UK: Snowden reporter's partner involved in 'espionage' and 'terrorism'

Comments (76)
majkmushrm wrote:

Well, I guess it’s good to know that the British authorities can spew crap just as fast as their American counterparts.

Nov 01, 2013 7:35pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
wastingtime wrote:

couldn’t say it better than that

Nov 01, 2013 8:41pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
St.Juste wrote:

Having worked in the US government for many years and being exposed to the security and classification system, I really do not understand the purpose of all these secrets. Rather I suspect that lifting espionage as a crime and letting people share the so called secrets with whomever might be interested would go a long way in preserving world peace.

Nov 01, 2013 9:01pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Laster wrote:

Terrorism®

Welcome to the future.

Nov 01, 2013 9:03pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Neurochuck wrote:

“The Democratic People’s Republic of Great Britain is a genuine workers’ state in which all the people are completely liberated from exploitation and oppression. The workers, peasants, soldiers and intellectuals are the true masters of their destiny and are in a unique position to defend their interests.”
http://www.korea-dpr.com
Now no one should say anything nasty about Dear Leader David.

Nov 01, 2013 9:06pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Laster wrote:

Hey, and incidentally, was the idea of giving Sir Fred that superinjunction, after running RBS into the ground another of those masterful plays at protecting UK’s National Security Interests?

How did that work out for you?

Nov 01, 2013 9:10pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
edgyinchina wrote:

‘Additionally the disclosure, or threat of disclosure, is designed to influence a government and is made for the purpose of promoting a political or ideological cause. This therefore falls within the definition of terrorism’…

So… Anything that is disclosed, or is threatened to be disclosed which promotes a political or ideological cause falls within the definition of terrorism…. So by extension, promoting the Constitution of the US (which promotes a political and ideological cause – freedom), and trying to uphold the Bill of Rights is an act of terrorism? ? ? this is the same definition that King George III used against the colonists in 1776-1812…. Go figure….

Nov 01, 2013 9:13pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Rhino1 wrote:

Don’t let me catch you say anything bad about Cameron, or I will ask my friend in Washington to find you a place in Guantanamo.

And believe me, we run a tight ship in our concentration camp. The Nazis would be proud of us.

Nov 01, 2013 9:16pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
sorrymess wrote:

after abu ghraib prison pics the USA showed how low it can go,
seems the usa is new Nazi power . I thought they might learn from Vietnam fighting communists but now its muslims,.

Nov 01, 2013 11:18pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Sloanstrike wrote:

“Miranda is knowingly carrying material the release of which would endanger people’s lives”

and when they say “people’s lives”, they mean “our jobs”

Nov 01, 2013 11:33pm EDT  --  Report as abuse

Wow all your comments were so great I am proud of you guys! for speaking your minds, if only we could have more whistle blowers that would be really something. It is always good to have these guys to put our democratic values in place.

Nov 01, 2013 12:10am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Rhino1 wrote:

What democratic values?

Nov 02, 2013 1:07am EDT  --  Report as abuse
matthewslyman wrote:

Greenwald could have booked Miranda’s flight via any of a number of routes that wouldn’t have involved a transit via London, or via any part of the UK. But he chose not to do so. Why?

Nov 02, 2013 1:11am EDT  --  Report as abuse
SanPa wrote:

The British used to display parts taken off the bodies of traitors and spies. Why did they fail to do so on this occasion?

Nov 02, 2013 1:14am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Rhino1 wrote:

@ matthewslyman:

Maybe he was mistaken about the democratic values of the UK?

Nov 02, 2013 1:26am EDT  --  Report as abuse
matthewslyman wrote:

@Rhino1: I’m not repudiating the other comments made here. But it’s interesting to consider the other angles, is it not?

Sure, there are flaws in the British system: like for example, last time I checked, you could only sue for “libel” if you were already famous before the “media” started defaming you. And only if you were rich enough to throw millions of GBP at your lawyers for the weeks or months it would take to win your case. So for anyone not already rich and famous, it was impossible to hold “The Media” to account.

