Bletchley Park accused of airbrushing Edward Snowden from history | World news | The Guardian
Kelsey Griffin, Bletchley Park's director of communications, said the exhibition was likely to avoid any mention of Snowden. "It is not within the remit of Bletchley Park trust to make political statements," she said. "We are very much a heritage institution and involved with education. So that will be the focus of the cyber-security exhibition – drawing lessons of the past for the future."
Museum consultant and Bletchley Park trustee Hilary McGowan said the trust had not directly discussed Snowden. "We have discussed cyber security and its importance in the modern world – that's as close as we've got to discussing Snowden and what he's done. I'm not sure acknowledging him would be the right thing to do, that might imply we approve of his actions."
So....we longer approve of those who risk life and limb to tell the truth about their government. Hmmmp.
Museum consultant and Bletchley Park trustee Hilary McGowan said the trust had not directly discussed Snowden. "We have discussed cyber security and its importance in the modern world – that's as close as we've got to discussing Snowden and what he's done. I'm not sure acknowledging him would be the right thing to do, that might imply we approve of his actions."
So....we longer approve of those who risk life and limb to tell the truth about their government. Hmmmp.
Though I have read recently that some of the upper management in NSA has advocated offering him amnesty if he returns most of the information he has that so far hasn't been released. Not much chance, but interesting.
Yeah, I would call BS on that pretty quick. IMO they talked about him, discussed how "the public" might cry, who might get offended either way, and just decided to avoid the whole thing.
Oh, nevermind, it's in the Guardian. That says it all.
Yeah, well, bear in mind this "hero" didn't stay here and take his medicine, he ran to OUR ENEMIES.
He had a choice to keep his mouth shut, and go on leading his life.
Or he had a choice to rat out what our government was doing to us, and out himself by releasing that info to our news media and only that info. If that led to his death or imprisonment... see option one.
A person's not a hero for making an easy choice or for running from the consequences of his actions.
Is you're hatred just a blanket that covers EVERY one and no one is worthy of being outside of it or what?
And so long as Russia will put a Putin in charge, they're our enemy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aaron_Swart...
What is the difference between Edward Snowden and Julian Assange? When "Wikileaks" broke into the headlines, it seemed to me that most conservatives wanted Assange brought home and shot. But apparently Snowden is a hero the same people. What changed? -- besides the Administration in the White House.
About 30 years ago, I wrote a book on cryptography. It has long since been eclipsed, but I found it checked out of the UT Library, interestingly enough. Do you encrypt your emails or the files on your computer? Although RSA admitted to creating a backdoor for the NSA, PGP apparently is still secure. The two easiest "unbreakable" codes are the one-time pad and the dictionary code. Do you bother to use them, or is it too much trouble?
Snowden showed a systematic spying on people who were innocent, including US citizens and our allies. This showed a complete lack of regard for our constitution and Natural Rights.
I also do not agree that conservatives were inconsistent. Plenty of conservatives want to hang both of them and both cases they are ignoring the law, the constitution, and the natural rights of these people.
The CIA can be systematically anally raping FOREIGN 2 year olds in front of their parents to get information from them... don't care. Though I may care a little if it's Israeli or British children.
But if our government violates the protections afforded our rights by the Constitution... that's a big deal.
If you want Constitutional protections, give your people a republican form of government and apply for membership as a State in the union.
Indifference is not hate.
Rand's ideas are not devoted to logic, they are devoted to a utopia. An idealized world where everyone is a hero who will stand up to oppression, where everyone will trade value for value without trying to get the better of the deal, where nobody is willing to kill to get what they want. Where laws exist out of nothing.
But in the real world, there are such people.
There was a national geographic type show, where a lioness had made a kill, and before she could share it with her cubs, a pack of hyenas broke her hip and stole the kill. So she and her cubs got to starve to death.
There's the real world.
Foreigners are not protected by our Constitution.
If they were, every single U.S. soldier would be guilty of murder, burglary, destruction of property, conspiracy, assault and battery, and probably a lot of other crimes we have on the books. Certainly they'd be guilty of violating the 1st, 2nd, 4th and 5th Amendments.
Like I said, I don't care what the government is doing to foreigners. What I care about is the government violating the Constitutionally protected rights of citizens.
Your indifference to non-US people shows that you hate people. Suggesting raping children is mean and outrageous and show a complete disregard for the rights of people. I will repeat, please spread your hate elsewhere.
"
There, I repeated it for you.
I didn't say the ends justified the means. I said... I... don't... care. The Constitution doesn't protect them.
The United States doesn't rule the world. The Confederate War was full of unnecessary carnage because both sides were fighting based upon "Laws of War" that were made obsolete by modern firearms; and the Union won after throwing the laws away.
The colonies won their independence, in part, by throwing the laws of war away.
Our boys are maimed, and the war goes on, because we keep playing by our rules instead of theirs. It's like insisting upon ordering a meal in English from a waiter who only speaks French. We believe what we want from WWII; the crowds cheering GIs as they march through the streets. They don't want to face the reality of our GIs on their march across Germany killing 14 year old boys and old men, with obsolete rifles they didn't know how to operate, trying to prevent our conquering their homeland.
I don't care if the CIA was recording every time Queen Elisabeth II used the crapper, beyond judging whether it was a waste of taxpayer money or not. but I care like hell if the NSA is saving the metadata from my phone call, or my neighbor's or any citizen's.
What we consider civilized and humane our enemies in this new war consider foolish and weak.
Note that Snowden didn't run to England or Canada or Australia.
And YOU have ruined my post!
NSA= Nosey Snoopy A$$holes.
That's all I have left to say here.
+1 for your post, LS!
You seriously have no problem with what the government does in your name? Silence is acquiescence. Indifference to rape, torture, and murder is little different than committing the act, when we subsidize it with our tax-money. If I pay someone to kill someone else, am I any less guilty?
Every time we kill a hundred civilians to kill a terrorist or two, we create a hundred more terrorists. You can't tell me that if a foreign entity was doing here what we are doing there, that you wouldn't grab your gun and resist to the death. They are only doing what's natural. The terrorist threat has been used as a means of propaganda to scare and control Americans, and you are supporting it.
We I talk about liberty for man, I mean it for all men, not just Americans, or whites or some group or another. The heart that beats in them is the same as the one that beats in you and me.
I could ramble all day, but in short I feel it would mostly be a waste of my time. If I have to explain why you should care about the Cia raping two year olds, then I doubt anything I have to say would appeal to your indifference.
So, with that, I wash my hands of you and that load of tripe, that is your opinion on our foreign policy. If I had a Gulch, you wouldn't be invited.
Only if your definition of "legitimate" is "what works".
"How we get our information goes a long way in how we are viewed around the world. "
To paraphrase Yoda... THAT is why you fail.
Please go tell the American children of chopped up war vets why daddy can't hold them or see them or is so ugly, because we'd rather let their daddy be maimed than hurt our enemies. Because we'd rather make their daddy go away for months or years at a time, and come back crippled or in a box, rather than spy on foreigners who have no Constitutional protections.
That is the most repulsive form of altruism I can imagine.
We're the third nation in less than 150 years to have failed in Afghanistan because we won't fight them on their terms. We keep wanting to fight everyone as if they're Frenchmen, grateful for being free from the Nazis.
The days of the Condottieri are over. We're no longer fighting Europeans or their proxies, not even philosophically.
We should have *conquered* Afghanistan. Appointed an American governor-general, and used it as a staging ground, along with the conquered Iraq, to invade and crush Iran.
And we should have done it years ago.