General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThe hardest thing to do is say "I was wrong"
I have given this a lot of thought. Since the news of the British government use a law, to capture terrorists, detained the spouse of a journalist as intimidation. Then the news they had the hard drives of a newspaper destroyed. The United States Government stood by silent.
I am so shocked right now by these actions, this is not an actions of an open free government, these are the actions of a totalitarian state...or we are within smelling distance of one.
I am sorry, I was wrong.
Safetykitten
(5,162 posts)leftstreet
(36,117 posts)Good for you
tabasco
(22,974 posts)LondonReign2
(5,213 posts)well done
NYC_SKP
(68,644 posts)geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)were not theirs.
And shame on the US for not condemning what they did on our behalf, unless of course they did it FOR us, which seems to be the general consensus. It would help if the US were to speak out against it, and make it clear we do not want even our allies, acting this way on our behalf.
So far I have not heard anything of that nature from our Government.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)along on Bush's illegal foreign adventures. Now they are paying the price. All that proves is how closely tied they are to the US, despite their denials.
It's no good, the world believes they were working for the US just as they were with Assange, another Whistle Blower who was targeted after he went after the banks. But it's backfiring these assaults by the US and their allies on Journalists. They are being trashed all over the world now. And the more people join forces to end this garbage, the sooner it will happen.
Ironically it appears that in their terror of the truth, THEY are the ones who will make it happen.
DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)And yeah, I only know that from repeated personal experience. I've been dead-right about things, things I knew to be true. Until I found out I was wrong. I happen to be against the government and the Administration on the NSA stuff, but I'm going to keep this generic, so that I don't end up looking like I'm rah-rah'ing you "coming over to my side". So again, in the generic and in the abstract, it takes some gumption to admit you were wrong about a thing, and I appreciate your saying so. Thank you.
malthaussen
(17,217 posts)(For whatever that's worth)
-- Mal
RobertEarl
(13,685 posts)It is not easy to admit that the path we are being lead down is not a path to more freedom. It is scary. Don't be scared tho, stand up for your freedom.
enigmatic
(15,021 posts)Only when knowing you were wrong and saying nothing.
I commend you.
mindwalker_i
(4,407 posts)The whole point of being sentient is to have the ability to absorb new information, process it, and be able to integrate it into one's being. I aspire to reach this state.
Jackpine Radical
(45,274 posts)I was about to say exactly the same thing in slightly different words. I have switched my view on many things over the years, beginning with a naive proto-libertarian view of the world and ending up finding myself in sympathy with certain kinds of socialists and anarchists. The key to intelligent behavior is the willingness to change your opinions, your models of reality, in accordance with the accumulation of new evidence on top of what you already have experienced. One should never place more faith in a model/theory/perspective than the balance of the available evidence warrants.
Hydra
(14,459 posts)I'm sorry it had to be true. I'd rather it wasn't...but this is where we are. It's a bleak place to have to inhabit, but the company is good
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)+1000000
LaydeeBug
(10,291 posts)and still no mention of Booz Allen, who is *still* profiteering from this mess.
TorchTheWitch
(11,065 posts)I don't have any problem saying I was wrong when I was. Maybe you do, but that's your problem.
HardTimes99
(2,049 posts)close to being a 'totalitarian state' (at least as Hannah Arendt and others of her time used the phrase). But it's clear that our experiment with democratic self-government is deathly ill. What, if anything, it shall be replaced with remains to be seen. But the prospect is neither amusing nor comforting.
dkf
(37,305 posts)We've all been there.
Maineman
(854 posts)cascadiance
(19,537 posts)... in the UK and then the Brits will have an excuse to scoop up Assange too.
And no Miranda warnings for him either, as they aren't the U.S. and Mirandas have no rights in the UK!
LearningCurve
(488 posts)eom
Demo_Chris
(6,234 posts)nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)warrprayer
(4,734 posts)... can change nothing.
WillyT
(72,631 posts)Courage !!!
& Rec !!!
limpyhobbler
(8,244 posts)Opinions adjust as we get new information.
In 2011 I used to always defend Obama's drone strikes because I thought we were making the world safe by killing terrorists. After lots of debates on this site people gave me new information, so I changed my mind.
Good for you, for adjusting when you see new information.
Cooley Hurd
(26,877 posts)It's quite cozy down here! I'll ask Rachel Maddow to move to the aisle seat.
Chaco Dundee
(334 posts)B.+ B.
MotherPetrie
(3,145 posts)Civilization2
(649 posts)Some times the epiphany is so powerful, that being wrong, for a time, was worth it.
None of us want to face the tough truths of this world, many NEVER actually do,. . denial is a powerful forcem and a place many choose to live their full lives.
Only the TRUTH will set us free. It is only possible to fix a thing when we recognize it is broken.
Catherina
(35,568 posts)We can show you around, show you where all the fun people are.
Noam Chomsky's in seat 63B, President Carter's in seat 12d, it's gotten very full but we're having the best conversations ever!
