Julie Bishop lashes Snowden on US visit

[struggle4progress]

Source: AAP via ZDNet

Summary: Australian Foreign Minister Julie Bishop has lashed out at Edward Snowden, accusing the US intelligence leaker of 'unprecedented treachery' after he unveiled Canberra's efforts to spy on Indonesia.
By AAP
January 23, 2014 -- 00:48 GMT (16:48 PST)

... "This represents unprecedented treachery; he is no hero," she added, in a speech at the Center for Strategic and International Studies on Wednesday.

"Snowden claims his actions were driven by a desire for transparency, but in fact they strike at the heart of the collaboration between those nations in world affairs that stand at the forefront of protecting human freedom," she said.

Reports based on Snowden's leaks said that Australia tried to bug the phones of Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, his wife, and members of his inner circle in 2009.

Indonesia protested by recalling its ambassador and suspending military and immigration cooperation. More recently, Indonesia responded furiously as Australia nonetheless entered Indonesian waters while picking up asylum seekers, incursions that led to an apology from Canberra ...

Read more: http://www.zdnet.com/julie-bishop-lashes-snowden-on-us-visit-7000025475/

[Thinkingabout]

1. Snowden will be looking over his shoulder for life, he has managed to piss off

lots of folks.

[Comrade Grumpy]

2. She's funny, accusing Snowden of "treachery"....

...for revealing her government's treacherous spying campaign.

[DJ13]

4. Perfect!

[Demenace]

15. What is wrong with you people?

How has your intellectual levels gone down so much that you cannot realize that is but a function of a government to engage in the gathering of information for the interest of that country and government?

What is her government supposed to do, not gather information before you disapprove of such acts? And again, I ask you, why is it the business of Snowden and Greenwald to disclose the activities of any foreign government? What gave him the right to disclose the secrets of her country?

You tell me how he has that right? If you are fine with this individual exposing the national security secrets of America, please do not expect other countries to do the same!

[okaawhatever]

38. Exactly. +100 nt

[DisgustipatedinCA]

65. You're new here.

Your rudeness isn't just inappropriate, it's also unacceptable. If you want to start over again, be my guest. But this in-your-face rudeness from a brand new poster doesn't tend to indicate that you're up to any good. You don't walk into a house you've never visited and show your ass the way you're doing here. Knock it off.

As to Greenwald and Snowden releasing stories about Australia, it's incumbent in you to tell me why this should bother me in particular. The US and Australia share intelligence. The NSA is dirty. We need to know what they're up to, so that we have a chance to put a stop to much of it.

[aquart]

76. I didn't notice rude. I noticed right. Heaven forfend the sanctimonious be contradicted.

Snowden is a treasonous, self-righteous piece of shit. He endangered our relationships with our allies. The good he did is a light crust on the vastness of his misunderstanding of international relations which are not now and have never been transparent. The NSA IS A SPY AGENCY. SPYING IS ITS MISSION.

Those of you who are only willing to be citizens of lollipop land admittedly have a tough time of it, but take a closer look at the ground you walk on. Not a nation on this earth that doesn't walk on blood. Not one. But keep looking. Antarctica will be green soon, maybe you can build your pure and perfect paradise there, a wonderful, one-faced world where nothing is contradictory and justice always prevails.

I don't want Snowden back. I shudder at the thought of his Sunday morning show.

[warrant46]

70. Being rude here time after time will probably get your opinion deleted

Also it puts you in the classic guise of someone who is going to be ignored.

There are so many intelligent ways to engage in disagreement.

Your post showing displeasure could have been phrased in a less vitriolic fashion and therefore more in keeping with the civilized community of debate.

[fasttense]

3. I think Bishop protests too much.

Bishop's accusations against Snowden ring hollow.

[1monster]

5. Since when does Snowden owe any loyalty to Australia? He witnessed treachery and

exposed it. That would only be treachery in the eyes of the treacherous.

[Kelvin Mace]

6. It is called "projection"

Ask your therapist how "ethical beaviour", twice daily, may be right for you.

Side effects may include a loss of hypocrisy and an awareness of irony.

