Check in if you WOULD TOO be attacking Snowden just as hard if this happened under Romney or Bush.

[Dr Fate]

Last edited Tue Jun 25, 2013, 03:56 PM - Edit history (1)

I WOULD TOO be attacking that dirty, vile traitor JUST AS HARD if this happened under a Bush or Romney.

I WOULD TOO spend all day saying that the law was legal and that it DOES TOO protects us even if this happened under the GOP.

THIS IS NOT ABOUT defending Obama- this is about attacking a dirty, vile, Red-Chinese loving TRAITOR who has compromised my children's safety.

This is about being loyal to AMERICA and it's VALID laws- no matter who our President is.

We are not hypocrites like those on the far, far, fringe lefties who only defend Snowden b/c it's an excuse to hate on The President.

They would not be defending him if this was Romney or Bush, but REAL Obama supporters like us WOULD TOO be attacking Snowden for the lying, cheat'in bastard that he is.

I pledge to attack ALL LEAKERS and to ALWAYS defend all currently legal spying measures, so long as the law they are following is a valid law.

Who else is with me?

[Recursion]

1. I'm pretty sure my opinion would be the same

Namely, that I don't quite buy what he says.

But I also remember this guy:

[Dr Fate]

4. I too, would spend all day defending Bush or Romney for going after any and all leakers.

Then again, I'm not some far-left hypocrite.

[Recursion]

5. Well, that's different from me, then

I didn't think MacBeth should be prosecuted, and I'm still open on what should happen to Snowden.

[quinnox]

2. lol, Yea, I suspect things would be very different

The authoritarian crowd would be praising Snowden to the moon in that scenario, or be run off DU.

[Dr Fate]

6. Then just wait until it happens to the next President.

Then you can attack the leakers jut like you do now.

[Dr Fate]

16. Just like when you and I attacked the leakers of the torture photos under Bush.

I remember your righteous passion in opposing those damaging leaks as well.

Yup- like it was yesterday.

[Dr Fate]

23. But if you could go back- you WOULD attack the torture photo leakers.

Just like I DID.

[Logical]

34. Some have trouble with planning and brainstorming. I understand. n-t

[LeftInTX]

7. I would not be praising him

I would have supported the leak but that is it. This globe trotting stuff is ridiculous.

[Dr Fate]

9. And you would say how ridiculous it was if he was dodging Bush's justice system.

Just like I would.

ALL. DAY. LONG.

[LeftInTX]

19. I don't approve of Snowden exposing our Intel to foreign countries.

I would not approve of it under Bush.

[Dr Fate]

22. Which is why you had so many harsh words for the torture photo leakers under Bush.

I'm glad to help you search for the links where you did that, if you think it would be helpful.

[LeftInTX]

25. Be my guest!

I don't approve of what happened in Abu Graib. It was a human rights violation.
However, I don't disapprove of us spying on other countries. Total apples and oranges. I would rather have accurate intel than a bunch of cooked up "weapons of mass destruction" bs.

[Dr Fate]

29. The leaked photos "expos(ed) our Intel to foreign countries" in a way that could harm Americans,

You said you would always oppose such things.

Come on now, stay on point!

[LeftInTX]

31. The leaked photos did NOT expose our Intel to foreign countries in way that could harm American.

It exposed a prison.

I don't support the way Bradley Manning has been treated in prison either.

[Dr Fate]

45. My Government told me that it would expose our troops to retaliation via similar torture methods.

Those photos exposed our Intel to foreign countries. You are opposed to any leaker who does this, no matter who the President is.

From Post #19:

"I don't approve of...exposing our Intel to foreign countries...I would not approve of it under Bush."

Surely you apply this standard to all leakers who expose intel- not just ones who do it under Obama. Correct?


I think you need to edit your post before some malcontent Liberal gets the idea that you are being inconsistent- that is, only attacking leakers who make Obama look bad.

If I could edit it myself, I would.

