidence presented of any crime except the crimes Snowden committed!
just Speculation and conjecture,
this is the same attack tactic the tea party uses...
amazing
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)is a crime? Silly, silly people.
Cryptoad
(8,254 posts)still no evidence........
Rex
(65,616 posts)You just don't want to pay attention? Is that the problem?
Cryptoad
(8,254 posts)When are criminal charges going to be filed? I still await something other than speculation.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)Better call the folks at Palintir.
Cryptoad
(8,254 posts)not reasoned debate.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)Really?
Cryptoad
(8,254 posts)He has never said he lied,,,,,, that is only speculation and conjecture on you part.
He said he did not answer the question correctly. that is not the same thing as admitting to lying,,,,
come back when criminal charges of lying to Congress have been filed against him........
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)in deciding to do it.
Even ProSense doesn't dispute the FACT that Clapper lied. You can check it out on this thread...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023444358
Months later, the FISA Amendments Act, which the Administration contends authorizes its PRISM program, passed without the open debate that the President now contends he wanted all along. And, again, I'm only touching on a fraction of the efforts just Senator Wyden made to compel the administration to engage the American people in a democratic debate. I, obviously, haven't mentioned the Director of National Intelligence's decision to lie when Wyden "asked whether the NSA had collected 'any type of data at all on millions of Americans.'" (Btw: Given that Wyden shared his question with the ODNI the day before the hearing, I am highly skeptical that Clapper's decision to lie was made unilaterally.) Or the fact that the Obama Administration repeatedly fought lawsuits and FOIA requests for, again -- not sources and methods -- but the Section 215 legal interpretation that the Administration claims authorizes its surveillance authorities.
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130810/09240524136/jennifer-hoelzers-insiders-view-administrations-response-to-nsa-surveillance-leaks.shtml
Cryptoad
(8,254 posts)and all I keep getting is more speculations. I you have this evidence you know it is your duty to turn it over to the proper authorities? I still await criminal charges to be brought forth!
riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)"In an interview with NBC’s Andrea Mitchell, he (Clapper) said that “I responded in what I thought was the most truthful, or least untruthful manner, by saying no,” though he also called his answer “too cute by half.” "
Or this....from Clapper himself in a letter to Senator Wyden
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/07/27/1227008/-Clapper-Admits-He-Lied-to-Congress-in-Letter-Posted-by-Senator-Wyden
"Clapper has not only admitted, finally, that the NSA engages in, or has engaged in, bulk collection of phone and internet metadata of millions of Americans, but he has admitted that in March, he lied before Congress when denying that such was the case.
In fact, he begins his letter to Wyden by stating, "It is highly unfortunate that the collection of telephony metadata was revealed through an unauthorized disclosure." ?
Cryptoad
(8,254 posts)Not answering a Question correctly is not the necessarily lying. Have you seen any criminal charges filed yet!
riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)Uh huh.
When my shit turns gold.
Cryptoad
(8,254 posts)Cryptoad
(8,254 posts)was in reference to answering questions about classified information to people whom did not have security clearances........ geeez...
you are grasping at straws!
Rex
(65,616 posts)since they got here...now why would that be?
Cryptoad
(8,254 posts)I was in the trenches of the DNC fighting battles when you were hanging on your Mama's strings..... just cause I point out the difference between speculation and fact is not a RW meme.....! Democrats use to know the difference. and I am starting to wonder where it was lost along the way!
msongs
(67,400 posts)
Californeeway
(97 posts)literally descended from the Gods. I for one have just got done getting a life-size tattoo of his face on my chest.........
arely staircase
(12,482 posts)
George II
(67,782 posts)....and he explained why he answered the question(s) the way he did, and corrected himself afterward.
Calling what he did during that Congressional hearing "lying" is stooping to right-wing conservative tactics.
Californeeway
(97 posts)you cannot question the mythology because then you are an authoritarian shill.
It's the reason why we can't believe any info the government releases about the programs if it debunks any of the holy script coming from dear leader. Because dear leader chooses what is true and what is false and that evil, over-sized government is out to get us, maybe even put us in FEMA camps.....
For that reason, it is indispensable to believe with religious fervor that everyone involved with gov. surveillance programs are would-be tyrants who hate us for our freedom. I am sure there are bad eggs, but the fixation on the worst case scenario wreaks of Alex Jonesesque paranoia. It's what happens when talented ratt-fuckers get a hold of gullible Liberals.
I kind of liked the good old days when you could tell the difference between DU and InfoWars.
Logical
(22,457 posts)We know you hate Snowden. The 1000 posts from you is enough, we know you hate him.
