Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

[Sergarr]

I think the NSA derail should go into the Imperial thread.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Guys, I'm not defending the NSA - I'm just saying that Snowden's actions were not covered under freedom of expression. Under common sense, yes - but that's a different thing, isn't it?

The intelligence apparatus were the ones doing wrong in the first place. As the "secrets" therefore weren't really secrets, Snowden was within his freedom of expression to tell them to everybody in the world.

[XXSockXX]

I'm just 18-year-old. I'm currently arranging my life position.

Yeah, there is your problem. You have no idea what you are talking about. Not your fault probably, because you lack the context for what you are saying, but still.

I visited the GDR once, when that was still a thing. Too many products in the stores was certainly not a problem there, you might have liked it. 

Guys, I'm not defending the NSA - I'm just saying that Snowden's actions were not covered under freedom of expression. Under common sense, yes - but that's a different thing, isn't it?

The intelligence apparatus were the ones doing wrong in the first place. As the "secrets" therefore weren't really secrets, Snowden was within his freedom of expression to tell them to everybody in the world.

It's not about the principle, it's about the legal issue. In that aspect Snowden was not covered by freedom of expression. That is all, the question was not if that is right or wrong, but why he was considered a criminal when anybody can supposedly say anything they want.

[Sinistar]

So about those concentration camps that were phosphor bombed just before Russian tanks rolled in en masse...





No, wait, actually I do not mind this conversation turned into USSR being bad or no and then turned again into a discussion about Showden. Please, continue.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

I visited the GDR once, when that was still a thing. Too many products in the stores was certainly not a problem there, you might have liked it. 

I had an instructor who once visited the GDR. He said that one of the more striking experiences was the eastern boarder guards warning him not to sell his blue jeans, as that would be illegal commerce. The singular pair of blue jeans that he was wearing, mind you. (I think he said he got offers later on, too.)

It's not about the principle, it's about the legal issue. In that aspect Snowden was not covered by freedom of expression. That is all, the question was not if that is right or wrong, but why he was considered a criminal when anybody can supposedly say anything they want.

The legal issue is exactly what I was talking about. As the intelligence apparatus did not have the legal right to collect the information they were collecting, it was not actually secret information in a legal sense. As a result, Snowden was therefore permitted to share it if he wished. In fact, you could even argue that he had an obligation to do so, as it would make the secret, illegal information into public, legal information for him to release it.

[XXSockXX]

I visited the GDR once, when that was still a thing. Too many products in the stores was certainly not a problem there, you might have liked it. 

I had an instructor who once visited the GDR. He said that one of the more striking experiences was the eastern boarder guards warning him not to sell his blue jeans, as that would be illegal commerce. The singular pair of blue jeans that he was wearing, mind you. (I think he said he got offers later on, too.)

Well, when I was there, there were no more border guards, because it was after the Berlin Wall falling but before reunification. People were crazy for used blue jeans though or any western clothing, or chocolate and bananas and other food. Basically anything they couldn't get there. The stores and supermarkets were not empty, but the choice of products was pretty limited and there was mostly just one kind of any product, and of crappy quality at that. People had money, but they didn't know what to buy, because there was nothing to chose from, so the money was essentially worthless.

The legal issue is exactly what I was talking about. As the intelligence apparatus did not have the legal right to collect the information they were collecting, it was not actually secret information in a legal sense. As a result, Snowden was therefore permitted to share it if he wished. In fact, you could even argue that he had an obligation to do so, as it would make the secret, illegal information into public, legal information for him to release it.

I get all of that, the point was just that Snowden is not a particular good example of freedom of expression not working.

[miauw62]

Freedom of speech usually concerns people being able to say their opinion, and state secrets are more of a fact than an opinion.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Then why is factual truth as much of a defense as sincere belief in slander lawsuits?

[Helgoland]

Please, people, could we stop polluting the Europolitics thread with NSA stuff?
We could talk about Wulff, for example - ex-president of Germany, was ousted in a media hounding, and has now released a book. Oh, and was cleared of all charges.

[Sheb]

Yeah, especially since we're arguing the finer points of whether or not Snowden should have been protected by the first amendment. NSA go home!

[Helgoland]

God, I love communist propaganda.

[Comrade P.]

God, I love communist propaganda.

I hear you posting Ernst Busch and raise you with Der heimliche Aufmarsch

[Helgoland]

Awesome lyrics - and they can be repurposed so easily...
I originally started listening to that stuff because of Brecht. Someday I'll have to visit his theatre in Berlin - he's one of the best writers that I know.

[da_nang]

Watching QI last night, apparently Russian elections are based a fair bit on whether or not the candidate has hair, due to the fact that the people that were... at the top's probably the easiest way to put it, have had an alternating pattern of bald, hair, bald, hair, bald, hair and so on.

Can someone confirm/deny this? It sounds a silly, but then again, people are known for doing silly things.

It's a joke.

[10ebbor10]

It might be a joke, but it's an actual consistent pattern. Of no relevance, but it is there.

This is because we have almost 200 countries (to be fair, most of them not with dynasties this long) quite a few with over a 1000 year of history. Adding the many traits there are, you can easily find a pattern if you're willing to look for it.