[uponit7771]

64. +1

[Skip Intro]

8. Not one for the attacking the messgenger, sorry. n/t

[patrice]

10. "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds." Ralph Waldo Emmerson. nt

[Dr Fate]

13. Good- so you are with me. Snowden should be branded a crook under any President.

Especially this one.

[patrice]

44. The key word in that is "foolish". If we ignore important stuff, because we're afraid

to be inconsistent, or if we ignore important stuff because we're afraid to be consistent, that's foolish in either case.

So all of that depends upon what the definition of important is, and that will vary from person to person, situation to situation, so we need to put all of those definitions HONESTLY together and see how much, and what type of, overlap there is, before individuals can decide whether to be consistent or inconsistent.

If something like Snowden did could have been part of either starting (e.g. the outing of Valerie Plame) or stopping Bush's War on Iraq, we would have different grounds for our decisions about whether to be consistent or not . . . .

or something like that.

[Dr Fate]

52. You would be for stopping Bush's War on terror, just not Obama's war on terror.

Is that what we are saying?

Something like that?

[patrice]

55. Republicans installed Saddam Hussein. We financed the Taliban start-up. OBL was the black-sheep in

a ROYAL family of one of our closest allies, ergo . . .

Bush was/is a terrorist.

I'm NOT a "9/11 Truther", but I do know that Plausible Deniability is one of the highest MARKETABLE financial commodities there is.

[Dr Fate]

59. And Obama's DOJ is exposing and investigating this grave act of treason too, no doubt.

I would not be suprised if Cheney, Bush and Snowden all end up as cell mates when Obama gets done with 'em!

[patrice]

58. And, oh yeah, Bush stole the Presidency. nt

[Dr Fate]

60. And Obama's DOJ is exposing and investigating that grave act of treason too, no doubt.

AFTER we get Hong Kong Eddie, that is.

At least he has his priorities straight, unlike all these far left radicals 'round here.

[Wait Wut]

11. I'm not 'attacking' him.

I think espionage is an appropriate charge for what he's done. And, yes, I would say so no matter whom was President.

There are too many questions, on both sides of this story, that need to be answered. But, if he really did take that job just to obtain information, that's espionage. I would feel the same way if he were a Russian or Chinese spy. If he had taken the job with no such intent and just 'happened' upon the information, I'd still have questions.

This has zero to do with Pres. Obama.

Face it, the guy is not helping his case. He's becoming an international hot potato. I'm not going to call him names or make emotional claims about his guilt or innocence. I want answers, that's all. If the answers lead to where I believe they will, he needs to be tried.

To be honest, I'm more concerned with 'how' he got the information than what he did with it. Nothing he's 'exposed' so far has shocked me, but the fact that he had access does.

[Dr Fate]

18. I am. Just like when you and I attacked the torture leakers under Bush.

Nice details, but this is not about Snowden per-se, this about proving that we who are so concerned are not being selective or hypocritical.

[VanillaRhapsody]

79. +1

[pnwmom]

12. I would attack anyone under any Presidency who was releasing information

about foreign intelligence that could bring harm to Americans and allies.

I supported a prison term for the Bush person who outed Valerie Plame -- and this situation could go far beyond that.


http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2013/06/officials-how-edward-snowden-could-hurt-the-u-s/

Beyond technical systems, U.S. officials are deeply concerned that Snowden used his sensitive position to read about U.S. human assets, for example spies and informants overseas as well as safe houses and key spying centers.

They worry this recent quote from Snowden was not an exaggeration: ” I had access to the full rosters of everyone working at the NSA, the entire intelligence community, and undercover assets all over the world. The locations of every station, we have what their missions are, and so forth.”

[Dr Fate]

15. You mean to say "did", not just "would."

I recall that you had some pretty strong words for those America-Hating traitors who released the military torture photos, for instance. All perfectly legal, and it brought harm to American and our Allies.

That was you, right?

[pnwmom]

17. I don't know what you're remembering. But releasing those photos wasn't equivalent

to outing Valerie Plame -- and what Snowden is threatening to do would be -- though on a much more massive scale.