[ctsnowman]

7. lol

[struggle4progress]

10. Perhaps you admire the famous philosophy of Henry Stimson, that

Gentlemen do not read each other's mail, a stance which ultimately led to the defunding of Herbert Yardley's cryptology group in the late 1920s

But I will consider it fortunate that not everyone shared Stimson's view and that cryptologic efforts continued elsewhere in the US government, with the breaking of Japanese codes prior to Pearl Harbor: the fact that some codes were cracked before the war played an important role in subsequent code-cracking and in the Pacific campaign of WWII

Ideological considerations, and a related belief that complete transparency was always essential, could have exposed to the Japanese during WWII the fact that the codes had been cracked, as the Chicago Tribune, the New York Daily News, and the Washington Times-Herald in early June 1942 published an article revealing that the US Navy in its Midway battle had prior knowledge of the exact location of the Japanese armada and the names and characteristics of the ships involved. With a few weeks, based on such stories, a national gossip columnist wrote, based on such articles: When the history of these times is written, it will be revealed that .. the fate of the civilized world was changed by intercepted messages. Various Republican opponents to FDR at the time, including the Chicago Tribune publisher, believed they would damage FDR politically if they made to the public a case that the government had known in advance about Pearl Harbor but had done nothing; and they were aware that the fact, that the US could read Japanese naval codes, would play into this narrative. A congressional inquiry was planned, but avoided when the importance of secrecy in the matter was made clear to several key congressmen; and potential prosecution of a naval source and of a reporter was squashed, due to fear the publicity might tip off the Japanese, who somehow never noticed these revelations

George Santayana's epigram, about the repetition of unremembered history, is a quite general warning, not limited to such histories as support our favorite preconceptions. I should, of course, much like to be able to adopt Stimson's view of spying -- but ethics also demands we not engage in wishful imaginations about the world: however difficult it seems to attempt sailing betwixt hard rocks on which mere good-natured optimism would founder and the poisonous whirlpools of Machiavellian cynicism justifying every act by political expediency, it is a skill we must learn

One of Snowden's recent accomplishments appears to be a rupture in Australian-Indonesian relationships. If it is your view that this is a good outcome, and the only natural result of some supposedly unethical behavior by Australia, you are certainly entitled to promote that view. But I am inclined to suspect the matter much murkier than, and I do not find you making any coherent argument for your position, beyond mere abstract sloganeering

[JDPriestly]

14. The NSA apologists on DU repeat over and over that "they all do it" meaning the surveillance.

If so, then "they" must know that "they all do it," and that "they all know they all do it."

President Obama explained that because surveillance is so common, various electronic devices are not allowed in the White House situation room. That makes sense.

So if "they" all know that "they all do it," why is the fact of surveillance such a secret? Why doesn't the American government which probably has the greatest surveillance network and capacity in the world simply say that they are wiretapping and collecting metadat on everyone and everything they can?

From whom are they keeping it secret? Surely not from the terrorists. They would be the first to figure out that what they communicate electronically could or is getting them caught.

From people in other countries? Maybe.

But most likely, they are keeping this a secret from the people in their own countries. In the US, that is the American people. And why would they keep the fact that they listen in and keep track of all of our communications a secret?

Because they want to maintain the ILLUSION that we are free. The fact is that thanks to the surveillance we are not free.

In addition, they are collecting the content of all of our or most of our communications. That was stated in this press conference by the other NSA whistleblowers.

Here is the link to the website with that press conference. It is very interesting.

http://new.livestream.com/accuracy/nsa-rebuttal/videos/39824993

And that collection is arguably a violation not only of our human rights but of our very own American Constiution.

The NSA is in my opinion violating our rights, our guaranteed rights, and should stop.

[struggle4progress]

16. "The NSA is in my opinion violating .. our guaranteed rights," you say, in a thread

about the Australian Foreign Minister's views of Snowden, based on damage to Australian relations

But the particular Snowden disclosures, which concern the Foreign Minister, are unrelated (so far as I can see) to any issues involving rights guaranteed under the American Constitution: Australia has its own national interests, and in particular its own intelligence interests, which are unrelated to any (real or imagined) effort to keep information from the US population to "maintain the ILLUSION that we are free" (to use your language)

[Demenace]

19. This is now what has been labeled as intelligent opinion around here...

People who see the world in a black and white view just like the Tea party groups but fail to recognize how unintelligent their views have become!

Just the same question, I ask this poster. Why should Australia accept Snowden's actions? For some around here, there is no distinction between local and international issues or the American constitution and the facts that its provisions stop at the shores of the United states because other countries have their own social contracts.

If Americans applaud the activities of Snowden exposing the national security secrets of America, that does not in any way mean that other nations and their citizens share these views!

Goodness sakes, people need to walk away from the 'group think' mentality that is driving discussions around here. People, you are smarter than these comments you are posting on this subject!

[JDPriestly]

28. Do you think that the Indonesian government did not already know that it was under surveillance?

So why the secrecy?

