Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:The Existence of a "United States of America" (Score 0) 174

by cold fjord (#47446707) Attached to: NSA Says Snowden Emails Exempt From Public Disclosure

Delusional? The NSA is violating people's rights and the highest law of the land...

Prove it. Prove that their actions are unconstitutional. It is often claimed, but the proof never seems to come. Where is the final court decision that says so? Where is the final court decision that says the Congress, the Executive branch, and all prior court decisions are wrong? Or is it "proved" by assertion only, proof by rhetoric?

Comment: Re:The Existence of a "United States of America" (Score 0) 174

by cold fjord (#47446693) Attached to: NSA Says Snowden Emails Exempt From Public Disclosure

You are a citizen who cares more about your children's survival than the survival of Freedom and the well being of millions. In other words you aren't merely part of the problem, you are the problem.

As is common on Slashdot your histrionics are popular, but it is pure demagoguery. Who are these "millions" whose "well being" you claim are at risk? Hmmm? Who? How is their “well being” at risk?

And what freedom is in danger of not “surviving?”

Your entire post is rubbish and it is a mark of how rare thoughtful moderation is that it is so high.

Comment: Re:Misuse of FOIA (Score 0) 174

by cold fjord (#47445583) Attached to: NSA Says Snowden Emails Exempt From Public Disclosure

He gave up his girlfriend and cushy job, he exposed clear evidence of violation of international treaties and the US Constitution by the world's dominant superpower, and then he endured being stuck in the Moscow Airport (there isn't enough Prozac in the world to make this OK) and is now stuck in Russia, which I assure you, is a severe downgrade from Hawaii.

Since it sounds like he really hasn't been in touch with her it looks more like he dumped his girlfriend. Why hasn't he invited his girlfriend to Russia?
He has stated that the only reason he took his "cushy job" was to steal classified documents:
      Snowden to newspaper: I took contractor job to gather evidence
Snowden couldn't be found in the airport for long stretches of time. Perhaps he was resting in a Russian supplied suite?
The simple truth is we know next to nothing about Snowden's living conditions in Russia, other than he is being protected by the FSB, who has no doubt had many chats with him, and his spokesman is on the FSB's public committee and a friend of Putin.

You'd have a great point if there were any reason we could trust the NSA.

You'd have a great point if there was any reason we could trust Snowden, a man who lied to friends, family, girlfriend, coworkers and the government to steal top secret documents and flee the country. The fact that he as leaked top secret documents doesn't make him trustworthy.

Comment: Re:"unwarranted invasion of personal privacy" (Score 1) 174

by cold fjord (#47445479) Attached to: NSA Says Snowden Emails Exempt From Public Disclosure

Just to protect us, obviously.

Obviously.

Now can you pretend that George Washington was a spymaster that ran a spy ring that spied on both the British and other colonists, and that Benjamin Franklin opened the mail of other colonists for intelligence purposes to aid the war effort? Well, you don't have to pretend, they actually did it.

Comment: Re:"unwarranted invasion of personal privacy" (Score 0) 174

by cold fjord (#47445173) Attached to: NSA Says Snowden Emails Exempt From Public Disclosure

You seem to "know" a lot of things that aren't true.

The gathering of phone metadata by NSA may be disagreeable, but it isn't a "general warrant." Since a court is supervising it and Congress has authorized it, you seem to be on weak ground as to what is constitutional. I disagree with you since you are making a variety of fundamental errors, including the suggestion that I would rather be living in North Korea.

I'm still waiting for this list of "fundamental freedoms" that have been lost.

You should look into the history of privacy in the Constitution. It is just one more thing you don't have a good handle on.

The Right of Privacy

Comment: Re:Snowden's copies? (Score 1) 174

by cold fjord (#47444801) Attached to: NSA Says Snowden Emails Exempt From Public Disclosure

Let's look at what I wrote:

Isn't it ... "odd" ... that Snowden could manage to steal 1.7 million documents, but apparently didn't manage to get copies of his own emails showing his alleged attempts to raise the issues through official channels? Now I wonder why that might be?

You don't think it could be because even if he did "raise the issue" of legality he was given the reasons why they were legal and chose to steal the documents anyway?

No moon or cheese there, and you have no answer for it, hence the name calling by you. Ta ta.

Comment: Re:Snowden's copies? (Score 0) 174

by cold fjord (#47444459) Attached to: NSA Says Snowden Emails Exempt From Public Disclosure

a) Because when I suspect my employer of illegal wrong doing doing I always write an email? Oh, wait, no, we're trained that those sorts of inquiries are supposed to go through channels without permanent records for legal liability reasons. You can argue that that's a bad thing, but that's reality in a LOT of places.

Snowden said he wrote emails that he can't produce despite taking almost two million documents. You can't explain that away since you are directly challenging him.

b) While I'm sure he'd have been capable of snagging his email, maybe it simply didn't occur to him.

And yet it occurred to him to steal documents on intelligence operations by Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Great Britain, Sweden, and other places? All this while intending to make the claim that he was a "whistle blower" on the US? And he forget the whistle he claims to have blown, repeatedly, while there? That doesn't wash.

If your argument is that Snowden didn't keep and release them because they would contradict and harm his 'narrative', then why is the NSA not bending over backwards to get them out there?

Maybe because they don't exist? Or they discuss classified programs that are still classified?

The NSA should be happy to provide us with such a relevant record that details their dutiful adherence to the law, and how they conscientiously explained to Snowden why he was mistaken in raising concerns.

I expect that the NSA has done that in the proper forums for discussing classified matters: in meetings with the administration, in closed sessions of Congress, and before the courts in closed hearings.

And if you really believe what what the NSA was doing was legal, how do you reconcile that with the general consensus that a great deal of what they were doing was not, in fact, legal.

Which "general consensus" is that? The one on Slashdot? Do you really need me to answer that for you?

Comment: Re:"unwarranted invasion of personal privacy" (Score 1) 174

by cold fjord (#47444233) Attached to: NSA Says Snowden Emails Exempt From Public Disclosure

Since you want to limit this to the intent of the Founders, could you quote the section of the US Constitution that establishes the right to privacy? (Without resorting to the "penumbras" the judges relied upon.)

It isn't so much that I have been debunked as mod bombed. It isn't that I'm an authoritarian, it is that you misunderstand the Constitution, the law, and the views of the Founders. You are apparently a part of the "Americans must die bravely from terrorist bombings in shopping malls or we aren't free" crowd. Like many on Slashdot you probably confuse liberty with license, a topic you should probably look into as it was understood by the Founders.

Of course you can't flap your arms and fly to the moon. After a while you'd run out of air to push against.

Working...