That was a nice post, elucidator.
I guess everyone else on the planet, including the Vietnamese, are wrong then. Note that it’s “Vietnamese” and not “Viet Namese”.
I’ll modify that. It was likely originally Nam Viet and called Viet Nam by the locals, but morphed into one word. Apparently, either would be correct.
I like John Kerry, he’s a pretty good guy
It’s a good thing the UN guides aren’t looked at by diplomats, country representatives, or anyone who gives a crap about protocol then. Can you imagine if the Vietna Mese found out?
Then again, they may save some face given that the two-word treatment is prominently used on the government’s web portal.
(Not that the one-word treatment is wrong per se (always check with your client’s preferred style first), just nitpicking a nitpick that wasn’t quite as nitty as all that.)
(ETA: None of this was meant to be hostile-sounding. Well, maybe reading it in S. Palin’s screechy voice would be appropriate being that this is the Pit and all.)
Snowden is adhering to the enemies of the United States and providing them air and comfort. Thus he is a traitor.
And he is living as a fugitive rather than fulfilling his obligation as an American to stand trial for his crimes. Thus he is a coward.
Kerry called it like it is.
:I check which forum I’m in:
Between his recent behavior, the way Trudeau portrayed him in 1971, and his attempt to be an empty suit with nice hair in 2004, I think Kerry has a fair bit of the pandering political slut to him.
Don’t get me wrong. I think he’s genuinely a man of some principles and convictions, a good citizen and a passable legislator. But much of what he says seems more chasing the “right” opinion as defined by someone else. He seems fake.
Didn’t Kerry help out Iran/Contra or something similar in his early career? He does seem to have veered rightwards since then.
Sure it does. Bravery doesn’t require stupidity to little or no benefit.
Cowardice is when you know what must be done, and still can’t summon up the courage to do it.
How does an all too real risk of having to spend the best decades of his life in prison further his cause? Does it get his message out any better? Sure seems like it would be hard to improve on what he’s already done in that regard.
Given Snowden’s goals and motivations - and assuming they’re altruistic rather than simply self-serving - how is he betraying those goals by not returning to the U.S. to face trial? I don’t see it.
I only see that by your morality, it’s what must be done. But he doesn’t have to be true to your inner self, only to his. I don’t see where it’s something that Snowden must do, in order to be true to his own self.
In his recent interview, Snowden claimed to be a patriot. If that’s true, then he’s betraying his inner self by not standing up in an American court of law and pleading his case for why his crimes were justified. And he’s definitely betraying himself by continuing to accept the largesse of a country that seems intent on making the US its enemy.
John Kerry isn’t a terrible person, for a politician. But I’ll say this much, the John Kerry that kicked that swiftboater’s ass on the Cavett Show is not the same John Kerry we have today.
Agreed. I especially noticed this when he was lobbying to bomb Syria. He didn’t seem to believe a singe word he was saying.
I thought Kerry was going to make an excellent Secretary of State, but I haven’t been too impressed so far. Maybe that tells us more about the job than about the man-- I honestly don’t know.
No. Leaking something to the press is not treason. Had he been passing information secretly to Mullah Omar (or some other member of al Qaeda or the Taliban), that would be treason.
There is no evidence of Snowden accepting money from the Russians. In fact, he’s only there because his passport was revoked before he could reach his desired destination in South America.
And coming back to America now would be incredibly stupid, as there is little chance of him getting a fair trial.
Daniel Ellsberg: Snowden would not get a fair trial – and Kerry is wrong
You’re like a fertilizer trade show, Smapti: constantly serving up new variations on the same bullshit.
What the fuck are you talking about?
He’s talking about Kerry’s role in the investigation into Iran-Contra.
Why does he need a trial for that? He can describe his motivations at lengths and get them made public already.
You assert this if-then connection, but where’s the argument for it?
I agree that the U.S. should give him a wider set of choices for where he can safely go, so that he can avail himself of a better choice. Once that comes to pass, if he stays in Russia, you would have a point.
He’d be pefectly safe in America.