The hardest thing to do is say "I was wrong"

[DearAbby]

I have given this a lot of thought. Since the news of the British government use a law, to capture terrorists, detained the spouse of a journalist as intimidation. Then the news they had the hard drives of a newspaper destroyed. The United States Government stood by silent.

I am so shocked right now by these actions, this is not an actions of an open free government, these are the actions of a totalitarian state...or we are within smelling distance of one.

I am sorry, I was wrong.

[Safetykitten]

1. +1

[leftstreet]

2. DURec

Good for you

[tabasco]

3. LOL.

[LondonReign2]

4. It is hard

well done

[NYC_SKP]

5. Recommended. (nt)

[geek tragedy]

6. The British actions were indeed totalitarian and creepy nt

[sabrina 1]

74. Yes, especially so since this had nothing to do with them.. The documents they were looking for

were not theirs.

And shame on the US for not condemning what they did on our behalf, unless of course they did it FOR us, which seems to be the general consensus. It would help if the US were to speak out against it, and make it clear we do not want even our allies, acting this way on our behalf.

So far I have not heard anything of that nature from our Government.

[geek tragedy]

75. Oh?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014573263

[sabrina 1]

79. Lol, and what is your point? We know the UK has been our puppet since Blair dragged his countr.y

along on Bush's illegal foreign adventures. Now they are paying the price. All that proves is how closely tied they are to the US, despite their denials.

It's no good, the world believes they were working for the US just as they were with Assange, another Whistle Blower who was targeted after he went after the banks. But it's backfiring these assaults by the US and their allies on Journalists. They are being trashed all over the world now. And the more people join forces to end this garbage, the sooner it will happen.

Ironically it appears that in their terror of the truth, THEY are the ones who will make it happen.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

7. I don't know what your position was before, but you're right--it's hard to admit being wrong

And yeah, I only know that from repeated personal experience. I've been dead-right about things, things I knew to be true. Until I found out I was wrong. I happen to be against the government and the Administration on the NSA stuff, but I'm going to keep this generic, so that I don't end up looking like I'm rah-rah'ing you "coming over to my side". So again, in the generic and in the abstract, it takes some gumption to admit you were wrong about a thing, and I appreciate your saying so. Thank you.

[malthaussen]

8. I commend you.

(For whatever that's worth)

-- Mal

[RobertEarl]

9. Good for you

It is not easy to admit that the path we are being lead down is not a path to more freedom. It is scary. Don't be scared tho, stand up for your freedom.

[enigmatic]

10. There's never any shame of saying "I was wrong"

Only when knowing you were wrong and saying nothing.

I commend you.

[mindwalker_i]

11. this is the mark of an engaged and thoughtful person

The whole point of being sentient is to have the ability to absorb new information, process it, and be able to integrate it into one's being. I aspire to reach this state.

[Jackpine Radical]

42. Absolutely.

I was about to say exactly the same thing in slightly different words. I have switched my view on many things over the years, beginning with a naive proto-libertarian view of the world and ending up finding myself in sympathy with certain kinds of socialists and anarchists. The key to intelligent behavior is the willingness to change your opinions, your models of reality, in accordance with the accumulation of new evidence on top of what you already have experienced. One should never place more faith in a model/theory/perspective than the balance of the available evidence warrants.

[Hydra]

12. Welcome

I'm sorry it had to be true. I'd rather it wasn't...but this is where we are. It's a bleak place to have to inhabit, but the company is good

[woo me with science]

38. "but the company is good."

+1000000

[LaydeeBug]

13. Hard drives of a newspaper destroyed?

and still no mention of Booz Allen, who is *still* profiteering from this mess.

[TorchTheWitch]

14. Not for everyone it isn't

I don't have any problem saying I was wrong when I was. Maybe you do, but that's your problem.

[HardTimes99]

15. It takes a big person to admit he or she was or is wrong. I don't think we're anywhere

close to being a 'totalitarian state' (at least as Hannah Arendt and others of her time used the phrase). But it's clear that our experiment with democratic self-government is deathly ill. What, if anything, it shall be replaced with remains to be seen. But the prospect is neither amusing nor comforting.

[dkf]

16. I think it hits everyone when the lights go on...it's freeing but initially not pleasant.

We've all been there.

[Maineman]

17. Smelling distance. You got that right! It smells very bad.

[cascadiance]

18. Makes you wonder if a fire will suddenly spontaneously start at the Ecuadorean embassy

... in the UK and then the Brits will have an excuse to scoop up Assange too.

And no Miranda warnings for him either, as they aren't the U.S. and Mirandas have no rights in the UK!

[LearningCurve]

19. Cheers

eom

[Demo_Chris]

20. rec. nt

[nadinbrzezinski]

21. Hi

[warrprayer]

22. he who can not change his mind...

... can change nothing.

