MercoPress. South Atlantic News Agency
OAS Secretary General Expresses Deep Displeasure over Airplane Incident involving President Morales in Europe
The Secretary General of the Organization of American States (OAS), José Miguel Insulza, expressed his deep displeasure with the decision of the aviation authorities of several European countries that denied the use of airspace to the plane carrying the President of the Plurinational State of Bolivia, Evo Morales, from Moscow to La Paz. Read full article
Comments
Disclaimer & comment rulesThen Mr Insulza, the Bolivian President shouldn't be trying to help a fugitive escape justice.
Jul 03rd, 2013 - 05:35 am - Link - Report abuse 0Also, how dare you attempt to interfere with the decisions of sovereign nations, and explain how the Bolivian presidents life was put in danger when his plane landed in Spain?????
Come on, talk is cheap Mr Insulza, you can't just make foundless accusations to get a few sound bites.
I think we can take it that they will do the same for Maduros aircraft when he leaves Russia.
Jul 03rd, 2013 - 06:43 am - Link - Report abuse 0Nothing justifies an act of lack of respect of the highest authority of a country.
Lack of respect my ass, when he starts showing it to others, he might find that they start showing it back.
I use to think it was difficult this day and age to be a terrorist, that is until snowden let them know how we look for them. I now think it is more difficult being a latam country leader. I mean......every action that happens to them they always take it as personally directed toward them......what an ego!
Jul 03rd, 2013 - 10:14 am - Link - Report abuse 0Perhaps there was a threat
Perhaps they thought the farmer was moving coca leaves
perhaps whatever.....it was a sovereign nation's decision to do what they did. Respect it or fly elsewhere. The USA should pull out of the OAS. They are a minority in a pool of clowns.
Big mistake this: they should have shot the bastard out of the sky.
Jul 03rd, 2013 - 11:11 am - Link - Report abuse 0One less delusional super ego for the “rulers” of SA. You do realise that these “presidents” we have here do RULE us, even Pepe uses the expression.
Mind you, it's better than having “hug a hoody Davy” who is clearly beyond controlling anything.
Lep, RC,
Jul 03rd, 2013 - 01:15 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Give Mr Insulza a break, he is just doing his job.
Besides, he is correct. If it is true that France closed their airspace to Evo (which seems odd) it is highly irregular.
I don't care much at all for Evo, but adherence to the Vienna Conventions and total respect for foreign heads of state are essential for international relations to work properly.
Its a great disrespect of the word PRESIDENT ! Europe must apologies for this cowardly act !!!
Jul 03rd, 2013 - 02:20 pm - Link - Report abuse 0#3 poppy -
Jul 03rd, 2013 - 02:27 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Oh yes, like the terrorists didn't expect that the USA government was spying on them, listening to their phone calls, reading their emails, looking at their facebook accounts. The reality is that we all expected that this type of crap was going on, but Snowden gave groups like the ACLU the proof that they needed to take the federal government to court on the violation of our rights. Before the release of this information, ACLU and other groups attempted to sue the Federal government but were denied because their was no “evidence” since the program that they were sue against didn't “exist”.
Though the NSA or Federal Government may have good intentions, you need to realize that this will lead to a tyranny in the USA. It is simply too much power for the government. Already you see the abuses by the IRS and the EPA, and that is what has been exposed, just imagine what else is going on. It will be only a matter of time before the government has an excuse to utilize this power to persecute its opponents, which one day you may become.
The fundamentalist terrorist groups know that they can no longer attack from the outside as in the past, we now go after them wherever we can.
Jul 03rd, 2013 - 02:55 pm - Link - Report abuse 0That leaves them only one other option, attack from the within, Infiltrate, convert, radicalise call it what ever you like, but it is a fact that is what they have been doing.
You are not going to find some twisted kid cooking up a bomb on a stove in his kitchen in the UK or USA, by looking for him In a camp in the Yemen!
Fine, let's protect our civil liberties, but don't fucking complain when the train you are travelling on disappears in a flash and if you are lucky, all you lose his your legs!
@5 I'd love to know what Vienna Convention you are talking about. The only one I could find that might have had some relationship is the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations. So I read it. No mention of “VIP” aircraft.