Don't feel bad, just relieved you know now.
cantbeserious
(13,039 posts)eom
jtuck004
(15,882 posts)No, it's the title of a book
By Carol Tavris and Elliot Aronson
It is so hard for so many people to admit that they wrote a whole book with a subtitle of "Why we Justify Foolish Beliefs, Bad Decisions, and Hurtful Acts".
Another good one is by Kathryn Schulz titled "Being Wrong", in which the first chapter is titled "Wrongology".
So yeah, it's a pretty common human condition. At least I think it is. Or maybe I'm wrong. No, it must be.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)Here's hoping some more people come around, so we can actually get some movement towards fixing the problem!
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)It hurts like hell to wake up and see it, doesn't it.
But it's our only hope.
Welcome, and I saved you a seat away from the exhaust pipe.
beevul
(12,194 posts)So hard that most people can't do it, in general - at least, that's my experience.
The upside (not that there is one to the whole fiasco), is a personal one for you:
Being able to admit when ones self is wrong, to ones self and others, is a truly and completely honorable thing. From what I have seen and experienced, few things will cause people to respect you more, than being able to admit it when you're wrong.
uponit7771
(90,367 posts)...info to out a gov program when there were better means to get what he wanted.
Why in the world should anyone trust that guy or his homies!?
regards
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)I believe we need to have strong oversight over the DEA, TSA, and NSA. That's what Democracy is all about. And I can do all that without trusting Snowden.
uponit7771
(90,367 posts)...info Snowden stole wasn't given to US enemies...I don't think we do know
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)Certainty is the opposite of open-mindedness.
uponit7771
(90,367 posts)treestar
(82,383 posts)It is an elected state, and the people who fill the offices according to the law are people we have to trust. We can't do surveillance for ourselves. Why shouldn't be we trust the people we elected over someone who just decides on his own, and had an avenue to use before he did so and ignored it (pursuant to our duly passed laws?).
As for calling it an authoritarian state, that's bullshit. We have real functioning courts. We have elections. We have freedom of speech.
We have classified information for a reason, and it's our information, which we want to keep from certain people out there who would do us harm.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)time. Pres Obama made no changes to either the leadership or programs. Just because you got to vote you think you are free. Either candidate would keep the same intel agencies. So how does my vote matter?
Blind trust has no place in a Democracy. We need oversight. Our founders knew what they were doing when they wrote the Fourth Amendment.
These agencies have an unlimited budget and no oversight. Why would you think they would obey the FISA Law or the Constitution. Just because you have faith?
I am not asking for the elimination of our spy agencies, just oversight. Democracy depends on transparency. Authoritarian State depends on secrecy.
dorkulon
(5,116 posts)Instead he gave his info to a newspaper. If he wanted to help terrorists, he would.
And you sound like a McCarthyite.
uponit7771
(90,367 posts)closeupready
(29,503 posts)uponit7771
(90,367 posts)dorkulon
(5,116 posts)It's a meaningless statement.
Besides, spies don't normally make a big public display of themselves. They tend to want to keep their access and continue spying. Get it?
uponit7771
(90,367 posts)...needlessly and wont face the music for doing so after admitting to breaking the law.
Hhe's
dorkulon
(5,116 posts)You're letting your emotions do your thinking for you. Your allegation makes no sense.
I'm not saying the guy deserves a Nobel prize, but keep it real.
Ocelot
(227 posts)uponit7771
(90,367 posts)Ocelot
(227 posts)Maybe you, but that's your problem
uponit7771
(90,367 posts)sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)now view him as a Whistle Blower, so I guess he didn't betray his country after all.
uponit7771
(90,367 posts)...about getting the conversation going
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)happened to them? Whistle Blowers can no longer remain in this country when they discover wrong doing and corruption and report it to the people due the draconian treatment of people who tell the truth. This has been proven beyond a doubt now. Binney and Drake who did everything by the book. Yes, 'a better way of doing it'! Not according to those who chose that 'better way'.
Douglas Carpenter
(20,226 posts)make us all their slaves? That would explain a lot, you know.
Ocelot
(227 posts)Criswell/uponit7771 predicts that Snowden handed over his information to "Terrorists"
"Can you prove it DIDN'T happen???"
Douglas Carpenter
(20,226 posts)suicide so that their spirits could reach what they believed was an alien space craft following the Comet HaleBopp, which was then at its brightest?
How do we know their spirits didn't all rendezvous on the alien space craft that was following the Comet Hale-Bopp?
There are somethings you just cannot prove are not true.
uponit7771
(90,367 posts)quakerboy
(13,921 posts)Then of course it will not be achieved.
Without 24/7 full surveillance of everything that snowden has ever done, we cannot prove that he is not trying to help a terrorist organization.
However there is no logical reason to believe that he is, though. Just like there is no logical reason to believe that Obama is a secret Muslim. That won't stop you from saying or believing silly things, and more than it will stop the racist teabaggers from saying or believing silly thing. Or even saying, or doing things that are harmful to the longterm state of our nation.
As to "better ways"... prove it. What better ways? This got the topic into the daily discussion all across the country, and in many other places. What other route did he have that had the potential to make that happen?