[Demenace]

31. For your education, it is called ways and methods....

It is a secret because Israel will never go on a chest pounding session while spying on America for its national interest, that is why countries keep such things a top secret!

[Demenace]

17. What has your rights in America, got to do with what Australia is doing with another country?

If this is a citizen of Iran, disclosing the national security secrets of America and his western allies, you will be clamoring for a war!

How is it that otherwise smart people have allowed themselves to develop a fantasy view about how the world and nations relate to one another? Makes me wonder why folks here point fingers at Tea party groups and their black and white view of the world but fail to recognize how much of this same worldview they share!

[JDPriestly]

26. In my view, some of the surveillance is illegal. The Fourth Amendment and several other amendments

to our Constitution guarantee the right to privacy of Americans unless their is probable cause to violate their privacy based on a reasonable suspicion of criminal activity.

Some or all of the NSA spying is most likely illegal. We cannot know unless we know just what they are doing.

A government in the US that hides illegal activity, activity that violates US laws or the US Constitution cannot claim the right to hide their illegal activity by labeling it as a "secret."

In this video, former NSA employees (high-level employees for the most part) explain that it is illegal for the government to hide its own illegal conduct by labeling it as a secret.

http://new.livestream.com/accuracy/nsa-rebuttal/videos/39824993

The video is long but full of interesting information.

[Demenace]

33. Dude, this story is about Australia which is not America...

It pains me to remind you, this story is about what Snowden exposed about a country called Australia which if I must remind you, is a sovereign nation that does not recognize your United states constitution. This has nothing to do with the illegalities you are talking about!

[JDPriestly]

34. So. Snowden owed no duty to protect the secrets of Australia. Why the fuss?

Obviously, Australia did not protect this secret from Snowden. Snowden may have contractual or other obligations to keep the secret, but he did not owe a patriotic duty to Australia.

[Demenace]

40. Again, you miss the point of the Australian reaction...

They trusted the United states and shared their national secrets with the United states government which again is what nations do! If I must remind you again, Snowden stole this information from the United states that Australia shared this information with. If you, in your wisdom continue to go down this road of defending a thief, it is your right and a reflection of the company you keep but the bigger picture which you have failed to see is, Snowden has cost your country if you are an American, one valuable means of gathering information around the world.

Information, you may some day wish your country America had access to some time in the future! Now, think about the number of such doors your little buddy just closed in relationships with America!


Today, you may continue to applaud Snowden but wait until the side effects of his activities begin to hit your pocket book in the form of lost business relations and the business community beginning to turn on your pal.

Sometimes, people fail to see when they are cutting off their noses to spite their own faces!

[JDPriestly]

54. May I respond?

"Today, you may continue to applaud Snowden but wait until the side effects of his activities begin to hit your pocket book in the form of lost business relations and the business community beginning to turn on your pal."

His "activities" consisted of warning the world that their communications on the internet are under the surveillance of the US government.

That is the truth. It is not the fact that Snowden revealed this truth that is the problem. It is not the fact that Snowden revealed this truth that we will suffer in our pocket books from lost business relations and the business community turning on someone, (I'm not sure who you mean by "your pal.&quot

What will cause the damage to our pocket books and the lost business relations and the business community turning on someone will be the fact that our government has placed virtually all the internet that means anything to anyone -- the world's personal e-mails, the world's on-line purchases, the identities of all of us in the world as we blog or use google and other search engines, the world's Facebook pages, the world's financial transactions including investment instructions and communications with others in the business world, the world's legal memos and discussions about legal issues among lawyers, lovers' coos and fights all over the world, everything we do electronically. That is what is going to turn the world off to us and our business community -- maybe.

The NSA should have just been open about what it is doing from the get-go. Snowden just happens to be the one with a conscience and a respect of other people's rights and privacy. Someone was bound to come out with this disgusting secret sooner or later.

Snowden is, as a person, as a a personality, a force of history. Secrets such as the enormous secret of placing the whole world's electronic communications under surveillance will come out eventually. In fact, had the whistleblowers said nothing, I will bet you that although it would have taken some time, someone would have figured the surveillance scheme out.

The USSR had an extremely effective secret police. It did not save them from their own mismanagement and extremist ideology. The NSA surveillance, like it or not, sounds and looks like the dream of secret police states throughout history. If it isn't, then why are they so secretive about what they are doing?

Does America have enemies? Yes. But the surveillance scheme does nothing to unite Americans in dealing with those enemies. And, as I pointed out about the Soviet Union, governments that establish wide and very effective secret service organizations and fall to threats just as do open societies.