Jul 03rd, 2013 - 03:45 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@6 Just as a matter of interest, can you list the governments that don't do things like this? Let's look at this logically rather than from a perspective of outraged moral indignation. NSA picks up an email where Mr Jones informs Mrs Smith that he'll be over that evening to give her a good seeing to. Is this intended activity illegal? So the NSA has no interest. Unless Mr Smith happens to work at the NSA! But Mrs Smith is divorced or separated. So it's no business of Mr Smith either. Alternatively, NSA picks up a message where Mrs Smith informs Mr Jones that she was successful at getting “the package” through airport security in her knickers and dropped it in one of the waste bins in the plane's toilets. Would you like to know that all aircraft were having their waste bins checked? Just in case. These are simple examples, but wouldn't you like to think that your government was doing everything it could to avoid the rear of an aircraft's fuselage being blown off? Freedoms and rights are all very well, but there is always a price to pay. You're free to say and do anything you like, as long as it's legal. And if it's not legal, why are you whingeing? I spent all my professional life under a legal obligation not to do or talk about various things. Didn't do me any harm. But I do hate people who set themselves up as moral arbiters. By what right? Who decided? One thing is certain. 316 million Americans weren't consulted on whether they agreed with Ed Snowden.
#7
Jul 03rd, 2013 - 03:55 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“It will be only a matter of time before the government has an excuse to utilize this power to persecute its opponents, which one day you may become. ”
Your SA leaders make you paranoid. You are not an American so there is no “US” form your statements.....unless you are one of those waiting for a free ride in the immigration immunity bill.
BAMP.......in you ideals...please tell me how you would prevent another 9/11 without balancing it against some liberties?
Tell me what exactly the evil USA government did with the information?
Most of all......tell me how many analsyts does it take to actually disseminate and drill into tall this information and data on 317 million people if not more?
Tell me, was it morally wrong and an infringement for the government to read and censure our father's and andgrandfathers when they served in WWII........they did serve right?
@9 Conqueror
Jul 03rd, 2013 - 04:06 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Heads of State enjoy full diplomatic immunity. Stopping and searching their aircraft is not good etiquette.
I would like to extend your Mr and Mrs Smith analogy at this point:
“These are simple examples, but wouldn't you like to think that your government was doing everything it could to avoid the rear of an aircraft's fuselage being blown off?”
Yes, but they are not doing “everything” are they. It would be so much easier to apprehend Mrs Smith and Mr Jones if all citizens were fitted with GPS transmitters. This way the authorities could intercept them that much quicker. Innocent people would have nothing to fear after all freedoms and rights are all very well, but there is always a price to pay.
Anyhow, thanks to Snowdon it is clear that the “government” is out of the loop. Mr Clapper stood in front of Congress and lied when asked if the NSA was eavesdropping US citizens. If the secret services feel they don't own either the public or the elected authorities any explanations, then they and they alone are deciding how much “protection” you need.
#10 poppy -
Jul 03rd, 2013 - 04:41 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“Your SA leaders make you paranoid. You are not an American so there is no “US” form your statements.....unless you are one of those waiting for a free ride in the immigration immunity bill.”
First of all, comments as those above only serve to make your debating points seem irrelevant. My choice to live abroad, though a born American citizen, has no relevance to the points I have made.
Prevention of another 9/11..
Consider first what was the cause of 9/11. Clearly some terrorists decided to blow up some stuff up. Well what brought these people to reach this point? Look for a solution to the problem (government policies) and not a symptom (terrorism). Around the world there are several countries that do not experience terrorism, even on a threat level. They are not sought out by radicals as a target to unleash terrorism. Policies by the Government have created these issues. Instead of going out to Afghanistan and fighting a war for 10+ years, go out there, kick some ass, and abandon the place. Kill, imprison, the people that are in power and leave, but don't hang around trying to do some implementation of democracy. Make it known that the USA will destroy those that attack it, including countries that support the terrorist groups. But the drone attacks, over and over, to try and do some nation building isn't working. We are only pissing more people off.
The information is power. It may be in good hands now, but the next government may have other uses for it. It opens us up to something extremely dangerous, ultimate and total power in the hand of the government. Remember what happened during Katrina, and the Boston Bombing aftermath, Martial Law; now what prevents that on a National Level? And analyzing the data is done via a computer not people. So looking through trillions of calls is nothing in today's age of technology.
Boston, bloody hell, there were two lunatics running round planting bombs and shooting people! asking the public to stay indoors until they were caught is not martial law.
Jul 03rd, 2013 - 05:13 pm - Link - Report abuse 0IT'S COMMON BLOODY SENSE!
