Venezuela, Nicaragua: Willing to grant asylum to Snowden

Lots of context for you here in this interview as well. Note Glenn is refuting their use of MSM talking points.

Originally posted by MsAphrodite
reply to post by Moshpet

 

Do you understand who Glenn Greenwald is? He is the source of this entire story. Snowden went to him with the information.

He is the only person who has seen everything, and he knows more than anyone else. You are refusing to go to the original source.

Deny ignorance.


FYI Glenn was reporting on these issues way back when Bush was involved.

He only knows what he has seen in person, and even that is subjective.
You can not expect me to believe that Snowden's been his bunk buddy this entire time?
That he has been in every single conference with all the foreign nationals?
That he can tell us if Snowden is naturally left or right handed, when using a urinal?
That he'd had eyes on Snowden every hour and minute of his escapades?

No, you can't.

Deny ignorance indeed.
How about waking up to the fact that Snowden isn't yours or anyones', white knight.

His actions, and the reactions of those Foreign Leaders is damning, and I'm not going to praise a traitor.
M.

Originally posted by Moshpet
reply to post by eLPresidente

 

Feel free to be upset.
It will not effect the truth.
He knowingly broke the law.
He gave willing gave information to Foreign nationals.

An, guess what, you're a puppet too.

Oh, and you quoted a politician as a defense for your position? Ron Paul, once was relevant, now he's nothing more than a retired politician with a big mouth. His son isn't much better (imo.)

M.

edit on 5-7-2013 by Moshpet because: (no reason given)

Wow, the point I was trying to make went completely over your head.

I was referring to regurgitating the rhetoric of establishment politicians because you are saying the exact same thing as they are, from Diane Feinstein, to John McCain. I quoted an iconoclast, a passage that went right over your head, it all went right over your head.

In fact, you felt SO out of your league by that single passage, that you felt the desperate need to attack Ron Paul's character instead of even bothering to dissect the quote (if it was so wrong...it wasn't, thats why you ignored it). Classic emotional response, somehow calling him a "big mouth" helps you win the argument. o.0

Your judgement is so clouded in establishment mentality that the very essence of this nation and the Constitution can't bothered to be considered.

But still, he broke the law, put him in jail, put all whistleblowers in jail, Americans have no right to the truth or privacy, we simply don't deserve it.

Look up at the top left of the webpage, what does it say under the abovetopsecret.com logo?

Originally posted by Moshpet

Originally posted by MsAphrodite
reply to post by Moshpet

 

Do you understand who Glenn Greenwald is? He is the source of this entire story. Snowden went to him with the information.

He is the only person who has seen everything, and he knows more than anyone else. You are refusing to go to the original source.

Deny ignorance.


FYI Glenn was reporting on these issues way back when Bush was involved.

His actions, and the reactions of those Foreign Leaders is damning, and I'm not going to praise a traitor.
M.

You are a traitor.

Oh, I wonder what it feels like to be accused of being a traitor without any merit whatsoever.

reply to post by Moshpet


Sorry dude, i'm not going to continue a dialogue with someone who has no context for an opinion. You have never even read the original story, and subsequent follow up.

In the Revolutionary War you would have been a staunch loyalist. Think about that.

No need for bashing. Some people just take longer to come around to the truth. When you have a full-force CIA/NSA disinformation machine that has a stranglehold on MSM, it's easy for somebody to be misled to think that Snowden is a traitor. He's only a traitor to the current federal government. He's certainly NOT a traitor to the American people. When the federal government says that Snowden caused damage to national security, it only means he caused damage to the security of the federal government. He caused NO damage to the security of the American people.

Let's not be too hard on Moshpet, he's already made up his mind and needs not be concerned with additional facts.
Besides, he's already admitted that he and his whole family were heavily indoctrinated in the military and currently somewhat dependent upon the government for health care in this post www.abovetopsecret.com.

ganjoa

Originally posted by Moshpet

Originally posted by MsAphrodite
reply to post by Moshpet

 

Do you understand who Glenn Greenwald is? He is the source of this entire story. Snowden went to him with the information.

He is the only person who has seen everything, and he knows more than anyone else. You are refusing to go to the original source.

Deny ignorance.


FYI Glenn was reporting on these issues way back when Bush was involved.

