美猶真陰毒, [史諾登事件]中國躺著也中槍!
- 美國官員透露，由於29歲的電腦高手史諾登有可能帶著美國最敏感機密，投靠中國，美國情治單位目前已將史諾登洩露美國國家安全局機密一事，視作外國間諜案處理。國會眾院情報委員會領袖也表示，他們正在檢視史諾登是否獲得外國政府，尤其是中國政府的協助。
- 密歇根州共和黨委員會主席Mike Rogers 在華盛頓告訴記者: [內務委員會正與美國情報機構徹底斯諾登逃離美國到香港後, 跟中國有什麼聯繫, 我們需要知道更多有關史諾登的動機、所接觸人士、他的行蹤、他為何選擇逃到香港，以及他在香港如何生存，是否獲得中國的奧援。]
- 馬里蘭州民主黨議員Ruppersberger對媒體說: [這似乎很不尋常: 他在中國，要求中國政府保護, 向中國媒體開記者招待會]
- 前美國中央情報局及國防部幕僚長貝希13日表示，史諾登是否可能投靠中國，甚至是否與中國官方合作，是美國政府目前最關切的問題。貝希說：「他很可能會為美國帶來極大損失，外國政府若取得史諾登所知的一切，就可探知美國蒐集數據情報的途徑。」
偷換概念 !
現在就是想說成這小子是變節投敵, 那怕他去的是香港，而不是中國, 反正大多數美國民眾不知道有什麼區別。他讓英國報紙 Guardian UK 採訪時，他們不說他給了英國的媒體開記者招待會, 他讓香港報紙 SCMP 採訪時他們就說成他給了中國的媒體開記者招待會。
- 據香港無線電視報導，香港立法會部分議員正考慮傳召史諾登到立法會，針對他所提出有關香港官商與學界網路遭入侵的指控作證。
如果香港真的這樣做，那正好配合美猶對中國的"潑髒水"行動, 香港官員說成中國官員, 那怕只是"針對他所提出有關香港官商與學界網路遭入侵的指控作證。" 美猶也可以說成 : 未知他跟中國官員私下揭露過什麼國家機密, 危害美國國家安全 !
其實有沒有研究過這小子在CIA的權力範圍有多大?
他被授權讀取什麼類型的國家機密檔案 ?
他那四部電腦裡面是不是真的藏有美國的國家機密檔案 ?
就算是美國的國家機密檔案, 這是有多機密的國家機密?
到目前為止，他暴露了的所謂"機密", 其實一點也不是什麼大秘密 !
有沒有研究這小子是不是美猶送來的臥底 ?
其實有沒有研究過這小子在CIA的權力範圍有多大?
他被授權讀取什麼類型的國家機密檔案 ?
他那四部電腦裡面是不是真的藏有美國的國家機密檔案 ?
就算是美國的國家機密檔案, 這是有多機密的國家機密?
到目前為止，他暴露了的所謂"機密", 其實一點也不是什麼大秘密 !
有沒有研究這小子是不是美猶送來的臥底 ?
繼續圍觀 !
--------------------------------------------------------------------
就算被人拆穿了，沒了道德優勢，還是要死雞撐飯蓋！玩政治，中國人真是不夠美猶玩，這麼髒，這麼毒，這麼卑鄙，這麼不要臉，只有美猶做得到！然而，所謂上帝在地上所揀選的人，智慧也只是馬馬虎虎，他們可能是上帝在地上所揀選的人，但“邪不能勝正”才是上帝在地上所定下的規律，因此，美猶行惡必遭清算！下面的文章，正好顯示他們的陰暗層面！作者約翰·博爾頓是美國政府中最硬的鷹派人物，他對中國的仇恨，最能代表美國政府裡面最仇恨中國的一組美猶政客，這次“斯諾登事件”，最搶著出來向中國潑髒水的政客都是美猶！北京! 北京! 請擦亮眼, 永永遠遠的擦亮眼!
Edward Snowden's leaks are a grave threat to US national security
Whatever his grandiose claims, the NSA leaker has betrayed his country by gifting China moral equivalence for its cyber warfare
看看小標題 "Whatever his grandiose claims, the NSA leaker has betrayed his country by gifting China moral equivalence for its cyber warfare" : 不管他的話怎樣洋洋大觀, 通過贈予中國在網絡戰等同的道德地位 ,洩密者已經背叛了他的國家 !
簡單的一句, 裡面包含: 野蠻, 仇恨. 極權, 背叛國家的定義我John Bolton說什麼就是什麼
- guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 18 June 2013 07.30 ED
Edward Snowden's revelations regarding highly sensitive US techniques for gathering foreign-intelligence
continue roiling Washington. And because Snowden combined elements of
truth swirled together with paranoid speculation, outright lies and pure
hype, reviving a rational discussion has been hard.