“The Media” (run according to editorial priorities established by Mr. Rupert Murdoch) hacked Millie Dowler’s phone, causing her parents (and the police) to believe she was still alive after she had already been murdered. They even told their contacts in the police that they had recordings from Millie Dowler’s voice-mails! There was a public outcry. But this cross-section of “The Media” were never held to account until senior politicians started being blackmailed broadly and on a grand scale by the likes of Andy Coulson (a former “journalist”, and one of David Cameron’s best friends apparently as PM Mr. Cameron later appointed Coulson to be his propaganda minister).

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24762474
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24769953

So it seems to me that in some cases, “The Media” are given too much freedom: they are left on far too long a leash (perhaps you could say, they are for the most part given the “benefit of the doubt” in order to preserve the broader advantages that a “Free Press” brings to our society). What makes me deeply disappointed in the journalistic trade though is that Western news journalists often present themselves as some sort of pseudo national institution (or neutral, non-partisan, almost divine trans-national institution) that should be given a “Get out of Jail Free” card in any and all matters, and never be brought to account for anything whatsoever at all. Is this the world we want?

People are people, whether they are “journalists” or not. Sure, we must enact STRONG laws to prevent the government from persecuting those who are just genuinely going about their business doing a public-interest story. Is that what Greenwald and Miranda were doing, independently of their own interests?
It’s very obvious that IF Miranda was genuinely surprised to be questioned for nine hours in London about the unusual and massive haul of digital media he had on his person; THEN either Greenwald is an irresponsible idiot who shouldn’t be in journalism (who failed to do due diligence on what would happen to Miranda when he transited London), or else, Greenwald is a callous fanatic who actually doesn’t care about Miranda’s wellbeing: he took advantage of him to get a better news story by goading a reaction from the British authorities and didn’t get informed consent from Miranda. So I’m sorry, but I’m really struggling to have much sympathy for Greenwald, even though I do subscribe to the opinion that the British authorities are not perfect (one law for the rich/royal/well-connected, and one law for others like the colonials: there’s a reason why the Eastern/central USA stopped being part of the British Empire!)

Nov 02, 2013 1:50am EDT  --  Report as abuse
umkomazi wrote:

So…………CaMoron’s smear campaign has started…

Nov 02, 2013 2:02am EDT  --  Report as abuse
matthewslyman wrote:

…Interestingly enough, Andy Coulson and his colleagues at “News International” qualify for branding as “terrorists” under the definition of terrorism cited in this Reuters article. (Read the pages cited in my previous comment.) They were bona fide blackmailers and subverters of government officers. But I don’t hear the word “terrorism” being cited by the British authorities in that case… I suppose the British authorities have to use the Big T word in Miranda’s case in order to justify the use of unusual police powers (allegedly contrary to international treaties) to do what Greenwald almost forced them to do.

So, no, I’m not siding with the British authorities. But seriously, Miranda and Greenwald as innocent victims??? GIVE ME A BREAK!

Nov 02, 2013 2:07am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Rhino1 wrote:

@ matthewslyman:

Very good arguments. Agree.

Maybe “innocent” in the way of “naive” (?), which you wouldn’t expect from someone who is in the business of taking on powerful corrupt governments and possibly a “police state”. Mr. Miranda on the other hand is a latino and therefore likely to be a bit of a romantic?

Nov 02, 2013 3:02am EDT  --  Report as abuse
ToshiroMifune wrote:

Welcome to 1984. It’s 30 years late but it’s just as stupefyingly stupid as the book portrayed it.

Nov 02, 2013 5:01am EDT  --  Report as abuse
hunterson wrote:

Governments seem to abuse the secrecy classification system not to protect vital national interests and intelligence, but rather to silence workers from speaking to the people.

Nov 02, 2013 9:08am EDT  --  Report as abuse
burn wrote:

The ADL has its own private spy network….which it shares with, FBI, NSA, Homeland Security, police…..when will someone stop ADL spying?

Nov 02, 2013 10:14am EDT  --  Report as abuse
datsneefa wrote:

Terrorism – the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes.

The definition from the dictionary more accurately describes the British government

Nov 02, 2013 10:17am EDT  --  Report as abuse
xwagner wrote:

World governments are criminal scum in the sway of corporations and banking interests. They do not operate in the best interests of their citizens.

Nov 02, 2013 10:56am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Craigomatic wrote:

Disgusting intimidation is what this is.

