171–180 of 244 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[deleted]
> all these revelations have done is increase paranoia and misunderstanding It was a leak of truthful information. Almost by definition it reduced misunderstanding. I'd also argue that it didn't increase paranoia; it massively reduced the number of people who were classified as paranoid by confirming some of their darkest fears.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What would you rank higher?
MKUltra. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_MKUltra
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[deleted]
> all these revelations have done is increase paranoia and misunderstanding It was a leak of truthful information. Almost by definition it reduced misunderstanding. I'd also argue that it didn't increase paranoia; it massively reduced the number of people who were classified as paranoid by confirming some of their darkest fears.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> all these revelations have done is increase paranoia and misunderstanding It was a leak of truthful information. Almost by definition it reduced misunderstanding. I'd also argue that it didn't increase paranoia; it massively reduced the number of people who were classified as paranoid by confirming some of their darkest fears.
[deleted]
Ah, we have different definitions of spied upon. The existence of stored information concerning my activities that I previous thought to be unstored constitutes spying by my definition.
Aka the Stasi approach, with most of the employees laid off through superior modern automation.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's still a country, albeit one in increasingly reluctant political union with England. It would be rare for a Scot to refer to something as happening in the UK rather than specifically Scotland. The legal system is independent and different to England and Wales for instance. The nearest US equivalent would I guess be Puerto Rico rather than Maine.
I don't want to go far into the rabbit hole here but are they represented in the UN or any other kind of international bodies constituted of member states? I understand how they feel about themselves, or more specifically how roughly half of them feel, however, it's not how the world sees them, generally speaking. Chinese understand "the UK" Scotland, as an international political entity will get you sideways looks.
If it weren't for the mistreatment of Bradley Manning, I'd consider US Government attempts to capture Snowden somewhat reasonable. If (in hindsight) there had been any high level response acknowledging the inappropriateness of any of the revealed programs, and attempting to fix or impose accountability measures on covert programs, I'd feel reassured that the bad behavior evidenced by the leaked information was an ano…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You must be aware that people actually have called the Snowden journalists collaborators who should be prosecuted, that this was in fact a major issue in how the story has been received. Why would you call them "his informal team of assistants?"
I have no idea what you're talking about, but if you're thinking of someone in particular who has suggested that Greenwald should be prosecuted, you should put your weird questions to that person, not me.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/12/peter-king-glenn-gr...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/2013/06/...
http://www.truthdig.com/eartotheground/item/would_ag_holder_...
http://www.alternet.org/civil-liberties/eric-holder-says-he-...
Taken literally from the entire first page on Google:
https://encrypted.google.com/search?hl=en&q=prosecute%20gree...
At least one sitting U.S. Congressman called for it, David Gregory threw it directly in Greenwald's face on Meet the Press, the question was even brought to the U.S. Attorney General.
Against that backdrop if someone calls these journalists "assistants" to Snowden, it really shouldn't be out of bounds to ask about it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[deleted]
> all these revelations have done is increase paranoia and misunderstanding It was a leak of truthful information. Almost by definition it reduced misunderstanding. I'd also argue that it didn't increase paranoia; it massively reduced the number of people who were classified as paranoid by confirming some of their darkest fears.
I disagree with the idea that adding more truthful information will necessarily reduce misunderstanding. It is very possible to say something which, while containing no falsehoods, does not tell the whole story and thereby increases misunderstanding. Note that, for instance, the oath sworn in an American courtroom is not only to tell the truth and nothing but the truth, but deliberately includes the phrase the whole truth
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[deleted]
> For the average person, your data is being collected along with everyone else's, but of course you're not being spied on, as there is no human personally looking at your data - it would be a waste of resources. Ah, we have different definitions of spied upon. The existence of stored information concerning my activities that I previous thought to be unstored constitutes spying by my definition. Aka the Stasi approac…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That may very well be true. But in the absence of a publicly known flight plan, involving a plane that in the past has been used in a program that involved all kinds of human rights abuses, it seems worth assuming it is worth asking questions about.
Can you help me understand what it is about a specific piece of equipment having in the past been used for human rights abuse that makes it unsuitable for any future use? It would be one thing if the CIA had operated the flight, but this plane is known to have been transferred to the DOJ long before the flight to extradite Snowden.
But the main point is that adds to the body of circumstantial evidence that some kind of a rendition operation was being planned.