He only knows what he has seen in person, and even that is subjective.
You can not expect me to believe that Snowden's been his bunk buddy this entire time?
That he has been in every single conference with all the foreign nationals?
That he can tell us if Snowden is naturally left or right handed, when using a urinal?
That he'd had eyes on Snowden every hour and minute of his escapades?

No, you can't.

Deny ignorance indeed.
How about waking up to the fact that Snowden isn't yours or anyones', white knight.

His actions, and the reactions of those Foreign Leaders is damning, and I'm not going to praise a traitor.
M.

Sounds just like something the redcoats would have said against the revolutionaries including our first president....the same revolutionaries and agitators that ...well...at least I celebrated yesterday. I'm a real American. I stand against tyranny and for freedom. Can you say the same? Just a question...not an indictment against your beliefs.

Originally posted by ganjoa
Let's not be too hard on Moshpet, he's already made up his mind and needs not be concerned with additional facts.
Besides, he's already admitted that he and his whole family were heavily indoctrinated in the military and currently somewhat dependent upon the government for health care in this post www.abovetopsecret.com.

ganjoa

edit on 5-7-2013 by ganjoa because: spaces

Posts like this deserves multiple stars.

Indoctrination...gotta love it.

Yes, I proudly served my nation, and my family has a proud history of the same. My father was a Chief Engineer in the Navy. My mother was also in the Navy, my Uncle and two of his sons served in the Air force m and several of my odder cousins were Marines.

So when some jackarsed twit betrays his country, and people think that's acceptable, I am going to say; OH HELL NO!

Just because you have right, to speak your piece, that I and my family among others. fought to preserve ; does not give you right to belittle my rights to the same freedom. Nor will I be cowed into silence because you want me to back down. Well neighbors, that will not happen.

So you can take your questionable moral stance, your delusional traitor, and your misplaced belief that your libertarian utopia will save the day.... and smoke it in your pipedream.

Because folks, when it comes to brass tacks; your pipedream won't save you from the hammer. Neither will your so called hero. It'll be people like those in my family, stepping up like the Army in Egypt, with our 'heavily indoctrinated beliefs' and our upholding of our Oaths.

So carry on with your belief in your fantasy hero.... it's not going to be good for anything, but its your right to dream thus.

Oh and your libertarian utopia, for those that dream of such; it had it's chance back in the day of Upton Sinclair. It failed and since then, no one has had enough sense to look at that era and do the math. The United States only will last as long as the rule of law, and the Constitution is upheld, under the will of the governed populace of this nation.

You have problems if you think your hero Snowden is going to matter. Because, in the long run, people like me are going to say; obey the rule of law, and change the government in the manner laid out in the Constitution....

Or be prepared to suffer in silence or in other ways.

But go ahead, change the government, Constitutionally and in accordance with the Laws .... Until then, know I will not support any I know to be a traitor... nor will I follow those that do.

You want change, you follow the Laws of the USA, and the Constitutional Processes to do so. Otherwise people like me will step up, an firmly correct your errors ; in accordance with those laws, and Constitutional processes... or worse.


M.

Well how does Snowden get on a plane from Russia anyway ?

His (U.S.) passport is no longer valid.

Can a nation issue him a passport and deliver it to him ?

Or can Russia 'allow' departure in the absence of a passport ?

Maybe he needs to be 'smuggled' out.

What ARE the options ?

Originally posted by Moshpet
Yes, I proudly served my nation, and my family has a proud history of the same. My father was a Chief Engineer in the Navy. My mother was also in the Navy, my Uncle and two of his sons served in the Air force m and several of my odder cousins were Marines.

I think we all can respect that. Most of us have had family in the military, believe it or not. Most every male in my family was involved in the military.

So when some jackarsed twit betrays his country, and people think that's acceptable, I am going to say; OH HELL NO!

"Oh Hell No". That's what they said to every other 'whistleblower' that tried to go through the legal process of trying to reveal the government breaking the law. They locked them up in prison, for trying to reveal illegalities going on. They didn't even need to be convicted of a crime, people can be contained indefinitely because of the patriot act. REGARDLESS if they fled to a different country OR stayed, the process of revealing our constitution being pissed on does not matter. You will still be silenced and nothing will change.