He broke the law, no one is arguing that, so why do you post 10 posts a day saying he broke the law?
But, and here is where you are unbelievably biased, Snowden made the NSA a topic of discussion and made Obama decide, all of the sudden, that we needed to discuss spying on Americans. This debate would NEVER HAVE HAPPENED without Snowden. So Snowden did a great thing. He exposed the NSA and now we can discuss it. The ACLU admits Obama was NEVER INTERESTED in discussing it until Snowden!
Wow, you are so biased that you cannot see anything except your hatred of Snowden because he exposed Obama.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)...saying he broke the law?"
Becuase it gives you an opportunity to post this "LOL, you lost this prosense. About 2 weeks ago," which shows that you're not comfortable with seeing criticism of Snowden. It appears to be getting under your skin.
Logical
(22,457 posts)DUer so wrapped up in one topic to the point where they throw all logic out the window like you are on this topic.
I know you almost lost it over the Chained CPI. But this is worse.
tridim
(45,358 posts)That is why Prosense and others, including myself do what we do. It's about maintaining DU's integrity.
If you don't understand that, maybe you shouldn't be participating in this debate. Facts are non-negotiable.
Logical
(22,457 posts)tridim
(45,358 posts)Do you care at all about DU's integrity?
Logical
(22,457 posts)tridim
(45,358 posts)So, no it's not a fact. Obama knew the need existed before you knew who Snowden was.
Do you care about DU's integrity?
Logical
(22,457 posts)tridim
(45,358 posts)Life Long Dem
(8,582 posts)http://blogs.wsj.com/corruption-currents/2012/11/27/obama-signs-whistleblower-protection-bill-into-law/
I don't see what's so funny.
MrMickeysMom
(20,453 posts)"It's about maintaining DU's integrity, as defined by .... "
PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)You post the same stuff day after day. You SPAM to GD forum over and over with the same OPs (OK, slightly different. But basically the same.) You have other copycat posters now doing the same thing. We all agree, he broke the letter of the law. We know that. Now stop this.
Logical
(22,457 posts)this on the DU.
L0oniX
(31,493 posts)Response to PowerToThePeople (Reply #8)
ProSense This message was self-deleted by its author.
oldhippie
(3,249 posts)Over and over and over again.
aikoaiko
(34,169 posts)Mail Message
At Sat Aug 10, 2013, 08:47 AM an alert was sent on the following post:
You admit that you are just a troll?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3439408
REASON FOR ALERT:
This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate. (See <a href="http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=aboutus#communitystandards" target="_blank">Community Standards</a>.)
ALERTER'S COMMENTS:
calling an old member who defends President Obama a troll is what is real trolling, it is also an over the top personal attack, and an example of the sort of thing making DU suck nowadays
You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Sat Aug 10, 2013, 08:54 AM, and the Jury voted 3-3 to LEAVE IT.
Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: Sometimes I want to paint the walls of DU in a soothing pink color.
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT and said: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: I disagree. Prosense admits in this thread that she does it for the LULZ. She can take her lumps.
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT and said: PA - not supposed to call other Duers trolls
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: I'm not going to hide this. The poster has been doing just that even going into other OPs to post her OPs, just to fan the flames and I'm going to use the words of the alerter, an example of the sort of thing making DU suck nowadays. ProSense gives just as good as she gets.
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT and said: troll accusation
Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.
SunSeeker
(51,550 posts)AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)nt
SunSeeker
(51,550 posts)
nessa
(317 posts)it does give the offender the benefit of the doubt, which in not necessarily a bad thing.
aikoaiko
(34,169 posts)At least that is my experience.
SunSeeker
(51,550 posts)The best I can make out from the above 3-3 decision to leave it is that if the DUer being called a troll "can take it," then it stays. Which is ridiculous of course.
WorseBeforeBetter
(11,441 posts)We'd fight over that, too. Pepto-Bismol pink might be in order...
Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)what a squirmy low life thing to press.
Logical
(22,457 posts)ProSense
(116,464 posts)PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)ProSense
15. You admit that you are an asshole? n/t
ProSense
(116,464 posts)I think you're the one upset because you stooped so low to imply someone is a "troll."
Feeling hurt?
PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)trolling for a reaction.
No, I am not feeling hurt. Not one bit.
I am not worried about this thread. You are not either. There will be another thread just like this one, brand new and without this history, in a day or so.
Logical
(22,457 posts)Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)you violate terms of agreement, and call long time posters a troll, yet give a pass the very same repetitive actions by others when you agree with the message (for whatever reason). One would think you may be a defensive hypocrite based on your responses recently.
Logical
(22,457 posts)Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)yet over and over and over, 1000 times over, you prove that a book should never be judged by it's title.