[Dr Fate]

20. I see. So some leaks are good, so long as they happen under Bush?

No, no no-That IS NOT what we are trying to say here.

[pnwmom]

24. It was wrong for Plame to be outed under Bush and wrong if even more "assets"

get outed now by Snowden.

[Dr Fate]

26. That's why Obama's DOJ is spending so much time exposing and investigating Cheney's Plame leak.

And trust me, the dragnet is closing. "Big Time."

ALL leakers tremble before Holder.

[Marr]

38. Did you want prosecutions for the people who brought Abu Ghraib into the light, too?

Your citing of Plame is just too easy. What Democrat *wasn't* all for seeing those people prosecuted?

[pnwmom]

39. I don't remember supporting prosecutions except for the torturers.

AFter 9 years, the only thing I remember is the shock of those photos.

[Report1212]

49. Plame supports Snowden by the way

Small detail

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jun/23/nsa-intelligence-industrial-complex-abuse

[pnwmom]

63. I realize that. But she made that statement BEFORE he had the interview

announcing that he had lists of American "assets" around the world that he could share.

If you read that essay, it is entirely directed at surveillance within the US. Where I strongly believe Snowdon crossed the line was in exposing spying against foreign targets, such as US spying against the former prime minister of Russian while Obama was negotiating with Putin.

But that is a small thing compared to what he's claiming to have -- lists of "assets" around the world -- and claiming to intend to do with them -- hand them over to foreign presses around the world so they can decide what to do with them.

[Puzzledtraveller]

27. Brilliant!

[leftstreet]

28. What's a 'hyportie?' And where is my chocolate ration? n/t

[Dr Fate]

30. Centrists dont care about spelling. We are from the streets.

n/t

[KittyWampus]

32. Dude, HE HAS LEAKED SENSITIVE INFO TO CHINA/RUSSIA & WILL DO MORE...

Oh, and I thought this wasn't about Snowden.

LOL!

[leftstreet]

36. What sensitive info did he leak? Is there a link?

[Orsino]

48. Vilification first. Facts later. n/t

[Dr Fate]

42. Which is why I attack him even HARDER than you attacked the torture photo leakers under Bush.

Well, maybe not quite that hard.

[Kolesar]

33. Abu Ghraib pics were under the Army Criminal Investigative Division, but they were not "secret",

as far as I can tell.
http://www.salon.com/2006/03/14/introduction_2/

Were any military units or US contacts put at risk due to the release of those pictures?

[Dr Fate]

43. They certainly were not "secret." Not after the traitors leaked them.

as far as I can tell.

And yes- Centrist Democrats as well as Republicans who voted for the Patriot Act know that exposing those photos also exposed our troops to retaliation and similar torture.

That is why I opppose ALL leaks, not just the ones that force Obama to explain our benevolent policies.

[Marr]

35. Uh-huh. I'm sure you'd all very anxiously defend Bush or Romney's right to domestic spying.

Because I'm sure your main complaint during the Bush Administration was that he didn't take the time to make his illegal domestic spying officially legal through back room channels, right?

Let's be honest. If Bush or Romney were in the White House, most of the DU'ers currently fixated on Snowden would find him extremely uninteresting, and would instead be focused on the domestic surveillance programs he highlighted.

[Amaya]

37. You're what is wrong with this country

[Dr Fate]

47. You are just mad that centrism is working. nt

n/t

[Union Scribe]

83. .

I'm a little slow tonight.

[Aerows]

40. You expect honesty

from a crowd that has intellectual dishonesty waving as their black flag as a battle charge?

[Douglas Carpenter]

41. Amen!! respect and obedience were right under Bush and they are right under a Demcoratic president

It was the government's duty to closely monitor all our activities and the people's duty to obey and comply under Bush and it would be under McCain or Romney or under the current President.

Defying, smart mouthing and back talking authority were wrong when there is a Republican in the White House and it is wrong when a Democratic President is in the White House.

[backscatter712]

46. Let's just say I'd be praising Snowden as much under El Chimpo Diablo...

as I am now.

