The US should get him back, rather than letting someone else pick his brain.

Immunity? They should give the man a medal . . .

It's all moot. Of course, it wont happen, and he smartly wouldn't accept immunity if it were offered. As to what SHOULD happen, Snowden shouldn't even need immunity. As things are, he's doing what he ought to in keeping out of the long reach of Uncle Sam, no matter what carrot is dangled in front of him.

To date, Snowden hasn't revealed so much as confirmed what has been known for years, but kept out of the public realm by Administrations making ludicrous/evil arguments courts making terrible/evil decisions.

Grant him immunity, bring before Congress, let him testify, and bulldoze the NSA.

Very much against. Snowden should be tried for treason and executed if found guilty, which he will be.

No.

If he just blew the whistle on the NSA surveillance programs aimed at citizens, that would be one thing. And there are legitimate avenues of whistle blowing, but Wikileaks isn't one of them.

Also, he's provided information to people who are not our friends. There's a word for that: treason.

So thanks for the heads up on the snooping. No thanks for the treason.

Treason? LOL he didn't attempt to overthrow the country, he simply revealed the secret government's secret crimes.

Give him Obama's job and a mansion with an ocean view.

I say yes, immunity. For too long have large money sucking government organizations done whatever they damn well pleased with no oversight worth speaking of. I am NOT okay with being spied on just because it might help them catch a terrorist.

What treason has he committed?

And yes, it would have been nice if he had found a serious journalist and broken the story properly. Unfortunately there are few, and they aren't allowed a real platform and instead are shunted off as kooks. So in this situation, wikileaks was probably the best he had.

Meanwhile, Fearless Leader throws a tantrum.

Obama cancels Putin meeting over Snowden asylum

Treason has a very specific constitutional definition - one that isn't supported in this case.

I think giving Snowden immunity would be the smart expedient thing to do, to keep Russia from being the beneficiary of what Snowden knows.

However, because it would be the "smart" thing to do, it pretty much guarantees that this administration won't do it,

Snowden should be given immunity. We need the NSA called out on this. I feel, right or wrong, that it is the government who is effectively committing treason against the American people by its near constant violation of the constitution via the various bureaus who are supposed to be "protecting" us. Snowden is more a patriot then the President. Spare me the pedantry, you get what I'm talking about.

ask yourself something VERY specific.

if this person is so bad, if his knowledge is so extensive... why is he still breathing?

The administration has taken out people with drones for so much less cause, so what reason does it have to let this guy remain on the front pages, and in front of people's minds?

Think about the little petulant cancelling of a meeting with Putin. WITH PUTIN! What's next, pick a fight with Latvia?

Sure, this guy released a buncha stuff, and that is BAD. Whistleblower? not.

He went to work for B-A SPECIFICALLY to find all he could.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/24/edward-snowden-booz-allen-hamilton_n_3491203.html

HOW DID HE KNOW IT WAS THERE?

A whistlblower works for a company or place, and see's bad happening, and THEN blows the whistle.
He doesn't get the job JUST to blow the whistle, and get the info to release it worldwide.
People who do that are SPIES.

Now if a group of people [not necessarily state actors] wanted to make yet another laughingstock of the US, they could hardly find a better way.

I'm in the camp that it's a moot point. He's had plenty o' time to spill already, and he would be a complete idiot to come back to the US.

SwissArmyD:

if this person is so bad, if his knowledge is so extensive... why is he still breathing?

The administration has taken out people with drones for so much less cause, so what reason does it have to let this guy remain on the front pages, and in front of people's minds?

That would be because sending a predator drone over Russia would considered an act of war.

Snowden can hang, and I'll be in the front row munching popcorn when he does. To quote Man of La Mancha, "I dislike stupidity, especially when it masquerades as virtue."

And the only things more detestable than Snowden are the idiots who consider him a hero.

I don't think you have to consider him a hero to appreciate what he has done to help bring the issues to light and help reign in the NSA in their program of spying on US Citizens.

I don't think you have to consider him a hero to respect his courage in standing up to an Administration and a power that has financially, personally ruined everyone that has tried to alert us to what the NSA is doing.

