AK> Hi, Lee Lofaso!   
    AK> I read your message from  29.07.2013 23:30   
    AK> about Clandestine activity is a holy cow of democracy.   
      
    ak>>> Anyway, Snowden did his best.   
      
    LL>> Snowden swore a national security oath. Snowden violated that oath   
      
    ...   
      
    AK>    Freedom has never been archived without treason of the   
      
    What Snowden did is not treason under US law.   
      
    AK>    oppressive regime. Because, when fighters for freedom   
    AK>    overthrow a legitimate, but oppressive power they commit   
    AK>    an act of high treason. And naturally, they were often   
      
    No oppresive power is legitimate. Legal is not legitimate.   
    Democracy is the only legitimate form of government. It is the   
    only form under which the people rule themselves.   
      
    AK>    hanged, shot etc. Lincoln was a traitor for the   
    AK>    slaveholding society that brought him up. French   
    AK>    revolution had executed the king and queen. No doubt it   
    AK>    was an act of treason.   
      
    AK>    In other words if the state authority does ugly things   
    AK>    it cannot be stopped without treason. Another matter is   
    AK>    - who are those people for whom the treason is done? If   
    AK>    the treason is made for the world it is great; if for   
    AK>    money, and many people suffered -- it is a dirty trick.   
      
    ...   
      
    LL>> oath. Therefore, Snowden is a traitor to his country.   
      
    ...   
      
    AK>    It depends on the point of view. For some people he is a   
    AK>    traitor, but for some he is saving freedom. It can   
      
    In this country treason is defined in the constitution. It   
    requires the intent to give aid and comfort to an enemy. If   
    Snowden did it to protect the American people from government   
    violations he did not commit treason. I doubt anyone believes he   
    did it to give aid and comfort to an enemy.   
      
    AK>    happen that in future an underground resistance and   
    AK>    democracy can be one thing. Such things happened in the   
    AK>    past. That's why it is an extremely bad idea to create   
    AK>    mechanism for rooting out underground resistance   
    AK>    completely. Just in case any democratic society must   
    AK>    preserve some "woods" where Robin Hoods could hide and   
    AK>    fight.   
      
    The problem with that is, in the US the underground resistance   
    is made up of the ones who want to be the dictators. Their   
    primary driving force is hate and bigotry.   
      
    ...   
      
    AK>    Snowden defends Holy cow of democracy - freedom, the   
    AK>    possibility not to be traced everywhere and every time.   
    AK>    Without such a freedom, freedom can come to an end at   
    AK>    some pretty day. People don't understand that a free   
    AK>    society must imply possibility of resistance. If   
      
    In the US we understand that. Unfortunatly those who want to end   
    freedom use that same possibility of resistance.   
      
    AK>    everything is under control no real resistance can exist   
    AK>    - we begin see it in Russia now.   
      
    All to evident.   
      
    ...   
      
    LL>> The state has a duty and an obligation to do whatever it takes to   
    LL>> protect itself and its citizens in the name of national security.   
    LL>> That includes developing technical instruments that make   
    LL>> clandestine activity possible.   
      
    AK>    You probably didn't read the place where I said that   
    AK>    there is no guarantee that an oppressive regime cannot   
    AK>    hijack power.   
      
    Lee is offering the basic arguement of the oppressive regime.   
    The enemy requires we sacrifice freedom to defend it.   
      
    AK>    Well, abstractly, I retell my story in other words, of a   
    AK>    movie script: The US state security organization has   
    AK>    made a robot-terminator who has to kill all the   
    AK>    underground opposition and criminals. But in some time   
      
    We don't need robots to do that, we have enough who are willing   
    to do it now.   
      
    AK>    oligarchs and moneybags pay some money to elect their   
    AK>    candidates for the presidency, senate etc, to make   
    AK>    themselves more powerful and rich. People tries to   
    AK>    organize resistance, but after coming to power the   
    AK>    moneybags order the terminator to eliminate all   
    AK>    democratic opposition, and it will be easy done because   
    AK>    the state knows all about all and has a necessary   
    AK>    totalitarian mechanism to suppress any underground   
    AK>    activity.   
      