Logical
(22,457 posts)Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)...i thought it was clever too...thanks.
Logical
(22,457 posts)Is a knot that is not stable and falls apart under too much load it matches your posts perfectly!
Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)it would go a long way in establishing how clever you can be.
Logical
(22,457 posts)Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)and fwiw, you don't see the whining in you own posts? so besides showing a lack of original creativity, you are also a hypocrit? Your constant complaining about admin and the supporters of admin certainly is on the whiney side lol
MrMickeysMom
(20,453 posts)It's sort of like a drive-by shooting commentary...
You poke
You poke more
Pay off! You've perhaps upset someone?
Have you ever read the best seller, sure to be in paperback at the library and quite worn by now... "Games People Play"
It's very easy to do this on DU. I'll bet a lot of us even do this... But YOU... deserve the drive-by Poke-DU commentary award.
Not quite as glamorous as a DUzy, but there you go.
I think I have it with you, now.
Congratulations!
ProSense
(116,464 posts)personal attacks and projecting nonsensical intent on every post I make.
That's my "goal."
MrMickeysMom
(20,453 posts)Get that silly little misconception straight, please.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)Is to prop up Obama, right or wrong.
You don't do a very convincing job of it.
Oh, and NSA domestic surveillance, especially under a D president whom should be held to a higher standard, is still repulsive.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)"Oh, and NSA domestic surveillance, especially under a D president whom should be held to a higher standard, is still repulsive."
...an excellent strawman builder.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)...because you do it ad nauseum.
Do you even know what a strawman fallacy is? 
It is a distorted, exaggerated or misrepresented version of an argument.
And, by the way, NSA domestic surveillance is STILL wrong, no matter how much you twist in the wind attempting to obfuscate the subject.
Scurrilous
(38,687 posts)Catherina for instance. 
AlinPA
(15,071 posts)Californeeway
(97 posts)posting pro Obama OPs on a Democratic discussion forum.
Geez, what a turd in the punch bowl, fucking up everone's hate-fest.
I've seen suggestions of changing the name of DU to Snowjob Underground and it seems like it would be a fairly accurate moniker.
Bobbie Jo
(14,341 posts)Problem solved. The constant sniping is inane.
Now stop this.
PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)Last edited Sat Aug 10, 2013, 04:34 PM - Edit history (1)
All ignore does is limit your view of what DU really looks like. It is a "create your own DU with only the views you agree with." There is nothing good about it (using ignore). It is worse than Fox news. (Using ignore makes DU worse than Fox news.)
Bobbie Jo
(14,341 posts)of others who disagree says otherwise.
The constant sniping is tiresome.
PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)118. The attempts to control the dialogue
View profile
of others who disagree says otherwise.
The constant sniping is tiresome.
I read a post. The post said something I read as admitting to trolling for a reaction. So I asked if they were in fact admitting to trolling. My post was alerted on. Jury was split. my post remained.
That is all.
Bobbie Jo
(14,341 posts)Good for you.
Again, the constant sniping is lame.
Jamaal510
(10,893 posts)VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)soooo it's not just "the letter" that he broke. Edit to add that actually his signing his name was to swear an oath to uphold "the letter" and all letters of that law.
Katashi_itto
(10,175 posts)Bingo....! Dead center hit.
Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)how come you always jump on posts that crap on Obama or the current admin?
Logical
(22,457 posts)Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)Logical
(22,457 posts)
MNBrewer
(8,462 posts)Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)MrMickeysMom
(20,453 posts)How do you assess stats? Or, is that a question for the admin's?
pnwmom
(108,977 posts)would be more accurate.
uponit7771
(90,335 posts)Logical
(22,457 posts)uponit7771
(90,335 posts)Marr
(20,317 posts)See a doctor if a feelings of hate and rage last more than several weeks.
cali
(114,904 posts)would absolutely positively be facing justice in the U.S.
Cracks me up. Delights me. You make it crystal how pissed off you are about it.
littlest violin for you.
Logical
(22,457 posts)"I'm remembering all those posts you wrote about how he would absolutely positively be facing justice in the U.S."
I remember them too. I can wait.
dairydog91
(951 posts)The stomping of feet, steam coming from ears, and overall shrieking tantrum coming from supporters of the omnipresent surveillance Agencies/Corporations is worth it.
dairydog91
(951 posts)It in no way changes the relevance of the information he released.
oldhippie
(3,249 posts)It seems like the very definition of disruption.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)oldhippie
(3,249 posts)That's why.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)Oh well.
oldhippie
(3,249 posts)... as always.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)oldhippie
(3,249 posts)Credibility.
tridim
(45,358 posts)oldhippie
(3,249 posts)... is spam. Especially when most don't disagree with the fact. In my book, that is spamming the board.