Nov 02, 2013 11:06am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Typhoon wrote:

In the good old days, someone (CIA, MI5 or KGB) would have just capped the dumb bastard and we’d all be off for cocktails at a nice hotel bar. I miss the good old days.

Nov 02, 2013 11:43am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Thingumbob wrote:

GCHQspeak: GCHQ = good guys. Snowden, Greenwald = bad guys = terrorists. Saudi financing of al-Qaeda = untouchable.

Nov 02, 2013 12:18pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Moefo wrote:

Snowden and his crew are nothing but traitors

Nov 02, 2013 1:30pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Afterburner wrote:

Snowden’s friends sister’s mother’s father’s daughter’s boyfriend’s dog’s master’s cousin’s friend spoke to a terrorist and that is confirmed!
The shrill of rouge government agencies grasping a straws as the blister is popped on their shredding of the laws. Thanks for turning on the lights Snowden, the NSA Orwellian cockroaches are fleeing for the cracks in the walls.

Nov 02, 2013 2:33pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Afterburner wrote:

Snowden is a traitor,..to fascists and those who consider the U.S. Constitution “just a piece of paper”. For those of us that feel government has no business recording every private conversation, he a true American hero, thank you Ed Snowden for turning on the lights, wow do the cockroaches squeal & scatter!

Nov 02, 2013 2:45pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
David_SD wrote:

I am very happy that the UK Parliament stood up against the Syria attack, reminding us all that, in democracies, it is legislatures which decide whether we go to war.

I am now hopeful that the UK Parliament will stand up against the NSA-GCHQ dictatorship. Lord knows, our US Congress is all blackmailed by the NSA, and will do nothing to help us Americans!

Nov 02, 2013 3:04pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Yeziam12 wrote:

So, the facts seem to still be in question don’t they.

I’m a bit puzzled by the story, Snowden said he dropped off all his classified information in Hong Kong, but somehow they ended up in Germany? Not such good control of thousands of classified documents IMHO. Based on that, I would say the web of lies they’ve created have confused even them and the facts are closing in on them and hopefully we are getting closer to apprehending these scoundrels.

“We assess that Miranda is knowingly carrying material the release of which would endanger people’s lives,” the document continued. “Additionally the disclosure, or threat of disclosure, is designed to influence a government and is made for the purpose of promoting a political or ideological cause. This therefore falls within the definition of terrorism…”

It’s about time we got some good news on how the governments are closing in on this criminal/spy ring. Regardless of the facts they are using their journalistic license to selectively release damning materials, they are still clearly guilty of theft and espionage and need to be held accountable to restore faith in truth, justice, and the American way.

Nov 02, 2013 3:48pm EDT  --  Report as abuse

Demonizing Snowden for his revelations is like blaming your nose for a bad smell.

Nov 02, 2013 3:56pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
dencal26 wrote:

I find it amazing that so many consider these traitors to be hero’s They are not.

Nov 02, 2013 4:08pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Flayer wrote:

We must protect ourselves – our individual liberties – from a corrupt president (ahem, ahem!) who would use the power of government and it’s agencies that he supervises to obtain personal information about citizens then use that information for POLITICAL purposes. Obama are is the PERFECT instrument for info gathering about citizens from birth to death. It was NEVER about health, health insurance or healthcare. Think, people, think. Ask yourself why ACA was from day one THE most important legislation for the administration even as it was not even a concern for 90% of Americans.

Nov 02, 2013 4:19pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
elpaso wrote:

Those who support terrorists are equally guilty of, if not now sooner or later, becoming terrorists themselves.

Nov 02, 2013 5:20pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
elpaso wrote:

“Congress is all blackmailed by the NSA” there is no proof of that. Twisting your facts to justify lies does not make it so.

Nov 02, 2013 5:24pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
UrDrighten wrote:

The UK said of Miranda: “Additionally the disclosure, or threat of disclosure, is designed to influence a government and is made for the purpose of promoting a political or ideological cause. This therefore falls within the definition of terrorism…”

So, terrorism is when you try to use *information* to influence a government to promote a (differing) political cause?

That means that a politician who runs against an incumbent is a terrorist if he reveals unflattering – but true – information about the incumbent!

Sick!

Nov 02, 2013 5:55pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Freeflight wrote:

Well.. i guess it takes one to know one?