If the NSA deems it important and necessary to place people under surveillance they should simply say so. And then let the people of the United States agree or disagree with their judgment. That's how our democracy should work. And then let the rest of the world deal with what we as a people decide to do.

As far as terrorists are concerned, limiting them to the slow and difficult means of communicating only in person is not such a bad thing. We will never have complete security. The best way to protect ourselves from terrorists is to work in an honest, open way with the leaders of all countries and to demonstrate our respect for people in all countries and cultures and continue to be a country that can be trusted. The NSA spying on Americans (which was bound to be discovered or revealed sooner or later) is, in my view, prohibited by our Constitution. If the Obama administration and the Senate foreign intelligence committee want to amend the Constitution to permit it, then let them advocate for that amendment.

We either are a democracy or we are not. Had the NSA limited its surveillance to real terrorist suspects (and not, for example, American lawyers and judges and businesses all over the world, etc.) or had it been forthright with citizens about what it wanted to do, then, perhaps the surveillance system might have gained very widespread support. (Assuming of course that the NSA could present evidence that the surveillance is both necessary and effective in preventing terrorism.)

We shall see what happens.

While I am at it, you might be interested in listening to the press conference of the other NSA whistleblowers. I found it very interesting.


http://new.livestream.com/accuracy/nsa-rebuttal/videos/39824993

[Octafish]

24. Outstanding post.

Every word.

[Demenace]

27. It is this self affirming attitude among Republicans that has bought them the label...

Party of the stupid, I guess Progressives are not immured from falling prey to self affirming attitudes!

What in anything your hero stated makes any sense to you about what the Australians are unhappy about?

[Octafish]

55. You have to ask?

Democracy means the people govern. When the secret government toadies of warmongers and banksters who are privy to secret spying govern, that's called tyranny. Clear?

[warrant46]

71. I agree but its a waste of time to debate with the self annointed

[DisgustipatedinCA]

63. The word is 'inured'. Sincerely, some dumbass progressive.

[Kelvin Mace]

25. Spying on a country you are at war with

or that is overtly hostile to you, is cool.

Spying on your allies? Uncool.

It is as simple as that.

If Australia wishes to spy on Indonesia, then Australia can declare Indonesia "hostile" to Australian interest, and then "spy away"!

If I call you my friend in public, but hire a PI to tail your, read your mail and record your phone calls, you are NOT my friend, and I am NOT yours, regardless of what I say.

Why are ethical issues so easily dismissed with a hand wave and an offering at the altar of "pragmatism"? The excuse "Well everyone else does it!" has been ethically discredited by kindergarten teachers everywhere for about a century now.

[Demenace]

29. So Israel spying on America is not in the national interest of the Israelis?

Where are you folks getting your education from nowadays? A country does not have to declare any hostility to engage in information gathering against another nation. The mere fact that in your eminent wisdom, you want a country to give the target of its espionage a heads up by declaring some form of hostility is in itself an indication of how uneducated you are about international relations.

My goodness, this is what passes for intellectual discourse here!

[Kelvin Mace]

36. Can you try and be a little less

condescending?

Are you wishing to debate the issue or just dazzle me with your snark?

A country does not have to declare any hostility to engage in information gathering against another nation.

No, a country does not. It MAY do any number of things which it CAN do. I thought we were discussing the morality of spying on your ostensible allies? I do not question countries "ability" to spy on its "allies" just its "moral right" to do so.

(And by "spy" I am talking about tapping phones, intercepting mail, bugging private/government/corporate entities, running spies into their country and/or recruiting spies in their country. Keeping up on people via overt means is fine)

So Israel spying on America is not in the national interest of the Israelis?

Depends on how you define "national interest". The risk of spying on the U.S. is the loss of U.S. aid and support (financial and military). The Israeli government has to decide if that risk is worth their "national interest". If it isn't, they should stop. If it is they CAN do so. Those decisions are not germane to the question of ethical/moral implications. Spying on your allies is simply WRONG.

[Demenace]

42. Telling you, you know nothing of what you speak about is not snarky...

There are too many of you around here who get on the soapbox and say absolutely nonsense and I have no patience with calling you guys out!

Take a moment to read the intellectual comment below mine for some sully needed education on international relations.

[Kelvin Mace]

50. Really?

Telling you, you know nothing of what you speak about is not snarky...

Hmmm.... Let's go to the tape and watch the replay:

Where are you folks getting your education from nowadays? Snarky and rude

The mere fact that in your eminent wisdom... Snarky

...an indication of how uneducated you are about international relations. Not quite snarky, but rude.