[backscatter712]

50. Hmmm....

[Dr Fate]

53. No, I really am from The Far Center.

And I'm here to help.

[nadinbrzezinski]

51. I have, with every new revelation

Starting with the Enabling Act

[Dr Fate]

54. Then you must be a centrist too.

nt

[nadinbrzezinski]

56. I misread your OP

Last edited Tue Jun 25, 2013, 09:29 PM - Edit history (1)

I have been attacking the rise of the new fascist state since the enabl...err USPA was enacted into law.

Nope I am not a centrist. I am a constitutionalist.

We are very much on two different galaxies.

[VanillaRhapsody]

80. Oh a Constitutionalist like Rand an Ron Paul you mean?

[Apophis]

57. You won't find any.

They'd support Snowden if this happened under Bush.

[Dr Fate]

61. I can wait.

I know they around here somewhere.

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

62. too funny

good one

[DirkGently]

65. You cannot be serious.

Edit: Ah. You are not serious. Irony's getting so sharp around here you could cut a finger.

[Dr Fate]

69. No. My Centrist values are sincere.

Whatever they may be at any given moment.

[DirkGently]

73. Uh huh. Troublemaker!

[ecstatic]

66. If I recall correctly, DU was furious about Bush-Rove leaking a CIA operative's identity

I don't think it's right when leakers put other peoples' lives in jeopardy. I think I've been consistent on that point. Bush was wrong, and I don't agree with the way Snowden went about this. His actions are looking less like someone trying to protect us and more like someone who experienced a quarter life crisis and chose to leak classified documents in lieu of shooting random people at the mall.

[Dr Fate]

67. Not as furious as Obama & Holder, who never stopped fighting to expose Bush's dire act of treason.

It's good to know that they have our backs on that one too.

I for one think that highlighting and exposing treason originating in the top tiers of the executive branch is something we could put on the back burner, after we get Hong Kong Eddie, but Obama is the boss, not me.

"I don't think it's right when leakers put other peoples' lives in jeopardy."

Me too. That is why you and I spent so much time attacking the torture photo leakers- who exposed our troops to similar retaliation.

Like I said- the centrists ARE TOO being consistent.

[ecstatic]

72. Not sure where you're going with your comments

(sarcasm, etc.), but I think a concerned whistleblower can either go through the proper channels, or provide general information to journalists without going into specifics or sharing graphic/disturbing photos. I think we'd be much better off if Snowden had released the data to the Senate/Congress and not China.

[Dr Fate]

74. Exactly. The congress hates the Patriot Act too.

They opposed it so much, they even refused to read it.

He would have been a welcomed hero in any of their offices- and then congress would have not rested until they gave us the details on why we needed to be spied on.

I also agree that the Chinese are evil. Well, except for the ones who create jobs and or loans for us.

[ecstatic]

75. Give it a rest. Those are your views, not mine.

There are open minded individuals in both houses who would have been concerned enough to take action if Snowden had approached them with proof of wrongdoing.

[Douglas Carpenter]

68. actually Valerie Plame and Joe Wilson have written a major OP-ED about the Snowden leak

The NSA's metastasised intelligence-industrial complex is ripe for abuse

Where oversight and accountability have failed, Snowden's leaks have opened up a vital public debate on our rights and privacy

by Valerie Plame Wilson and Joe Wilson

guardian.co.uk, Sunday 23 June 2013 13.00 BST


Let's be absolutely clear about the news that the NSA collects massive amounts of information on US citizens – from emails, to telephone calls, to videos, under the Prism program and other Fisa court orders: this story has nothing to do with Edward Snowden. As interesting as his flight to Hong Kong might be, the pole-dancing girlfriend, and interviews from undisclosed locations, his fate is just a sideshow to the essential issues of national security versus constitutional guarantees of privacy, which his disclosures have surfaced in sharp relief.