Senators on the Intelligence Committee, prior whistleblowers like Daniel Ellsberg, former spies, former NSA employees read these folks and tell me you don't consider Snowden a hero.

http://www.alternet.org/civil-liberties/sen-ron-wyden-nsa-spying-its-bad-snowden-says?paging=off

Sen. Ron Wyden On NSA Spying: It's As Bad As Snowden Says

July 25, 2013 Editor's note: This is a transcript from a speech given on Tuesday, July 23, at the Center for American Progress in Washington.

When the Patriot Act was last reauthorized, I stood on the floor of the United States Senate and said, “I want to deliver a warning this afternoon. When the American people find out how their government has interpreted the Patriot Act, they are going to be stunned and they are going to be angry.”

From my position on the Senate Intelligence Committee, I had seen government activities conducted under the umbrella of the Patriot Act that I knew would astonish most Americans. At the time, Senate rules about classified information barred me from giving any specifics of what I’d seen except to describe it as "secret law"—a secret interpretation of the Patriot Act, issued by a secret court, that authorizes secret surveillance programs; programs that I and colleagues think go far beyond the intent of the statute.

If that is not enough to give you pause, then consider that not only were the existence of and the legal justification for these programs kept completely secret from the American people, senior officials from across the government were making statements to the public about domestic surveillance that were clearly misleading and at times simply false.

...

Edward Snowden’s Revelations

Last month, disclosures made by an NSA contractor lit the surveillance world on fire. Several provisions of secret law were no longer secret and the American people were finally able to see some of the things I’ve been raising the alarm about for years. And when they did, boy were they stunned, and boy, are they angry.

You hear it in the lunch rooms, town hall meetings and senior citizen centers. The latest polling, the well­-respected Quinnipiac poll, found that a plurality of people said the government is overreaching and encroaching too much on Americans’ civil liberties. That’s a huge swing from what that same survey said just a couple years ago, and that number is trending upward. As more information about sweeping government surveillance of law­abiding Americans is made public and the American people can discuss its impacts, I believe more Americans will speak out. They’re going to say, in America, you don’t have to settle for one priority or the other: laws can be written to protect both privacy and security, and laws should never be secret.

...

So, today I’m going to deliver another warning: If we do not seize this unique moment in our constitutional history to reform our surveillance laws and practices, we will all live to regret it. I’ll have more to say about the consequences of the omnipresent surveillance state, but as you listen to this talk, ponder that most of us have a computer in our pocket that potentially can be used to track and monitor us 24/7. The combination of increasingly advanced technology with a breakdown in the checks and balances that limit government action could lead us to a surveillance state that cannot be reversed.

"... everyone's interests would be best served by giving leaker
Edward Snowden immunity in exchange for maximum testimony about the
NSA under oath."

This presumes that congress has any interest in this exchange. The
majority seem indifferent.

Meanwhile, other sources have revealed that this massive domestic
spying is also being used to enforce drug laws.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2013/08/05/the-nsa-is-giving-your-phone-records-to-the-dea-and-the-dea-is-covering-it-up/

I'm ready to hop in bed with him.

Even if he still has a touch of acne, he's fearless, unlike our metrosexual president.

Amy ... what about the puppy???

So ... Patrick ...

I thought you were being facetious at first. I promise to dissect and pay attention to everything you say, if you'll just say why you think he's detestable. I respect your opinion.

Whatever you have to say, I'm going to discuss it with my sweety this weekend on our bike ride. I really will - not joking at all here - cornfields get a bit predictable, and we might need a fuse.

Oh, so you got her. I'm so glad.

Holly Who Channels Granny from Downton Abbey says,

'WooooWOOOwoooWOOO!'

That is a Pug War Howl, and a thing to be reckoned with, and normally I have to wave treats above her head to get those.

But in this case, it was a happy War Howl. Can't wait to hear more.

I assume Patrick is joking.

Give him immunity, and start debating this stuff publicly and in Congress.

The secrets/state privilege was defined in the United States v. Reynolds SCOTUS decision.

The problem is that the Obama Administration has been prosecuting whistleblowers.

Give him immunity and let him come back and justify why he didn't follow the chain of command.

