He's called a "traitor"

[Phatscotty]

But none of that is an answer to the simple truth that Snowden revealed some very important secrets. Teaching terrorist groups where the US is spending it's espionage money is not excusable under any circumstances. The United States is not a thing; it's human beings. And helping other people to kill your people is treacherous to say the least.

Good stuff, just interested in a link on the 'teaching terrorists' charge. Could you please share

[Juan_Bottom]

Good stuff, just interested in a link on the 'teaching terrorists' charge. Could you please share

Oh bullsh*t, c'mon. Anyone who's aware of the Black Budget leak already understands this.
Snowden's black budget leak showed how much money is being pumped into counter espionage, and where in the world the money is going to. The information is so sensitive that the post refused to publish it all. Even so, they've printed out the NSA and CIA's rough budgets, including $3.8 billion defense against espionage, other exact budgets, and information on our increased spending in cyber attacks. Any intelligence agency could use this information to help them disseminate what our intelligence capabilities are.
The financial details of the Bin Laden raid were also revealed, as well as the logistical end, in that the raid was conducted by satellites with receivers all over Pakistan. It also detailed where key spy blind spots are, like with what Hezbollah really does and what Chinese jet fighters are actually capable of.
The United States has also been issuing warnings this week to allies that Snowden did take detailed information about joint intelligence operations, which could endanger them. This includes intelligence sharing with countries that are not allied with the United States, or may have separate branches of government that could be wholly unaware that there is cooperation with US intelligence.

It's not that Snowden gave terrorists our playbook exactly. It's more like he gave them our budget for players.
- $200 million for a quarterback
"Ok so they've got a good passing game."

Between that and the Manning/Snowden leak about what typed of encryptions the US cannot break, this is a very serious blow to our defense against terrorism.

Wrong. It's because the US has the biggest economy and the most power to f*ck with anyone who disagrees with it. Do what we want or we'll screw your economy with sanctions, take away your aid or invade you.

And come on: do you seriously think anyone gives aid to developing countries without attaching a bucket load of strings to it? State philanthropy is not even close to the heaven-sent gift you seem to think it is.

No you're wrong, and you're arguing like an idiot. What you're wailing about isn't even feasible and is just the common "America Sux" vaguely worded waste of everyone's time. You're thinking of Attila the Hun. The United States gives money to basically every country on the planet except for Western Europe, Australia, Canada, and Russia. Think about the scope of that. When you're living on some muddy sh*thole of an island with no economic future and the US volunteers to give your people $100,000 a year, that is in-arguably a goddamn heaven-sent gift.
Do we use our donations as a weapon during negations? Yeah, most definitely and anyone would. But does that mean we can f*ck with the entire planet and be dicks to everyone who was ever born? No, that's stupid. The United States is very small; it's the size of the Sahara Desert. If the world wanted us annihilated, we would be ancient history. America is kept in place because the world wants America in place, and because, for lack of a better word, the United States is benevolent in it's position as leader.

The US government hands out approximately $50 Billion dollars a year. Here is a map of where the aid goes to, provided by the US government. This is to help you understand the scope of funding the planet, while also leading the world in research, technology, and academia.
http://foreignassistance.gov/CountryIntro.aspx

This is in addition to the fact that Americans are always ranked in the top spots for personal charity as well. I've read that America donates over $200 Billion Dollars a year to charity annually.

[mrswdk]

The US economy is around $12t and its military spending is. what, half of the world's total? Nice try at the 'humble old me' line, but giving everyone the cute eyes doesn't really work if you're the US government.

Try going to Pakistan or most of the Middle East spinning your bullshit 'benevolence' line, see how well you're received.

[BigBallinStalin]

Note: JB has no source whatsoever for his claims about Snowden. Y'all are disputing a fictional story he created.

[Juan_Bottom]

The US economy is around $12t and its military spending is. what, half of the world's total? Nice try at the 'humble old me' line, but giving everyone the cute eyes doesn't really work if you're the US government.

Try going to Pakistan or most of the Middle East spinning your bullshit 'benevolence' line, see how well you're received.