My goodness, this is what passes for intellectual discourse here! Snarky

Yep, it seems you are just trying to impress me that you can be rude and sarcastic with the best of them.

Well, you impressed me.

Good day, sir.

[struggle4progress]

37. You aren't actually reading the history carefully IMO: continued cracking of Japanese naval codes

during WWII depended on pre-war work, just as the cracking of the German enigma coding was built on Polish work conducted before hostilities began

It sure would be swell if we didn't have to think this way, but long human experience indicates we really aren't given such a choice. However decent most people may be, groups and institutions seem to have a diminished moral capacity -- and although this is certainly true of US or Australian institutions, it is also equally true of other institutions in countries besides the US and Australia

[Kelvin Mace]

45. Again,

my caveat applies. Spying on your allies is WRONG. Spying on countries hostile to you is FINE.

Japan was making it plain that it planned on invading China and taking control of the Pacific, with such ambitions going back to the Sino-Russo war. So, spying on Japan was FINE.

Everyone with an ounce of brain knew that Germany was going to war at some point, so spying on Germany was completely fine.

Spying on the Soviets during the war was risky, but morally justifiable since they were allied with us only out of necessity, and were hostile before and after Hitler.

So, yes, I am fully cognizant of the historical context.

[Demenace]

48. Dude, whose book of morality are you asking us to live up to?

National security or national interest is not a subject of 'morality'. Waiting to gather information on the kingdoms around you until you are under attack is the hallmark of stupidity!

The best time to call for a fire drill is not during an active fire, you get your safety drills in when there are no active fires so you can call on the lessons learnt during an active fire!

What is wrong with your reasoning capacity, dude! You are sounding like you are still in high school!

[Kelvin Mace]

52. Not interested in engaging your rude discourse

[blackspade]

8. Bishop is an idiot....

"unprecedented treachery" ???

Talk about hyperbole.

[George II]

9. I thought his entire motive was to expose US spying on Americans??? Guess he lied!!

[LiberalLovinLug]

12. Does any of those like you who hates Snowdon ever stop

and look around at those that stand with you shouting their nationalist fear-mongering paranoia? Those that insist that there needs to be a secretive, above-the-law group that can do what ever it wants, wiretap anyone, without citizen oversight? A system that could be so easily and unabashedly highjacked by "special interests" of the corporate class, or the MIC, or even used against political rivals?

Its mostly rightie wingnuts, like this representative of Australia's new Con government. Do you ever take a deep breath, look around, and think about what kind of agenda you are helping to push?

[George II]

18. Maybe if he came out ONCE and said EVERYTHING that he thinks, and tell us EVERYTHING...

...now, he wouldn't be so disliked.

No, he'll never do that, because he'll just fade away. He has to dole out stuff little by little just to stay in the headlines.

So, tell me - his expressed "motive" was to expose what the United States government has done to spy on it's own citizens. THAT is what he said at first. What does dribbling out what the US government has done to spy on other governments, or dribbling out what other governments have to yet other governments. What do these have to do with his expressed TRUE motive?

On top of that, most heroes don't hopscotch from adversarial country to adversarial country while they're trickling this information out to the world.

One other thing. Supposedly he was leaving Hawaii to go to South America (my guess Brazil, where his partner in crime lives) That's a mere 7400 miles from Hawaii. Yet he goes from Hawaii to Hong Kong (5600 miles) to Moscow (10,000 miles), winding up 17,000 miles from his ultimate destination. If he was headed for South America, why travel over 30,000 miles to get there when he was a mere 7400 miles away to begin with?

With each statement, press conference, and release of information he contradicts himself.

He's an egomaniacal attention whore who shows himself week after week that his initial motive was false.

[LiberalLovinLug]

56. Hard to argue with confusion

So "he'll just fade away", yet "He's an egomaniacal attention whore"?

Instead of relying on your own opinion of Snowden's motive here is his actual answer to the question in an interview:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/09/nsa-whistleblower-edward-snowden-why


Q: Why did you decide to become a whistleblower?

A: "The NSA has built an infrastructure that allows it to intercept almost everything. With this capability, the vast majority of human communications are automatically ingested without targeting. If I wanted to see your emails or your wife's phone, all I have to do is use intercepts. I can get your emails, passwords, phone records, credit cards.

"I don't want to live in a society that does these sort of things … I do not want to live in a world where everything I do and say is recorded. That is not something I am willing to support or live under."