13 RC
Jul 03rd, 2013 - 05:39 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Yes, and it is also proof that blanket surveillance of 300 million people's phone and internet activity isn't very effective.
Do as i say= but never as we do,
Jul 03rd, 2013 - 05:42 pm - Link - Report abuse 0i dont know, these third world countries will pull anyones leg, if its got bells on it . lol
Condorito
Jul 03rd, 2013 - 06:04 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Disagree, you are never going to prevent all the attacks, but you are certainly going to prevent some of them. It's not an ideal situation, but this is not a war in the conventional sense of the word. You fight it with what you can.
I am all for human rights, especially the main one, the right to life. So I am willing to accept the intrusion, even if it only saves one life, because that life could belong to someone I care for.
Of a population of 300 million Americans, 120.000 so far, take Snowdens position. It would seem that a lot more of them take the same position as me.
16 RC
Jul 03rd, 2013 - 06:24 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I agree that you can't prevent all attacks, but do you think many have been prevented? If so, how many cases are there where terrorist have been found guilty of planning attacks based on monitoring their internet activity?
120,000 people with electronic signatures making the effort to petition is actually a significant number. Once this gets going Senators, congress and civil liberty groups will be making the same point that I am making - a good few already are.
On the humorous side, I liked this tweet from Rick Perry:
“Who knew… in those Verizon ads… …when the guy said, “can you hear me now”… …he was doing a mic check for the Obama Administration?”
# 13 & 16 RC -
Jul 03rd, 2013 - 06:41 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The justification to eliminate our rights given to us by the USA Constitution for the sake of safety is a dangerous path. If there is belief that the Bill of Rights and other Amendments should be altered, then do so through the normal process established in the document itself. But violating the Constitution is never an option.
Staying indoors by force, entering people's property by force, confiscating people's weapons by force (Katrina) are all violations of the Constitution. The Constitution was made to be altered, it isn't perfect. Such was the case of slavery.
There is no doubt that lives will be saved by the intrusion on our rights, but the savings are only temporary. Just look at history, the loss of freedom is synonymous with the loss of life. Communism, in my opinion is equal to the total loss of freedoms, killed off millions of people (USSR, China, North Korea). Don't think that it won't happen in the USA as well. Remember how the Japanese and Germans, though American citizens, were treated during World War II. You really believe that the USA government won't do the same to its own people, but those that are promoters of liberty. The fact that the IRS and EPA and who knows what other agency targetted Liberty Groups is enough to show that with even more power there will only be even more abuses.
Condorito
Jul 03rd, 2013 - 06:49 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Good question, yes I do think a significant number have been convicted, but the point surely is, you can not DISCLOSE publicly where or how you developed the intelligence used to detect and convict them or you RISK LOSING it and using it again.
That is what is so emotive about this guy. It is not what he DISCLOSED, it is the fact that he DID disclose it. What will the next one disclose or the one after that and the one after that.
The guy betrayed a trust placed on him and he needs to be punished to the full extent of the law to discourage others from doing the same or people, innocent people, some time in the future, will pay for it. That will absolutely happen it is plain for anyone to see, if they care to see it.
19 RC
Jul 03rd, 2013 - 07:21 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I haven't read of any such convictions either in the US or UK press - I accept that could just be me not keeping up with the facts. Can you point me to any such cases?
We should thank Snowdon and if Obama is sensible he will come out and welcome the revelations because it gives him the initiative to put the boot in to the security community on behalf of Congress, Civil liberties and the industry players who were coerced into cooperation (I see that Mozilla has picked up the ball for the internet industry).
Condorito
Jul 03rd, 2013 - 07:32 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Search Bomb plot foiled, you will find several examples, both in the states and the UK.
I agree with some of BAMF's points. The IRS and EPA scandals stink to high heaven of political chicanery to me and nothing to do with the fight against terrorism and that! Is well out of order! Shades of Watergate I should notbwonder?
#12 debating? WTF! whos is debating as there is nothing to debate with a foreigner. Pretend all you want to be American......we have pregnant Mexicans cross the border all the time just so there kids can be an American, a serious flaw in the interpretation of the 14th amendment.
Jul 03rd, 2013 - 09:07 pm - Link - Report abuse 0As for Boston where I live:
1- it was not Boston it was Watertown
2-that was not martial you fucking moron. That is the police protecting it's citizens while in hot pursuits of terrorists. You should
AND YOU ARE NOT AMERICAN SO PLEASE STOP SAYING “OUR” CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS.