You may disagree.
dairydog91
(951 posts)Unless you're deluded enough to think that Snowden supporters don't know that he broke the espionage laws and are going to have an epiphany once they learn of his lawbreaking.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)Are those also "well understood" points?
Paulie
(8,462 posts)Did you get that far in the blog post before you quoted it?
ProSense
(116,464 posts)Paulie
(8,462 posts)Given his profession and contributions to his field and to human rights with his non patented inventions.
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)I swear you are alternating between bullshitty posts claiming that everything Snowden and greenwald have revealed is bogus nonsense, and stern reminders that Snowden has broken the law by revealing classified information. But I must be wrong about that. Nobody would be posting such obviously contradictory nonsense day after day week after week month after month.
cantbeserious
(13,039 posts)eom
cantbeserious
(13,039 posts)eom
PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)dougolat
(716 posts)...it's been going on for a decade
...part of the leak was training material
...there are multiple programs duplicating these processes
...any fig leaf of propriety imposed on the official govt. agencies and people wont touch the private contractors and Carlyle operatives, or even the individuals with purient curiosity or a personal axe to grind
...the bad guys are laughing because they have back doors in place and nothing is likely to even slow them down
yet we wonder why war crimes and bank frauds have such impunity, when Spitzer was about to prosecute it only took a few bank records and E-mails leaked to take him out of action.
This spying can be used to turn the head of any judge, legislator, witness, cop, or lawyer. Yet some people want to squint just right and pretend it isn't so.
Fringe
(175 posts)If everyone took it upon themselves to decide, what type of secrets are to be kept and which ones should be shared, we would have a big mess.
cantbeserious
(13,039 posts)eom
Fringe
(175 posts)This is the same government that has gotten us into numerous conflicts and wars over a span of at least 70 years by telling lies and misleading the general public.
This is the same government that has murdered innocent women and children and many stood behind them when they did it. I remember people cheering when bombs were dropped on Iraq.
I wish at the time there had been as much of a stink about innocent people being killed as there is about that moron telling secrets.
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)Illegal unconstitutional and immoral activities. What is the ethical course of action with respect to that classified data?
Fringe
(175 posts)Follow the chain command/complaint process. A person who has a top secret clearance is well aware of responsibilities that come with that classification.
Deny and Shred
(1,061 posts)What responsibility does one with a top secret clearance have to the Constitution? Are they obliged to go along with anything that has been classified no matter how unconstitutional or even criminal?
What reforms do you really think will come from following the complaint process? What retribution will they get for apostasy?
"Its not for a person to decide what is ethical or moral based on their views." That may be the most incredible sentence I've read in a long time. If morals and ethics aren't based on one's views, what are they based on?
I know the Nuremburg trials are "quaint" (to paraphrase Cheney and the Geneva Convention) but America at that time didn't excuse Nazis who claimed to be following the chain of command.
Fringe
(175 posts)Their own what policies are constitutional or moral there would be chaos.
For the most part a person with a security clearance does not have access to all information that would make them knowledgeable enough to decide what classified information if released would put the government or others at risk if released.
Even judges based on the law don't agree on what is constitutional so no, a single person is not qualified to exposed classified information based on their personal views.
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)"Follow the chain command/complaint process." - we hung people at Nuremburg for doing that.
ZombieHorde
(29,047 posts)I could be wrong though, and the tactic may work.
Katashi_itto
(10,175 posts)Weeks of post after post of the same stuff.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)msanthrope
(37,549 posts)Katashi_itto
(10,175 posts)msanthrope
(37,549 posts)click the button on the bottom of the post and alert...you can alert the Hosts of the Forum, or activate the jury system.
You can register your discontent in ATA.
You can use the ignore button.
You have a variety of tools available to you.
Katashi_itto
(10,175 posts)msanthrope
(37,549 posts)a duty to the community to report it?
Just as you would report bigotry, if you really, really think something is "spam" and in violation of the rules, then why not report it? Otherwise, it's not really spam then, is it?
Katashi_itto
(10,175 posts)is that by letting the posts continue and not lifting a finger, the OP does nothing but continue to shred her own credibility.
I think that's an even more potent effect.
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)Response to Katashi_itto (Reply #95)
DemocratsForProgress This message was self-deleted by its author.
Autumn
(45,064 posts)That thread was an interesting read.
Puglover
(16,380 posts)that is so not missed on this site.
I would love for just one of the participants of that thread to tell me just how they differ from OET. Site admin is a bitter TSed troll and calling DU a "cesspool" Jesus do any of these people even know the meaning of irony?