"In the beginning of a change, the patriot is a scarce man, brave, hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot." -- Mark Twain.

Pirate Jo, let me preface this part by saying, I am not being sarcastic with this next paragraph. (With subsequent paragraphs, however, all bets are off.) That said, thank you very much for your interest in what I have to say. But I promise you, I am not that interesting. You have more interest than I deserve, frankly. I am a temporarily (supposedly) disabled vet with PTSD and SAT (and I'm not going to clarify those acronyms; you can all look them up and draw your own conclusions...privately, please; I've been recently accused of supporting the sexual molestation of babies without condemnation for my accuser. I no longer care what the lot of you think, and I suspect I will be abandoning this blog shortly anyway). Day-to-day existence is becoming increasingly unjustifiable to me. (And kindly spare me any pretensions that any of you care about any of this; you do not. I know it. You know it.)

I've been called naive in my life. And I've been called cynical. The cynical Patrick has now come to the fore...with a vengeance.

I'm looking at those who say that this is the time for a revolution, that this is the time we take back our privacy laws, and I think, "Do you really think that's going to happen? Really? Really?

"You actually believe that the spirit of outrage over these abuses is going to sweep over America, the American people will rise up, and our privacy rights will be respected?"

And people call me naive. Snort.

Snowden might be promised immunity...whether or not he gets it is another matter. And if he is promised immunity and is betrayed by the government, I don't believe for a second that a significant portion of the population will rise up in outrage. I think we'll all just retire to our living rooms and watch Jeopardy.

He will be presented as a stupid, reckless and irresponsible man who should have taken his concerns to his chain of command, and deserves what he gets. Not by you all, but by the majority of Americans.

I don't doubt that most people on this blog do care about this. But something I've seen many, many times over the years I've been posting here -- And I've been here since the very inception; no one can claim seniority over me, although many can claim equal time -- is that most posters here are the exception as well as exceptional people.

You could all collectively be outraged over this. But you are not representative. You do not even come close to a fair cross-section of the population.

But I'm not telling you anything you don't already know.

Even if, by the greatest miracle since the parting of the Red Sea, the American people did rouse from their torpor and suddenly get off their increasingly wide asses and made a demand, all the government will do is pay lip-service. "Oh, we're so very sorry...we did an awful thing...we'll respect your constitutional rights, mea culpa, mea culpa..."

And they'll go right back to spying on us, just as they're doing now. If anything, they'll become more invasive than ever. Just a little more careful about not letting any Snowdens on the inside. And we'll all go back to the television and tell ourselves that we did a great thing, and that spirit of our forefathers still lives in us...convincing ourselves that we actually accomplished something.

It's a nice thing that Snowden did for us. Too bad it won't amount to a hill of beans.

Thank you, everyone, for your interest in what I had to say. I am touched and flattered, but I honestly don't think I'm worth all that. There are much better posters here than I. Such as Conan or Cousin Dave. Or Pirate Jo, or M4 or Crid or just about anyone, really.

Amy, I only wanted to let you know that if I do leave, I have no intention of up and disappearing from your life without a word to you, like a certain other someone did. I think he did a terrible, terrible thing to you, which you didn't deserve. I just wanted you to know that.

"That would be because sending a predator drone over Russia would considered an act of war." Patrick

I don't mean now... and certainly not a drone. When he was in Hong Kong, though. Even now with the correct leverage, it could be done.

But the administration at this moment, doesn't seem to have it together. Unless they really DO want to diminish us.

This is playing out like a cheap game, right now. They try to convince us it's a phony scandal, just like the others, AS IF. It's just that chicago machine politics don't work very well on an int'l stage.

Snowden is just a pawn, so what's being gained here, and what lost?

"Holly Who Channels Granny from Downton Abbey"

Pirate Jo- I have heard that female pugs are the bitchier of the sexes. I've also noticed they tend to be smarter.

I've only had neutered male pugs who as my stepdad described, "shameless dogs that want everything delivered to them on a silver platter without working for it". Every time he would take my pug for a walk, the pug would be "fuck that, carry me home." And yes....he carried him home.