[WillyT]

23. (((((((DearAbby)))))))

Courage !!!







& Rec !!!

[limpyhobbler]

24. You seem so human and intelligent right now.

Opinions adjust as we get new information.

In 2011 I used to always defend Obama's drone strikes because I thought we were making the world safe by killing terrorists. After lots of debates on this site people gave me new information, so I changed my mind.

Good for you, for adjusting when you see new information.

[Cooley Hurd]

25. Welcome to your under-the-bus seat.

It's quite cozy down here! I'll ask Rachel Maddow to move to the aisle seat.

[Chaco Dundee]

26. we have been there for a while

B.+ B.

[MotherPetrie]

27. K&R

[Civilization2]

28. I thought I was wrong once, but I was mistaken (We have all been wrong, correcting it is the thing!)

Some times the epiphany is so powerful, that being wrong, for a time, was worth it.

None of us want to face the tough truths of this world, many NEVER actually do,. . denial is a powerful forcem and a place many choose to live their full lives.

Only the TRUTH will set us free. It is only possible to fix a thing when we recognize it is broken.

[Catherina]

29. I'll be honored if you take a seat next to me under the bus

We can show you around, show you where all the fun people are.

Noam Chomsky's in seat 63B, President Carter's in seat 12d, it's gotten very full but we're having the best conversations ever!

Don't feel bad, just relieved you know now.

[cantbeserious]

30. + 1000 - Thank You - Facing Reality Is Hard - Face It We Must

eom

[jtuck004]

31. Mistakes Were Made (but not by me).

No, it's the title of a book

By Carol Tavris and Elliot Aronson

It is so hard for so many people to admit that they wrote a whole book with a subtitle of "Why we Justify Foolish Beliefs, Bad Decisions, and Hurtful Acts".

Another good one is by Kathryn Schulz titled "Being Wrong", in which the first chapter is titled "Wrongology".

So yeah, it's a pretty common human condition. At least I think it is. Or maybe I'm wrong. No, it must be.

[Scootaloo]

32. Welcome aboard

Here's hoping some more people come around, so we can actually get some movement towards fixing the problem!

[woo me with science]

33. I heart this post.

It hurts like hell to wake up and see it, doesn't it.

But it's our only hope.

Welcome, and I saved you a seat away from the exhaust pipe.

[beevul]

34. It is hard, thats a fact.

So hard that most people can't do it, in general - at least, that's my experience.


The upside (not that there is one to the whole fiasco), is a personal one for you:

Being able to admit when ones self is wrong, to ones self and others, is a truly and completely honorable thing. From what I have seen and experienced, few things will cause people to respect you more, than being able to admit it when you're wrong.

[uponit7771]

35. How do you we know Snowden is NOT trying to help some terrorist organization? He's a theif and stole

...info to out a gov program when there were better means to get what he wanted.

Why in the world should anyone trust that guy or his homies!?

regards

[rhett o rick]

36. Do you instead trust the Authoritarian State run by Republicans Gen Clapper and Gen Alexander?

I believe we need to have strong oversight over the DEA, TSA, and NSA. That's what Democracy is all about. And I can do all that without trusting Snowden.

[uponit7771]

43. No, nor do I trust one ran by a democrat either....but I would still like to know how we know this

...info Snowden stole wasn't given to US enemies...I don't think we do know

[rhett o rick]

46. How could we know at our level. I disregard those that are certain in either direction.

Certainty is the opposite of open-mindedness.

[uponit7771]

68. The question of whether he COULD or did is bad in and of itself...really bad

[treestar]

70. More than random people

It is an elected state, and the people who fill the offices according to the law are people we have to trust. We can't do surveillance for ourselves. Why shouldn't be we trust the people we elected over someone who just decides on his own, and had an avenue to use before he did so and ignored it (pursuant to our duly passed laws?).

As for calling it an authoritarian state, that's bullshit. We have real functioning courts. We have elections. We have freedom of speech.

We have classified information for a reason, and it's our information, which we want to keep from certain people out there who would do us harm.

[rhett o rick]

71. Wouldnt that be so nice. The intel agencies are the same as they have been for a long

time. Pres Obama made no changes to either the leadership or programs. Just because you got to vote you think you are free. Either candidate would keep the same intel agencies. So how does my vote matter?

Blind trust has no place in a Democracy. We need oversight. Our founders knew what they were doing when they wrote the Fourth Amendment.

These agencies have an unlimited budget and no oversight. Why would you think they would obey the FISA Law or the Constitution. Just because you have faith?

I am not asking for the elimination of our spy agencies, just oversight. Democracy depends on transparency. Authoritarian State depends on secrecy.

[dorkulon]

40. Because he could have done that secretly--he could still be doing it.

Instead he gave his info to a newspaper. If he wanted to help terrorists, he would.

And you sound like a McCarthyite.