Autumn
(45,064 posts)And there are people in that thread that are people who post here.
Puglover
(16,380 posts)As I said how in the hell is that site anything but a reflection of OET that operates behind a shield of supposed adoration for President Obama. Ugh.
I cannot even imagine what the President would think of shite like this.
On edit again: All this being said, Skinner always maintained what people do on other websites is of no concern to him. And I totally agree.
Katashi_itto
(10,175 posts)Search a bit for that? Meh. Nobodies perfect. The things is, by his own actions, our president has made the idea of things like that within the realm of credibility. And at least I don't spam on a scale never seen on DU
Number23
(24,544 posts)That puts so much in perspective. Good Lord, the crazy is thick in that thread.
Best response: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3194149
And 69 mouth breathers rec'd it too. Gotta love the New DU. 
oldhippie
(3,249 posts)... as they have, and a jury may let it stand anyway. Juries can do that. It's still spam.
Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)vs. just throwing it out there to create an illusion and build post #'s
Sounds like nothing more than the same "public policy" that brought us the "death panels" rhetoric. Yah, saying it often enough to try and make it stick didn't work then either.
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)is engaged in producing spam and also not think it is a violation of community standards. There is no rule or community standard against posting the same ridiculous talking points here over and over again, and there is little chance that 4/6 jurors will vote to hide it, so really all one can do is note, in response to the op, just how ridiculous and boring these posts are.
Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)could you explain why you don't consider your posts as spam?
Katashi_itto
(10,175 posts)Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)SunSeeker
(51,550 posts)Right now they are the only type of posts listed in the Greatest Threads box on the home page. There is so much going on in the country and the world, and yet DU is flooded with these posts.
Democracyinkind
(4,015 posts)Thanfully so.
tularetom
(23,664 posts)The laws he broke were unfair and unconstitutional but he still violated them.
I can't believe Lewis would condemn somebody for acting according to the dictates of his conscience just as he did.
Fire Walk With Me
(38,893 posts)-Waterboarding
-Rendition
-Solitary confinement (PFC Manning)
-Indefinite detention of US citizens with neither trial nor representation
So they can take Snowden, send him to a secret prison anywhere in the world, stuff him in a hole for the rest of his life without trial or representation and waterboard him anytime they wish, and it's all "legal".
WTF is it going to take to get people to wake up to what is going on in this country, and who is doing it to us!
For further reading:
Indefinite Detention, Endless Worldwide War and the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act
http://www.aclu.org/indefinite-detention-endless-worldwide-war-and-2012-national-defense-authorization-act
"On December 31, 2011, President Obama signed the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), codifying indefinite military detention without charge or trial into law for the first time in American history. The NDAA’s dangerous detention provisions would authorize the president — and all future presidents — to order the military to pick up and indefinitely imprison people captured anywhere in the world, far from any battlefield.
Make a Difference
The breadth of the NDAA’s worldwide detention authority violates the Constitution and international law because it is not limited to people captured in an actual armed conflict, as required by the laws of war. Under the Bush administration, similar claims of worldwide detention authority were used to hold even a U.S. citizen captured on U.S. soil in military custody, and many in Congress assert that the NDAA should be used in the same way. The ACLU does not believe that the NDAA authorizes military detention of American citizens or anyone else in the United States. Any president’s claim of domestic military detention authority under the NDAA would be unconstitutional and illegal. Nevertheless, there is substantial public debate around whether the NDAA could be read even to repeal the Posse Comitatus Act and authorize indefinite military detention without charge or trial within the United States.
Although President Obama issued a signing statement saying he had “serious reservations” about the NDAA’s detention provisions, the statement only applies to how his administration would use them, and would not affect how the law is interpreted by subsequent administrations. The provisions – which were negotiated by a small group of members of Congress, in secret, and without proper congressional review – are inconsistent with fundamental American values.
Both Congress and the president need to clean up the mess they have created. No one should live in fear of this or any future president misusing the NDAA’s detention authority. The NDAA’s detention provisions must be repealed."
(Obama has now signed this provision twice, and and Chris Hedges et al. sued him to overturn it, and succeeded [a judge ruled section 1021 unConstitutional], Obama sent lawyers and got it reinstated. Shows you what he truly cares about.)
Posting this even though it flies out into thin air and no one can actually see it.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)Does it have anything to do with the OP?
msongs
(67,400 posts)Fire Walk With Me
(38,893 posts)Obama sure isn't doing a thing or saying a thing about it. How do you so passionately embrace a president who gave a free pass to blatant war criminals? Some 100,00 dead Iraqi citizens, stolen oil, thousands of dead US soldiers...Cheney's Halliburton value going up and up...But Obama pardoned them through inaction so it's good and right!