I think you're misunderstanding something here. Everyone here loves this country, or what it stood for. If we didn't, I'm sure we'd pack up and leave. Do you not think we also believe someone has betrayed this country?

Just because you have right, to speak your piece, that I and my family among others. fought to preserve ; does not give you right to belittle my rights to the same freedom. Nor will I be cowed into silence because you want me to back down. Well neighbors, that will not happen.

Nobody was belittling your rights to freedom. Nobody was saying you shouldn't live as you are. We are not trying to silence you. We do not want you to back down. What they were saying was, your whole family and you are indoctrinated. Upon reading this, you won't even consider what I'm saying. I'm sure you're already looking for ways to one up me in your response. But seriously, think hard for a second okay?
We do not disrespect the service to our nation you and your family did. We salute that.
However, that does not make it okay for every single little decision the government makes to be okay.

So you can take your questionable moral stance, your delusional traitor, and your misplaced belief that your libertarian utopia will save the day.... and smoke it in your pipedream.

Questionable moral stance? You mean, wanting the constitution upheld?

reply to post by introV


Powerful response, thank you. It's sad to see how so many are being misled in the name of patriotism.

Originally posted by amazing
If he's a traitor so then were the Son's of Liberty and all of our Forefathers including that traitor George Washington leading insurgents against the Government and Ben Franklin talking to our enemies the French and even going to their country to talk to them! Good Lord! The list goes on and on...

I don't like Venezuela's government or politics but...this is good news.

How would he be like them? If he was revealing information that he thought would be he would be more like Benedict Arnold who was unhappy with the fall in the currency and internal fighting in congress. Of course now he will be stuck living in one of two crap holes. At least he would have tiolet paper in Bolivia. Of course if I were him I would trust neither of these countries because they both have huge stability problems and could have changes in regime at any time. Athough is does not seem any stable nation will have him.

If you are not willing to change the government legally and via the Constitution, which means working through the Will of the Governed via voting and legal Civil Actions, State Challenges to the Laws and such, via votes, then you are trodding onto quicksand. If you have taken legal, Constitutional measures and not raised an up-swelling of public support to make a change, then the Governed People have said, 'sit down and shut up'.

The fact is, damned few of you have paid attention to the part where the Governed is involved. If the Governed, through their tolerance, or acquiescence of a law, have not challenged the law, via the legal system; you personally have no right to determine for them what is valid or not. It's on them.

Any law can be challenged, and many have, as have many bits of the the Constitution, and Amendments to it, and the Bill of Rights.

Since there have been no 'majority' outcries or votes on these so called bad laws or actions on behalf of the Governed and supported by such, that have been legally reviewed and struck down. That the governed, themselves a majority of the population have worked with their State and Local Governments, to challenge in a court of law; these so called wrong doings, and have these actions upheld by a Court of Law as proof of wrong doings or crimes; has not occurred.

Then guess what, the law stands, and the changes stand.

Your personal feelings matter not, as you are just one person among the many of the Governed. Until the Governed, determine for themselves as a majority of the populace, that you may or may not be right in your views; you have no right to expect the Governed Populace to suck up to your beliefs, nor can you command them to do so.

Do I think there is room for improvement in our Government, yes.

But I also know that if the Governed Populace is content, to allow a law to be enacted, and that they do not challenge it via the legal system; then neither I nor you have a right to determine that for them.

Among the Governed Populace, those people in "We the People..." as described in the Constitution, you and I are just one small fraction. Until such time as the Governed Populace says that your personal beliefs or mine for that matter are relevant, then you do not have a voice that matters in such things.

Then for all those whistle blowers that break the laws. If you are so concerned for them, why the hell have you not worked to create a change to the Legal System where such people are protected? That's right, I am calling you on it. You make lots of noise, but you so not step up and act on it. All you do is piss and moan, cry and complain, and let it continue.

Well guess what, until you get off your arse and you start a legal action and work with others to create a movement within the Governed Populace, to effect such a change; all you are is noisemakers who just want to cry foul.

That's right, you are the problem and the reason nothing changes with the whistle blowers get prosecuted when they break the law. You. Are. The. Problem. Because you want change, but none of you get off your buttocks and push the actions to make change forwards. No, you come to ATS, or your FB and you cry about injustice(s), and that's all you evidently seem willing to do. "Whah, whah, look another injustice. Whah, whah."