Doesn't matter. Look at how much money we pump into Pakistan.
It's $1,876, 495,000.00
http://foreignassistance.gov/OU.aspx?OU ... AgencyID=0

Irrespective of what the local populace thinks, American assistance has kept Pakistan moving forward. You're just a jarheaded hater. What would happen, hypothetically, to the world, if America stopped giving out $250 billion in money annually? Speaking on what you yourself brought up, our next largest military competitors, China and Russia, are rated as the least charitable countries in the world. The expression "what's in it for me?" is a commonly used Chinese one. Think on that.

Note: JB has no source whatsoever for his claims about Snowden. Y'all are disputing a fictional story he created.

Well if there are no sources then it should be real easy for you to prove me wrong then, huh? Otherwise just shut the hell up because you obviously have nothing to say.

[BigBallinStalin]

Still, JB has no sources for his claim. It's not my work to provide evidence for his fictional stories, but I will show evidence that his story is fictional. There's no citations! He can make up anything, and then gets angry when this obvious truth is pointed out! Ha!

So, the point still stands. People ITT are debating JB about his fictional account of Snowden. It's pretty funny!

[mrswdk]

The expression "what's in it for me?" is a commonly used Chinese one.

Sounds legit.

[Symmetry]

To be fair, BBS considers the Irishmen who volunteered to fight against the Nazis as traitors, so there's only so much you can argue when you meet a crazy right wing brick wall.

[BigBallinStalin]

To be fair, BBS considers the Irishmen who volunteered to fight against the Nazis as traitors, so there's only so much you can argue when you meet a crazy right wing brick wall.

[Phatscotty]

Note: JB has no source whatsoever for his claims about Snowden. Y'all are disputing a fictional story he created.

Well if there are no sources then it should be real easy for you to prove me wrong then, huh? Otherwise just shut the hell up because you obviously have nothing to say.

I wanted some links too. I typed in awbullshitc'mon.com, but it only rerouted me to healthcare.gov.

JB I didn't ask because I thought you couldn't provide them, I asked so you can share your perspective better and just be a good guy and share good stuff like that with the rest of us

Y U bogart?

[Symmetry]

To be fair, BBS considers the Irishmen who volunteered to fight against the Nazis as traitors, so there's only so much you can argue when you meet a crazy right wing brick wall.

I'm not sure if that was a troll post or not, it looked a bit like an orc.

[Phatscotty]

IDK, maybe what Snowden did is okay. He's just following in Obama's footsteps. I would dare say directly supplying arms to foreign enemies is a step beyond possibly indirectly supplying information. Now watch, as all the people who are up Snowden's ass say nothing about God Obama.

President Obama waives a provision of federal law designed to prevent the supply of arms to terrorist groups.
http://washingtonexaminer.com/updated-o ... le/2535885

[Symmetry]

Meh, if you want to go with a proper US terrorist supporter, look no further than Peter King, former Chairman of the House Committee on Homeland Security, and fundraiser for the IRA. He's Republican though, so maybe he doesn't count when it comes to helping terrorists.

King became involved with NORAID, an organization that the British, Irish and U.S. governments had accused of financing IRA activities and providing them with weapons.[14][30][31][32] Regarding the 30 years of violence during which the IRA killed over 1,700 people, including Lord Mountbatten, Lord Kaberry, Sir Anthony Berry MP and over 600 civilians, King said, "If civilians are killed in an attack on a military installation, it is certainly regrettable, but I will not morally blame the IRA for it."[33]

[mrswdk]

How did the IRA know Lord Mountbatten had dandruff?

They found his head and shoulders on the beach.

[Symmetry]

How did the IRA know Lord Mountbatten had dandruff?

They found his head and shoulders on the beach.

The boat was destroyed by the force of the blast. Mountbatten, then aged 79, was pulled alive from the water by nearby fishermen, but died from his injuries before being brought to the shore.[76][77][78] Others killed by the blast were Nicholas Knatchbull, his elder daughter's 14-year-old son; and Paul Maxwell, a 15-year-old from County Fermanagh who was a crew member.[79]

I like my sick jokes to be forensically accurate where possible. Still, good call on one of the terrorist bombings Peter King was funding.