Given what has been accomplished so far, what reason is there to not trust "that guy" and his so called "homies". Not even sure which "homies" you refer to, though your attempt to diminish them is fairly apparent given your choice of wording.
uponit7771
(90,367 posts)...benefit of the doubt.
He's a thief and did so without the need when there were other memes of redress...
regards
quakerboy
(13,921 posts)Show me the post, the person who gave snowden, or the information he provided, "the benefit of the doubt" Prior to the event. Couldnt be done, because there was nothing to credit. Its a silly argument. If taking any concealed information and making it public automatically takes away your "benefit of the doubt", then there is never any way to expose misdeeds. Because if you say nothing you are complicit, and if you say something you are a criminal. It is an Impossible lose lose situation you have created. Therefore, I reject it.
Anyway, you still didn't address what I asked. This is the second assertion that there was another way. So, what other means of redress were there? Specifically, what alternate avenue of action did snowden have available that would have brought this NSA spying issue to be a regular daily conversation point among people in the USA, therefore having any possibility of we the people requiring a change in the system of our elected officials, who have made it clear they intend to make no changes unless forced.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)one iota of proof of our speculations, that's all they are.
uponit7771
(90,367 posts)...regards.
I didn't erase the benefit of the doubt by stealing information....
Snowden did
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)up to. The amount of secrecy in this country is simply unacceptable. Far too much information is now 'classified' most of it should not be.
If the Government deprives the people of the information they have a right to, I have no problem with a Whistle Blower making it possible for us to see whatever it is they are hiding.
If they have nothing to hide, they have nothing to worry about.
uponit7771
(90,367 posts)NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)uponit7771
(90,367 posts)...regards
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)uponit7771
(90,367 posts)Bonobo
(29,257 posts)You have truly set yourself apart in my eyes.
I had nearly lost hope that even one person would change their mind after these growing signals of repression.
Thank you and I think you are wonderful.
Logical
(22,457 posts)myrna minx
(22,772 posts)Little Star
(17,055 posts)KittyWampus
(55,894 posts)dorkulon
(5,116 posts)I need more than your word on that.
boston bean
(36,224 posts)board, and becuse the guardian only showed that (no smashed drive) and only WROTE about smashed drives, we are to believe Kitty that no drives were smashed. And not the written word of the Guardian.
Sorry assed explanation, I am sorry to have to relay, but thought you would like to know.
KittyWampus
(55,894 posts)Rusbridger implies British Intelligence Agents forced them to destroy hard drives
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/20/nsa-snowden-files-drives-destroyed-london
The man was unmoved. And so one of the more bizarre moments in the Guardian's long history occurred with two GCHQ security experts overseeing the destruction of hard drives in the Guardian's basement just to make sure there was nothing in the mangled bits of metal which could possibly be of any interest to passing Chinese agents. "We can call off the black helicopters," joked one as we swept up the remains of a MacBook Pro.
Whitehall was satisfied, but it felt like a peculiarly pointless piece of symbolism that understood nothing about the digital age. We will continue to do patient, painstaking reporting on the Snowden documents, we just won't do it in London. The seizure of Miranda's laptop, phones, hard drives and camera will similarly have no effect on Greenwald's work.
Here is what Wikileaks reported about this:
Guardian forced by UK gov to smash Snowden harddrives in front of UK spies. We denounce the UK government's strong arming of the Guardian into destroying history. Remember what happens to book burners?
https://www.facebook.com/wikileaks/posts/562835883751528
Here's another example stemming from the original report from Rusbridger:
"UK gov forced newspaper to destroy hard drives housing NSA leak information"
http://www.techradar.com/us/news/world-of-tech/uk-government-forced-guardian-to-destroy-snowden-hard-drives-1174534
WHAT REALLY HAPPENED:
Posted the next day and totally ignored:
Rushbridger VOLUNTARILY destroyed the (singular) hard drive. Allegedly destroyed.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/20/nsa-snowden-files-drives-destroyed-london
Lie #2-
a. Rusbridger claims they smashed the Hard Drive of a Mac Book Pro.
b. The Guardian included the following photograph with the caption: The remains of a computer that held files leaked by Edward Snowden to the Guardian and destroyed at the behest of the UK government. Photograph: Roger Tooth. Thats a computer, singular.
c. Rusbridger tweeted the following photo of the supposed smashed hard drive:
d. Rusbridger later again tweeted it was A mac book pro
It wasn't until many people recognized the picture showed no hard drives and pieces of both an extremely old pc and a macbook pro that Rusbridger finally changes his story.
boston bean
(36,224 posts)dorkulon
(5,116 posts)I guess you could still say they were compelled to destroy the copies they had, though "forced" is a bit much.
TheKentuckian
(25,029 posts)DeSwiss
(27,137 posts)defacto7
(13,485 posts)Progress is good! Mistakes are our best friend when we learn from them. Check my signature. I try to live by it.
raccoon
(31,127 posts)Ever notice how they act when you mention those "weapons of mass destruction?"
indepat
(20,899 posts)sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)And I couldn't agree more regarding what happened this past week in Heathrow and to the Guardian. It truly is shocking.