Snowden's sympathizers and anti-American activists have so far largely controlled his story line. But that is changing, and with it, the likely tenor of the debate over whether Snowden is a hero or a traitor.
Publicizing America's alleged intelligence-collection programs against China may not be identical to Philip Agee revealing the identities of US clandestine operatives, thereby endangering their lives, but it is close. We do not yet know whether Snowden jeopardized US agents, but vital sources and methods of intelligence gathering and operations are clearly at risk. In cyber terms, this is akin to Benedict Arnold scheming to betray West Point's defenses to the British, thereby allowing them to seize a key American fortification, splitting the colonies geographically at a critical point during the American Revolution.
廢話! 如果美國沒有這樣做，Snowden 怎能給中國在網絡戰等同的道德地位 ?
Snowden's initial leaks on NSA programs also caused substantial political harm, above and beyond the intelligence damage. Several European governments which co-operated with the US are now predictably running for the tall grass, endangering the continuity of existing programs and damaging prospects for future co-operation. As with the Bradley Manning/WikiLeaks exposure of thousands of classified State Department and Pentagon cables, Europeans want to know why Washington can't protect sensitive information.
Economically, cyber warfare is even more one-sided. As economist Irwin Stelzer recently said (paywall):
The NSA's programs, at least, were approved by all three branches of our government, two elected by the people and the third populated by the first two. The Founders only gave us three branches, and while far from perfect, they are at least ultimately accountable to America's real sovereigns: its citizens. Snowden is accountable only to his own self-importance.
Moreover, the China leaks highlight gaps and inconsistencies in Snowden's "legend" (as invented identities are sometimes called). Before he made his run for China, was he acting alone, as he claims, or was he acting partly as a vehicle for others in the intelligence community or in Congress, disgruntled and out to settle scores? Snowden denies previous ties to China's government or being Beijing's agent: is this true or not? Or is he not now, both overtly and covertly, trying to bribe Beijing's authorities to secure asylum in China, contrary to his earlier smug comments about facing the consequences of his actions in America?
我們不能理性的討論. 不是因為我們理虛, 這是因為 Snowden 將真相成分, 混合傳言, 徹頭徹尾的謊言與疑神疑鬼的推測 一起炒作 !
Snowden's sympathizers and anti-American activists have so far largely controlled his story line. But that is changing, and with it, the likely tenor of the debate over whether Snowden is a hero or a traitor.
斯諾登的同情者和反美運動活動家迄今已在很大程度上控制了他的故事線。但在激化斯諾登是英雄還是叛徒的辯論下, 這種情況正發生變化
Snowden initially violated his oath to safeguard the national security secrets entrusted to him by revealing National Security Agency (NSA) programs arguably affecting the privacy of US citizens. The second wave of leaks, however, involved purported American cyber-intelligence activities globally and against China. Snowden claimed there were more than 61,000 US hacking operations globally, with hundreds of them directed at China and Hong Kong, and implied the existence of numerous other activities to surveil and counter Beijing's growing cyber-warfare capabilities.可圈可點 !也是說: 為了爭取故事線控制權, 必須引導主流輿論 將Snowden 描為叛徒; 為了將Snowden 描為叛徒, 中國必須中槍 !
Publicizing America's alleged intelligence-collection programs against China may not be identical to Philip Agee revealing the identities of US clandestine operatives, thereby endangering their lives, but it is close. We do not yet know whether Snowden jeopardized US agents, but vital sources and methods of intelligence gathering and operations are clearly at risk. In cyber terms, this is akin to Benedict Arnold scheming to betray West Point's defenses to the British, thereby allowing them to seize a key American fortification, splitting the colonies geographically at a critical point during the American Revolution.
這招叫做: Guilt by Association:The political implications are grave. Snowden has given Beijing something it couldn't achieve on its own: moral equivalence. Now, China can portray itself as a victim, besieged by America, and simply trying to defend itself.
- the attribution of guilt (without proof) to individuals because the people they associate with are guilty
因為跟當事人綁在一起相提并論的人是有罪, 因此無需證明, 當事人也是有罪 !
廢話! 如果美國沒有這樣做，Snowden 怎能給中國在網絡戰等同的道德地位 ?
Snowden's initial leaks on NSA programs also caused substantial political harm, above and beyond the intelligence damage. Several European governments which co-operated with the US are now predictably running for the tall grass, endangering the continuity of existing programs and damaging prospects for future co-operation. As with the Bradley Manning/WikiLeaks exposure of thousands of classified State Department and Pentagon cables, Europeans want to know why Washington can't protect sensitive information.
斯諾登的洩漏壞了美國與一些歐洲國家的合作項目和夥伴關係, 但關鍵的一點是在如果美國沒有這樣做，斯諾登怎能壞了這些項目和關係 ?
"Europeans want to know why Washington can't protect sensitive information." 歐洲人想知道華盛頓為什麼不能保護敏感信息?
Bolton 在忽攸讀者 !
