Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.sys.mac.system > #72738 > unrolled thread

ot - snowden, the short version

Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.mac.system

Contents

  ot - snowden, the short version "M. John Matlaw" <nouser@invalid.com> - 2015-04-06 17:16 -0400
    Re: ot - snowden, the short version Davoud <star@sky.net> - 2015-04-06 20:50 -0400
      Re: ot - snowden, the short version Martin Frost me at invalid stanford daht edu <nospam@stanford.edu.invalid> - 2015-04-06 20:13 -0700
      Re: ot - snowden, the short version Martin Frost me at invalid stanford daht edu <nospam@stanford.edu.invalid> - 2015-04-06 20:14 -0700
        Re: ot - snowden, the short version dorayme <do_ray_me@bigpond.com> - 2015-04-07 15:52 +1000
      Re: ot - snowden, the short version dorayme <do_ray_me@bigpond.com> - 2015-04-07 15:51 +1000
      Re: ot - snowden, the short version befr@eaglesoft.de (Bernd Fröhlich) - 2015-04-07 14:47 +0200
      Re: ot - snowden, the short version Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> - 2015-04-07 09:37 -0400
        Re: ot - snowden, the short version JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2015-04-07 13:20 -0400
          Re: ot - snowden, the short version nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-04-07 13:27 -0400
            Re: ot - snowden, the short version JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2015-04-07 15:46 -0400
              Re: ot - snowden, the short version J Burns <burns4@nowhere.com> - 2015-04-07 16:25 -0400
                Re: ot - snowden, the short version JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2015-04-07 17:35 -0400
                  Re: ot - snowden, the short version J Burns <burns4@nowhere.com> - 2015-04-07 20:13 -0400
              Re: ot - snowden, the short version Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> - 2015-04-07 18:58 -0400
          Re: ot - snowden, the short version Tom Stiller <clusterfux.upmon@gmail.com> - 2015-04-08 03:11 +0000
            Re: ot - snowden, the short version nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-04-07 23:34 -0400
            Re: ot - snowden, the short version JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2015-04-07 23:56 -0400
              Re: ot - snowden, the short version befr@eaglesoft.de (Bernd Fröhlich) - 2015-04-08 09:31 +0200
              Re: ot - snowden, the short version Tom Stiller <clusterfux.upmon@gmail.com> - 2015-04-08 12:51 +0000
            Re: ot - snowden, the short version Davoud <star@sky.net> - 2015-04-08 10:27 -0400
              Re: ot - snowden, the short version nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-04-08 10:49 -0400
                Re: ot - snowden, the short version Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2015-04-08 15:59 +0000
                  Re: ot - snowden, the short version Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2015-04-08 08:37 -0700
                    Re: ot - snowden, the short version Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> - 2015-04-08 14:12 -0400
                Re: ot - snowden, the short version Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> - 2015-04-08 11:19 -0400
                  Re: ot - snowden, the short version nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-04-08 11:47 -0400
                    Re: ot - snowden, the short version Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> - 2015-04-08 12:57 -0400
                      Re: ot - snowden, the short version Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2015-04-08 18:09 +0000
                        Re: ot - snowden, the short version Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> - 2015-04-08 13:56 -0400
                          Re: ot - snowden, the short version Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2015-04-08 19:02 +0000
                            Re: ot - snowden, the short version Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> - 2015-04-08 16:50 -0400
                              Re: ot - snowden, the short version Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2015-04-08 22:00 +0000
                                Re: ot - snowden, the short version Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> - 2015-04-08 19:56 -0400
                        Re: ot - snowden, the short version Davoud <star@sky.net> - 2015-04-08 21:14 -0400
                          Re: ot - snowden, the short version JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2015-04-08 21:32 -0400
                      Re: ot - snowden, the short version "M. John Matlaw" <nouser@invalid.com> - 2015-04-08 14:11 -0400
                      Re: ot - snowden, the short version nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-04-08 14:24 -0400
                        Re: ot - snowden, the short version Kurt Ullman <kurtullman@yahoo.com> - 2015-04-08 16:57 -0400
                      Re: ot - snowden, the short version JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2015-04-08 15:35 -0400
                        Re: ot - snowden, the short version Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-04-09 10:37 +0000
                      Re: ot - snowden, the short version Davoud <star@sky.net> - 2015-04-08 21:25 -0400
                        Re: ot - snowden, the short version JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2015-04-08 21:45 -0400
                          Re: ot - snowden, the short version befr@eaglesoft.de (Bernd Fröhlich) - 2015-04-09 09:26 +0200
                          Re: ot - snowden, the short version Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-04-09 12:44 +0000
                        Re: ot - snowden, the short version nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-04-09 10:06 -0400
                    Re: ot - snowden, the short version JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2015-04-08 15:25 -0400
                  Re: ot - snowden, the short version Raymond Wiker <rwiker@gmail.com> - 2015-04-08 17:57 +0200
                  Re: ot - snowden, the short version Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-04-08 19:05 +0000
                    Re: ot - snowden, the short version Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2015-04-08 21:49 +0000
                      Re: ot - snowden, the short version Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-04-09 10:33 +0000
                        Re: ot - snowden, the short version Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2015-04-09 13:23 +0100
                          Re: ot - snowden, the short version Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-04-09 12:46 +0000
                Re: ot - snowden, the short version JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2015-04-08 11:23 -0400
                  Re: ot - snowden, the short version Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2015-04-08 16:32 +0000
                    Re: ot - snowden, the short version Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2015-04-08 08:46 -0700
                      Re: ot - snowden, the short version Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2015-04-08 18:08 +0000
                        Re: ot - snowden, the short version Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> - 2015-04-08 14:09 -0400
                          Re: ot - snowden, the short version JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2015-04-08 15:52 -0400
                            Re: ot - snowden, the short version Warren Oates <warren.oates@gmail.com> - 2015-04-08 16:46 -0400
                              Re: ot - snowden, the short version Fred Moore <fmoore@gcfn.org> - 2015-04-08 17:57 -0400
                        Re: ot - snowden, the short version Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2015-04-08 20:05 -0700
      Re: ot - snowden, the short version "M. John Matlaw" <nouser@invalid.com> - 2015-04-07 11:30 -0400
      Re: ot - snowden, the short version Electric Comet <electric-comet@mail.invalid> - 2015-04-07 10:29 -0700

