Snowden granted asylum in Russia

Discussion in 'West Mall' started by djimaplon, Aug 1, 2013.

  1. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez 10,000+ Posts

    It's not always black and white, but it's pretty hard to justify damaging your nation's security just to make a point especially if it's not necessary.
     
  2. Joe Fan

    Joe Fan 10,000+ Posts

    To me, he is both traitor and hero.
    But he still has to answer for the bad part
     
  3. OUBubba

    OUBubba Reluctant and Bullied Sponsor

    Lt. Vindman and his brother say “what’s up?”
     
  4. Monahorns

    Monahorns 5,000+ Posts

    Trump should pardon Snowden. No normal working American was endangered by him.
     
  5. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez 10,000+ Posts

    Just military personnel in the field. They're not normal working Americans. **** 'em.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  6. Monahorns

    Monahorns 5,000+ Posts

    I don't know what all Snowden put out there. How were military put at risk? They are already at risk in the field. Maybe information about who and what are where? That is not good for sure and would put them more at risk. I am not for that.

    But I think transparency even if the pendulum swings too much one way is important for the continuance of this nation. He exposed a huge lie about how the government is harming all of us including the families of those in the military. Despite the negative aspects of his action, he needs to be pardoned. He isn't in a position to ever do that again. Maybe he should live out the rest of his life in another country too. Pardon and banishment.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  7. theiioftx

    theiioftx Sponsor Deputy

    I’ll be honest. I haven’t really followed the Snowden story. At first, I thought he should be jailed. With the recent happenings of the FBI, CIA and IRS, I’m thinking he is a patriot. Flame away. I’ve lost all trust in government.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  8. OUBubba

    OUBubba Reluctant and Bullied Sponsor

    they won.
     
  9. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez 10,000+ Posts

    So you have no idea what the hell he did, but in your book he's a hero.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Funny Funny x 1
  10. Monahorns

    Monahorns 5,000+ Posts

    Are all lawyers this bad at reading comprehension?
     
  11. OUBubba

    OUBubba Reluctant and Bullied Sponsor

    To be fair, "hero" might have been a bit of an over interpretation, but, otherwise, he's accurate. You don't know the impact (or potential impact) of his actions yet you're good with a pardon.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  12. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez 10,000+ Posts

    That's a nice diversion, but you're supporting a pardon for someone whose actions you really admit you don't know. You rarely talk out your rear, but you definitely did here.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  13. Monahorns

    Monahorns 5,000+ Posts

    I see you have the same problem.
     
  14. Monahorns

    Monahorns 5,000+ Posts

    How many military lost their lives because of Snowden?
     
  15. Monahorns

    Monahorns 5,000+ Posts

    Maybe Deez will come back and explain how many.

    My point is, if no one in the military was harmed due to Snowden's data leak, then the leak was definitely worth it. If the military had to pull people out of locations and make significant changes to address risk, then the leak was worth it. If there was some small amount of military personnel being harmed, then the leak could be worth it. However, we would have to determine what that "small amount" is. If there was a huge loss of life because of the leak, then it wasn't worth it. We would also have to determine what "huge loss" means.

    I believe this because we as a nation were being lied to by the CIA and the NSA. I consider their lie and their constant surveillance of every citizen as a grave injustice. We as a nation needed to know what was going on. We can't have a viable republic if our rulers are evermore committing injustice against us while violating our rights and freedoms.

    Also, bear in mind, the same people who lied to us about recording all of our data in servers were the same people who claimed Snowden's leak endangered military personnel. That doesn't mean it was an untrue statement. But it does call into question its truth. It may be true that there was added risk, but the degree of the added risk is in question. At least some of the rhetoric coming from the government was because they were pissed they got found out.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  16. OUBubba

    OUBubba Reluctant and Bullied Sponsor

    That's a nice compliment.
     
    • WTF? WTF? x 1
  17. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez 10,000+ Posts

    I can't name individuals who are dead because of Snowden, because we can't know what terrorists were able to evade capture because they knew our foreign surveillance techniques and lived to kill others. There's no way to know that just as there's no way to know that anyone died as a result of the Rosenbergs' leaks to the Soviet Union. After all, the Soviet Union never used nuclear weapons against anyone.

    Did he endanger people? Yes, and he wasn't particularly careful about it. In fact, by his own admission, he didn't even read everything he leaked. Some of it was related to surveillance of Americans, but much of it was not. His work aided Al Qaeda and other terror groups, because it taught them how we track them, making our job harder. He also ratted out a NSA employee who prepared a slide discussing surveillance of Al Qaeda in Iraq. Link. If that guy ever gets captured, Al Qaeda will know who he is and what he did. Snowden did admit that this was a "**** up" but said it was worth it. I wonder if that guy's family will feel the same way if one day his severed head shows up in the mail.

    The bottom line is that Snowden didn't have to do this to raise the issue he wanted to raise. There is a whistleblower process, which he didn't even try to use. Furthermore, it's kinda ironic that a guy who is concerned about internet privacy screwed over the United States and the United Kingdom and then fled into the arms of some of the least free nations on earth (China and Russia), which could give two shits about anybody's privacy.

    But he does have a hot girlfriend, so there's that.
     
  18. Musburger1

    Musburger1 2,500+ Posts

    The Intel Agencies trampled the Constitution and continue to do so to this day. Snowden outed them and made public the criminality in much the same way as Ellsberg when he produced the Pentagon papers. The establishment went after Ellsberg and tried to go after Snowden.

    Wah, Wah, "He should have gone through the chain of command and followed the correct protocols."

