What the "Snowden is a traitor" crowd don't get

[noise]

There has not been any sort of truth or reconciliation effort after 9/11. Instead government officials exhibit a grandiose sense of entitlement as they conduct themselves in a "we are above the law" manner. It is extremely arrogant to sweep away massive Bush administration betrayals of the public by claiming "we need to move on for the good of the country." Or to suggest that investigating torture is somehow tantamount to criminalizing politics.

The reason so many people support Snowden is because his leaks are based on the idea that the government has breached its trust with the public. The word of government officials isn't good enough to justify all this power and secrecy. Fearmongering and intimidation are not indicative of a government acting in good faith.

[99th_Monkey]

1. That IS certainly one of the things 'they' seem overly obtuse about, for sure.

Another is acting like Daniel Ellsberg -- and everything that incident represents
re: civil liberties -- never happend, as though they never heard of the words "whistle
blower", much less have any idea what the term means.

[kardonb]

22. snowden

what I DO get :he took the job with the sole purpose to spy and denigrate National Security . Ergo : he is a traitor ! Forget all the lame excuses of privacy , you know damn well there is none as soon as you enter the cyber world : Facebook , twitter , etc .

[99th_Monkey]

23. "Forget all the lame excuses of privacy" <-- your words

Wow. Just wow.

Thank you for your honesty at least.

[Cronus Protagonist]

24. ummmm the privacy here is in telephone communications

Apparently you are not aware of that. And spying needs a foreign power, and there was none involved in this case. As for denigrating national security, this is internal spying upon US citizens that is explicitly disallowed, and in fact is plainly and clearly UNAMERICAN in its nature. What's an American to do when confronted with private contractors who are not even part of the government are doing this kind of spying on his fellow Americans? Yup. You know the answer. It is his constitutional duty.

[JDPriestly]

33. Does the NSA equal the government? the United States? Does it trump the Constitution?

A traitor is one who betrays the US, the Constitution and who gives aid and comfort to the enemy. I don't see that Snowden has done that at all.

Enemies who are also spying on their people can only be troubled by Snowden's forthrightness because someone in their country will follow Snowden's example and give back to the people the nation that is belongs to the people and not to a tiny clique at the top.

[NuclearDem]

35. Well, gee, can't argue with that word/colon salad.

[Enthusiast]

58. No, shit?

[URL=.html][IMG][/IMG][/URL]

[sabrina 1]

72. You just repeated a talking point that has no basis in fact. Where did you get that from and

can you please provide some evidence of this claim? Nothing from Faux or other right wing sources please, we know all their 'traitor' memos by heart.

Thanks in advance.

[SomethingFishy]

115. First of all you have no idea why Snowden took the job

probably because it payed well.

And while I agree, and so do the terms of service, that when you post on twitter or Facebook or anywhere on the internet for that matter your shit is public.

However, my e-mails and my phone calls and my private texts are none of anyones business including the government.

You call "privacy" a lame excuse. I call it one of the founding principles of this nation.

[hopemountain]

215. he said himself why he took the job

he took the job to get this very information. read the text of his greenwald "interviews" and statements to the chinese press.

[Th1onein]

216. So the FUCK what?

He did more than you did, to protect YOUR privacy. So the FUCK what he took the job to get the information he needed to expose what they're doing to their own people? So the FUCK what?

[hopemountain]

252. oh, well

Last edited Sun Jul 21, 2013, 06:30 PM - Edit history (1)

pardon the fuck me.

really, you are still under the illusion that we can do something about it?
we have no say over our rights to privacy - that's been done to us since that fuck head j. e. hoover led the invasion into all of our private lives. before i was even born, i might add. there is nothing any of us can do about the secretive military industrial complex. not our legislators, not our president.

my concern is this twerp intentionally got the information and planned to sell it to the highest bidder & make himself a hero while enraging all of our enemies and putting the safety of our loved ones at greater peril. he was naive, grandiose, and yes, stupid - to say the least.

[Th1onein]

253. First, WHERE'S THE EVIDENCE OF YOUR ALLEGATIONS?

"my concern is this twerp intentionally got the information and planned to sell it to the highest bidder & make himself a hero while enraging all of our enemies and putting the safety of our loved ones at greater peril."

Got any evidence? Any at all?

[hopemountain]

254. where is YOUR evidence?

all i need to know is he said he intentionally got hired on to get the information
he had 4 laptops
he went to the countries of our enemies
what, he didn't know that these countries are also hacking into our privacy and secrets?

that is all the proof and evidence i need.

but, since you need more, get it yourself. i can't teach you common sense.

[Th1onein]

255. It works like this: When you accuse someone of something, you have EVIDENCE.

So simple.

But, then, you know that already, don't you? But, instead of providing evidence of what you allege, you try to make it fly with "because I said so."

Sorry, FAIL.

[hopemountain]

256. the evidence

i read and heard were his statements. that is enough evidence to satisfy me.