Page 1 of 4  [1] 2 3 4  Next page →

#72738 — ot - snowden, the short version

Still recommending Citizenfour*  but John Oliver has an interview with 
him that gets to the some of the main points in a rather shorter (and 
more obscene) form.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XEVlyP4_11M

The interview starts at about the 15 minute mark (halfway through) but 
the whole program is worthwhile.  The first 15 minutes discusses various 
inanities relating to the PATRIOT act (which comes up for renewal on 
June 1) and the media coverage of it.


*Turns out the free stream is bootleg.

http://www.slashfilm.com/citizenfour-streaming/

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#72751

M. John Matlaw:

> Still recommending Citizenfour*  but John Oliver has an interview with 
> him...

Whatever the merits of John Oliver's argument, Edward Snowden is a
traitor, a liar, a coward, and a defector.

-- 
I agree with almost everything that you have said and almost everything that
you will say in your entire life.

usenet *at* davidillig dawt cawm

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#72762

Davoud <star@sky.net> writes:

> M. John Matlaw:
> 
> > Still recommending Citizenfour*  but John Oliver has an interview with 
> > him...
> 
> Whatever the merits of John Oliver's argument, Edward Snowden is a
> traitor, a liar, a coward, and a defector.

Not to mention a hero.

Martin

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#72763

Davoud <star@sky.net> writes:

> M. John Matlaw:
> 
> > Still recommending Citizenfour*  but John Oliver has an interview with 
> > him...
> 
> Whatever the merits of John Oliver's argument, Edward Snowden is a
> traitor, a liar, a coward, and a defector.

Not to mention a hero.