" I've been recently accused of supporting the sexual molestation of babies without condemnation for my accuser. I no longer care what the lot of you think, and I suspect I will be abandoning this blog shortly anyway). Day-to-day existence is becoming increasingly unjustifiable to me. (And kindly spare me any pretensions that any of you care about any of this; you do not. I know it. You know it.)"

I have not seen the incident that you refer to, perhaps many here have not. I read several posts (I don't have time to comb through more than that...) and saw you refer to a comment by luj, but I cannot find it. While the comment is nasty, are you going to let it drive you away?

Are you going to let some rude person on the internet dictate your actions?

crella, because Patrick has cited justification for TSA to continue groping passengers - regardless of youth - without objection, he is now crying because this has been seen as supporting such groping.
If you see a wrong and don't say anything, you support the wrong. Beyond that, if you cite items supporting the wrong, you support the wrong. That's the idea. Of course he objects. I don't care other than to point out that arguments on his part have blamed the audience for not understanding him. I find that rather like Jackson Pollack blaming a viewer for not understanding the great meaning found in paint splattering - expect art is not supposed to be logical, and argument is.

----

On topic: I have nothing definite to say about Mr. Snowden because I don't know what he has done, specifically. Unbiased sources? I suspect that this is a red herring, because I know it's possible for a government, even ours, to arrange an accident for anyone seriously threatening. I would also caution against the idea that Snowden knows all of the information he has passed on. There are over 400,000 files on my computer, and even if I tried, I couldn't find the details for all of them as quickly as I could transmit them elsewhere.

The man is a criminal. That does not mean I don't think it is good for the American people to know about this program and have a serious debate about what it means for us all. It does mean, however that I do not believe this man has done what he has done for the good of the people. After all, why Hong Kong and why Russia? What other information does he have and is know in the hands of our "not-friends"? I would treat him no differently than Manning.

'Waste, you are a liar. You know it. I know it. You and luj asked for my opinion on something. I chose not to give it. So, you and luj decided to get "creative" with the parameters, and claimed that I was invited to disagree with what the TSA is doing and I refused to do so.

No, I chose not to give my opinion one way or another. Newsflash: I do not have to give my opinion because you demand it. Further breaking news: I don't even have to tell you why, if I don't want to. And final news bulletin: You are not entitled to make up lies about someone because they refuse to capitulate to your demands to present their opinions.

You are not entitled to my opinion, nor are you entitled to any explanation from me as to why I choose not to give it. And you are not entitled to tell lies because I choose not to give it.

You are entitled to realize, "Oh, well. Patrick's not going to tell me what he thinks about this. Guess I'll discuss it with someone else or move on to another topic."

You and luj are extraordinarily sick individuals, 'Waste. Here you are, actually believing you can justify laying the most despicable accusation possible upon a human being. And for what? Because he chose not to enter a discussion with you about a particular topic.

I could tell you why I don't answer it. But I'm not going to. To do so would actually be capitulating to bullies.

But just to put your illness in perspective, 'Waste. No one else on this blog felt any need whatsoever to resort to bullying tactics and making up lies about me because I chose only to insert a few facts about the issue that were being overlooked without weighing in on it.

And let's be serious for a moment. Do you actually think the mental weakling lujlp is even capable of having an informed opinion on this issue? Up until two days ago, he didn't even realize that you had to enter a contract to board a plane. In fact, he insisted that he didn't.

Even if he never paid attention to the contracts he was (in effect) signing, then common sense would dictate that there's a contract involved. Would a reasonable person at least expect there would be one? Not luj. "Harrumph! Harrumph! I never entered a contract to get on a plane."

Um...duh. Yeah, you did.

Here's a useful little mantra for you, 'Waste. Repeat after me.

"I am entitled to ask for someone's opinion. They are not obligated to give it to me, nor are they obligated even to tell me why they don't give it to me. That does not give me the right to decide their opinion for them, nor does it give me the right to tell lies about them. Nor do I have the right to call them child molesters."

'Waste, you are a bully, as is luj. And I do not capitulate to bullies. They are, in essence, cowards, as demonstrated by the fact that you choose the internet as your medium to attempt to bully others. It's a good idea, for a while...the anonymity allows you to be yourself without fear of the consequences.