Nov 02, 2013 6:01pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
reader... wrote:

I wonder why British authorities didn’t just arrest him…it is curious.

Nov 02, 2013 6:54pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
SoulLeister wrote:

Following the UK’s logic (if I may be so bold as to call it that), hypothetically speaking of course (for plausible denial reasons)… had Miranda read the papers that have been deemed “terroristic”(???) then his own upper brain housing group is as terroristic as the papers themselves… so unless it is the UK’s intention to play mind police with the entire population, then we are all terrorists to include the intelligence entities themselves (do us all a favor and arrest yourselves first… those of you wrapped up in the intelligence circular logic web you’ve spun).

Nov 02, 2013 8:37pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
TheNewWorld wrote:

Did you all read this?

“Additionally the disclosure, or threat of disclosure, is designed to influence a government and is made for the purpose of promoting a political or ideological cause. This therefore falls within the definition of terrorism…”

Doesn’t this mean that political parties and voters are terrorists? Political activism is now terrorism.

Nov 02, 2013 8:56pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
TheNewWorld wrote:

@dencal26

Exposing government lies to the people who are governed would only be considered traitorous by those who are in the government lying to the people. So what department of lies do you work in?

Nov 02, 2013 9:13pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
authentic8 wrote:

Their definition of terrorism could basically make any criticism of government equal to terrorism.

Nov 02, 2013 9:18pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
cooperbry wrote:

The politicians are getting so desperate. The people will win in the end!

Nov 02, 2013 10:58pm EDT  --  Report as abuse

@St.Juste

If you want to test your thesis, try sharing all *your* secrets with your neighbors and seeing how it works out.

Be sure to get back to us.

Nov 02, 2013 11:08pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
sailordude wrote:

These whistle-blowers (note the liberal media calls them mostly “leakers” now) messed up by doing this under Beloved Leader Obama. No way they get any help from the media who work for him!

Nov 02, 2013 12:36am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Smithj666 wrote:

Greenwald phrased it perfectly. The British government just equated Journalism with Terrorism. Congratulations.

Nov 02, 2013 12:59am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Shootist wrote:

Definitions of terrorism are getting awfully broad, aren’t they.

Nov 03, 2013 1:03am EDT  --  Report as abuse

While Greenwald and co. may just be trying to make a name for themselves, not saying that’s true, just a possibility, Snowden must be recognized as risking his life to expose corruption, unless it is an elaborate ruse. Considering the rollout of Obamacare, I doubt that. I can’t see that he had much to gain, but a lot to lose (like his life). The most serious things about it are how they classify everything secret that is incriminating to the Gov. and how they are working internationally to gain control of world populations. If America is not free, then no one else will be either. These people must be held accountable if any of us are to survive in freedom. I hope the fallout from Europe is great enough to turn the tide here in the States.

Nov 03, 2013 1:35am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Brianbkseller wrote:

Having never been impressed by the brilliance of the working journalists encountered during the past 80 years, I am not ready to turn over the micromanagement of the nation’s affairs to them.

Nov 03, 2013 2:06am EST  --  Report as abuse
billydelyons wrote:

“We assess that Miranda is knowingly carrying material the release of which would endanger people’s lives”

Did you notice how the UK government stated “MATERIAL” the release of which would endanger people’s lives?

Now, they are equating deploying war material, such as chemical weapons, with handing over documents to the press?

They are using terms meant for discussing people who use weaponized material that can physically hurt/kill people to demonize someone who possesses documents that would reveal the extent to which the UK government is spying on its own people and allies.

Does ANYONE share that point of view?

Nov 03, 2013 2:06am EST  --  Report as abuse
texas58 wrote:

How stupid to use this guy as a carrier for such documents. Did Greenwald really think Miranda wouldn’t be a person of interest?

Nov 03, 2013 3:26am EST  --  Report as abuse
Anthrop66 wrote:

MI5 as counter intelligence? You can be assured of that. Their intelligence is counter to everything we as humans hold dear. Their presentation to the court is everything you can expect from brain dead government men in black.

When governments try and save their stupid *sses they always appear to be manipulating something contrived. Then they use words like “Terrorist”, and “Spy” to try and make their argument have more import. It’s all BS smoke and mirrors people. Western government are losing their purchase on human suffering and are basically whining about how we aren’t the good little slaves they would have us be !!!

