Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
It seems to me that Seaward is getting himself quite confused on the notion that a person can act out of conscience, be people can respect him for that, while everyone acknowledges he will still very likely face serious legal consequences for his actions.
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
azazel the cat wrote: And here we have our impasse: you make no distinction between morality and legalism, even in the face of immoral laws.
That distinction stopped being remotely relevant to the conversation the minute your hero decided that he wasn't just going to leak PRISM info, but also anything he'd ever seen before that was classified.
The overriding point I've been trying to get you to understand for several pages now is that your perceptions - "This is moral!" "This is legal"! - do not equal reality. I understand the hilariously self-serving instant amnesia among Snowden supporters over the other leaks he's decided to make after PRISM, but they don't just go away because they take away from is hero of the people status.
You know, Seaward, there's a long history of people breaking the law to stand up for what they believe is right. Law isn't morality. At best, you hope the law is generally aligned with morality. Sometimes, you can come, rightly, to the decision that your moral duty is to break the law.
HiveFleetPlastic wrote: You know, Seaward, there's a long history of people breaking the law to stand up for what they believe is right. Law isn't morality. At best, you hope the law is generally aligned with morality. Sometimes, you can come, rightly, to the decision that your moral duty is to break the law.
You can.
You can also be monumentally wrong about that decision. We've discussed such cases earlier in the thread.
But the fervent desire to look at one act in a vacuum is ridiculous. If I killed a guy and said it was self defense, people would go, "Hey, that's fine, fair play." If I then promptly killed three more guys and also claimed self defense, I suspect people would start to go back and re-think that first instance.
Not you folks with Snowden, though. You bought the whole, "I only care about America," crap when he leaked PRISM, and then stuck your fingers in your ears and whistled loudly when he started leaking stuff that had nothing to do with it. So you're welcome to keep claiming the moral high ground, I guess. Dude's a fething traitor. Just like Manning. Nothing moral about that at all.
Seaward wrote:But the fervent desire to look at one act in a vacuum is ridiculous. If I killed a guy and said it was self defense, people would go, "Hey, that's fine, fair play." If I then promptly killed three more guys and also claimed self defense, I suspect people would start to go back and re-think that first instance.
In other words, you believe that because John Lennon went on to record a bunch of terrible songs with Yoko Ono, Hey Jude is therefore also made terrible after the fact.
That's a very strange way of looking at things, but I guess it must help you when the authorities change gears mid-speech and tell you that we have always been at war with Oceania.
Seaward wrote: But the fervent desire to look at one act in a vacuum is ridiculous.
Fervent? How can people posting on the internet be fervent about anything? Its words typed into a little box, posted to a gaming forum. I'm not sure that action could be any less fervent, really.
Anyhow, on the larger point, I think in order to make any kind of case that Snowden's leaking of PRISM was in some way self-serving, you need to form some kind of sensible claim about what his personal benefit might be.
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
sebster wrote: Anyhow, on the larger point, I think in order to make any kind of case that Snowden's leaking of PRISM was in some way self-serving, you need to form some kind of sensible claim about what his personal benefit might be.
I suppose it's a good thing the claim has never been that it was a self-serving act then, isn't it?
I very much doubt it was self-serving at all, though I'll certainly keep an eye on the outcome of the USIS investigation after it was revealed they royally fethed up his TS/SCI check.
Seaward wrote: I suppose it's a good thing the claim has never been that it was a self-serving act then, isn't it?
So why did he do it then? Pure treason driven from his treasonous heart?
Because without some kind of self serving reason, then the only possible cause is some kind of principle. And if we allow that, while that obviously in no way removes the threat of legal penalty*, it does mean simple calls of 'traitor' become really, really simplistic, and kind of boring.
*And it's kind of sad I have to clarify that but, well, this thread has shown I have to.
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
So why did he do it then? Pure treason driven from his treasonous heart?
Because without some kind of self serving reason, then the only possible cause is some kind of principle. And if we allow that, while that obviously in no way removes the threat of legal penalty*, it does mean simple calls of 'traitor' become really, really simplistic, and kind of boring.
Only if you follow the absurd line of thought that says as long as someone breaks the law in service to their own personal morality, they can never be wrong.
