Does no one care about wikileaks?

[i'va biggen]

Originally Posted by Old-T

No.

LOL that is what I should have the old turd.

[CuteOldGuy]

Originally Posted by Old-T

No.

Sorry, your word isn't good enough. But you got LittleFredo to chuckle. He's an idiot, you know.

[lustylad]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Well, show me where they did.

Let's start with Snowden. Here is what the House Intelligence Committee concluded in a report issued last month:

"Snowden caused tremendous damage to national security, and the vast majority of the documents he stole have nothing to do with programs impacting individual privacy interests - they instead pertain to military, defense, and intelligence programs of great interest to America's adversaries."

You can read the unclassified summary here:

http://intelligence.house.gov/upload...ry_-_final.pdf


All 23 members of the House Intelligence Committee, both Republicans and Democrats, signed the following letter to Obama stating "Mr. Snowden is not a patriot. He is not a whistleblower. He is a criminal."

http://intelligence.house.gov/upload...-15_sep_16.pdf

[CuteOldGuy]

Really? Trust a government report without further information? You don't know me very well. If an independent investigation confirms these charges, I will change my opinion. But trust a government report? You must be kidding.

[Old-T]

I think folks here have a reasonably good idea about you. But not every one sees things as binary as you do. So let me get this right: the only way you will accept that something needs to be protected is if the details are shown to YOU. Preferably posted in an open forum here.

To put it bluntly that is dumb.

If you do not believe a bipartisan collection of elected representatives, then one has to question whether you believe in our form of government at all. You may yearn for an 18th century agrarian country that was a lose confederation of villages ruled by the wealthy white males, but that instantiation of the US is long gone. Demographics and technology killed it for better or worse.

Keeping you happy is not worth further damaging our nation's security. You want people to prove to you that traitors like Snowdon did serious harm, but you have no issues at all repeatedly shouting that they were cherubic heroes when you have not seen a fraction of what they gave to foreign countries. Your inconsistency is amazing.

[i'va biggen]

You can explain something to the SOF, but you can't make him understand it.

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by Old-T

instantiation

[gnadfly]

Originally Posted by Old-T

I think folks here have a reasonably good idea about you. But not every one sees things as binary as you do. So let me get this right: the only way you will accept that something needs to be protected is if the details are shown to YOU. Preferably posted in an open forum here.


....

The NOAA has been caught several times participating in the global warming scam. At least once, they were caught falsifying data. How? Somebody asked for details. Now the NOAA has been reluctant to release details even defying a court order. This should be a totally NON Partisan organisation that has been weaponize with partisanship by Barack Obama.

Also, it seems that Barack Obama used a nonsecured email system to communicate official business to SOS Clinton. Obama lied about it. Few in the media care because they are in bed with the Dims.

No, I don't trust the govt and need to see the evidence. You Democrats are the pinnacle of "Absolute power corrupts absolutely." We have turned into a nation of men, not a nation of laws.

[CuteOldGuy]

Originally Posted by Old-T

I think folks here have a reasonably good idea about you. But not every one sees things as binary as you do. So let me get this right: the only way you will accept that something needs to be protected is if the details are shown to YOU. Preferably posted in an open forum here.

To put it bluntly that is dumb.

If you do not believe a bipartisan collection of elected representatives, then one has to question whether you believe in our form of government at all. You may yearn for an 18th century agrarian country that was a lose confederation of villages ruled by the wealthy white males, but that instantiation of the US is long gone. Demographics and technology killed it for better or worse.

Keeping you happy is not worth further damaging our nation's security. You want people to prove to you that traitors like Snowdon did serious harm, but you have no issues at all repeatedly shouting that they were cherubic heroes when you have not seen a fraction of what they gave to foreign countries. Your inconsistency is amazing.

The government has a long history of lying, on a bipartisan basis, when they think they are under attack. What I see from Snowden are facts of the government's behavior that they would not wanted to have exposed. These are things the American people should know. It's not surprising the government would unite to condemn him. So, no. A government report holds very little water for me. They lie. They have reason to lie. Their secrets were revealed.


I'm willing to consider information contrary to my thinking. I do not condone exposing military or other national security secrets to foreign governments. But the government has no credibility.

[i'va biggen]

http://thediplomat.com/2013/12/yes-e...-is-a-traitor/

http://www.stanforddaily.com/2015/05...rs-not-heroes/

[lustylad]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

I'm willing to consider information contrary to my thinking. I do not condone exposing military or other national security secrets to foreign governments. But the government has no credibility.

Bullshit, your mind is made up and you are impervious to logic or evidence. You shout "the government lies" whenever you want to dismiss something without taking the time and effort to examine it closely. You don't object when a House Committee tells you something you agree with - Hillary lied about Benghazi, the IRS is corrupt, Fast and Furious was a fiasco, etc. Did those findings have no credibility, COG?

We know that Snowden downloaded over 1.5 million documents. Only a tiny fraction had anything to do with NSA surveillance activities that you or anyone else might object to. Furthermore, the latter documents were stolen LAST, not first - which means his PRIMARY purpose was to steal intelligence/defense secrets and his SECONDARY purpose was to mitigate his crime by deceiving gullible idiots like you into thinking he is a whistleblower.

But since you are so obsessed with evidence, COG, let's flip the question on you - show me the evidence that any of the NSA activity has caused real, tangible harm to US citizens. Have people been put in jail? Have innocent Americans been harassed because of info that was improperly accessed by the NSA?

I personally don't give a fuck if the NSA collects and stores metadata - I want them to do it! That's their fucking job! You can't find a needle in the haystack if you don't have the haystack to look for it.

And the worst part of all this is when the next terror attack on US soil occurs, fuckers like you will rush to blame the NSA for not doing its job properly.

[dilbert firestorm]

Originally Posted by lustylad

[snip]

But since you are so obsessed with evidence, COG, let's flip the question on you - show me the evidence that any of the NSA activity has caused real, tangible harm to US citizens. Have people been put in jail? Have innocent Americans been harassed because of info that was improperly accessed by the NSA?

I personally don't give a fuck if the NSA collects and stores metadata - I want them to do it! That's their fucking job! You can't find a needle in the haystack if you don't have the haystack to look for it.

And the worst part of all this is when the next terror attack on US soil occurs, fuckers like you will rush to blame the NSA for not doing its job properly.

NSA can't & won't find terrorist in the metadata. the data itself is useless for that purpose.

[CuteOldGuy]

So, LardoLad, you are officially on record as preferring security over liberty. Enjoy the coming police state. It's people like you willing to sell out freedom that are causing the demise of this once great country. And I stand by my statement. If it can be shown that any information affecting real national security was leaked by Snowden, I will change my position. You just like being a statist asshole.

[dilbert firestorm]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

So, LardoLad, you are officially on record as preferring security over liberty. Enjoy the coming police state. It's people like you willing to sell out freedom that are causing the demise of this once great country. And I stand by my statement. If it can be shown that any information affecting real national security was leaked by Snowden, I will change my position. You just like being a clueless statist asshole.

ftfy!

[i'va biggen]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

So, LardoLad, you are officially on record as preferring security over liberty. Enjoy the coming police state. It's people like you willing to sell out freedom that are causing the demise of this once great country. And I stand by my statement. If it can be shown that any information affecting real national security was leaked by Snowden, I will change my position. You just like being a statist asshole.

http://thediplomat.com/2013/12/yes-e...-is-a-traitor/

Keep ignoring the links provided SOF so you may remain on your soapbox. With your head firmly embedded in ass.