    Such a government will be so corrupt it will not survive against   
    an honest government. However it will do a lot of harm before it   
    falls.   
      
    ak>>> Because it is a matter of democracy survival.   
      
    LL>> It is a matter of survival, not just of democracy, but also of the   
    LL>> human race. Just think what would happen if terrorists had the   
    ...   
    AK>    Such a spying technology that was disclosed by Snowden   
    AK>    doesn't allow to prevent terrors acts! Maximum it can   
    AK>    help trace terrorists after a committed terror attack.   
    AK>    Or it can provoke a young man to do a terror act and   
    AK>    then arrest him and his friends before the attack.   
      
    Which is not how a democracy functions, but it is how you can   
    destroy a democracy.   
      
    AK>    Terrorism can be killed only the same way how it was   
    AK>    born! The US people must understand why Arabs that were   
    AK>    so far from terrorism until WWII became so close to   
    AK>    terrorism after the war. The reason is simple -- great   
    AK>    injustice. So, the remedy against Arab terrorism is   
    AK>    justice, not spying on all the people around the world.   
      
    Pope John Paul II said, "If you want peace, work for justice."   
    That is my motto on that subject.   
      
    ...   
      
    AK>    I've already said that system is not able to prevent   
    AK>    terror attacks. So, calling it an instrument against   
    AK>    terror attacks is a foolish idea.   
      
    That is not true. The US government has prevented a lot of   
    terror attacks. However, they did it within the law. There is no   
    evidence of any terror attacks being prevented by illegal means.   
      
    AK>     If Al Qaeda has a   
    AK>    nuclear bomb it will blow it up despite the fact that   
    AK>    that Americans are kept under surveillance. The   
    AK>    possibility to be tracked after the attack scares them   
    AK>    not.   
      
    You just made a point that needs to be recognized by all those   
    who fear bringing suspects from Guantanamo to trial in the us.   
    They fear inciting Al Qaeda. That's stupid, Al Qaeda will   
    attack when ever they can, regardless of what we do. After all,   
    Al Qaeda is not a name owned by anyone, any terrorist in the   
    world can call his group Al Qaeda.   
      
    AK>    
    LL>> Allowing terrorists and bad guys to run and hide is not an option.   
    LL>> As George W. Bush said, we have a War on Terror to fight! You heard   
    LL>> that? We must make war on a verb! En garde!   
      
    AK>    Ha-ha. And he waged war against poor Afghanistan,   
      
    Afghanistan was responsible for giving Bin Laden a base. For   
    that the invasion was justified.   
      
    The Taliban was a cruel dictatorship, and their overthrow was   
    justified. What was not justified was not finishing the job, and   
    letting the Taliban get a 10 year war going. The US should have   
    been out of there within a year, two at most. The sooner the   
    better.   
      
    AK>    although Bin Laden was in his cozy sweet home in   
    AK>    Pakistan.   
      
    Bin Laden was not in Pakistan until after the invasion.   
      
    AK>    And Bush declared that Talibs are terrorists   
    AK>    although they had never done any terror acts at that   
      
    I don't recall Bush declaring the Taliban as terrorists. They   
    were terrorists to their own people, but the justification for   
    the invasion was bringing down Bin Laden. Overthrowing the   
    Taliban was gravy. Unfortunately Bush, and especially Cheney,   
    screwed that up badly.   
      
    AK>    time. Actually there were hundreds of terrorists, but   
    AK>    then became millions.   
      
    That part is clearly true.   
      
      
   BOB KLAHN bob.klahn@sev.org   http://home.toltbbs.com/bobklahn   
      
   ... The Law of Unintended Consequences carries it own penalties...   
   --- Via Silver Xpress V4.5/P [Reg]   
    * Origin: Fidonet Since 1991 Join Us: www.DocsPlace.org (1:123/140)