Then you go off on a ramble about air travel. Its surprising that you never brought up the air miles he garnered (no doubt to take advantage of anything he can because that's the kind of person he is)

When did he ever contradict himself other than in your own mind? He did say he was purposely NOT revealing information that he thought would be sensitive to national security. But yeah, I understand that you'd never believe him on that one.

This last line of yours always puts the nail in the coffin for those of you that have a distaste for an informed public. If your arguments had such merit you would never have to stoop to the he's just an attention whore argument. As if the world's media should simply ignore one of the biggest stories of this new century because in the process it may give Snowden some kind of undeserved notoriety. That it is Snowden himself that has donned the title of "hero".

Seriously you have talked yourself round and round into so many circles I have trouble keeping up.

[George II]

59. Reread what I said, I said that he WON'T tell us everything he knows all at once because...

....THEN he'll fade away. Since he's an egomaniacal attention whore he doesn't WANT to disappear from the headlines. Understand?

[LiberalLovinLug]

73. aaaaaaaaaand cue the syntax error police

which then negates any obligation to address anything else in my response.

What a grand life he leads...eh? Like all attention whore's do. Living the high life, sitting on his throne with maidens feeding him grapes, while he chuckles while deciding which secret he will divulge next, for no other purpose than to bring down his home country and get rich and famous doing it. Have I got that about right?

[George II]

74. It's not a syntax issue, it's the fact that you totally turned what I said around.

[Demenace]

20. You tell me what gives Snowden the right endanger a foreign nation...

Where in the disclosure about Australia's activities against another sovereign, did this have anything to with the protection of the rights of Americans? Will you say the same if some individual from the Middle East stole American national security secrets and was exposing them weekly? Would you not have asked why the government has not been able to track this subject down and ended this activities immediately?

More importantly, why should the Australians not be pissed at reading their national security secrets been exposed by an American? You give me an intelligent reason why the Australians should be okay with this?

[LiberalLovinLug]

57. Because we live in a global villiage - everything is connected

And yes to answer your question, I would definitely support any brave soul that exposed this kind of unprecedented attack on privacy and the assumption that the ultra elite have their very own secret piracy system that gives them an advantage politically and militarily over their fellow citizens living in means well below them.

Of course the ruling elite hate it, that goes without question. The average who make up the majority of Australians should welcome this revelation. Why? for the same reasons Americans should.

The main argument that you who despise Snowden seems to condense down to the fact that we have already gone so far into this way of doing things, that everyone does it, so even though it may be distasteful, thats the way it is and because there is nothing to stop it, lets all just put our 100% behind it. But you seem to disregard any thought about where this will lead. You imagine a room of pure goody two shoes agents who sit in a room diligently listening in on Islamic terrorists plans. When in reality it is simply a vast personal information gathering service to be sold to the highest bidder. And its folks like you that pave the way for it to be even MORE secretive. Until, if it isn't already, simply a vehicle for the top 5 multinationals to quash any competition or information that may be "bad for business"

[struggle4progress]

23. Snowden obtained his documents prior to June 2013, but the Australian federal elections

were held in September 2013. So Snowden's documents refer to a prior government

[LiberalLovinLug]

58. What difference does that make?

You cannot be inferring that a Con government would NEVER engage in such underhanded behaviour. One government was caught with red hands, the next is outraged by ....not the previous government...but that anyone would dare tell on them. That says it all as to what side of the fence Ms. Bishop is on and proves that it is the real rulers that are the world elite, those that transcend political party trappings, that her loyalties lie with.

[Whisp]

53. It appears Snowden has pronounced himself King of the World!

What a meglomaniacal turd pile to assume he has that right to fuck with the whole world.

[muriel_volestrangler]

11. So the Australian government says human freedom needs protecting from the Indonesian president?

I'd have titled the story "Julie Bishop lashes Indonesian president on US visit". It's big news that she thinks the Indonesian president is so untrustworthy that she needs to spy on him, and that anyone revealing she is doing that is endangering 'human freedom'.

[Demenace]

21. You must be naive to think governments should trust one another...

And even if that is an expectation you demand of your government as an American which in itself will be the dumbest thing you can ever think to express publicly, why do you think the Australian public wants their government to be trusting of other sovereign nations around them?

What in the world gave you such an idiotic idea!

[muriel_volestrangler]

22. She didn't say "we all do it", or "we don't trust one another"; she said:

"in fact they strike at the heart of the collaboration between those nations in world affairs that stand at the forefront of protecting human freedom". She claims that she was spying on Indonesia 'to protect human freedom'. She thinks she has the moral high ground. She's a moron, and morally defective.