真相是 :
Viviane Reding, the European Union’s outspoken justice commissioner, has demanded explanations from Washington and said that Prism “shows why a clear legal framework for the protection of personal data is not a luxury but a necessity.” Marietje Schaake, a Dutch member of the European Parliament from the free-market party Democrats 66, said that “for a lot of people on both sides of the Atlantic, this is a wake-up call, leading to serious questions both at the highest level and in the general public.”
The case will complicate negotiations on a free trade agreement, known as the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, Ms. Schaake said. “I worry about the fallout from Prism,” she said. The European Parliament, “representing 500 million people, must give thumbs up to a deal. And the key question is will there be enough trust, and that trust has certainly had a blow with the revelations of Prism.” ( source : Differing Views on Privacy Shape Europe’s Response to U.S. Surveillance Program )
美猶對中國的仇恨無遮無掩 ! 嗬嗬 ! 北京不值得等同的道德地位! 只有美國才可以跟道德拉上關係 ?Militarily, US combat arms are far more vulnerable to attacks on their command-and-control information technology systems than are Beijing's more primitive capabilities. That may change as China's military becomes more sophisticated, but for now, offensive cyber capabilities are a preferred Chinese strategy.
Economically, cyber warfare is even more one-sided. As economist Irwin Stelzer recently said (paywall):
"America has lots of intellectual property that is worth stealing, China has very little."By inaccurately elevating Beijing to moral equivalence with Washington, Snowden obscured this critical distinction, giving China political shelter.
在軍事上，美軍作戰力量的指揮和控制的信息技術系統比北京的低級能力更容易受到攻擊; 經濟上, 美國比中國有更多值得偷的知識產權。因此Snowden 給北京在網絡戰跟華盛頓等同的道德地位是錯的 !
什麼邏輯啊 ? !But what Americans should understand most importantly is what the China leaks reveal about Snowden. If he is lying about these programs, as in some of his earlier assertions about NSA's eavesdropping, that tells us something important about his character. And if he is telling the truth, revealing sensitive information about American efforts to protect itself against the world's greatest cyber-warfare power, that tells us even more about his character.
看看作者在中國的網戰問題如何入罪 Snowden :NSA activities against China do not even arguably violate the privacy of US citizens, which is Snowden's supposedly highminded motive for initially breaking his word, dishonorably and deceitfully. In fact, Snowden's unilateral decision to leak endangers the national security of 300 million other Americans. He didn't ask their views or their permission, and he has no democratic legitimacy whatever.
(1) 如果這些項目不是屬實, 這告訴我們他性格中一些重要的東西 ( 暗示他是個騙子 )
(2) 如果他說的是實話, 他暴露有關美國針對世界上最大的網戰大國保護自己的努力的敏感信息, 更加告訴我們他的性格 ( 暗示他是個叛徒國賊)
我的評論： 第一： 陰毒 ! 第二： 不要臉 ! 美國自己在作賊還寫到自己在抵抗世界上最大的網戰大國 !
The NSA's programs, at least, were approved by all three branches of our government, two elected by the people and the third populated by the first two. The Founders only gave us three branches, and while far from perfect, they are at least ultimately accountable to America's real sovereigns: its citizens. Snowden is accountable only to his own self-importance.
好了現在歪曲事實 , 將國安的所有活動, 說成一切都是為了抵抗中國, 它保護美國人民都來不及了, 怎麼會傷害美國人民的隱私？
還說 Snowden洩漏敏感信息沒有得到人民同意, 不民主, 國安得到人民選出來的政府的三個分支授權的, ( “根正苗红”?)
Moreover, the China leaks highlight gaps and inconsistencies in Snowden's "legend" (as invented identities are sometimes called). Before he made his run for China, was he acting alone, as he claims, or was he acting partly as a vehicle for others in the intelligence community or in Congress, disgruntled and out to settle scores? Snowden denies previous ties to China's government or being Beijing's agent: is this true or not? Or is he not now, both overtly and covertly, trying to bribe Beijing's authorities to secure asylum in China, contrary to his earlier smug comments about facing the consequences of his actions in America?
was he acting alone, as he claims,陰濕 ! 還想誰拉下水？
or was he acting partly as a vehicle for others in the intelligence community
or in Congress,
disgruntled
out to settle scores?
is he not now, both overtly and covertly, trying to bribe Beijing's authorities to secure asylum in China
嗬嗬正好不是 !
斯诺登非正式请求在冰岛进行政治避难
Unfortunately, Snowden clearly has more information to reveal, causing more damage to the United States
and its allies. But we know enough already to conclude that Snowden has
betrayed his country and the trust his countrymen placed in him in
sensitive positions of confidence in our intelligence community.
是的，你 John Bolton 說什麼就是什麼 !
So,
make no mistake: any American politician who now calls Snowden a hero
is not fit to be entrusted with America's national security.
有意思! 這句話說給誰聽 ?
