That doesn’t really contradict what I said?
I wasn’t trying to contradict you… that might’ve been apparent if you’d noticed I liked your post.
2 Likes
I was on my phone so my reading was cursory!
WOW, cool, you make my point for me. The right Reverend Martin Luther King Jr, Andrew Lumsden, Emmeline Pankhurst. Do you know these people?. You know why you know them?. They did the right thing, faced with laws that they thought wrong. Did they hide, lie, and run from their appointments in court?.
Nope.
Would they have been agents of change if they had of run?.
Nope.
Just criminals.
So i’m utterly confused as to why you don’t think snowden and manning did the right things, because you don’t agree with it? They’re not criminals because you say they are. You have an extraordinarily narrow view of this, you’ve agreed they did the morally right thing but…what? Having them be tortured without due process is somehow patriotic? They might not have skipped the country but both our respective governments have done appalling things to those activists that dare challenge the law, i’d forgive snowden for not being too keen on getting kidnapped and water boarded should he leave russia.
3 Likes
You are conflating things. I think they were morally right to oppose the things they found out about. Society is morally right to oppose them doing it, laws don’t get passed carelessly, but with intent and deliberation. They might be wrong, but that is fixed by Parliament, not protestors. ONLY if the protests can convince the majority of the case can the government ever be forced, by the voters, to change, and THAT only happens through long, determined efforts by groups of people prepared to pay the penalties of the present law.
Pankhurst and her friends brought about change by their force of character and determination. Eventually enough people (men, as they were the only voters) saw that in fact these women were right, moral, justified, and a law which denied them that recognition was utterly beneath the respect of society. They did so by resistance, and willingness to endure unjust punishment. any right thinking person honours them as immortal giants, now.
Snowden did his opposing in a way that a) let him avoid punishment and b) let the government off the hook of some of the public opprobrium, because they didn’t have to give him a trial, they were able to deny the charges and confuse the issue with him being a perceived agent of Russia. He was a coward, and will never be less than that. achieved nothing, really.
Manning was sworn to service, spoke out, and is being punished for breaking regulations. This was the cost of speaking out. How is that hard for you to understand?. Do you think the manifestly excessive punishment, and the swelling public opposition to it isn’t a hugely powerful force on the US representatives?.
Of course it is. She will ultimately have achieved a significant amonut of change.
On the other hand, how little Snowden pressures them now they can sneer at him sitting in Moscow.
I will be honest to you. I suspect you are too young to be wise enough for me to get my points across to you. So I give up on explaining my obvious holding of the belief that Snowden has been cowardly, avoided his punishment so failed to do much good ; and Manning brave AND ALSO punished correctly under rules she agreed to serve under . . . and ultimately punished for the good of her State and people, in two or three different kinds of “good”. Nice talking to you, be well friend.
7 Likes
Yes. Do you think Rosa Parks got a fair trial?.
Or in fact any activist in the last hundred years?.
You make me sad. I despair of teaching you anything at all.
1 Like
Whereas your sustained patronising dickishness merely inspires weary contempt on my part.
7 Likes
How is it less patronising, for you to link to two obvious references to the fact he thought he would be punished without a chance to justify himself.
Of. Course. He. Thought. That.
Don’t be mad, bro.
Your disdain is showing…
2 Likes
And Ellsberg thought it and a whole slew of lawyers have said the same thing. He’s charged under the espionage act. You don’t get to offer a real defense to being charged under it. You know that and I know that. Why are you being dishonest here?
Snowden got various parts of the US government, including the president, to admit they broke the law and did something illegal. That’s not “nothing.”
3 Likes
I do have a mild disdain for you in particular, you realise. You misrepresented me to accuse me of bad faith, then didn’t say sorry when I instantly showed where you had done so.
Gotta earn your dain from me, sport.[quote=“enso, post:74, topic:94829”]
Snowden got various parts of the US government, including the president, to admit they broke the law and did something illegal. That’s not “nothing.”
[/quote]
any laws get changed? anyone get punished?. Do they get to discredit him by portraying him as a Russian stooge?.
OK, Maybe nothing was me being a bit cavalier with my phrasing, but imo he is cowardly.
No offense but I had better things to do than do a point by point reply on my phone and you aren’t a regular so I didn’t think to come back later.
Yeah Snowden is so cowardly that he gave up a comfortable life and career to be on the run from the US government for the rest of his life based on principle. What a coward!
3 Likes
That is an interesting take on his actions. I am willing for you to explain how I am wrong, but I thought he initially expected to be anonymous?. Not to pay any penalty at all?.
Society is probably on their side actually, the overwhelming public support for manning leading to her commutation and the opposition to government spying and the debate surrounding it is thanks to snowden. Despite the fact governments seem to be hellbent on legitimising into law what he revealed.
But again you are damning people for not sticking around to be tortured. Is it their patriotic duty to be tortured? To think a whistleblower of his standing would get a fair trial when the president wants him executed is naive.
Violent protest as well don’t forget; they didn’t get very far on just force of character and determination with tea and buttered crumpets organising a major leaflet drop. I support the suffragette movement but it wasn’t this rose-tinted, stiff upper lipped quiet protest you seem to be portraying it as, they would be labelled domestic terrorists these days.
What’s hard for me to understand is why you can’t condemn this manifestly excessive punishment, as you so quaintly put it, as the torture that it so clearly is. So it’s a court martial offence but that does not justify this purely spiteful and cruel revenge.
Disagree. He’s opened up the debate about mass surveillance and created such public opposition to it that it is directly putting pressure on governments and tech companies. The fact governments seem to be doubling down and legalising it is deeply worrying.
You mean tortured for the good of her state and people, yes? Just so we’re clear that you do indeed condone it. Giving up your life, not knowing if you’ll ever see your family again, is the definition of bravery to me so that’s where we’ll never ever see eye to eye. The rest is just incredibly patronising. Good day, sir.
3 Likes
I think you will find, the society that has just endorsed tRump, is fine with military punishments for oath breakers. I may be wrong. :
You don’t seem to have a very good level of comprehension. My choosing the term
manifestly excessive punishment would let you know I condemn it, if you did.
I didn’t expect you to understand if I explained the two or three different kinds of “good” her punishment brings. Quickly then, 1) it is the rule of law as it stands at present. This is a social good. 2) It makes other people in a similar situation now, think twice before they commit themselves, which will curb excessive “cause” takers from breaching faith with their oaths of service. This is a social good. 3) It makes society more aware of the military disciplines and punishments, these things are done in our name, we ought to debate their probity. 4) Possibly society will think it ought to change, possibly not, but at least now it is a matter of debate.
Bet you still don’t understand how I can believe these are good things. Even worth her punishment happening, though it isn’t the reason the punishment is happening. THAT is because she knowingly broke disciplines she had agreed to obey. Hard being a service person, not for the weak.
You are utterly wrong. He has explicitly stated, even on camera for Citizenfour, which was filmed when he gave up the data initially, that he expected to be caught and immediately go to jail. He never expected to be able to get out of Hong Kong or to still be free years later. He’s said this in public over and over.
2 Likes
Paladins gonna Paladin.
2 Likes