Had you asked me why I don't enter discussions about the TSA, I might have told you. But...too late. You chose to make an asshole of yourself, and you did so. On a grand scale. You are filth, plain and simple. I cannot call you human.

This internet bullying is a nice thing, 'Waste-product, but I wouldn't push my luck too much, though. It wouldn't take too much for someone to hack their way into your real-life information. You just might one day walk out your front door into a real-time punch in the mouth. (Which is, after all, the only way to deal with bullies.)

Don't leave me Patrick! You're the only one who shares my views on many of these issues!

Although not the TSA ones specifically. But I do often read your posts (If I remember correctly, mainly on vegetarianism and Palestinians) and think, "Finally a voice of reason!"

So if you're making this announcement hoping some one will beg you to stay, I will happily oblige.

Please!
Please!
Please!
Please!
Please!
Please!
Please!
Please!
Please!
Please!
Please!
Please!
Please!
Please!
Please!
Please!

Personally, I think all this crap about Snowden is just a red herring for what's really going on, that we haven't found out about yet. Because when the shit hits the fan on what the NSA has REALLY been doing (let's say, oh, hacking into peoples' 401ks, just as a ferinstance), THAT'S when the American people will rise up and say "ENOUGH!" Or not. Because I think Patrick's really the only one who's got it right - too many people are too complacent anymore. Give 'em their shinies and their flat screen tvs, give 'em their beer and Honey Boo Boo, and most of 'em are gonna ignore the "big bad gub'mint" because they've been told there ain't nothin' they can do about it. And they believe it.

Sad sad sad.

(Patrick, don't go. I know we've had our little run-ins from time to time, but I'd miss you. And I DO like you. A lot.

I'm going to be in Florida this weekend. I've posted my email address. I wouldn't mind meeting you)

Clearly I've missed something.

I'm currently in the process of sending in renewals for classified visit requests, so this Snowden business is on my mind right now. But also for that reason, I have to be circumspect. So please bear with me. Some reading between the lines might be required.

Bottom line up front: I don't think that granting Snowden immunity or not is going to make much difference at this point. He isn't coming back to the U.S. unless he's dragged back. And public protestations aside, I don't think the government really has much interest in doing so. Reason why: whatever damage he's going to do, he has already done. Russia has already gotten out of him everything they want from him. At this point he has no further value to them, except maybe as a propaganda icon. The rest of his life, however long it lasts, will be spent bouncing back and forth between Moscow and various banana-republic capitals, with stretches of sleeping in airports for weeks at a time, and constantly being monitored by "handlers". At this point he's basically an expensive, and not particularly wanted, Kewpie doll. This prison of his own creation is much worse than anything the U.S. government could ever do to him.

There's a right way and a wrong way to go about these things. Snowden had a window to do things the right way. He blew it. That pisses me off, hugely. He had an opportunity to set things up so that all the facts would be laid bare and we could have a national throw-down on the issues. Instead, what's going to happen is that the extent of the situation will probably never be known for sure, and any attempts to find out will probably just dissolve in a morass of accusations and counter-accusations.

and saw you refer to a comment by luj, but I cannot find it. While the comment is nasty, are you going to let it drive you away?

One question crella, if you didnt see it how do you know its nasty?

'Waste, you are a liar. You know it. I know it. You and luj asked for my opinion on something. I chose not to give it. So, you and luj decided to get "creative" with the parameters, and claimed that I was invited to disagree with what the TSA is doing and I refused to do so.

First off Patrick, I thought you were ignoring us? Second we did not get creative after several people made the assumption that you supported the TSA in their molestation and you protested you were 'reporting the facts'. We did not 'claim' you were invited to disagree we deliberately asked if you disagreed. On several occasions. You responded by saying you refused to disagree

No, I chose not to give my opinion one way or another. Newsflash: I do not have to give my opinion because you demand it. Further breaking news: I don't even have to tell you why, if I don't want to. And final news bulletin: You are not entitled to make up lies about someone because they refuse to capitulate to your demands to present their opinions.