Well, well, well…………….
Jul 03rd, 2013 - 09:34 pm - Link - Report abuse 0They “Haughty Ones” don’t allow our Presidents planes to overfly……..
In the eighties they used to plant bombs on our President’s planes……
Presidente Omar Torrijos 1929 – 1981 (presente)
Presidente Jaime Roldós 1940 – 1981 (presente)
I guess “They” expect us to be grateful for this “improvement” in international relations……..
#22 Poppy -
Jul 03rd, 2013 - 10:37 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Clearly you are just another pusillanimous American. You want to simply hide away in you little home and pray that no terrorists come after you. You are pathetic. You give up your rights away for a little safety just like how a whore sells herself for a little cash.
France has now issued an apology. Good for them.
Jul 03rd, 2013 - 11:42 pm - Link - Report abuse 0As I said @5:
”If it is true that France closed their airspace to Evo (which seems odd) it is highly irregular.”
@4 typical SA know it all......read about thing,m therefore you know. Your assumptions are telling.
Jul 04th, 2013 - 12:48 am - Link - Report abuse 0There are few things I fear and my fears you could never conceive. Lecture your fellow SAmericans, they need it before they get rides in green Falcons by your government.
It was a dumb move. proves we're human. we're in mercury retrograde & dk if I believe in it but good snacks were accidentally left at the store today :)
Jul 04th, 2013 - 06:45 am - Link - Report abuse 0USA behaviour has been disgraceful.
Jul 04th, 2013 - 11:25 am - Link - Report abuse 0Downing presidential planes is way, is way beyond the requirements of international protocol.
If the US Administration forced down a plane over foreign countries carrying either the UK P.M. or the Brasilian President in order to search their baggage, I would rightly be incandescent with rage.
On behalf of the South American president on whom the United States of America heaped this immense discourtesy, I am truely incandescent.
@11 Sorry, still can't find where this is in any Vienna Conventions. Moreover, a Head of State may enjoy diplomatic immunity, once he/she has proved their identity, but that doesn't mean their transport does. You might want to note that a “diplomat” is only entitled to diplomatic immunity after they have presented their credentials and those credentials have been accepted. There are too many countries around the world that think having a “diplomatic passport”, for instance, is a licence to do anything they want. It isn't. Besides, “diplomats” are enjoined to comply with all the legislation of the country they are “visiting”.
Jul 04th, 2013 - 01:08 pm - Link - Report abuse 0But I noted your wild suggestion that citizens should be fitted with GPS transmitters. Why is it always necessary for South Americans to take things to extremes? I see that CFK said “I can not leave aside an incident that took place last night when a President of the South American nation and his military plane, which has absolute and indisputable immunity, was illegally seized by the old Europe,” What a load of tosh. Where is the legal basis for this “immunity”? When was the aircraft “seized”?
And, incidentally, aiding a criminal is not acceptable under the terms of “diplomatic immunity”!
@28 Then perhaps you'll burn yourself out! “Downing” an aircraft has a particular meaning. Although I have seen a “comment” on a British press article that the aircraft should have been shot down! Morales is, of course, a bit player with pretensions. Compared to the safety of 316 million Americans and 63 million Britons, he's insignificant. Besides, he likes to throw his weight about in Bolivia. He needs to understand that others can throw their weight about and they are heavier than he is. I would have loved it if he'd got on the radio and started gabbling about being the president of Bolivia and been told to land or get shot down. France is a sovereign country. It decides who uses its airspace.
#28 first....please send me the link that proves the USA “downed” his aircraft?
Jul 04th, 2013 - 02:19 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Second, if it was the USA, take it as a stark remember when push comes to shove, what level of the game that tribal leader is getting himself into. Don't fuck with the big boys if you can't fuck back. It shows how powerless you SA commies are to protect your tribal leaders. If that happened to a UK or USA leader....there would be one less country in the world.
Now back to reality geoff........pull your laced panties out of the crack of your ass and remember, this was a cocaine dealer it happened to, no one of significance. He should kiss the ground they did not send a sidewinder up his indian ass.
29 Conq:
Jul 04th, 2013 - 02:32 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“You might want to note that a “diplomat” is only entitled to diplomatic immunity after they have presented their credentials and those credentials ”
That is true and the French have said in their apology to Bolivia that they didn't know it was Evo's jet, so they can get off the hook with that excuse, but those that mislead the French can't use the same excuse. The French will be angry about the situation - add to that that they now want to delay the start of EU-US trade talks because of Snowden's revelations; Merkel is demanding answers from Obama; the Chinese are laughing; UNASUR is kicking up a fuss...this all adds up to a major own goal for the US.