Infinite 
riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)turned themselves in... for violating the Fugitive Slave Act.
Oh, or the entire LGBT community and most hetero couples for violating anti-sodomy laws.
Even Nelson Mandela operated in secret for many years in violent anti-apartheid actions before he was (unwillingly) arrested. He desperately evaded escape because he believed he could create greater, faster change if he was free.
I mean lawbreakers all of them! Cowards for not going to prison willingly!
There are so many examples from history of brave heroic people who flagrantly, and not so flagrantly, broke laws and tried very hard not to be caught in that act.
And now we call them heroes.
Progressive dog
(6,900 posts)riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)Or breaking the law, what ProSense's OP is all about?
Really?
Progressive dog
(6,900 posts)riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)but even so, addressing your concern, do you really think Snowden's position isn't personally risky?
Really? Cause you are probably the first person on DU I've come across, on either side of this issue, who doesn't realize the guy's in a pretty bad situation, personally, emotionally, and safety-wise.
Progressive dog
(6,900 posts)He did.
He is exactly where he chose to be when he committed espionage from Hong Kong. He may have stupidly thought that Assange and Greenwald would get him asylum in a better place than Moscow. He might even believe that Russia is more free than the USA. He may believe that he was going to cash in on his stolen secrets.His bad judgement doesn't make his criminal acts acceptable and it doesn't elicit my sympathy.
riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)and THEIR "criminal" acts are regarded as heroes and heroic.
ProSense and others appear to believe that Snowden should simply roll over and get arrested. Some people do. Some clearly don't. That doesn't make Harriet Tubman a "coward" for example for not being willing to face "justice" (ha).
Progressive dog
(6,900 posts)breaking the law. He broke the law from Hong Kong.
That would not make Harriet Tubman a coward. She stayed to free more slaves. This coward wanted to be known. He did this for himself, he is not a patriot. He probably expected to sell the secrets .I wonder how much Glenn And Assange have contributed to Eddie so far.
riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)and if you don't think the slave states weren't a world away (akin to Hong Kong for Snowden) to the free states, then you haven't been reading history.
Nobody knows what Snowden's next move is. Chances are, if he lives, there's more to come from him. That would be akin to Tubman "freeing more slaves" right? if he releases MORE info, ie. participates in even MORE "law breaking" according to you, then that would make him more heroic? I mean I think it would but that doesn't appear to be your argument.
But honestly, if Tubman had only 1 singular action that had as much impact on the Fugitive Slave Act, as Snowden's whistle blowing has had on the NSA's illegal spying, then she'd be a heroine regardless of how many other slaves she freed.
Frankly if Tubman only managed to free ONE slave, she'd still be a heroine in my book and anyone else who DID manage to free just one slave , is still a heroine and not a coward despite that they broke the laws of the day.
laundry_queen
(8,646 posts)Do you know how many African Americans came to Canada to get away from the US during slavery? I suppose they should've just turned themselves in! 
Progressive dog
(6,900 posts)committed no crime. You do understand the difference between criminals and slaves, don't you?
riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)Tubman and the entire Underground Railroad members?
Because of course, they WERE criminals, violating the Fugitive Slave Act....
Progressive dog
(6,900 posts)criminal and slave are you confused about? Or maybe you are confused about the difference between someone putting themselves at risk of imprisonment to help people escape slavery and someone who decides to steal from his government and flee.
riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)The slaves were possessions remember?
Helping them escape was akin to stealing from their owners. And yes, fleeing with stolen goods.
A crime in that era.
Maybe you are confused about what the definition of a crime is?
Progressive dog
(6,900 posts)All crimes are not the same. That is a pretty simple concept. Snowden is scum and I hope he has a very unpleasant stay in Moscow.
riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)(took enough damn time)
See for those of us who believe in the Constitution -Tubman and associates AND Snowden broke the law for the greater good. Snowden's "crimes" exposing NSA spying on Americans definitely do rise to the level of helping runaway slaves under the Fugitive Slave Act since he's revealed how extensive our privacy rights have been eroded.
Transformative civil disobedience.
You don't believe that. Okay.
But at least you know pretty much how strongly those of us on the other side feel about this.
Progressive dog
(6,900 posts)I believe that there is a choice between the rule of law and anarchy. I believe that a democratic government is the best defense against tyranny.
Snowden is an accused felon who fled to avoid prosecution. A criminal who is afraid to face a jury of his peer, who will determine guilt or innocence. By fleeing, he has shown knowledge of guilt.