[Demenace]

30. And in your simple nature, you believe the Australian government will personally fax you a reason..

That you do not understand the principles of deniability and the complexities of why a nation engages in information gathering is now the fault of the Australians, somehow!

Dude, now the Australian government has to come up with a reason because your buddy dipped his sticky fingers in a pot that did not belong to him! Whether that reason is valid or not is not the issue because there is no way in the world the Australians will tell you the real reasons why that country was targeted and beside it is non of your business to demand for such a response!

[muriel_volestrangler]

43. No, it's the fault of their idiotic foreign minister, who doesn't understand what treachery is

She is talking bollocks. She is being hypocritical (see reply #41). She wouldn't know 'human freedom' if it bit her on the arse. 'Freedom' includes 'not being spied on'.

You are trying to argue that (a) all governments should spy on each other, because they don't trust each other, and (b) no-one should actually say that they do.

[struggle4progress]

32. I can't see how that particular approach gets you very far: Indonesia is, to my view,

a rather authoritarian country, and I think I myself would prefer to live in Australia if faced with the choice

... Alexander, a civil servant, is facing five years in jail for writing “God does not exist” on a Facebook page he moderated called “Ateis Minang” (“Minang Atheists”). Chairul said the issue was that Alexander had used the Koran to highlight his atheist views ...
Dismay After Indonesian Atheist Charged With Blasphemy
By webadmin on 3:09 pm January 20, 2012

... In their indictment, prosecutors accuse Tajul of telling his students that the Koran, as they knew it, was not the original sacred text ...
Indonesian Prosecutors Demand 4 Years for Shiite Leader Over Alleged Blasphemy
By webadmin on 8:53 pm July 4, 2012

The girls were expelled from their high school in Tolitoli city, on Sulawesi island, and reported to police after the video of their dance to the US band's hit One More Night went viral online ... In the five-minute clip, the girls, wearing school tracksuits, switch between Islamic prayer rituals and mostly innocent dancing, with the occasional pelvic thrust and suggestive hand gesture thrown in ... Blasphemy in Indonesia carries a maximum sentence of five years, though minors usually face half the adult sentence and are locked up in juvenile detention facilities. The girls are in grade 12, where students are normally aged 17 or 18. Police did not give their ages but said they were being treated as minors ...
Indonesian girls face jail over Maroon 5 dance
AFP
5:17am April 24, 2013

Snowden and you, of course, are entitled to hold the view that international spying is despicable, and are entitled to advocate against it. But Snowden seems to have violated US law by quietly collecting documents he was not authorized to obtain and disseminating them widely, motivated apparently by his disappointment that Barack Obama (rather than Ron Paul) had won election in 2008; the result has been some significant diplomatic squabbles, and few people will take the stand that Snowden has a right to interfere in foreign affairs in this manner

[Demenace]

35. These fake intellectuals would want you to think otherwise...

Most of these otherwise smart people are caught up in the 'group think' mentality that is typical of the American public and cannot be bothered to educate themselves on the subjects they comment on.

For most of them, if an individual they have chosen to worship says the sky is green, there is no stopping to ask questions, the sky must be green and if it is not, has to be made green in their collective minds. This is the attitude you are experiencing right now.

The thing that gets me is, it is their collective right to applaud the exposure of the National security secrets of America by Snowden but to demand that other nations feel the same way is plain idiotic and so uneducated for people you would think are otherwise smart!

[muriel_volestrangler]

39. You say that Snowden is entitled to advocate against it

and you think that international espionage is good; but then you turn round and say Snowden has no right to reveal the existence of what you think is a Good Thing.

Why not just admit you hate Snowden, without having any coherent reasons for doing so? You can't even keep your argument straight in a single reply.

[Demenace]

44. Dude, this information is not his to reveal...

He stole this information and the Australian do not have to agree with his action, in fact I would be surprised if the Australian government is not taking steps to respond to Snowden directly for meddling in their national security!

You should be telling Snowden to look over his shoulder, if you are a true follower of his activities because Australia can do things, America maybe reluctant to do on this issue!

[muriel_volestrangler]

47. Dear god, you sound eager for someone to assassinate Snowden

Take your fantasies elsewhere.

[Demenace]

49. I guess, I just woke you up to the league your buddy is playing in..

It is not my fantasies, welcome to reality 101, pal!