Re. “take things to extremes” - I am merely extending your own argument. You say it is good that they listen in on all of you because it helps them catch the bad guys and that everything possible should be done. So the next stop for efficient crime prevention is tagging. You should support it. My point is there is a balance that needs to be struck and blanket internet surveillance of all citizens is a step too far - seems pretty clear to me and once all the fuss dies down the US senate and congress will arrive at the same conclusion and roll back this kind of surveillance activity.
What puzzles me is that every Brit I know is fervently anti ID cards, yet all of you (on this site) are kowtowing to much more invasive US surveillance. Why?
Well, that's the first time I've been called a South American commie!
Jul 04th, 2013 - 04:09 pm - Link - Report abuse 0And I have little time for Bolivia's president per se.
But a President is a President is a President,
and you do not treat them in the spotlight of world publicity as a cocaine dealer (your words) or a criminal needing forcing down in a 'friendly' country.
The USA has lost every last vestige of respect it might have in this Continent.
And heaven help any president that comes into South American air-space; very gently they will be forced to land and Airforce 1 will be taken apart in a hunt for cocaine hunt and spys.
Just how foolish can a country get!!!
Losing respect from SA is like losing respect from adolf hitler. I would LOVE to see argentina or any SA country force down Air Force 1. Apparently you are not aware of it's own defenses and the fact that it travels with a military jets escort. It's comical you blame the US of this apparently unfolding lie of a cocaine leader seeking to usurp attention the other SA presidents are getting.
Jul 04th, 2013 - 05:03 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Board Air Force 1? I would give up my annual salary to see a SA nation, any SA nation do that act of war. You think the Brits are militarizing the south atlantic now? See what happens if you can find a SA nation stupid enough or ballsy enough to attempt that action. Even the converted jew tinman would not board AF1. Just to suggest that any nation there would remotely consider that screams of your simple mindedness.
;lolololololol
33 Poppy,
Jul 04th, 2013 - 05:59 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Are drinking? Your posts get more incomprehensible as the thread goes on.
I assure you that South American nations are not overly concerned by the US military. Just look at history of US military intervention in Latam:
Bay of Pigs...hummm CIA humiliated...
Nicaragua - didn't get their way there either...oh wait a minute, Granada, they won that one. What a glorious victory against a tiny island with the population of a small town.
Not exactly a history of success is it.
@31 “those that mislead the French can't use the same excuse.” You mean the Bolivian aircrew. Sorry, you're still trying to make something out of nothing. Snowden is a CRIMINAL. Get that? He's a CRIMINAL. Every citizen of every country is enjoined to assist lawful authorities to apprehend CRIMINALS. Morales is above that, is he? In my view, that makes him a CRIMINAL. Refusing to comply with the lawful requirements of a sovereign state is a CRIMINAL action.
Jul 04th, 2013 - 06:27 pm - Link - Report abuse 0What you don't understand is that Brits don't object to ID cards. What they object to is what's on them and having to carry them all the time. And one other thing. Britain is, basically, a law-abiding nation. The reason the government wanted ID cards is because immigrants aren't law-abiding. If the British government had restricted the issue of ID cards to immigrants, there would have been no problem. Every Brit would have supported ID cards. In fact, we would have supported immigrants' foreheads being branded with the appropriate information.
@32 What a funny little boy. What “respect” does South or Latin America deserve? At the top, or bottom, of the shitpile is argieland. It lies, doesn't pay debts, breaches agreements, breaches the UN Charter. It's also degenerate, corrupt, belligerent. Bolivia and Ecuador are dictatorships. Chile and Uruguay are just scared. With no morals. Morales is a wanker. Saying he would “consider” a request for asylum from a thieving criminal. What a pity he has such a big mouth and no brain! Just push this to the limit. In a recent “event”, armed British marines stood guard on the gangways to a British government vessel. Neither the UK nor the US will permit latino extremists to attack their assets. Make no mistake. They WILL fire. They WILL kill.
So get your nutty “extremists” under control. Why would WE, or the United States, care about latino deaths? You breed like rabbits. Need to be taught some responsibility. Or exterminated.
Nicaragua was a fun time to be had while it lasted.