Snowden will be hunted relentlessly and, when finally found, with glee, brought back to the US in handcuffs and severely punished. (If Private Bradley Manning's obscene conditions while incarcerated are any indication, it won't be pleasant for Snowden either, even while awaiting trial.) Snowden has already been the object of scorn and derision from the Washington establishment and mainstream media, but, once again, the focus is misplaced on the transiently shiny object. The relevant issue should be: what exactly is the US government doing in the people's name to "keep us safe" from terrorists?

We are now dealing with a vast intelligence-industrial complex that is largely unaccountable to its citizens. This alarming, unchecked growth of the intelligence sector and the increasingly heavy reliance on subcontractors to carry out core intelligence tasks – now estimated to account for approximately 60% of the intelligence budget – have intensified since the 9/11 attacks and what was, arguably, our regrettable over-reaction to them.

Today, the intelligence sector is so immense that no one person can manage, or even comprehend, its reach. When an operation in the field goes south, who would we prefer to try and correct the damage: a government employee whose loyalty belongs to his country (despite a modest salary), or the subcontractor who wants to ensure that his much fatter paycheck keeps coming? - Valerie Plame Wilson and Joe Wilson

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jun/23/nsa-intelligence-industrial-complex-abuse

[L0oniX]

70. I'm still upset that Jessica Lynch leaked info about the military propaganda lies concerning her.

[Dr Fate]

71. She and Snowden deserve each other. n/t

n/t

[JI7]

76. this is pathetic, comparing JEssica Lynch, Abu Ghraib pic leakers to Snowden ?

SNowden is going to nations like China which have a really shitty human rights record and giving them info.

the others released things we were doing that were wrong. they also didn't run off and hide .

and i never defended Jonathan Pollard who is a better comparison to Snowden.

[LondonReign2]

82. "the others released things we were doing that were wrong"

Hear Hear JI7! Snowden only released things that we were doing that were RIGHT, i.e., massive secret surveillance of the US public, which of course everyone knew about and was old news, and then after revealing what we were doing right the coward didn't even stick around to be tortured for revealing things that were totally legal and not really a problem anyway because we need to catch terrorists don't we? even if it didn't work so well with Boston but that just shows were need more secret spy programs that everyone already knows about if we ever really want to be safe.

[Octafish]

77. ''Checking in! I'm getting my anti-Snowden groove going right now...

..there're going to be a lot of changes, starting with a drone on that no good Dr. Fate and Ostrafich or whatever that sumbitch's name is..."

[Benton D Struckcheon]

78. One More Time

Posted this before but this looks like a good thread to do it again.

Snowden's not a black or white issue. Obviously by releasing the info re what the NSA is doing he made it crystal clear just how bad things have gotten. I am of the opinion it's actually worse than under Bush as now they have constructed clear procedures and a legal rationale, that for all we know may stand up to a court test.

However, that doesn't excuse Snowden's actions in giving the SCMP specific lists of hacked sites and servers. It certainly doesn't excuse his extraordinary offer to journalists from other countries to come take a look at who's getting hacked.
As I said before, all countries spy. This hacking the US does into foreign servers and sites is just spying in the cyber era. No foreign country would or should expect that its servers and sites would be secure from US attempts to get in and see what's in there, any more than our Defense Dept would be surprised that China is trying to get into their stuff.
Him releasing what we do far as these spying activities is certainly traitorous, even if it doesn't rise to the level of treason, which is a tough hurdle to jump over, rightly so. I don't know why he didn't just leak anonymously to a trusted journalist, and stick to what the NSA is doing re Google and Verizon and so on. But he made his choice to out himself, and then lay out the specifics of our spying activities. That's just nuts. For that he needs to pay, with prison time.

[baldguy]

81. A slimy self-serving douchebag would still be a slimy self-serving douchebag.

[Fire Walk With Me]

84. Um, you forgot the :sarcasm: emoticon? The only reason to support Snowden is to hate on Obama?

I hate upon the Bush/Cheney/neocon surveillance state =power grab= and the death of the 1st, 4th, and 5th Amendments to the Constitution. Notice that the 2nd is also under attack.

Demanding and supporting the founding articles of this country is hating on Obama?