Well isnt this the pot calling the kettle black? I accused you of supporting power hungry assholes. No where did I call you, or even those you support pedophiles. So either YOU are make[ing] up lies about someone because they refuse to capitulate to your demands" or your subconcious is trying to draw your attention to something.

I'm guessing the later, because while you can be an ass at times you've never struck me as unethical when scrapping about.

Though I do find it odd you lost your shit over filming permits when using guns and you wont get upset over TSA agents and cops fingering peoples assholes

You and luj are extraordinarily sick individuals, 'Waste. Here you are, actually believing you can justify laying the most despicable accusation possible upon a human being. And for what? Because he chose not to enter a discussion with you about a particular topic.

Again, I never called you a pedophile, you called yourself that.

Up until two days ago, he didn't even realize that you had to enter a contract to board a plane. In fact, he insisted that he didn't.

Actually what I said was I had never signed anything to board a plane, and I havent

Look here Patrick. You've gone off the deep end. You've had years to say you disagree with the behavior of the TSA. YEARS. scorces of months, thousands of days, millions of hours. Yet every tiem you are asked you say you refuse to disagree, not that you refuse to ANSWER, that you refuse to DISAGREE.

Thats on you, no one else.

As far as I can tell this one subject is the only one we've really ever disagreed on. And in response to that disagreement you gone from kind of amusing disparaging remarks, to some childish I'n not talking to you (pay attention to me so you can see I'm not talking to you) game, to threatening to leave because less than 4 people dare to disagree with you on
one
fucking
subject?

For christs sake man, grow up already

Crella, direct quote from lujlp: "Patrick, who advocates for the TSA fingerbanging babies in the name of national security..."

You have now seen me being accused of supporting pedophilia. Which is, essentially, calling me a pedophile. Who supports pedophilia, but pedophiles?

There's a right way and a wrong way to go about these things. Snowden had a window to do things the right way. He blew it. That pisses me off, hugely. He had an opportunity to set things up so that all the facts would be laid bare and we could have a national throw-down on the issues. Instead, what's going to happen is that the extent of the situation will probably never be known for sure, and any attempts to find out will probably just dissolve in a morass of accusations and counter-accusations.

Posted by: Cousin Dave at August 8, 2013 7:18 AM

I might agree with you Cousin Dave, if hadn't read that at least three prior employees blew the whistle on the NSA, and all three of them were ignored, and retaliated against.

Other than that, your analysis is spot on.

Look at the date

http://mobile.rawstory.com/therawstory/#!/entry/nsa-whistle-blowers-allege-data-being-collected-on-every-american,5160ea1ed7fc7b56709eb1b0/1

Isab, I'll go look at that later... something else I can't access at work.

@Patrick "Snowden should be tried for treason"

I agree that he should be tried for treason but only because of the fact that he would be found completely innocent, and then be a free man, as he should be - it is laughably impossible that he might be convicted of treason.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/06/12/no-edward-snowden-probably-didnt-commit-treason/

Snowden should be regarded as a hero for exposing corrupt Constitutional violations and for risking his life to protect the rights and liberties of Americans.

Exactly, the way George Zimmerman should have been tried for murder.

"Crella, direct quote from lujlp: "Patrick, who advocates for the TSA fingerbanging babies in the name of national security..."

You have now seen me being accused of supporting pedophilia. Which is, essentially, calling me a pedophile. Who supports pedophilia, but pedophiles?"

But you know it's not true, I know it's not true. You can't stop people from saying disgusting things on the internet (and that was a disgusting mental image, thanks lujlp), but you can stop letting them affect you.

"One question crella, if you didnt see it how do you know its nasty?"

While I did not see the direct quote until Patrick posted it, he said you accused him of being a pedophile, and that fits neatly into my 'nasty remark' category...

"Crella, direct quote from lujlp: "Patrick, who advocates for the TSA fingerbanging babies in the name of national security..."

What do you call that remark, lujlp? You stated he was advocating sexual assault of babies by the TSA.

He does crella. But that does not make him nor those sexually assaulting the american public (which includes children) pedophiles.

Pedophiles are sexually aroused by children and by touching children.