He's a traitor through stupidity and hubris. He's a not particularly well-educated guy who honestly believed he knew better than thousands of other people, many of them experts on the topic at hand. I understand why that makes him your hero, but it doesn't make him right.
He never be label as a traitor though. I be label as an individual that broke federal law and will be punish under the regular laws of the land. This guy will not die. Manny had a better chance of getting himself executed then this guy,
Proud Member of the Infidels of OIF/OEF
No longer defending the US Military or US Gov't. Just going to ""**feed into your fears**"" with Duffel Blog Did not fight my way up on top the food chain to become a Vegan...
Warning: Stupid Allergy
Once you pull the pin, Mr. Grenade is no longer your friend
DE 6700
Harlequin 2500
RIP Muhammad Ali.
Jihadin, Scorched Earth 791. Leader of the Pork Eating Crusader. Alpha
Jihadin wrote: He never be label as a traitor though. I be label as an individual that broke federal law and will be punish under the regular laws of the land. This guy will not die. Manny had a better chance of getting himself executed then this guy,
Nah, you're right, he's not going to get charged under treason statues, as long as things stay the way they are with his case.
I am interested to find out what they missed in his background check, though. And the fact that he lied on his resume when getting the gig with Booz amuses me to no end.
You filled out a SF 89 form to Seaward. You know what they look for . Reminds me. I need to start collecting my bank statements.
Proud Member of the Infidels of OIF/OEF
No longer defending the US Military or US Gov't. Just going to ""**feed into your fears**"" with Duffel Blog Did not fight my way up on top the food chain to become a Vegan...
Warning: Stupid Allergy
Once you pull the pin, Mr. Grenade is no longer your friend
DE 6700
Harlequin 2500
RIP Muhammad Ali.
Jihadin, Scorched Earth 791. Leader of the Pork Eating Crusader. Alpha
Seaward wrote: Only if you follow the absurd line of thought that says as long as someone breaks the law in service to their own personal morality, they can never be wrong.
Only if we continue with the nonsense that there's some notion of right and wrong beyond that which each person determines for themselves, and we can even carry on with the nonsense that it is you, Seaward, text removed. Reds8n , who gets to determine what right and wrong is.
Or we can spend some time thinking about the reality that we all have fairly different principles and points of view, we can quickly come to understand that a person who acts bravely in service to their principles has to be admired for their bravery, even if they did something that is illegal, or that we'd don't personally believe was the right course of action.
I understand why that makes him your hero, but it doesn't make him right.
Why he's my what? Where has your imagination wandered off to this time?
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2013/06/21 07:30:23
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
sebster wrote: Only if we continue with the nonsense that there's some notion of right and wrong beyond that which each person determines for themselves, and we can even carry on with the nonsense that it is you, Seaward, God of boring internet nonsense everywhere, who gets to determine what right and wrong is.
Oh, I hardly think it's just me. But then, I'm basing that opinion off of actual polling on reaction to the PRISM leak.
But it's good to know you'll never be making another argument about doing something because it's the moral thing to do again.
Or we can spend some time thinking about the reality that we all have fairly different principles and points of view, we can quickly come to understand that a person who acts bravely in service to their principles has to be admired for their bravery, even if they did something that is illegal, or that we'd don't personally believe was the right course of action.
Yeah. Runs off to a non-extradition country, "blows the whistle" on a legal government program, and then starts leaking a bunch of other gak. What a paragon of bravery.
Why he's my what? Where has your imagination wandered off to this time?
Oh, merely back to your posts calling his actions heroic in the initial thread.
Sure, but I'm absolutely certain that the only opinion on the subject that matters to you is your own. That is, if the polling was 70% in favour of what he did, you wouldn't change your mind.
But then, I'm basing that opinion off of actual polling on reaction to the PRISM leak.
But it's good to know you'll never be making another argument about doing something because it's the moral thing to do again.
Yeah. Runs off to a non-extradition country, "blows the whistle" on a legal government program, and then starts leaking a bunch of other gak. What a paragon of bravery.
Sbuh? People who lived in exile weren't brave?
You're either a very weird man with very weird opinions about many historical figures, or you really haven't thought about this at all?
So was Sun Yat-sen a hero?
Oh, merely back to your posts calling his actions heroic in the initial thread.
Oh, so you think that recognising one individual action by a person as heroic means that individual becomes a personal hero?
