8 ms·

So you're saying that if something is "legal," even if it's unethical/unconstitutional ("Hey, John Yoo said it's okay to spy on our own people and torture peopl

So you're saying that if something is "legal," even if it's unethical/unconstitutional ("Hey, John Yoo said it's okay to spy on our own people and torture people, then it must be!") that you should not report the fact that its being grossly abused in a way that it was never intended to be? If no one knows that our constitutional rights are being violated because of secrecy, it doesn't mean that they're not being violated (ironically, this is what the government has been using as a defense now for a while when people try to sue over the NSA: You have no proof we are spying on you specifically, so you can't sue us.) The comment above you makes an excellent point. Just because behavior is deemed legal, does not make it so. Also, Snowden was no lawyer. Who determines which behavior was legal and which wasn't? Obviously the US government and the NSA believed that everything they were doing was on the up and up (and obviously this was not so.) Do you think that Snowden should have hired an entire law firm to go over every single file to deem whether or not each and every document either supported illegal and legal behavior by the government? (Which is somewhat what he did by giving all the documents to reporters to vet and disclose what they thought was important)

nickpsecurity 10y ago
"So you're saying that if something is "legal," even if it's unethical/unconstitutional" That's what you're saying. Strawmaning is full-time profession in Snowden threads here. I've said consistently in my replies that the legal stuff is activities against foreign countries, within their operational mandate, and that Americans have accepted as morally right (or a necessary evil) for decades. Not unconstitutional stuff, not gross abuses, not anything like that. Just that they develop tools and capabilities to spy on foreign countries for America's interests. Aka, their job and one that's legally a state secret. " Just because behavior is deemed legal, does not make it so." It actually does. The whole concept of a legal system haha. However, I'm allowing for activism against abuses. It's why, as above, I'm talking about all the stuff he leaked that Americans were fine with and endorsed as legal. Even celebrated in "patriotic" films. "Obviously the US government and the NSA believed that everything they were doing was on the up and up (and obviously this was not so.)" Red herring important in other discussions about NSA's bullshiting legal team but not here. NSA's beliefs != the laws. Snowden, as a trained spy, knew it was legal for them to spy on foreign nations. That's what we're talking about. "Do you think that Snowden should have hired an entire law firm" Jesus. You're really grasping at straws and blowing up the hypotheticals. He claims to read each document at one point. No, all I expect is a simple question asked on each one: does it fall within their legal mandate or is it evidence of unconstitutional, deceptive activity against Americans in violation of the Constitution, their mandate and claims? That simple. Would've kept the leaks to just what America collectively would've had a problem with. Instead, the fool leaked all the legal stuff, too, giving right-wingers the excuse to dismiss him entirely as a traitor. Lots of lost votes for reform. Also, leaking our foreign secrets to foreign media and trusting them to act in our interests... wtf. You don't need to be a lawyer to know that was treason.
- Nullabillity 10y ago
  > Red herring important in other discussions about NSA's bullshiting legal team but not here. NSA's beliefs != the laws. Snowden, as a trained spy, knew it was legal for them to spy on foreign nations. That's what we're talking about. So because it's done against "them" it's suddenly okay? That's trite xenophobic bullshit. Treason laws and classified information have no place in anything claiming to be a developed democracy.
  - nickpsecurity 10y ago
    "That's trite xenophobic bullshit." On the contrary, it just recognizes the fact that nations with competing interests exist. Many of which spy on us for similar reasons. You'd have to be xenophile to justify doing no spying when even our allies are doing the opposite. "Treason laws and classified information have no place in anything claiming to be a developed democracy." The existence of them in many democracies for good reason show otherwise. Plus, we've had methods for detecting and correcting abuses for years. Requires a certain percentage of honest politicians and active citizens, though. That problem was actually created and sustained by democracy a la tyranny of the majority. They're doing it again with likes of Hillary and Trump.
    - Nullabillity 10y ago
      > On the contrary, it just recognizes the fact that nations with competing interests exist. Many of which spy on us for similar reasons. You'd have to be xenophile to justify doing no spying when even our allies are doing the opposite. Where does the line go for who is to be considered "other"? As someone living in Stockholm, why should I care more about companies in Gothenburg doing well than a company in Oslo? Or am I an outsider as well, since I have a mother from Copenhagen? > The existence of them in many democracies for good reason show otherwise. No, that just shows that they're not actual democracies either. > Plus, we've had methods for detecting and correcting abuses for years. Requires a certain percentage of honest politicians and active citizens, though. That problem was actually created and sustained by democracy a la tyranny of the majority. They're doing it again with likes of Hillary and Trump. Okay, this is getting far into Poe's law territory.