[struggle4progress]

51. The conversation might be more interesting and more productive, were you able to refrain

from putting words into my mouth

[okaawhatever]

62. Agreed. And Snowden took 1.7 million documents. How many of those had to do with

what he claimed. And Indonesia, like Russia, is not exactly a bastion of free speech or laissez-faire government.

[Ash_F]

13. Australia one of the WASPY "Five Eyes" /nt

[muriel_volestrangler]

41. First the Israelis, now Julie Bishop's under attack over faked passport scandal

The Rudd government has rounded on WA Federal MP Julie Bishop, accusing the deputy opposition leader of putting Australia's national security at risk.

But coalition MPs have lined up to defend their foreign affairs spokeswoman.

Ms Bishop is under fire for first suggesting, then backing down on claims Australian security agencies had forged passports.

"She has broken a long-standing convention, she has put our national security at risk," Foreign Minister Stephen Smith told ABC Radio today.

http://www.smh.com.au/national/first-the-israelis-now-julie-bishops-under-attack-over-faked-passport-scandal-20100526-wc3j.html

See, when an Australian politician makes an accusation about their security services, that's OK; but when an American does it, that's treachery. Because we all know that treachery means something foreigners do to you country, not what you did yourself 4 years ago.

[struggle4progress]

64. I missed the part where she next, in a fit of pique, collected a million or so documents

about Australia's clandestine activities, and related activities of Australia's allies, and set out to distribute the documents worldwide in a manner calculated to cause as much friction as possible in international affairs

[muriel_volestrangler]

66. If only she had, she'd not be a ridiculous Orwellian hypocrite now, would she?

She's a hypocrite, because she complains about people revealing the workings of the Australian security services, which is what she did herself; and she's Orwellian, because she claims her friends and she spy on the world for 'human freedom'. And because that's such a dumb fucking claim, she's ridiculous. It's a shame that she's in a position of power, rather than just some silly media commentator, though. Just imagine if she had the moral courage of Snowden to stick to her principles, instead of selling out, and getting into bed with the intelligence complex.

[struggle4progress]

67. Or maybe, like many politicians, she's often just something of a blowhard and a hack, and

just happened at that moment to be looking for something she could aim at her political opponents but then shot herself in the foot

Frankly, I'm not seeing evidence of enormous dedication to ethical principle in Snowden

Not that long ago, he was a gun nut who thought leakers should be shot in the balls; later he was a libertarian who didn't support Obama, but then said he had expected great things from Obama and was terribly disappointed in him; then he's tricking co-workers into giving him their passwords so he can access files; suddenly he's in China, where he portrays himself as a great defender of civil liberties -- then meets with a local newspaper there to give them lists of IP addresses in China he says the NSA has hacked

No, if I put those pictures side by side, I see evidence of instability, desire to control and manipulate, dishonesty, and a gigantic ego: it looks pathological to me

[AverageJoe90]

60. Unfortunately, she may have a point, it seems.

Regardless of what you may think of Australia's bugging of Indonesia's president(personally, I can't comment, since I don't know the whole story), she does unfortunately happen to be quite correct, sadly, at least in this one respect: Snowden's working with Russia shows nothing more than crass hypocrisy on his part; For all our faults, no Western country I can think of is even HALF as fucked up or as wannabe Orwellian as Putin's Russia(or the "People's Republic" of China for that matter). And yeah, this even includes us, too.

And it seems that Snowden's "revelations" have done quite a bit more harm than good(if any at all....which is highly doubtful, to be truthful) for this country in particular, as a whole; not to mention that much of his escapades have played right into the hands of the "libertarian" Tea-Bagging right in this country.

[JI7]

61. Snowden seems to think only certain countries like China, Russia should be able to spy

and that countries like the UK and Australia are "authoritarian" or whatever the fuck that means.

[Theyletmeeatcake2]

68. Lashings and Julie Bishop go together......

She's part of a heartless government that regards global warming as crap,is ready to cut welfare payments,it's towing boats full of refugees back to Indonesia,is ready to reduce taxes for the wealthy......we are really going to get screwed over in Australia .....and do check out the way she dresses....like Joan Collins out of Dynasty...mean I know but the 80's were a cruel time fashion wise ....and as for loyalty don't get me started on her record....she started as a lawyer representing asbestos companies and running court cases that lasted so long that the sick people would die before the case finished that meant the case was unable to be completed....what a piece of work this woman is..she even looks demonic....

[lumpy]

72. Well, it looks like Snowdens revelation about Australias snooping has gotten some results.

Negative of course. Now Snowden admirers are going to castigate Australia and its leadership.
Who's next?

[Theyletmeeatcake2]

75. What does that mean?