Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. Standard member sasquatch672
    Don't Like It Leave
    09 Jun '13 20:33
    Ed Snowden has identified himself as the NSA whistleblower responsible for the public disclosure of the PRISM program. Watch his interview on the Guardian's website. His actions, and what we do now, represent our last, best shot at remaining a free society. He's as brave as they come.
  2. Subscriber no1marauder
    It's Nice to Be Nice
    09 Jun '13 21:13
    Originally posted by sasquatch672
    Ed Snowden has identified himself as the NSA whistleblower responsible for the public disclosure of the PRISM program. Watch his interview on the Guardian's website. His actions, and what we do now, represent our last, best shot at remaining a free society. He's as brave as they come.
    Surprised you are not commending the bravery of Bradley Manning and calling for his immediate release.
  3. 10 Jun '13 02:42 / 1 edit
    This just in, President Obama says he has learned of all this for the first time on the evening news and has decided to fire the janitor of the NSA.

    Whew, glad that is all taken care of.

    Oddly enough, Obama also won another transparency award, but I think for a different reason.
  4. Subscriber Sleepyguy
    Reepy Rastardly Guy
    10 Jun '13 12:50
    Link to the video...

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/09/edward-snowden-nsa-whistleblower-surveillance
  5. Donation rwingett
    Ming the Merciless
    10 Jun '13 13:06 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by sasquatch672
    Ed Snowden has identified himself as the NSA whistleblower responsible for the public disclosure of the PRISM program. Watch his interview on the Guardian's website. His actions, and what we do now, represent our last, best shot at remaining a free society. He's as brave as they come.
    Everyone from Glenn Beck to Michael Moore is calling him a hero.

    Edit: everyone except Peter King, that is.
  6. Standard member sasquatch672
    Don't Like It Leave
    10 Jun '13 13:22
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    Surprised you are not commending the bravery of Bradley Manning and calling for his immediate release.
    Bradley Manning did not commit espionage. The truth is, I wish he weren't so weak-chinned and lovesick, but all of these guys do the American public a great service. Ed Snowden will wind up being far more important than Manning.
  7. Subscriber no1marauder
    It's Nice to Be Nice
    10 Jun '13 13:29 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by sasquatch672
    Bradley Manning did not commit espionage. The truth is, I wish he weren't so weak-chinned and lovesick, but all of these guys do the American public a great service. Ed Snowden will wind up being far more important than Manning.
    You think so because right wingers are praising him for doing the same thing that most of them want Bradley Manning to go to prison for life for. Ed Snowden will become a rich man benefiting from the publicity of this event while Bradley Manning rots in prison.

    This is hypocrisy of the highest order.

    If Obama pardoned Bradley Manning, what would be your reaction?
  8. Subscriber Sleepyguy
    Reepy Rastardly Guy
    10 Jun '13 13:35 / 2 edits
    Here are three snippets from the video (hastily transcribed by yours truly) that I think are the meat of Snowden's beef with the NSA. The second one seems to be at odds with the talking heads on TV who say the NSA can only go into the data they've collected through a court order.

    At 2:43:
    The NSA specifically targets the communications of everyone. It ingests them by default. It collects them in its system and it filters them and it analyzes them and it measures them and it stores them for periods of time, simply because that's the easiet, most efficient and most valuable way to achieve these ends. So while they may be intending to target someone associated wiht a foreign government, or someone that they suspect of terrorism, they're collecting your communications to do so.

    At 3:14:
    Any analyst at any time can target anyone, uh, any selector anywhere. Where those communications will be picked up depends on the range of the sensor networks and the authorities that that analyst is empowered with. Not all analysts have the ability to target everything. But I sitting at my desk certainly had the authorities to wiretap anyone, from you or your accountant to a Federal Judge to even the President if I had a personal e-mail.

    At 7:12:
    Because even if you're not doing anything wrong you're being watched and recorded, and the storage capability of these systems increases every year, consistently, by orders of magnitude, to where it's getting to the point you don't have to have done anything wrong, you simply have to eventually fall under suspicion from somebody, even by a wrong call, and then they can use the system to go back in time and scrutinize every decision you've ever made, every friend you've ever discussed something with, and attack you on that basis to sort of derive suspicion from an innocent life and paint anyone in the context of a wrongdoer.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/09/edward-snowden-nsa-whistleblower-surveillance
  9. Standard member sasquatch672
    Don't Like It Leave
    10 Jun '13 13:41
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    You think so because right wingers are praising him for doing the same thing that most of them want Bradley Manning to go to prison for life for. Ed Snowden will become a rich man benefiting from the publicity of this event while Bradley Manning rots in prison.

    This is hypocrisy of the highest order.

    If Obama pardoned Bradley Manning, what would be your reaction?
    Bradley Manning - I haven't brushed up, but to the best of my recollection, he didn't expose sources and methods. If he exposed sources, that would be one thing - that would be bad. Manning also didn't do it for principle. Snowden did. But - I wouldn't care if Manning got pardoned. He reminds me of a guy that was in while I was in. The guy had an M-16 and two 30-round mags while on guard duty, and tried to "commit suicide" by slitting his wrists with his dog tags.
  10. Subscriber no1marauder
    It's Nice to Be Nice
    10 Jun '13 13:42
    Originally posted by Sleepyguy
    Here are three snippets from the video (hastily transcribed by yours truly) that I think are the meat of Snowden's beef with the NSA. The second one seems to be at odds with the talking heads on TV who say the NSA can only go into the data they've collected through a court order.