Nov 03, 2013 5:52am EST  --  Report as abuse
gerrydwelder wrote:

The FBI and DHS in America have redefined ‘TERRORISTS’!!!!
as retired veterans, Tea Party (Taxed-Enough-Already)over worked fathers and mothers, farmers and kids selling kool-aide as ‘TERRORISTS’!!!

When is enough >enough

Nov 03, 2013 6:03am EST  --  Report as abuse
BobStreb wrote:

The “British authorities” are transparently FOS, as usual. There’s not enough gloss and banter in the world to cover up the UK’s “authorities” participation in the NSA’s criminality.

Nov 03, 2013 6:40am EST  --  Report as abuse
BobStreb wrote:

@matthewslyman…Thank you for your Statist apologetic. On your own time you may research the social/political benefits of a Free Press as pertaining to the First Amendment to the US Constitution. Simply put, a Free Press should aid in the creation of an informed constituency, and work to keep the government in check by revealing to the people its corruption and abuses of power.
The American powers-that-be learned during the Vietnam War that a Free Press is a threat to the government’s agenda. Bush & Co. made a successful effort to rein in the press during the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. His administration’s effort included not only the control of information reported by the press, but also an outright physical assault on members of the press. “Friendly fire” killed scores of American and international journalists.
Obama and his administration have claimed the attack on the Free Press as their own. Simply research on your part will confirm that Obama’s attack on journalists and journalistic free speech challenges the velocity of Hitler’s on his rise to power.
Your comment ““The Media” are given too much freedom: they are left on far too long a leash…” exposes your entrenched allegiance to a government-dominated social/political system that is far removed from the ideology and statutes of the American system, regardless of the last two American administrations’ bi-partisan and unconstitutional attacks upon both.
Your socio-political ideology is what America went to war over with King George III. In the end- after ideology becomes policy, and policy becomes law and regulation, and they become enforced upon the people by the powers of the state- government is not a friend of the people it dominates and controls.
There is a civil war taking place in America on many levels, and the government’s war against a Free Press is one of them. Also, it is no surprise that the government of the UK, and its apologists, are also at war with a free press.

Nov 03, 2013 7:39am EST  --  Report as abuse
SaneMan wrote:

It is a sad day when two democracies act in a tyrannical fashion. China and Russia must be overjoyed.

Nov 03, 2013 7:43am EST  --  Report as abuse
authentic8 wrote:

@Yeziam12:

“I’m a bit puzzled by the story, Snowden said he dropped off all his classified information in Hong Kong, but somehow they ended up in Germany? Not such good control of thousands of classified documents IMHO.”

*Sigh* These documents were *published* in several newspapers.

“Regardless of the facts they are using their journalistic license to selectively release damning materials, they are still clearly guilty of theft and espionage…”

The materials are damning to lying and scheming governments only. The only one possibly “guilty” of theft is Snowden and not Greenwald and other journalists publishing these documents. This is the legally justified action of a free press. Read about what a free press means. As for Snowden’s guilt, there are laws protecting whistleblowers but, regardless of these, there ethical reasons why such actions are justified in the interests of holding others to account for breaking laws.

“…and need to be held accountable to restore faith in truth, justice, and the American way.”

It’s statements like the above make people doubt that the “American way” is any longer synonymous with truth and justice. It was precisely the observation of the lack of truth and justice and adherence to the American way that moved Snowden to do what he did. It is surely double-think and/or ignorance of the USA’s foundational values to see things any differently.

Nov 03, 2013 8:49am EST  --  Report as abuse
AZreb wrote:

If the definition of terrorism is “to influence a government” and/or “promoting a political or ideological cause” then any PAC or lobbyist group is guilty of terrorism – as are all parties with their political or ideological platforms.

Nov 03, 2013 9:17am EST  --  Report as abuse
tennessee1 wrote:

Great to see the UK lapdogs toeing the official statist party line and making anyone who opposes gov tyranny an “enemy of the state.”

Gov is completely paranoid at this point and like any cornered rat, these governments will do whatever it takes to hold onto their power. Unfortunately for us, that means an accelerating race towards a completely totalitarian state and we don’t have far to go with the “soft-tyranny” we already have.