Well, I guess that kind of explains the very weird approach you've taken to this whole thing.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/06/21 08:21:27
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
LONDON (Reuters) - Britain's spy agency GCHQ has tapped fiber-optic cables that carry international phone and internet traffic and is sharing vast quantities of personal information with the U.S. National Security Agency, the Guardian newspaper said on Friday.
The paper, which has in recent weeks been publishing details of top-secret surveillance programs exposed by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden, said on its website that Snowden had shown it documents about a project codenamed "Tempora."
Tempora has been running for about 18 months and allows GCHQ, which stands for Government Communications Headquarters, to tap into and store huge volumes of data drawn from fiber-optic cables for up to 30 days, the paper said.
The Guardian said Snowden had provided it with access to documents about GCHQ's alleged cable-tapping operation as part of his effort to expose "the largest program of suspicionless surveillance in human history."
For decades, the NSA and GCHQ have worked as close partners, sharing intelligence under an arrangement known as the UKUSA agreement. They also collaborate with eavesdropping agencies in Canada, Australia and New Zealand under an arrangement known as the "Five Eyes" alliance.
The latest Guardian story will likely put more pressure on British Prime Minister David Cameron's government to reassure the public about how data about them is collected and used.
Earlier this month, in response to questions about the secret U.S. data-monitoring program Prism, British Foreign Secretary William Hague told Parliament that GCHQ always adhered to British law when processing data gained from eavesdropping.
He would not confirm or deny any details of UK-U.S. intelligence sharing, saying that to do so could help Britain's enemies.
"In line with long-standing practice we do not comment on intelligence matters," a GCHQ spokesman said on Friday.
NSA spokeswoman Judith Emmel rejected any suggestion the U.S. agency used the British to do things the NSA cannot do legally. Under U.S. law, the NSA must get authorization from a secret federal court to collect information either in bulk or on specific people.
"Any allegation that NSA relies on its foreign partners to circumvent U.S. law is absolutely false. NSA does not ask its foreign partners to undertake any intelligence activity that the U.S. government would be legally prohibited from undertaking itself," Emmel said.
INTERCEPT PROBES
The Tempora operation involves attaching intercept probes to transatlantic cables where they land on British shores from North America, the Guardian said.
That was done with the agreement of unnamed companies, which were forbidden from revealing warrants that compelled them to allow GCHQ access, it added.
Snowden made world headlines earlier this month when he provided details of NSA surveillance programs to the Guardian and the Washington Post.
In Washington, Snowden's disclosures have ignited a political storm over the balance between privacy rights and national security, but the NSA has defended the programs, saying they have disrupted possible attacks.
In the wake of Snowden's revelations, U.S. officials acknowledged that the NSA, with cooperation from internet and telephone companies, collected email on foreign intelligence suspects, including counterterrorism targets, as well as masses of raw data on calls made within the United States and overseas by subscribers to major telephone companies.
The content of messages of people in the United States - including U.S. citizens - sometimes are intercepted "incidentally," officials have said, but rules require such intercepts to be purged unless U.S. authorities get court authorization.
Iceland flipped him.....triple spy super secret chinchilla humping non US legs
Proud Member of the Infidels of OIF/OEF
No longer defending the US Military or US Gov't. Just going to ""**feed into your fears**"" with Duffel Blog Did not fight my way up on top the food chain to become a Vegan...
Warning: Stupid Allergy
Once you pull the pin, Mr. Grenade is no longer your friend
DE 6700
Harlequin 2500
RIP Muhammad Ali.
Jihadin, Scorched Earth 791. Leader of the Pork Eating Crusader. Alpha
Now if Snowden was planning to do this from the get go then sure....max him. Since he's a contractor I cannot see waiting on a specific position to open to do what he did.
Proud Member of the Infidels of OIF/OEF
No longer defending the US Military or US Gov't. Just going to ""**feed into your fears**"" with Duffel Blog Did not fight my way up on top the food chain to become a Vegan...
Warning: Stupid Allergy
Once you pull the pin, Mr. Grenade is no longer your friend
DE 6700
Harlequin 2500
RIP Muhammad Ali.
Jihadin, Scorched Earth 791. Leader of the Pork Eating Crusader. Alpha
. Reminds me. I need to start collecting my bank statements.