    At 2:43:[quote]The NSA specifically targets the communications of everyon ...[text shortened]... p://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/09/edward-snowden-nsa-whistleblower-surveillance
    Well we're at never-ending war with Islamists, so a few tiny intrusions on personal privacy are to be expected and accepted by any patriotic American.
  11. Subscriber no1marauder
    It's Nice to Be Nice
    10 Jun '13 13:44 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by sasquatch672
    Bradley Manning - I haven't brushed up, but to the best of my recollection, he didn't expose sources and methods. If he exposed sources, that would be one thing - that would be bad. Manning also didn't do it for principle. Snowden did. But - I wouldn't care if Manning got pardoned. He reminds me of a guy that was in while I was in. The guy had an ...[text shortened]... ile on guard duty, and tried to "commit suicide" by slitting his wrists with his dog tags.
    Manning did it for a bigger principle than Snowden i.e. for the American people to get information that would stop the killing in two unnecessary wars:

    Manning said he leaked a massive database of incident reports from Iraq and Afghanistan because he believed they might "spark a domestic debate on the role of the military and our foreign policy in general as it relates to Iraq and Afghanistan." He hoped people who saw the dramatic video of a 2007 Apache helicopter strike in Iraq he leaked would be outraged by the "delightful bloodlust" of the pilots. The U.S. State Department cables he gave to Wikileaks detailed shady deals and backroom intimidation and were "a prime example of a need for a more open diplomacy."

    http://gawker.com/5987951/why-did-bradley-manning-do-it

    You seem to let your personal distaste for Manning affect your position on the two cases.

    EDIT: Compare Manning's explanation of why he leaked to Snowden's:

    My sole motive is to inform the public as to that which is done in their name and that which is done against them."


    Don't see much difference.
  12. 10 Jun '13 14:17
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    Well we're at never-ending war with Islamists, so a few tiny intrusions on personal privacy are to be expected and accepted by any patriotic American.
    "Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel." Samuel Johnson
  13. 10 Jun '13 14:18
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    Manning did it for a bigger principle than Snowden i.e. for the American people to get information that would stop the killing in two unnecessary wars:

    Manning said he leaked a massive database of incident reports from Iraq and Afghanistan because he believed they might "spark a domestic debate on the role of the military and our foreign policy in gen ...[text shortened]... and that which is done against them."


    Don't see much difference.
    Must.....not....respond!

    We already went like 30 pages of arguing about Manning.
  14. Standard member sasquatch672
    Don't Like It Leave
    10 Jun '13 14:25 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    Manning did it for a bigger principle than Snowden i.e. for the American people to get information that would stop the killing in two unnecessary wars:

    Manning said he leaked a massive database of incident reports from Iraq and Afghanistan because he believed they might "spark a domestic debate on the role of the military and our foreign policy in gen You seem to let your personal distaste for Manning affect your position on the two cases.
    I would argue that one of the wars was necessary; the Taliban were hosting a large number of bad guys. Regardless (I hate when people say "Irregardless", I posit that Manning's real problem was with war itself and the nature of war. War is a terrible thing. Good men do things that are against their nature, and against human nature, and are ugly and horrifying, in war. In order to do that job, it's necessary to harden yourself, to develop a callous on your soul and on your psyche. My guess is that the Apache crew in the video mentioned in your link have several kids.

    I'm not excusing behavior. I think one of the good things about Vietnam was that it was broadcast almost live. For the first time, the American public was exposed to the horrors of war, and they recoiled. They saw a little girl, naked, crying, panicked, grieving, horrified, running down a road. And they recoiled. It's the only human response. Today, we have a ban on photographs of caskets returning to Dover Air Force Base. Those photographs do not desecrate the dead; they are a stark reminder of the price of war. The real reason those photographs are banned is because they - and the government knows this - would undermine public support for war.

    I do not have a problem with what Manning did, and I do believe that the government overcharged him. The sunlight that Manning and Snowden provided are a wonderful disinfectant.

    There are legitimate reasons to hold secrets. That the American people will not know that their government is spying on them is not one of those reasons. As for the "damage" done by either, but specifically by Snowden - the NSA did the real damage. They failed in their mission by undertaking outrageous and unconstitutional searches. If the NSA had taken great care to only collect on foreign sources, and conduct those searches in a manner consistent with the protections of the Fourth Amendment, we would never have heard of Ed Snowden. Our society needs his kind of bravery.

    EDIT: I can't make the misplaced smiley go away. It's there on its own.
  15. Subscriber no1marauder
    It's Nice to Be Nice
    10 Jun '13 14:33
    Originally posted by sasquatch672
    I would argue that one of the wars was necessary; the Taliban were hosting a large number of bad guys. Regardless (I hate when people say "Irregardless", I posit that Manning's real problem was with war itself and the nature of war. War is a terrible thing. Good men do things that are against their nature, and against human nature, and are ugly and ...[text shortened]... bravery.

    EDIT: I can't make the misplaced smiley go away. It's there on its own.
    I'd say some military action against AQ in Afghanistan was surely justified after 9/11 but to try to occupy and pacify Afghanistan was a fool's errand.

    I agree with everything else in the post.