    Yeah, right. The chain of command was complicit in criminality and Snowden saw what had happened to Binney and others. The cowards in the US Government and their lackeys in the UK government as well as the effeminate press have violated any ethical behavior in the effort to punish him and intimidate others from shedding light on their criminality.

    Most of you that condemn Snowden's actions would have most likely continued to collect a paycheck and kept your mouth shut if you were in his shoes, allowing the public to stay in ignorance about the illegal gathering of data and surveillance. Hypocrites.
     
  19. Horn6721

    Horn6721 10,000+ Posts

    Mus
    You are right. I am not sure I would do the right thing at the expense of my family.
     
  20. Monahorns

    Monahorns 5,000+ Posts

    Mus, this is where my mind is at.

    I will add. The threat to military personnel would be much less if the US wasn't so involved around the world. Being an empire threatens everywhere you are and it then those nations are a threat to our people overseas.

    I am not advocating for total isolation, but the less threatening we are to others the less reason they have to harm us. I know that isn't the whole situation. People could still want to harm us regardless of what we do.
     
  21. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez 10,000+ Posts

    So if you disagree with our foreign policy, you have the right to work at taxpayer expense to undermine it. That's a good example to set. That can't possibly go wrong.

    Yeah, no ****. It's almost as though there are actually bad people and regimes in the world (besides the US, obviously).
     
  22. Musburger1

    Musburger1 2,500+ Posts

    Its been an evolutionary process to become an empire. The need/desire for growth and acquisition or control of resources (oil, etc.) played a large role. Throw in the dollar as reserve currency, Nixon taking the USA off of the gold standard, the implosion of communism, and the mobility of capital, and you end up where we are; a nation that consumes more than it produces. We have replaced a production based economy with a financialization based economy. Managing an empire is essential to keep the system on life support.

    You don't take down an empire via the ballot box. Ron Paul types don't get voted into office with a mandate of taking down the system. If you think the establishment hated Trump, that doesn't hold a candle to what it thinks of a libertarian. Empires generally die either as a result of militarily defeat, internal revolution brought on by social collapse, or economic implosion (USSR). Usually there is some mixture of two or even all three elements.
    I liken Snowden to someone who joined an organization under the perception he was serving the country and then discovered he was in essence supporting a mafia and wanted to escape, blow the whistle, and also preserve his life.

    Edit: To further illustrate, you might consider Tom Cruise as a young lawyer in "The Firm." Or for a real life parallel, how about Pat Tillman, the former NFL player who gave it up to fight in Afghanistan, only to figure out he was being used as a pawn in a corrupt game prior to be taken out by friendly fire and then used as a piece of propaganda.

    People serving in the armed services don't see it this way, understandably. If they did, there would be no military. And while I believe the members of the military take an oath to protect the Constitution (I could be wrong, but I think they do), and enlist with the expectation of protecting the country, that isn't how they are being used.

    A normal thinking person thinks spending trillions of dollars over the past 19 years in the Middle East has been a big waste of money and stressed the financial health of the country. But an insider who makes a living via government contracts, a large shareholder of Lockheed-Martin, a corporation with eyes on developing resources, and so forth, would rightly perceive that the empirical adventures have been wildly successful. Trillions of debt paid by others (or in the future) have enriched them greatly with minimal risk to themselves. This is the true face of empire. Making the world safe for corporatism at the expense of the ordinary person.[/QUOTE]
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
    Last edited: Dec 1, 2020
  23. OUBubba

    OUBubba Reluctant and Bullied Sponsor

    [/QUOTE]
    Hexk, a crap ton of military and ex military still support the guy with bone Spurs who called them dumb and ignored troop bounties. I mean wth?
     
  24. nashhorn

    nashhorn 5,000+ Posts

    Nice post Mus
     
  25. theiioftx

    theiioftx Sponsor Deputy

    Hexk, a crap ton of military and ex military still support the guy with bone Spurs who called them dumb and ignored troop bounties. I mean wth?[/QUOTE]


    Point to one validated source and stop lapping up propaganda. Do you have a poster of Don Lemon over your bed?
     
    Last edited: Dec 2, 2020
  26. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez 10,000+ Posts

    Just remember, he's from Oklahoma.
     
  27. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez 10,000+ Posts

    He harmed your enemy and helped your friends. What a shock that you see him as righteous. I'm sure that Stalin thought the Rosenbergs were friggin dandy. Of course, your friends would summarily put a bullet in the head of anyone who did that to them, but we won't talk about that.
     
    Last edited: Dec 2, 2020
  28. Musburger1

    Musburger1 2,500+ Posts

    Oh please. If you are going to make a comparison with Stalin, the Intel agencies make a better example. Who has no respect for the law and abuses the power at their disposal, punishing anyone that dare expose them? Not a lot of daylight between them is there? Which side did the press take? We’re they neutral or did they attempt to partray Snowden as a disgruntled, uneducated high school dropout until that approach backfired?

    My enemy is the unelected, and unaccountable deep state that has no respect for the Constitution. My friends are law abiding people who respect the Constitution. If Snowden had injured the former (unfortunately, he didn’t slow them down in the slightest) I would think that most beneficial to the public.
     
  29. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez 10,000+ Posts

    Dude, cut the phony idealism. Monahorns is just naive, but you actively shill for one of the filthiest and most autocratic regimes in the world. That sorta kills your credibility when you lecture about the rule of law or the Constitution.

    Vladimir Putin is your friend. You've proven that pretty overwhelmingly over the years. Your enemy is anyone who is adverse to him.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  30. Musburger1

    Musburger1 2,500+ Posts

    Pretty weak response in an attempt to deflect from the subject matter. Neither Putin nor Russia has anything whatsoever to do with the core topic.
     

Share This Page