The tea party feels strongly about keeping. government hands off their Social Security and Medicare. I know this too.
riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)etc etc should have turned themselves in for "justice" in the slave states. To face just as unbiased and impartial judicial system (cough) as Snowden turning himself in to face "justice" in the US right now.
Criminals - all of them.
Okay. Glad you cleared that up. I think I'll just let that hang out there. No need to embellish.
Response to Progressive dog (Reply #185)
laundry_queen This message was self-deleted by its author.
snappyturtle
(14,656 posts)
L0oniX
(31,493 posts)
Android3.14
(5,402 posts)What are you doing, pretending to be 13 years old today? Haven't you read the memo about consistency of character?
AppleBottom
(201 posts)
Fire Walk With Me
(38,893 posts)
pmorlan1
(2,096 posts)Of course he broke the law and even John Lewis, who walked back part of the comments he made to the Guardian recognizes that it was an act of civil disobedience. He didn't walk back that part of his comment.
blackspade
(10,056 posts)Very true.
And the American people are better off for it too.
kelliekat44
(7,759 posts)all points concerning this issue. There is nothing that Obama can say or do that will satisfy his detractors on the right and on the left. He just needs to do whatever he thinks is in the best interest of the nation and forget the negative. "Accentuate the positive, eliminate the negative and latch on to the affirmative, and don't mess with Mr. in-between."
No one will even mention the positive news about our trade deficit, falling unemployment, falling deficits, increases in manufacturing, busy and full shopping malls...how many straight months of job growth? No ...let's concentrate on an issue that puts no food on anyone's table, fails to educate anyone's child, and provide care for no one. I envy your tenacity. You are a gem here on DU. (And no, I don't like NSA spying, I don't like drone attacks, and I wish for universal healthcare. But I don't like cowards who damage the nation's reputation and security and help turn citizens against each other. I don't like disrespecting our President and I didn't disrespect President Bush either...and I disagreed with almost everything he did in office.0
SidDithers
(44,228 posts)Fuck Snowden.
Sid
Logical
(22,457 posts)L0oniX
(31,493 posts)midnight
(26,624 posts)Feingold also blogged about it at Daily Kos:
Our founding fathers laid down a basic principle -- that we are a nation of laws and that no one, including the president, is above the law. From Guantanamo Bay and warrantless wiretapping to torture and excessive secrecy, the Bush administration has turned this principle on its head. The Constitution states that it and the laws of the United States are "the supreme Law of the Land." Yet, the current administration has claimed unprecedented powers as it has ignored or willfully misinterpreted the laws on the books.
While Americans’ decisive call for change this election was a clear repudiation of the Bush administration’s conduct, failing to act swiftly to reverse the damage could essentially legitimize that conduct and the extreme legal theories on which it was based. That is why it is critically important for President-elect Obama to unequivocally renounce President Bush’s extreme claims of executive authority.
Full transcripts of the video clip below the fold. You can watch the full episode here.
http://www.mefeedia.com/entry/bill-moyers-journal-russ-feingold-on-the-rule-of-law/12671884
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)He knows he broke the law, so he claims he will be tortured and killed if he returns to the US.
Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)Logical
(22,457 posts)THE N.S.A.’S DIRTY DISHES: OBAMA’S PRESS CONFERENCE
Apple, Google and AT&T meet Obama to discuss NSA surveillance concerns
Obama sets plans to improve privacy in NSA surveillance
Obama's NSA Conference Could Be Subtitled 'The Guardian Gets Results'
Obama Promises Reform of NSA Spying, But the Devil Will Be in the Details
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)see the inside of an American court.
Cha
(297,180 posts)No, pesky going through the channels of "whistleblowing" for him. Instead he releases it to a vicious libertarian propaganda operator like greenwald.
Hidey hole in Iceland didn't work out for the sneak thief.. so he's in Putin's Russia now praising that shit to hilt. Didn't work out like he'd planned or did it? Time will unravel that one.
Fringe
(175 posts)Last edited Sun Aug 11, 2013, 11:28 AM - Edit history (1)
Snowden is no hero.
WinkyDink
(51,311 posts)Fringe
(175 posts)However, that does not make Snowden any less of a thief.
Also, It is not about what I enjoy. It's the fact that he broke the law and took it upon himself to selectively decide which policies are relevant.
riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)as a national security contractor. The Whistleblower Protection Act doesn't cover them.
http://my.firedoglake.com/mspbwatch/2013/06/09/the-newly-passed-federal-contractor-whistleblower-protection-law-would-not-have-helped-edward-snowden/
Last December, Congress passed (and the President signed), the National Defense Authorization Act of 2013. Contained in that bill was section 828, now codified at 41 U.S.C. 4712, which, beginning July 1, 2013, will protect disclosures made by government contractors to any member of Congress, an Inspector General, the GAO, a contract oversight employee in an agency, authorized DOJ or law enforcement agencies, a court or grand jury, or a management official at the employing contractor with authority to investigate wrongdoing.