Martin

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#72772

In article <myegnw3a0m.fsf@Sunburn.Stanford.EDU>,
 Martin Frost me at invalid stanford daht edu 
 <nospam@stanford.edu.invalid> wrote:

> Not to mention a hero.

But not to mention it twice.

-- 
dorayme

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#72771

In article <060420152050579965%star@sky.net>, Davoud <star@sky.net> 
wrote:

> Edward Snowden is a
> traitor, a liar, a coward, and a defector.

Is he a liar? What is the evidence for this? I can at least see how 
you computed the other characteristics.

-- 
dorayme

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#72785

Davoud <star@sky.net> wrote:

> Whatever the merits of John Oliver's argument, Edward Snowden is a
> traitor, a liar, a coward, and a defector.

Sorry, you´ve got the facts wrong:
The american government consists of cowards and liars.
Snowden was telling the truth (and I thank him big time for it).

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#72787

In article <060420152050579965%star@sky.net>, Davoud <star@sky.net> 
wrote:

> Whatever the merits of John Oliver's argument, Edward Snowden is a
> traitor, a liar, a coward, and a defector.

Not to me Davoud. I'm not an American. Snowden is a hero.
-- 
Where's the Vangelis music?
Pris' tongue is sticking out in in the wide shot after Batty has kissed her.
They have put back more tits into the Zhora dressing  room scene.
  -- notes for Blade Runner

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#72798

On 15-04-07 09:37, Warren Oates wrote:

> Not to me Davoud. I'm not an American. Snowden is a hero.

He may have rendered a huge public service and made a huge sacrifice,
but he did break his non disclosure contract with his employer.

I am not privy to the text of that NDA, nor whether it was between him
and Booz Allen or between him and NSA, but it isn't easy for a
politician to find a logical reason to pardon Snowden without opening
the floodgates to everyone breaking their NDA.

My guess is that when Obama steps out in Jan 2017, he'll sign an
executive pardon. (although I am not sure it is possible since at this
stage he is only a suspect as the military kangaroo court hasn't yet
ruled he was guilty.)

I think Snowden may have to return to USA, face the military kangaroo
court and get sentenced to torture and life in military prison, but time
it such that Obama signs the pardon on the day after he has been sentenced.

I have a lot of respect for the guy, and would help hide him if I had
the opportunity. But also realistic in terms of his legal situation in USA.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#72799

In article <552411fc$0$42980$c3e8da3$5e5e430d@news.astraweb.com>, JF
Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:

> > Not to me Davoud. I'm not an American. Snowden is a hero.
> 
> He may have rendered a huge public service and made a huge sacrifice,
> but he did break his non disclosure contract with his employer.

he was defending the constitution.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#72804

On 15-04-07 13:27, nospam wrote:

>> He may have rendered a huge public service and made a huge sacrifice,
>> but he did break his non disclosure contract with his employer.
> 
> he was defending the constitution.

But does defending the constitution allow you to break the law/contracts ?

His NDA itself was not unconstitutional or illegal.  So even if the NSA
activities were to be ruled unconstitutional, it doesn't automatically
void the NDA.


Note that Snowden isn't accused of breaking his NDA, he is accused of
treason if I remember correctly. And that is way overboard.

So far, the information that has been made public has been generic
powerpoint files that show what sort of info is being collected. So no
operational info has been leaked.  The only harm so far as been a very
bruised NSA ego.

The issue here is that should this go to court, it isn't what
journalists leaked that matters, it would be what Snowden gave to
journalists. That database could conceivably contain actual operational
data (names of operatives, actual captured data from US citizens) etc.

Since Snowden is no longer in posession of that database, all the
military could do is *allege* what could be in this database without any
proof of what is in it. So it becomes impossible to have a proper court
proceeding (whether military kangaroo or proper court) without knowing
exactly what Snowden actually leaked to journalists.


BTW, if you haven't watched the movie "CitizenFour" , do so. It shows
the process by which Snowden made the initial contacts and meetings in
Hong Kong.