nickpsecurity 10y ago

"So you're saying that if something is "legal," even if it's unethical/unconstitutional" That's what you're saying. Strawmaning is full-time profession in Snowden threads here. I've said consistently in my replies that the legal stuff is activities against foreign countries, within their operational mandate, and that Americans have accepted as morally right (or a necessary evil) for decades. Not unconstitutional stuff, not gross abuses, not anything like that. Just that they develop tools and capabilities to spy on foreign countries for America's interests. Aka, their job and one that's legally a state secret. " Just because behavior is deemed legal, does not make it so." It actually does. The whole concept of a legal system haha. However, I'm allowing for activism against abuses. It's why, as above, I'm talking about all the stuff he leaked that Americans were fine with and endorsed as legal. Even celebrated in "patriotic" films. "Obviously the US government and the NSA believed that everything they were doing was on the up and up (and obviously this was not so.)" Red herring important in other discussions about NSA's bullshiting legal team but not here. NSA's beliefs != the laws. Snowden, as a trained spy, knew it was legal for them to spy on foreign nations. That's what we're talking about. "Do you think that Snowden should have hired an entire law firm" Jesus. You're really grasping at straws and blowing up the hypotheticals. He claims to read each document at one point. No, all I expect is a simple question asked on each one: does it fall within their legal mandate or is it evidence of unconstitutional, deceptive activity against Americans in violation of the Constitution, their mandate and claims? That simple. Would've kept the leaks to just what America collectively would've had a problem with. Instead, the fool leaked all the legal stuff, too, giving right-wingers the excuse to dismiss him entirely as a traitor. Lots of lost votes for reform. Also, leaking our foreign secrets to foreign media and trusting them to act in our interests... wtf. You don't need to be a lawyer to know that was treason.

Nullabillity 10y ago
> Red herring important in other discussions about NSA's bullshiting legal team but not here. NSA's beliefs != the laws. Snowden, as a trained spy, knew it was legal for them to spy on foreign nations. That's what we're talking about. So because it's done against "them" it's suddenly okay? That's trite xenophobic bullshit. Treason laws and classified information have no place in anything claiming to be a developed democracy.
- nickpsecurity 10y ago
  "That's trite xenophobic bullshit." On the contrary, it just recognizes the fact that nations with competing interests exist. Many of which spy on us for similar reasons. You'd have to be xenophile to justify doing no spying when even our allies are doing the opposite. "Treason laws and classified information have no place in anything claiming to be a developed democracy." The existence of them in many democracies for good reason show otherwise. Plus, we've had methods for detecting and correcting abuses for years. Requires a certain percentage of honest politicians and active citizens, though. That problem was actually created and sustained by democracy a la tyranny of the majority. They're doing it again with likes of Hillary and Trump.
  - Nullabillity 10y ago
    > On the contrary, it just recognizes the fact that nations with competing interests exist. Many of which spy on us for similar reasons. You'd have to be xenophile to justify doing no spying when even our allies are doing the opposite. Where does the line go for who is to be considered "other"? As someone living in Stockholm, why should I care more about companies in Gothenburg doing well than a company in Oslo? Or am I an outsider as well, since I have a mother from Copenhagen? > The existence of them in many democracies for good reason show otherwise. No, that just shows that they're not actual democracies either. > Plus, we've had methods for detecting and correcting abuses for years. Requires a certain percentage of honest politicians and active citizens, though. That problem was actually created and sustained by democracy a la tyranny of the majority. They're doing it again with likes of Hillary and Trump. Okay, this is getting far into Poe's law territory.