Jul 04th, 2013 - 06:32 pm - Link - Report abuse 032 GeoffWard2
Jul 04th, 2013 - 06:43 pm - Link - Report abuse 0First of all the USA would clear the flight plan properly (the Falcon crew apparently did not do that) and would not deviate at all from that plan.
Secondly ANY SA country even putting aircraft in close proximity with AF1 without prior permission would have a REAL problem to deal with. We are talking aircraft destroyed in the air.
Thirdly, the only way AF1 would ever land in ANY SA country would be if the POTUS WANTED to.
Come on, you must see that is the only scenario that would ever happen.
Chris......Geoffward2 does not seem to understand that real countries, UK USA etc, plan their leaders movements well in advance and takes every precaution of defending them as well.
Jul 04th, 2013 - 06:46 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Hahaha Poppy!
Jul 05th, 2013 - 02:54 am - Link - Report abuse 0Is there anything your beloved USA can get right?
You reckon they could win a war? For the more that forsaken nation wins, the less it ends up with, in respect and influence...
I'll be at the shore, waving :)
Stevie.
Jul 05th, 2013 - 05:33 am - Link - Report abuse 0What would you do without the beloved USA?
Life would be meaningless for you without them. Still you could always turn your politics on the UK or better still, Europe in general.
Guys,
Jul 05th, 2013 - 09:12 am - Link - Report abuse 0the mere statement by the OAS, Unasur, etc. that the US President is persona non grata in the southern continent is sufficient to deter the US President from ever visiting South America again. Airforce 1 is the tag to get you engaged.
This is *Politics* with a big P.
Trade will still go on with the great if not the good. But there will be little in the way of presidential visits to the Continent,
and little in the way of gaining back the influence that is rapidly being taken by other leading nations/blocs.
This was planned as a period of recoupment of world interests by the USA. It is becoming rapidly a 'pipe-dream'.
US standing in the world has reached an all-time low (though, arguably, it can go a lot lower if it persists in these behaviours).
Pray for a better time, better governmental advisors, and a 'listening President'. This Administration has - unfortunately for all those with such high hopes - shot its bolt.
Stevie your countries idea of a war is killing it's own citizens. Yes.....less influence sohow can we possibly have ordered those countries to ALLEGEDLY prevent the indian chief's corporate jet from flying? IS every leader in that ......continent vying for attention?
Jul 05th, 2013 - 09:39 am - Link - Report abuse 035 Conq:
Jul 05th, 2013 - 02:33 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“Sorry, you're still trying to make something out of nothing. ”
Well in that case it is great to see the French eat humble pie over “nothing” - we don't see that often.
“ In fact, we would have supported immigrants' foreheads being branded with the appropriate information.”
And the irony is that your head is being stamped by the security services of a foreign country. An ID card is to identify you, it carries your name and some bio-metrics. The information being stored and filtered by the US is far more invasive.
Why kowtow to a foreign nation to this extent?
Why defend such indignity? If an MI6 whistle blower revealed that the UK was carrying out blanket surveillance of US citizens internet activity, what do you think the reaction would be? US citizens baying for the blood of the whistleblower and praising MI6? I think not.
And yet here you are stoically defending their abuses. It's like some kind of Stockholm syndrome.
I think Churchill summed it up with:
“Americans Will Always Do the Right Thing — After Exhausting All the Alternatives” ... In the end political & public pressure in the US will curtail blanket surveillance.
#43 your first problem is that you see the internet as if being oin your home it it is not.....it is a public place no different than being on an open street. You southies really bunched up your panties uo that ass crack of your's.
Jul 05th, 2013 - 02:59 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Poppy,
Jul 05th, 2013 - 03:21 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“You southies really bunched up your panties uo that ass crack of your's.”
That is impressive, but I don't think I can help you.
“it is a public place no different than being on an open street”
That is a fair point, but I would still object to every conversation I had in the street (or in any public place being recorded).
Like I said before, if you are happy with it then fine, but I expect the majority of Americans are not going to be happy with it because it is an abuse of power and at the very least encroaches on being unconstitutional.
Guys this was always going to happen?
Jul 05th, 2013 - 04:59 pm - Link - Report abuse 0When we started communicating over the ether instead of by landline, it was inevitable. Whether by state or by business, someone was going to listen to it.
Look at us,
Condi's in Chile.
Caps in the States.
I am in the UK.
Yet, here we are communicating around the world in real time, real time.