Just because Snowden did something which is beneficial to democracy does
not automatically absolve him of the fact he broke his NDA. It would
take someone with good judgement to state that in this case, breaking
the NDA was an excusable offense.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#72806

On 4/7/15, 3:46 PM, JF Mezei wrote:
> On 15-04-07 13:27, nospam wrote:
>
>>> He may have rendered a huge public service and made a huge sacrifice,
>>> but he did break his non disclosure contract with his employer.
>>
>> he was defending the constitution.
>
> But does defending the constitution allow you to break the law/contracts ?
>
> His NDA itself was not unconstitutional or illegal.  So even if the NSA
> activities were to be ruled unconstitutional, it doesn't automatically
> void the NDA.
>
>
> Note that Snowden isn't accused of breaking his NDA, he is accused of
> treason if I remember correctly. And that is way overboard.

Isn't an NDA a civil contract?

How about the UK Official Secrets Act of 1911?  Much of it is still in 
effect. If you approach a restricted space, it's a felony.  If you make 
a sketch that might be useful to an enemy, it's a felony.

In 1934, Angela Lansbury's father wrote a book about his father.  He 
inadvertently quoted an official document. He was convicted and the book 
recalled for censorship.

In 1936, an MP said Britain's air defenses were inadequate.  He was 
charged. In 1938, the act of 1911 was amended so that the public 
interest could be used as a defense. I believe it was amended again in 
1989 so that the public interest could no longer be used as a defense.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#72811

On 15-04-07 16:25, J Burns wrote:

> Isn't an NDA a civil contract?

I am not sure in the case of Snowden and Booz Allen and NSA.

In Canada, like UK, we have official secrets, so this is far stricter
than an NDA. And I would assume that to work for NSA (whether as
contractor or employee) The level of secrecy requires signing something
that is far mroe important than a civilian commercial NDA.

The problem is that if you don't enforce NDAs, they become meaningless.
So how to you exonerate Snowden without jeoperdizing all other NDAs.


I would help Snowden in any way I could. And I truly respect what he has
done. I even went to a protest against a terrible "patriot act" like law
the current govt in Canada is passing without proper debate.


BUT, I also realise that by breaking his NDA, Snowden got himself into
trouble. SO the challenge is to find a way to justify waiving the
charges against him in a logical and fair way.

Chelsea Manning is doing prison/torture for what she did. (was a he at
time of offenses).

What abvout whoever leaked the photos and videos of the US military
performing torture at Abu Ghraib ?  Did he/she do any prison ?


The problem is that when the president condones the use of torture, then
the military does it "legally", so you can't argue the military is
breaking the law.

Similarly, NSA is acting legally, given rubber stamp for all its spying
by that FISA court. So you then have to argue that the FISA court is
acting illegally, outside the constitution.  Not an easy task.


The big problem is that when one argues that it is wrong for
organisatiosn such as NSA to not follow due legal process and use its
own private courts, then you should upholde the due legal process and
not ask for Snowden be granted special process.

In fact, accusing SNowden of "treason" may be a good thing because if he
is not found guilty, he is free to go. If you accuse him of breaking hiw
NDA, odds are that he will be found guilty.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#72815

On 4/7/15, 5:35 PM, JF Mezei wrote:
> What abvout whoever leaked the photos and videos of the US military
> performing torture at Abu Ghraib ?  Did he/she do any prison ?

Antonio Mario Taguba, native of the Philippines. His punishment was to 
be transferred to the Pentagon as Rumsfeld's assistant. He recalled that 
he'd been in the Army 32 years, and this was the first time he realized 
it was the mafia. Rumsfeld had Major General Taguba fired.

Obama looked at the photos and said they were too degrading to publish.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#72814

In article <5524341f$0$46962$c3e8da3$aae71a0a@news.astraweb.com>,
 JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:

> On
> 
> Note that Snowden isn't accused of breaking his NDA, he is accused of
> treason if I remember correctly. And that is way overboard.

