Edward Snowden

[JDavis]

 

 

 

 

Do you even read my posts?

 

Sorry, can't find a response that answers this specific question. Could you possibly repeat it for me? The issue is lying and deceiving over what they were up to, not specifically over whether it explicitly illegal to do the surveillance.

 

 

But if what they were up to, i.e. the surveillance was legal, justified and constitutional, then the lying and deceiving was too.   Governments keep secrets all the time, and they should.    Look up the history of the SR-71 Blackbird.  The US government lied and deceived for half a decade on the very existence of the aircraft.  And I am glad they did.

 

The issue is not lying and deceiving, it is whether the actions by the NSA were justified and constitutional.   Anything else is just a smokescreen.

 

 

If that is the case they have not broken any laws.....   so what is so difficult to understand?

 

 

 

The government did not break any laws, as I said the PATRIOT Act gave them this power.   The two questions are if the powers are constitutional and if their use is justified.

[Gandalf]

 

do you not grasp the concept of the word "if" or is it that you don't comprehend the written words?

 

OK. So "if" Snowden has not disclosed issues of national security to the Russians/Chinese, what should happen to those in Government who have lied and deceived about what they have been up to? And what, also in that event, should happen to Snowden?

 

We're a nation of laws Gandolf, and whistle blowers do have some legal safeguards.  He should return home and let things proceed through the system.....   and all who have broken the law should be held accountable.  Snowden as well as the others.   One thing that many don't seem to understand is that to participate in civil disobedience, one must be prepared to shoulder the legal consequences.

 

Most everyone who signed our declaration of independence lost everything they had.

And what should happen to those in Government who have lied to and deceived the American people and arguably contravened the Constitution? Do they get off scott-free, because they have power, money and control of information?

Do you even read my posts?

Sorry, can't find a response that answers this specific question. Could you possibly repeat it for me? The issue is lying and deceiving over what they were up to, not specifically over whether it explicitly illegal to do the surveillance.

Thanks! In what way do you think those in Government who lied and deceived should be brought to account?

[Gandalf]

Do you even read my posts?

 

Sorry, can't find a response that answers this specific question. Could you possibly repeat it for me? The issue is lying and deceiving over what they were up to, not specifically over whether it explicitly illegal to do the surveillance.

 

But if what they were up to, i.e. the surveillance was legal, justified and constitutional, then the lying and deceiving was too.   Governments keep secrets all the time, and they should.    Look up the history of the SR-71 Blackbird.  The US government lied and deceived for half a decade on the very existence of the aircraft.  And I am glad they did.

It seems odd for a Christian to be glad that people lied and deceived. Doesn't such take people to hell?

[other one]

 

 

 

 

 

Do you even read my posts?

 

Sorry, can't find a response that answers this specific question. Could you possibly repeat it for me? The issue is lying and deceiving over what they were up to, not specifically over whether it explicitly illegal to do the surveillance.

 

 

But if what they were up to, i.e. the surveillance was legal, justified and constitutional, then the lying and deceiving was too.   Governments keep secrets all the time, and they should.    Look up the history of the SR-71 Blackbird.  The US government lied and deceived for half a decade on the very existence of the aircraft.  And I am glad they did.

 

The issue is not lying and deceiving, it is whether the actions by the NSA were justified and constitutional.   Anything else is just a smokescreen.

 

 

If that is the case they have not broken any laws.....   so what is so difficult to understand?

 

 

 

The government did not break any laws, as I said the PATRIOT Act gave them this power.   The two questions are if the powers are constitutional and if their use is justified.

 

 

Show me where the constitution says that the government has to always tell us everything.......   or for that matter even at times not lie to us for our own good.

[Gandalf]

Do you even read my posts?

 

Sorry, can't find a response that answers this specific question. Could you possibly repeat it for me? The issue is lying and deceiving over what they were up to, not specifically over whether it explicitly illegal to do the surveillance.

 

But if what they were up to, i.e. the surveillance was legal, justified and constitutional, then the lying and deceiving was too.   Governments keep secrets all the time, and they should.    Look up the history of the SR-71 Blackbird.  The US government lied and deceived for half a decade on the very existence of the aircraft.  And I am glad they did.

 

The issue is not lying and deceiving, it is whether the actions by the NSA were justified and constitutional.   Anything else is just a smokescreen.

 

If that is the case they have not broken any laws.....   so what is so difficult to understand?

 

 

The government did not break any laws, as I said the PATRIOT Act gave them this power.   The two questions are if the powers are constitutional and if their use is justified.