[uponit7771]

44. ...again, how do we know he hasn't?! I don't trust him, logically I have no reason to based of facts

[closeupready]

47. No plausible motive, for one.

[uponit7771]

66. Embarrasing US gov IS his motive and pushing a book for money is GG

[dorkulon]

52. How do we know anything isn't happening?

It's a meaningless statement.

Besides, spies don't normally make a big public display of themselves. They tend to want to keep their access and continue spying. Get it?

[uponit7771]

67. IF... IF you're willing to give Snowden the benefit of the doubt. I don't, he's a thief and stole...

...needlessly and wont face the music for doing so after admitting to breaking the law.

Hhe's

[dorkulon]

84. This sounds personal.

You're letting your emotions do your thinking for you. Your allegation makes no sense.

I'm not saying the guy deserves a Nobel prize, but keep it real.

[Ocelot]

51. Sounds like you're engaging in Conspiracy Theory (N/T)

[uponit7771]

64. Believing a thief who betrayed his country would be betray his country? nah...reasonable

[Ocelot]

69. He didn't betray me

Maybe you, but that's your problem

[uponit7771]

73. You = United States of America?! Quite lofty no? tai

[sabrina 1]

77. He did exactly what we all wanted SOMEONE to do before it is too late. A majority of Americans

now view him as a Whistle Blower, so I guess he didn't betray his country after all.

[uponit7771]

78. WE?!!?!? Nope we all didn't want someone to break the law when there was a better way of going

...about getting the conversation going

[sabrina 1]

80. What better way? The way Drake and Binney did it? Go to Congress etc etc? Do you know what

happened to them? Whistle Blowers can no longer remain in this country when they discover wrong doing and corruption and report it to the people due the draconian treatment of people who tell the truth. This has been proven beyond a doubt now. Binney and Drake who did everything by the book. Yes, 'a better way of doing it'! Not according to those who chose that 'better way'.

[Douglas Carpenter]

57. how do we know he is not sent to earth by space aliens who are planning to conquer our planet and

make us all their slaves? That would explain a lot, you know.

[Ocelot]

58. Plan 9 from Outer Space?

Criswell/uponit7771 predicts that Snowden handed over his information to "Terrorists"




"Can you prove it DIDN'T happen???"

[Douglas Carpenter]

60. remember that Heaven's Gate religious "cult" out in San Diego - Remember how 39 member committed

suicide so that their spirits could reach what they believed was an alien space craft following the Comet Hale–Bopp, which was then at its brightest?

How do we know their spirits didn't all rendezvous on the alien space craft that was following the Comet Hale-Bopp?

There are somethings you just cannot prove are not true.

[uponit7771]

65. Did he steal their secret data? no? well there it is then

[quakerboy]

63. If you set an impossible goal

Then of course it will not be achieved.

Without 24/7 full surveillance of everything that snowden has ever done, we cannot prove that he is not trying to help a terrorist organization.

However there is no logical reason to believe that he is, though. Just like there is no logical reason to believe that Obama is a secret Muslim. That won't stop you from saying or believing silly things, and more than it will stop the racist teabaggers from saying or believing silly thing. Or even saying, or doing things that are harmful to the longterm state of our nation.

As to "better ways"... prove it. What better ways? This got the topic into the daily discussion all across the country, and in many other places. What other route did he have that had the potential to make that happen?

Given what has been accomplished so far, what reason is there to not trust "that guy" and his so called "homies". Not even sure which "homies" you refer to, though your attempt to diminish them is fairly apparent given your choice of wording.

[uponit7771]

88. It wasn't impossible before Snowden stole gov information, it was VERY possible to give Snowden the

...benefit of the doubt.

He's a thief and did so without the need when there were other memes of redress...

regards

[quakerboy]

92. Sure it was.

Show me the post, the person who gave snowden, or the information he provided, "the benefit of the doubt" Prior to the event. Couldnt be done, because there was nothing to credit. Its a silly argument. If taking any concealed information and making it public automatically takes away your "benefit of the doubt", then there is never any way to expose misdeeds. Because if you say nothing you are complicit, and if you say something you are a criminal. It is an Impossible lose lose situation you have created. Therefore, I reject it.

Anyway, you still didn't address what I asked. This is the second assertion that there was another way. So, what other means of redress were there? Specifically, what alternate avenue of action did snowden have available that would have brought this NSA spying issue to be a regular daily conversation point among people in the USA, therefore having any possibility of we the people requiring a change in the system of our elected officials, who have made it clear they intend to make no changes unless forced.

[sabrina 1]

76. Well, if you have anything to back that up, post it. We can all speculate, about anyone. But without

one iota of proof of our speculations, that's all they are.

[uponit7771]

87. The breadth to be able to suppose has been set by Snowdens actions not by mine...

...regards.

I didn't erase the benefit of the doubt by stealing information....

