Obama General Discussion, vol. 5

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
I don't understand this line of thinking. Those involved would have to do some communication over mobile phones/ internet, other forms would just be too costly and time consuming. Travel is slowly but surely becoming pretty difficult for them so they really have very few choices.

i did edit my post a while back to say "unless it's seriously encrypted unbreakable code"...

i honestly don't know - they managed in the days before mobile phones/internet didn't they - terrorism is not a new thing... just saying, they might not be 100% reliant on internet/mobile technology, or might have some super genius code writers on the job, that's all...

also, with these latest revelations, the US has been spying on their own allies - it's hardly limited to tracking terrorists, that's why i think it's a whitewash or at least definitely not the full story!
 
It's been reported before that terrorists have used cell phones to communicate, albeit the pay-as-you-go type. I would also think they might be using codes and aren't so obvious in their communication.

:up:
 
Snowden has admitted to being an independent contractor who deliberately aimed to work for the NSA with the intent to get information on US security. He even says he has more information that he will give to journalists in different countries:

http://www.engadget.com/2013/06/24/edward-snowden-tells-south-china-morning-post-he-took-booz-allen/

Do I smell a spy? He complains about the US government violating our freedoms yet seeks support from dictators.

And he's still in Russia, supposedly in transit at a Moscow airport. Russia does not know where he is going and is not involved, so says the ever reliable Putin.

All I can think right now is, shit!
 
it's interesting to see how the US are labelling him a spy now he's no longer playing their game...

media here are describing him as a "whistleblower"
 
i did edit my post a while back to say "unless it's seriously encrypted unbreakable code"...

i honestly don't know - they managed in the days before mobile phones/internet didn't they - terrorism is not a new thing... just saying, they might not be 100% reliant on internet/mobile technology, or might have some super genius code writers on the job, that's all...

also, with these latest revelations, the US has been spying on their own allies - it's hardly limited to tracking terrorists, that's why i think it's a whitewash or at least definitely not the full story!

Most pre-mobile communication was written and travel, travel has been slowed down and written isn't really going to be reliable in an ever changing world.

I doubt the terrorist have that much of an upper hand when it comes to encryption.

I understand what you are saying, but I don't think we can completely dismiss the uses when it comes to thwarting security threats.
 
it's interesting to see how the US are labelling him a spy now he's no longer playing their game...

media here are describing him as a "whistleblower"

No one is calling him a spy yet. That's me suggesting he might be one.

And he could be - based on where he is now, what he wants to do with his information, and why he worked at NSA in the first place. I was on the fence about him, but now Snowden's motives seem very suspicious. Especially if he's still in Russia, a place still fuming over losing the Cold War to us.
 
Most pre-mobile communication was written and travel, travel has been slowed down and written isn't really going to be reliable in an ever changing world.

I doubt the terrorist have that much of an upper hand when it comes to encryption.

I understand what you are saying, but I don't think we can completely dismiss the uses when it comes to thwarting security threats.


BVS, i was thinking more along the lines of "carrier pigeon" :D
 
No one is calling him a spy yet. That's me suggesting he might be one.

And he could be - based on where he is now, what he wants to do with his information, and why he worked at NSA in the first place. I was on the fence about him, but now Snowden's motives seem very suspicious. Especially if he's still in Russia, a place still fuming over losing the Cold War to us.

no, i wasn't referring to your comment necessarily but the fact that the US have logged espionage charges against him, which infers spying...

as far as i understand it, according to his film, he claims he felt "morally challenged" with his work in surveillance, and felt he had to expose it as he felt the US was overstepping the mark... i guess if he was a spy, he wouldn't have gone public, but stayed covert and sold the information secretly or something, i dunno...
 
Maybe he was paid by someone, or he really believes in what he did. Just seems odd that he will complain about the US government violating citizens' security yet is spending time in Russia, which doesn't have much freedom for it's citizens either. I just highly doubt Putin is telling the truth by saying he's not working with him. C'mon, it's Putin!
 
the funny thing is they're all at it really - wasn't there a Russian spy ring exposed in the US a few years ago - they were all deported back to Russia i think... i can't remember the girl's name - i just remember the media posting loads of her facebook photos :lol:

eta: i think the worst thing is the US govt hypocrisy element really... that seems to be what the ROW is up in arms about...
 
Honest question you guys: if Bush was president when this whole Snowden thing went down, would it have changed your opinion on the topic?
 
the honest answer is that Bush/ Chaney deserved more suspicion, their abuse of power and blatant lies were much worse, they proved they did not deserve the benefit of the doubt

there is quite a bit of difference between how both Administrations did/do things. I do realize many of the policies are the same.
 
Honest question you guys: if Bush was president when this whole Snowden thing went down, would it have changed your opinion on the topic?

Honest answer: it shouldn't.

Reality: Partisanship is so ingrained into political discussion that it can lead to irrational analysis.

The issues of (i) balancing civil liberties and national defense and (ii) the treatment of Snowden (whistle blower or traitor) can (and should) be discussed with no regard as to the party in power.
 
Honest answer: it shouldn't.

Reality: Partisanship is so ingrained into political discussion that it can lead to irrational analysis.

The issues of (i) balancing civil liberties and national defense and (ii) the treatment of Snowden (whistle blower or traitor) can (and should) be discussed with no regard as to the party in power.

I agree...

:wave:hello stranger :hyper: good to see you!
 
Honest answer: it shouldn't.

Reality: Partisanship is so ingrained into political discussion that it can lead to irrational analysis.

The issues of (i) balancing civil liberties and national defense and (ii) the treatment of Snowden (whistle blower or traitor) can (and should) be discussed with no regard as to the party in power.

:up:
 
i am still uncertain as to why it took me over 2 hours to vote last november in my very liberal neighborhood in GOP controlled, swing state of Virginia.





welcome back to NBC!
 
Honest answer: it shouldn't.

Reality: Partisanship is so ingrained into political discussion that it can lead to irrational analysis.

The issues of (i) balancing civil liberties and national defense and (ii) the treatment of Snowden (whistle blower or traitor) can (and should) be discussed with no regard as to the party in power.

:up:

I agree. Both sides are guilty and should be called out equally with NO excuses for the one you like most.
 
Helpful hint: if you're going to attempt to insult people's intelligence, it helps if you don't make the attempt with uninspired and laughably ineffective insults.

Also, if this is going to be your style going forward, tim, then FYM isn't the place for you.

Sorry diemen, I feel quite comfortable in FYM opposing most of the people not living in the real world as most liberals do. I won't correct your grammar as I don't feel the need to justify my college degree. Just curious, what do you do for a living?
 
I'll drop the sarcasm then: if all you're going to do is toss around silly insults at every opportunity, then that's not going to fly here. I suggest you consider a different approach.
 
I'll drop the sarcasm then: if all you're going to do is toss around silly insults at every opportunity, then that's not going to fly here. I suggest you consider a different approach.

Ok. What do you do for a living?
 
Back
Top Bottom