 

.......   or for that matter even at times not lie to us for our own good.

So who makes that call, and who are they responsible to? Its the road to tyranny.

[JDavis]

 

 

 

 

 

 

Do you even read my posts?

 

Sorry, can't find a response that answers this specific question. Could you possibly repeat it for me? The issue is lying and deceiving over what they were up to, not specifically over whether it explicitly illegal to do the surveillance.

 

 

But if what they were up to, i.e. the surveillance was legal, justified and constitutional, then the lying and deceiving was too.   Governments keep secrets all the time, and they should.    Look up the history of the SR-71 Blackbird.  The US government lied and deceived for half a decade on the very existence of the aircraft.  And I am glad they did.

 

The issue is not lying and deceiving, it is whether the actions by the NSA were justified and constitutional.   Anything else is just a smokescreen.

 

 

If that is the case they have not broken any laws.....   so what is so difficult to understand?

 

 

 

The government did not break any laws, as I said the PATRIOT Act gave them this power.   The two questions are if the powers are constitutional and if their use is justified.

 

 

Show me where the constitution says that the government has to always tell us everything.......   or for that matter even at times not lie to us for our own good.

 

 

you must have me confused with someone else, I have never made such claims at all, just the opposite in fact.

[JDavis]

 

 

Do you even read my posts?

 

Sorry, can't find a response that answers this specific question. Could you possibly repeat it for me? The issue is lying and deceiving over what they were up to, not specifically over whether it explicitly illegal to do the surveillance.

 

But if what they were up to, i.e. the surveillance was legal, justified and constitutional, then the lying and deceiving was too.   Governments keep secrets all the time, and they should.    Look up the history of the SR-71 Blackbird.  The US government lied and deceived for half a decade on the very existence of the aircraft.  And I am glad they did.

 

It seems odd for a Christian to be glad that people lied and deceived. Doesn't such take people to hell?

 

 

no, not in the least. 

 

With this "view" of yours it was wrong for the Allied Powers to use deception about where the D-Day invasion was going to take place, and it was wrong to keep the invasion a secret at all.

 

Gideon used deception to win a battle in the Bible, did that send him to hell?

 

Rahab lied outright to hide the spies (which by your view was also wrong) and ended up in the Hebrew "hall of fame".  Guess she was not taken to hell.

 

Tamar deceived Judah and still ended up on the genealogy listed for Jesus.  I am guessing she did not lead anyone to hell for her actions.

 

I spent a good part of my Marine Corps career as a custodian for classified material, so perhaps I am bit biased on this topic. 

[other one]

 

So who makes that call, and who are they responsible to? Its the road to tyranny.

 

 

If a group is to be a Republic, for it to work, the people have to elect individuals who would not cross that line.  However in the modern world, a totally open government is doomed to failure in dealing with despot governments.  It is simply a fact that we do and need to spy on other governments and has been so for hundreds of years.  God commanded it of Joshua a very long time ago.

[Gandalf]

Do you even read my posts?

 

Sorry, can't find a response that answers this specific question. Could you possibly repeat it for me? The issue is lying and deceiving over what they were up to, not specifically over whether it explicitly illegal to do the surveillance.

 

But if what they were up to, i.e. the surveillance was legal, justified and constitutional, then the lying and deceiving was too.   Governments keep secrets all the time, and they should.    Look up the history of the SR-71 Blackbird.  The US government lied and deceived for half a decade on the very existence of the aircraft.  And I am glad they did.

It seems odd for a Christian to be glad that people lied and deceived. Doesn't such take people to hell?

 

no, not in the least. 

 

With this "view" of yours it was wrong for the Allied Powers to use deception about where the D-Day invasion was going to take place, and it was wrong to keep the invasion a secret at all.

 

Gideon used deception to win a battle in the Bible, did that send him to hell?

 

Rahab lied outright to hide the spies (which by your view was also wrong) and ended up in the Hebrew "hall of fame".  Guess she was not taken to hell.

 

Tamar deceived Judah and still ended up on the genealogy listed for Jesus.  I am guessing she did not lead anyone to hell for her actions.

 

I spent a good part of my Marine Corps career as a custodian for classified material, so perhaps I am bit biased on this topic.

I prefer the plain truth of the New Testament. Deliberate lying takes people to hell. Christians who support it need to look to their conscience.

[Gandalf]

So who makes that call, and who are they responsible to? Its the road to tyranny.

 

If a group is to be a Republic, for it to work, the people have to elect individuals who would not cross that line.

So who decides when they have? And what do you do about it?