Snowden did

[sabrina 1]

91. That information belongs to the people. We pay for it, we have a right to know what our government

up to. The amount of secrecy in this country is simply unacceptable. Far too much information is now 'classified' most of it should not be.

If the Government deprives the people of the information they have a right to, I have no problem with a Whistle Blower making it possible for us to see whatever it is they are hiding.

If they have nothing to hide, they have nothing to worry about.

[uponit7771]

93. ...yes, and to get it through legal means like a FOIA request not steal it

[NuclearDem]

85. Glenn Beck does it a lot better than you do.

[uponit7771]

86. Walk? I have a spine injury...something I can't help right now but it's getting better.

...regards

[NuclearDem]

89. No.

This.

[uponit7771]

90. it helps stop prostate cancer so...yeah

[Bonobo]

37. Bravo!

You have truly set yourself apart in my eyes.

I had nearly lost hope that even one person would change their mind after these growing signals of repression.

Thank you and I think you are wonderful.

[Logical]

39. Really classy post! n-t

[myrna minx]

41. It truly is shocking, but we're pushing back together.

You are a class act.

[Little Star]

45. hear, hear

[KittyWampus]

48. "They" did not have the harddrives destroyed. That was an outright lie by the Guardian.

[dorkulon]

53. Citations please.

I need more than your word on that.

[boston bean]

54. It shall not be forthcoming. Kitty saw a pic of a smashed processor

board, and becuse the guardian only showed that (no smashed drive) and only WROTE about smashed drives, we are to believe Kitty that no drives were smashed. And not the written word of the Guardian.

Sorry assed explanation, I am sorry to have to relay, but thought you would like to know.

[KittyWampus]

59. Not that you give a crap about the truth but here it is: They lied twice:

Lie #1-

Rusbridger implies British Intelligence Agents forced them to destroy hard drives
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/20/nsa-snowden-files-drives-destroyed-london

The man was unmoved. And so one of the more bizarre moments in the Guardian's long history occurred – with two GCHQ security experts overseeing the destruction of hard drives in the Guardian's basement just to make sure there was nothing in the mangled bits of metal which could possibly be of any interest to passing Chinese agents. "We can call off the black helicopters," joked one as we swept up the remains of a MacBook Pro.

Whitehall was satisfied, but it felt like a peculiarly pointless piece of symbolism that understood nothing about the digital age. We will continue to do patient, painstaking reporting on the Snowden documents, we just won't do it in London. The seizure of Miranda's laptop, phones, hard drives and camera will similarly have no effect on Greenwald's work.

Here is what Wikileaks reported about this:

Guardian forced by UK gov to smash Snowden harddrives in front of UK spies. We denounce the UK government's strong arming of the Guardian into destroying history. Remember what happens to book burners?

https://www.facebook.com/wikileaks/posts/562835883751528

Here's another example stemming from the original report from Rusbridger:

"UK gov forced newspaper to destroy hard drives housing NSA leak information"

http://www.techradar.com/us/news/world-of-tech/uk-government-forced-guardian-to-destroy-snowden-hard-drives-1174534

WHAT REALLY HAPPENED:

Posted the next day and totally ignored:

Rushbridger VOLUNTARILY destroyed the (singular) hard drive. Allegedly destroyed.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/20/nsa-snowden-files-drives-destroyed-london

Lie #2-

a. Rusbridger claims they smashed the Hard Drive of a Mac Book Pro.

b. The Guardian included the following photograph with the caption: “The remains of a computer that held files leaked by Edward Snowden to the Guardian and destroyed at the behest of the UK government. Photograph: Roger Tooth.” That’s “a computer,” singular.

c. Rusbridger tweeted the following photo of the supposed smashed hard drive:



d. Rusbridger later again tweeted it was A mac book pro



It wasn't until many people recognized the picture showed no hard drives and pieces of both an extremely old pc and a macbook pro that Rusbridger finally changes his story.

[boston bean]

61. Does a mac book pro have a friggin hard drive?

[dorkulon]

83. Thanks.

I guess you could still say they were compelled to destroy the copies they had, though "forced" is a bit much.

[TheKentuckian]

49. That is inspiring

[DeSwiss]

50. K&R

[defacto7]

55. K&R

Progress is good! Mistakes are our best friend when we learn from them. Check my signature. I try to live by it.

[raccoon]

56. Republicans and conservatives find it especially hard, I think.

Ever notice how they act when you mention those "weapons of mass destruction?"

[indepat]

62. And that smell is getting a tad rank

[sabrina 1]

72. Thank you for doing this, it is hard to realize you have been wrong.

And I couldn't agree more regarding what happened this past week in Heathrow and to the Guardian. It truly is shocking.

[Smarmie Doofus]

81. Understandable. I can't believe it sometimes myself. n/t

[blackspade]

82. Thumbs up!