Members of the TSA and those who support them are enamored of governemnt power and control

Also Patrick has stated he refuses to disagree with the actions of the TSA, what would you call THAT remark?

"Also Patrick has stated he refuses to disagree with the actions of the TSA, what would you call THAT remark?"

An opinion that I don't agree with, but far from deliberately offensive. As opposed to the comment of yours that's being discussed which I can't even bring myself to type - it's that vile.

Is the TSA actually probing babies' body cavities? Are they actually 'finger banging' babies? You don't think that's a gross overstatement?

Patrick not opposing the TSA? Why I call THAT remark 'his opinion'. What else would you call it? I fail to see where it justifies you going into attack mode.

If you're expecting luj to man up and admit he crossed a line, you're wasting your time. He has lied repeatedly to avoid committing himself to a particular position.

I chose to not to commit to any opinion on the TSA on this blog. Luj has claimed repeatedly that refusing to give an opinion means that I support it.

Then, probably recognizing that this claim is so obviously defective, he changed his story, claiming that I "refused to disagree."

No, I refused to give my opinion on the topic at all. And I will not be bullied by luj or Radwaste or anyone else into giving it. No matter how many times luj calls me a pedophile.

Incidentally, I would love to meet the judge who would determine that the sexual act that luj loves describing on babies is not pedophilia.

crella, Elle, TSA agents touch peoples genitals, hundereds have complained that they have inserted fingers into their openings. Yes my comment was vile and shocking

THE FACT THAT PEOPLE ARE FUCKING PAID BY THE GOVERNEMNT TO FONDLE YOU IN THE NAME OF FAUX SECUIRTY SHOULD BE TEN FUCKING TIMES WORSE THEN THE WORDS DESCRIBING THE ACTIONS

And Partrick SUPPORTS those actions.

I never called him a pedophile, nor did I refer to those proto humans working for the TSA pedophiles, as they dont do it for sexual gratification but for love of power.

Patrick called himself a pedophile. Whether that is a result of his own guilty concious, or him just trying to deflect the fact that he approves of the TSA touching people's (which includes children) genitals.

Crella, Elle, you want to know why I went so over the top?

Patrick does nothing to protest the TSA or roadside cops conducting cavity searches on the side of the road without bothering to change gloves between probing one woman's ass and the next woman's vagina.

But he went completely ape shit over the fact that people filming movies where the actors wearing ski masks and threatening people with machine guns have to get a permit and let the local cops know they arent using real guns.

So yeah I thought such a monumental disconnect needed to be debased as thuroughly and shockingly as possible.

Casue really, I ask you, who goes nuts about film permits to warn cops that those arent real guns, and if perfectly fine with the sexual assault of millions of americans (including children) for no reason what so ever?

As always, luj lies. And the only one going apeshit is him. I never said one way or another about TSA. luj lies when he says I refused to object. I refused to give my opinion. He doesn't know what I think, he isn't going to know what I think, and that drives him apeshit.

He and Waste-product seem to believe that they're entitled to the opinions of every person on this blog, and if they don't get it, they have the right to decide for you.

And yes, luj did call me a child molester, his really, really perverted and disgusting imagery (which should probably prompt an investigation by the FBI) was not expressed in terms of controlling someone else. They were sexual terms, as can be plainly seen. (Although rape is actually
more about control, domination and oppression than about lust. So luj pretending that his really disgusting and perverted imagery was about control and not about sexuality does not absolve him. On the contrary, it confirms that he called me a child molester.)

And luj is lying also about what I said during the permit thread. He claims I object to warning the police about what's happening, when I said in that thread, more than once, that a phone call to the police to let them know what's happening will suffice. Obviously, I'm not objecting to warning the police when I plainly stated they should call the police first to warn them.

So, the only disconnect is between luj and the truth. At this point, I'm not certain is luj is a pathological liar, or is simply so weak in the head that he can't even remember what he reads two days ago. (Though I would not rule out both.)

luj, you obviously have serious control issues, and you need professional help. At least you admitted you're off the deep end.

Patrick does nothing to protest the TSA or roadside cops conducting cavity searches on the side of the road without bothering to change gloves between probing one woman's ass and the next woman's vagina.