We are using it for peaceful purposes, we have no intent to physically harm anyone. The fact is some people do and they communicate like we do, to plan, organise and coordinate that harm.
It was absolutely inevitable that we were going to be spied on.
What is the alternative? Scrap it and lose the incredible ability to communicate with people the other side on the side of the world?
I take the position, if you are using it for lawful means you have nothing to worry about, it's a necessary evil for having it.
Its quite lawful to wire large amounts of your own money between banks, etc.
Jul 05th, 2013 - 06:06 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Its quite lawful to discuss on email the details of your tactics in tomorrow's divorce court hearing
Its quite lawful to buy abortion tools over the internet
but if I had been hacked by the government doing these things, and if the government decided to blacken my name and destroy my career ...
I doubt if any US government agency has ever done such a thing, even though drama-documentaries come out on the theme quite regularly .. and probably Watergate never really happened ..
and Americans never set foot on the moon.
I guess if the state wants to punish people who question what the state does in our name we should welcome this
... because none of us would ever question the actions of the government democratically voted into office
.. however illegal it proved to be when we looked into it.
Best just to let them get on with these global illegalities;
best to pretend that it is all for our own good and keep our head down.
That way we will never end up in prison or stateless or 'wanted for rendition', or being leant on by countries and individuals for trumped up accusations.
No, much better to say .. “All hail our Government, right or wrong”
I just hope that I'm not 'the last honest man' when Big Brother finally knocks on my door to stop my mouth.
“Like I said before, if you are happy with it then fine, but I expect the majority of Americans are not going to be happy with it because it is an abuse of power and at the very least encroaches on being unconstitutional. ”
Jul 05th, 2013 - 07:13 pm - Link - Report abuse 0It is the price of balancing certain liberties with certain death by terrorism. Most Americans opinion accept this as a part of security. You obviously don't know America as you think you do. They do not like it, but accept. Besides....it is metadata. Add yes....I can photograph you and your honey on the street and not a thing you can do about it.
geoffy you are rambling. Youy embarrass yourself and not know it. IWatergate is wateargate is about re-elections and yes, abuse of power and where did Nixon end up?
Because many of us Americans accept this action you assume we do not question the American government? You assume too much. Really.....did you have family driven away in a greed Ford Falcon?
It is too difficult for government to get away with committing a crime like those in SA countries. Geesh geoffy.......are you a fiction writer? I am far from naive know what my early background was.......but really man.
48 Poppy:
Jul 05th, 2013 - 08:24 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“It is the price of balancing certain liberties with certain death by terrorism. ”
I agree with the first half of that..
“You obviously don't know America as you think you do.”
Time will tell.
Well until somebody comes up with a better way of fighting it, we will use what we have and live with it, because it certainly beats dying by it!
Jul 05th, 2013 - 09:39 pm - Link - Report abuse 0RC
Jul 05th, 2013 - 10:20 pm - Link - Report abuse 0The world is not overflowing with people who want to kill you and the few that do are not using the internet to make their plans.
Have you see the comedy “Four Lions”?
Brilliant humorous take on domestic terrorism - even they knew they had to eat their SIM cards!
Yes, Poppy #48,
Jul 07th, 2013 - 03:53 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I admit to a bit of a ramble in #47 ... Glenfiddich ... but in 'vino' veritas.
And yes, I am a wisher that the better side of human nature will prevail; no apologies for that.
But defending the exposed illegalities is a bit like Cosi fan Tutte ...
just 'cos all women do it doesn't make it 'right'.
I too wish humanity was better than it is. Overall, I think the majority of people are good. But even just one can do MASSIVE damage. The old cold war saying...“Trust....but verify”
Jul 07th, 2013 - 10:56 pm - Link - Report abuse 0I can and many people can accept that governments are gathering metadata in the quest to stop a dirty bomb, or worse, an outright nuclear ignition.
Hi Poppy.
Jul 08th, 2013 - 09:33 am - Link - Report abuse 0Just seen a Denzil Washington/Bruce Willis movie: 3 Muslim bombings in the US, martial law gets totally out of hand, people find the treatment is much worse than the problem., Denzil's FBI prevail and the US is saved from its military. Rousing stuff!
Anyway, nobody on the site seems to know just what secrets were revealed; there was a promise of revelations, but nothing more.
Perhaps you heard more detail in the USA?
really.....movies.....?
Jul 08th, 2013 - 01:22 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!