So history tells us things are about to get really bad, but the good news is totalitarian states ultimately end up spending all their resources in a futile attempt to hold onto their power and they will inevitably collapse on themselves. I can only hope once the collapse does occur that WE THE PEOPLE can round up all the evil self-serving politicians and bring them to the justice they deserve.

Nov 03, 2013 10:18am EST  --  Report as abuse
tennessee1 wrote:

By the gov’s definition it’s the gov itself which is now the “terrorist.”

Nov 03, 2013 10:26am EST  --  Report as abuse
Rajomorajo wrote:

Brittania has turned into a dictatorial police state, just as Uncle Sam.

Nov 03, 2013 11:58am EST  --  Report as abuse
forgot0246 wrote:

Carrying documents makes you a “terrorist” what a bunch of Baloney.
The new aristocracy feels threatened by there serfs.

Nov 03, 2013 1:17pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Popsiq wrote:

Espionage? E-sponge ? what’s the difference?

If an individual does it they’re hackers, criminals and wrong. If a government does it, it’s just …. ‘right’. See?

Nov 03, 2013 6:49pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Popsiq wrote:

Espionage? E-sponge ? what’s the difference?

If an individual does it they’re hackers, criminals and wrong. If a government does it, it’s just …. ‘right’. See?

Nov 03, 2013 6:49pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Popsiq wrote:

Espionage? E-sponge ? what’s the difference?

If an individual does it they’re hackers, criminals and wrong. If a government does it, it’s just …. ‘right’. See?

Nov 03, 2013 6:49pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Popsiq wrote:

Espionage? E-sponge ? what’s the difference?

If an individual does it they’re hackers, criminals and wrong. If a government does it, it’s just …. ‘right’. See?

Nov 03, 2013 6:49pm EST  --  Report as abuse
act1 wrote:

Snowden’s idea of being wrongfully persecuted by the U.S. is almost laughable. Here is a thief protesting that he has performed a righteous act and thus should be hailed as a hero. He had no right to pilfer the material he stole. He neither asked nor was given permission to obtain that government information. He is, to all intents and purposes, guilty of a criminal act that places in jeopardy individuals and sources of information vital to our country and its allies.

Nov 03, 2013 8:10pm EST  --  Report as abuse

As a decorated national security whistleblower, I think it is important to remember that Snowden is a leaker, not a member of our community. Wanton lawlessness does not ethical dissent make.

Nov 03, 2013 8:13pm EST  --  Report as abuse
ccharles wrote:

The protection for telling the truth is gone now. And the nerve of the same people to call someone a terrorist, while aid and abetting the terrorist in syria and calling them rebel. Actual fighters are rebels, and journalist are terrorist. Wow.

Nov 03, 2013 8:43pm EST  --  Report as abuse
2buckchuck wrote:

Let me get this straight. Attempting to influence a government to advance a political or ideological position is terrorism? I see. So If I write a letter to my Congressman, asking him to consider my position on an issue in the hopes that he will adopt it, thus representing me, I am a terrorist? Once that was the essence of Democracy. We are way doen the rabbit hole now. The future is going to be very ugly in the former free world.

Nov 04, 2013 1:26am EST  --  Report as abuse
Overcast451 wrote:

Of course, “Terrorism” – the catch-all for smashing your rights and freedoms.

Just like so many have said – the ‘terrorism’ scare isn’t about real terrorism – it’s about control.

There is in fact a big problem with terrorism – but it’s by and for the government. The governments are the biggest threat now, not camel riders with improvised bombs.

Nov 04, 2013 9:38am EST  --  Report as abuse
Overcast451 wrote:

Well – the documents they released proved the Government is involved in a disregard for civil rights and sedition.

Nov 05, 2013 8:32am EST  --  Report as abuse
lylelwr wrote:

So now stealing classified documents is no longer considered espionage but “journalism”? Most of the people on this site seem to think it’s ok to steal whatever you want. That doesn’t make you a hero — just a thief.

Nov 07, 2013 11:47am EST  --  Report as abuse
fairbro_plus wrote:

Looks like everyone on the Right and on the Left found something they agree on!

Nov 07, 2013 12:07pm EST  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.