This may come as a shock to you, but I'm not obligated to protest these things on this blog or share my opinions with you.

It's plain to me that you feel you have the right to know everyone's opinion when you demand it. Obviously, that's a serious problem with control. No one is obligated to tell your opinion on anything. And given the your rather deep-seated control issues, it's certainly understandable if they choose not to.

And yes, you did call me a child molester. You did not express your rather sick, disgusting and perverted description of TSA's activities in clinical terms. You used sexual terms.

"Patrick, who advocates for the TSA fingerbanging babies in the name of national security..."

And I never advocated anything. I simply declined to share my opinion here, as is my right, much as it bothers you that I will not share my opinion with you.

"Patrick does nothing to protest the TSA or roadside cops conducting cavity searches on the side of the road without bothering to change gloves between probing one woman's ass and the next woman's vagina."

We're required to post comments of protest regarding everything you deem worthy of protest, or be found lacking, and HERE, so you can see it and approve? We are commenters on a blog. It is not our blog. Are people reading a blog responsible for protesting or objecting to each and every objectionable issue in order to be judged worthy to comment?

I read Amy's blog for enjoyment, and also for her opinion of various issues. I like the way she thinks, her sense of humor, and I very often learn something.

I don't think that makes me required to have some kind of demonstrable Doctrine of Crella available for you to check over to see if I'm hitting all the notes in my comments that you seem to deem necessary for "membership", or to judge whether I'm worthy of censure because I do not comment on issues you see as core issues. I don't even think that blog owners should be required to address each and every issue to have credibility with those following the blog.

Blog owners can write about, or not write about what pleases them. People who comment can choose to comment, or not comment on, particular posts. I am in no way required to give you my opinion on every issue brought up on this blog, and neither is Patrick (or anyone else). You are not blog owner but a fellow commenter and therefore I don't think it's up to you to mete out punishment in the form or accusations or nasty remarks, in other words, police the blog and rag on people who don't post on articles you think they should.

Not posting on something doesn't mean you don't have an opinion about it. And besides, what exactly does a comment against cavity searches on Texas roadsides, or the TSA, DO about the issue? Diddly-squat. It surely makes for interesting discussion (which is why I think we're here) but it does little about the actual issue...unless there have been results in Texas due to your comments here that I am not aware of...

I write to politicians,dozens of letters, do you? Or do you just post to blog articles and call it a day, having done your part?

Crella, Patrick is a moron with a persecution complex. I accused him of supporting a security state mentality which permits the sexual assault of children.

If he thinks that makes him a pedophile thats on him.

Side note, why is him accusing me directly of pedophilia not as shocking to you?

Also the point of permits is not to just let the local precinct know the morning of. What of the film location is on the edge and a 911 call gets routed to the precinct not called?

What if thieves called in a film location and then carried out a series of robberies that they cops wouldnt respond to?

Patrick continued to rant about how stupid it was even after dozens pointed out the flaws in his logic and the reasons for the permits on of which is to have an actual cop on scene to prevent needless 911 call tying up from real emergencies.

Now maybe Patrick overreacted to my criticism because gay men have often been erroneously accused of pedophilia, but given the fact he ignored every post where I pointed out that I only accused him of supporting a burgeoning police state I'm thinking he's just an unethical prick who doesnt like the fact that anyone dared disagree with him

"I'm thinking he's just an unethical prick who doesnt like the fact that anyone dared disagree with him"

but you say-

"Patrick is a moron with a persecution complex. I accused him of supporting a security state mentality which permits the sexual assault of children."

DOES the TSA sexually assault children? You're beating him over the head with something that isn't even occurring, then says he advocates it.

The someone who doesn't like people disagreeing with him in the slightest is you.

I like it when people disagree with me, it gives me to opportunity to learn new things and see thing from a new perspective.

And yes the TSA does molest children, they've even hired a few CONVICTED child molesters.

Dont belive me though, use google you'll find scores of horror stories

There may be child molesters hired by the TSA, but what you said was 'Patrick is in favor of the TSA finger-banging babies', as if it were official TSA policy.

It is not.

You're really reaching now.