One count of theft of government property and two counts of espionage, 
FWIW. All our felonies, but none are capital crimes like treason can be. 
>
-- 
“Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive,
     but what they conceal is vital.”
                       — Aaron Levenstein

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#72818

On 2015-04-07, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:
> On 15-04-07 09:37, Warren Oates wrote:
>
>> Not to me Davoud. I'm not an American. Snowden is a hero.
>
> He may have rendered a huge public service and made a huge
> sacrifice,
> but he did break his non disclosure contract with his employer.
> >
> I am not privy to the text of that NDA, nor whether it was between
> him and Booz Allen or between him and NSA, but it isn't easy for a
> politician to find a logical reason to pardon Snowden without
> opening the floodgates to everyone breaking their NDA.
> >
> My guess is that when Obama steps out in Jan 2017, he'll sign an
> executive pardon. (although I am not sure it is possible since at
> this stage he is only a suspect as the military kangaroo court hasn't
> yet ruled he was guilty.)
> >
> I think Snowden may have to return to USA, face the military
> kangaroo court and get sentenced to torture and life in military
> prison, but time it such that Obama signs the pardon on the day after
< he has been sentenced.
> >
> I have a lot of respect for the guy, and would help hide him if I
> had the opportunity. But also realistic in terms of his legal situation
> in USA.

What's the greater obligation: contractual agreements or defending the
constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic?

Does the NSA's trampling of the constitution make them a domestic enemy
of the constitution?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#72819

In article <cojkj4F2istU1@mid.individual.net>, Tom Stiller
<clusterfux.upmon@gmail.com> wrote:

> Does the NSA's trampling of the constitution make them a domestic enemy
> of the constitution?

yes.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#72820

On 15-04-07 23:11, Tom Stiller wrote:

> What's the greater obligation: contractual agreements or defending the
> constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic?

You are looking at the "moral" what is right or wrong.

I am thinking about the situation where something which is morally right
happens to be legally wrong.

If one is to maintain rule of law, you can't start ignoring people who
break the law.  And by the book, Snowden broke the law.

So the challenge is to find a way to go through the due legal process in
a way that is fair and does not result in Snowden having to do prison time.

Where there is a will, there is a way. But I don't sense the USA has the
will to welcome Snowden back without retribution, torture and military
kangaroo courts.


> Does the NSA's trampling of the constitution make them a domestic enemy
> of the constitution?

It isn't clear to me whether the NSA did anything illegal, or whether it
was the politicians who gave the NSA powers/mandate that is beyond what
the Constitution allows.

And BTW, there exists the possibility that no matter how undesirable or
despicable all the excessive spying is, that it could be perfectly legal.

Imagine the possibility where Snowden spilled the beans on something
that turns out to be perfectly legal. How do you treat Snowden then ?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#72829

JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:

> If one is to maintain rule of law, you can't start ignoring people who
> break the law.  And by the book, Snowden broke the law.

So what about Clapper? He lied under oath. Is that not breaking the law?
Why is that ignored? Oh, must be because he is a senator and Snowden is
not :-/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#72837

On 2015-04-08, JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:
> On 15-04-07 23:11, Tom Stiller wrote:
>
>> What's the greater obligation: contractual agreements or defending the
>> constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic?
>
> You are looking at the "moral" what is right or wrong.
>
> I am thinking about the situation where something which is morally right
> happens to be legally wrong.
>
> If one is to maintain rule of law, you can't start ignoring people who
> break the law.  And by the book, Snowden broke the law.
>
> So the challenge is to find a way to go through the due legal process in
> a way that is fair and does not result in Snowden having to do prison time.
>
> Where there is a will, there is a way. But I don't sense the USA has the
> will to welcome Snowden back without retribution, torture and military
> kangaroo courts.
>
>
>> Does the NSA's trampling of the constitution make them a domestic enemy
>> of the constitution?
>
> It isn't clear to me whether the NSA did anything illegal, or whether it
> was the politicians who gave the NSA powers/mandate that is beyond what
> the Constitution allows.
>

But which takes precedence, the legal oath taken to protect the
constitution, or the subsequent contract agreement?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 4  [1] 2 3 4  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.sys.mac.system

csiph-web