However, and this is a big however, there is an exception for “any element of the intelligence community, as defined in section 3(4) of the National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 401a (4))” or to
any disclosure made by an employee of a contractor, subcontractor, or grantee of an element of the intelligence community if such disclosure—
(A) relates to an activity of an element of the intelligence community; or
(B) was discovered during contract, subcontract, or grantee services provided to an element of the intelligence community.
4bucksagallon
(975 posts)Where I worked all information was considered proprietary. At the very least he is a common thief, oh and for the hero worshipers here, I almost forgot Snowed In is cowardly common thief and super hero, LOL! How confusing this is all becoming.
Fringe
(175 posts)This guy is not honorable, he's a thief, someone who deserves no honor.
WinkyDink
(51,311 posts)JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)That is a question that each person must answer for himself or herself.
We viewed some of the laws of the Soviet Union and Germany under the NAZIs and even now view some of the laws of some countries as thinly veiled political repression. So each person has to ask himself whether the fact that you are being tried and perhaps sentenced for whistleblowing on a program that you believe is unjust or dangerous to the American people is a political crime or an actual crime. It depends on the point of view.
Not all violations of law should be prosecuted and punished. It depends on whether the law is just in the first place as well as the motives behind the violation of the law.
Think of the Zimmerman case. That was not a political crime, but Zimmerman had a good defense under the law to a very serious crime. The Stand Your Ground law introduced new considerations for the jury that members of the jury stated caused them to acquit.
Is our law against "stealing" and releasing classified information a) enforced arbitrarily or b) inherently unjust because it does not permit a defense for whistleblowing and allow a jury to acquit a defendant who sincerely believes he is speaking out about a crime or crimes committed by the government? These are legitimate questions that Americans need to be asking.
What if the information leaked were about some terrible threat to the environment that was being hidden by our government because the government itself was responsible for the threat?
What if the information leaked was about some terrible threat to the freedom of our press or our freedom of religion or any other of our rights guaranteed under the Bill of Rights.
And what if Snowden's leaks were actually intended to and resulted in better protection for our rights?
So laws can be enacted that create political crimes if they allow no mitigating circumstances to excuse the crime they create. And what do we do if someone like Snowden leaks evidence that the government is exceeding its authority, failing to respect our rights, surreptitiously establishing a police state?
This is more complex than the OP acknowledges.
When speaking from the conscience about a controversial issue or government wrongdoing or overstepping is prohibited by law, then the law is political. It is repressing speech based on the political content of the speech, and that violates the Constitution. The language of the law may hide the actual purpose of the law (to prohibit speech based on political content) by claiming that the repression of the speech is required for national security. But that does not change the fact that the real purpose of the law is to prohibit speech that is truthful but critical of the government. Our government is not supposed to be able to hide its mistakes, faults and power grabs behind laws that permit the prosecution of essentially political crimes.
WinkyDink
(51,311 posts)TOO BAD THIS IS NOT A NATION WHERE THAT AMENDMENT IS ASSURED ANYMORE.
Fringe
(175 posts)...and then run off to another country and hide, no law has been broken unless I am caught and bought to trial?
Good to know!
WinkyDink
(51,311 posts)People CAUGHT RED-HANDED, EVEN LITERALLY, are not guilty by law unless convicted.
It is why we have "Not guilty by reason of insanity" as a verdict, for example.
I am definitely not arguing that citizens can or should just ignore the truth in front of their eyes; I opine on the guilt and innocence of suspects or defendants all the time.
However, it behooves govt officials, as sworn upholders OF THE LAW, NOT to so opine.
Fringe
(175 posts)Swowden should come back and face trial.
George II
(67,782 posts)....Ghandi and the civil rights leaders performed their acts of "disobedience" and were fully prepared to face the consequences of their actions.
The civil rights leaders in particular felt that the laws were wrong, and they violated them to bring attention to those laws in an effort to change them.
Snowden, for whatever TRUE reasons he had for violating the law, didn't have the guts or conscience to face the consequences of his actions.
Let the Russians have him. No doubt eventually he'll rue the day he turned tail and ran.
kentuck
(111,085 posts)I think that is more of a wish than a fact.
SomethingFishy
(4,876 posts)But we must move forward.
AZ Progressive
(3,411 posts)not about fairly debating something. This is how they think.