If you are intent on seeking change, then get off your buttocks and make a change. Start a petition, collect thousands of signatures, force your lawmakers to see that the Governed Populace support your intent. Hammer (politely) on their doors, call them up and express your opinions on the matter. Work with groups of like minded people and pool resources, and some money into the effort, then take legal action in a Court of Law to challenge how whistle blowers are dealt with. Then do not give up if you don't seem to make progress, because the legal system works slowly and moves ponderously and the changes must be Constitutional, in accordance with the BIll of RIghts, and fit the Framework of Law. Which means review and evaluation.

But until the Governed Populace agrees with you and supports you, all you are doing is urinating into a stiff breeze.

So, step up and get off your buttocks to make a change, or step off and deal with it.
M.

reply to post by Moshpet


You have admitted to not watching or following news sources. The truth is that there HAVE been numerous attempts to challenge this and those attempts have been slapped down due to "lack of standing." It's impossible to reveal that which is labeled as secret due to national security. No one can reveal or talk about those who have actually been violated. See how that works yet?

Thanks to Snowden's revelations something is now happening and many more Americans are now aware.

ACLU Sues Government Over 'Dragnet' Surveillance of Americans

reply to post by MsAphrodite


Frankly, what I said stands. Until the ACLU or another group generates enough public support via the Governed, then nothing will change.

There are reasons things are secret, classified and need to know. There will always be such things, and not just in our Government. You do not have to approve of such things, nor does the Government have to 'fill you in' on such things. It's clear that many of you think that it's just a cover up, but it's not always the case or so childishly simple.

From my own experiences in the Army and Combat:

There were many things going on behind the scenes and various operations, that had I known about and had fallen prisoner, I could have endangered countless lives, by simply knowing that information. For example there were several CIA guided operations that occurred in Panama during Operation: Just Cause, that I only learned about many years after the fact. Some of those operations my unit supported. Same with ops in other countries.

As for the 'Day to Day' current operations of the various alphabet agencies, and the secret or sensitive information or gathering techniques they employ. I clearly do not have a need to know about them, and neither do you. Because the fact remains that any large or small nation will have people working against it. It was true in the days of Rome and it is true now. It also stands to reason that if secrets and operations were not kept quiet and 'need to know, secret, top secret, and the like,' many lives would be at risk or lost.

So no. It's quite likely the ACLU doesn't have a 'right to know' how the NSA is doing what they were mandated to do by the Government. Not to mention, rightly so, because they would have to pass many background checks as an organization, which would likely be every member; in order to gain access to those materials.

So rather than crying foul, about how the government is 'hiding behind "Classified Statutes." ' Maybe you need to look to forcing the Government to create something like the Inspector General's office that is present in the Military, with Auditory powers and legal teeth to review such things. Rather than saying, "The government keeps hiding behind their rules over official secrets, that are there to protect me."

The laws governing official secrets, classified information and the like, exist to protect you. You may not care for them, but that will not change that fact. That there are problems that exist in how easily Snowden got access to classified information, does concern me, and many others.

You don't have to like the facts, but there they are.
M

reply to post by Moshpet


I'm sorry but your explanation is simplistic in light of the full story which you have not read. As I said, get back to me when you have fully informed yourself of the reality of the extent of what is occurring.


Bolivia is added to the list of countries now willing to take Snowden in.

link

reply to post by MsAphrodite


And, I showed to you in simple questions, how the 'reporter' could not verify every single one of Snowden's actions.
Because he was not with him every moment of the day, day in and day out since Snowden took flight.

Therefore anything he says is circumstantial evidence, about what Snowden has said in those 'unsupervised' moments.

Accountability!

Since he can not account for Snowden's every single discussion, or moment of time, anything said by him is subject to being nothing more than conjecture on his part. As for 'journalistic integrity, he gets paid, does he not? We all also know sensationalism sells. So no there is no such thing as balanced or unbiased reporting.

So no, given that Snowden was not chained to his hip at all times, anything said by the reporter is suspect.
M.

reply to post by Moshpet


Typical tactic used to deflect away from the issue. The issue here is NOT Snowden.

He is the messenger.