[Th1onein]

257. Got links? On edit: Bzzzt! Times up! You FAIL again!

Last edited Tue Jul 23, 2013, 06:19 PM - Edit history (1)

I'd like to read and hear the same thing, yanno? Somehow, I don't think I will, though; not if I depend on you to give me the links to your "evidence."

[hopemountain]

258. do your own research and reading

to prove me wrong. i am not the least bit interested in convincing you nor proving anything to YOU.

[Th1onein]

259. LOL! Too little, too late. Sorry, you FAIL. Again.

Come on, now, surely you can come up with ONE little linkie, to prove your statements? Do you really expect people to take you seriously if you can't do that?

I'm not the only one on this forum. You made statements that are unsubstantiated, that remain unsubstantiated, to this entire forum. Please substantiate them with evidence.

Or, you can just go ahead and admit you're wrong. That'd be good.

[BehindTheCurtain76]

27. low as it gets

The ones who say Snowden is a traitor are the lowest of the low on the human evolution ladder. They are either brain dead or victims of their own conveniently convoluted belief systems meant to absolve them of all constructive criticism. People afraid of terrorism are cowards plain and simple. They are the ones that evil, Machiavellian rulers target to push through there draconian policies of control by creating fear while sometimes being the actual perpetrators instead of terrorists. None of these terror incidents have been investigated properly due to stonewalling...who wouldn't want to know the truth except those hiding behind 'national security'. Our government kills thousands every month and allows our own people to be poisoned so if you believe they 'care' then your just plain stupid.

[99th_Monkey]

31. I suspect some may be sucking on Big Guv-mint tits, getting paid to do it

I can't prove that, but let's just say, it wouldn't surprise me for a second.

[BehindTheCurtain76]

48. I agree

Sock puppet profiles have revolutionized blogging and online commenting to influence public opinion or as I call it..."consensus reality". Like your profile name btw...99th Monkey is what it's all about.

[99th_Monkey]

53. .

Thanks. It's too funny, because just earlier today, I changed my avatar pic
from Rob't Kennedy to Einstein, just to change it up, and because I loved the
silliness he captures in it.

[BehindTheCurtain76]

55. Einstein

He was an anti-war activist who became a vegetarian and taught people to push limits and think outside the box...like MLK he would be Obama's biggest critic if he were around...kinda like Dr Cornell West.

[99th_Monkey]

91. Yah, that too. :-) eom

[Enthusiast]

59. You don't need to prove it.

It is true nonetheless.

[Katashi_itto]

60. Agree, I think it's very obvious who they are

[truth2power]

118. I agree, monkey. What you said, exactly. And it rankles, more than you know...

[creeksneakers2]

178. I'm that low

not because I love big brother and I want to be spied on. I call Snowden a traitor because he gave classified information to countries we are in conflict with. If Snowden stopped at revealing U.S. surveillance of its own citizens I'd call him a whistle blower and maybe even a hero.

Most of the other posters who have called Snowden a traitor shared my reasoning. I think its contemptible how Snowden supporters here continue to try to confuse the issues of the surveillance revelations and the betrayal of our secrets to countries we are in conflict with.

[Swagman]

180. how do you know

he gave classified information to countries we are in conflict with?

[creeksneakers2]

211. Following the news

There were revelations about international spying that had nothing to do with domestic spying. For one, he let the Chinese know who we had hacked in China. Snowden's revelations collapsed an effort to get the Chinese to quit industrial spying on us.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-07-01/snowden-s-leaks-cloud-u-s-plan-to-curb-chinese-hacking.html

[brooklynite]

2. What the "Snowden is a hero" crowd don't get

It is true that there hasn't been a "truth or reconcillation" effort...because by and large, the people aren't interested in one. This is NOT a situation where "above the law" politicians are seperated from an oppressed populace; it's a situation where most people perceive the world as a dangerous place (whether deservedly or not), and their ELECTED officials respond, as much for CYA as anything else, by implementing and maintaing security and intelligence-gathering policies. The Patriot Act was passed by an elected Congress; it has been in force for 10 years during which the Republicans and Democrats have changed control, and no Party, no liberal caucus, and no Party base has pushed to significantly change the Law, much less repeal it.

I'm not personally opposed to reforming the rules under which the NSA acts, but neither am I naive enough to espouse (as some DU'ers have) that we should have no intelligence-gathering whatsoever. And neither are most voters, including MOST DEMOCRATS. Panamanian officials just stopped a North Korean ship attempting to smuggle missle parts; do you suppose somebody might have gathered some foreign intelligence that led to the seizure?

Edward Snowden violated his security clearance. His release of information may have put our legitimate intelligence-gathering efforts at rish; it may not have. But it wasn't his decision to make, and he deserves to face charges for his conduct.

[noise]

6. The public is intimidated into supporting these policies

CIA officials said the public needs to debate whether they want the CIA using torture. Typically followed by a comment noting that when bodies pile up because the CIA can no longer prevent attacks the anti-torture crowd should take responsibility. The so called public demand for safety has been driven by an unwavering fearmongering campaign.

[Thinkingabout]

9. Snowden breached the trust his employer had in him, stole from the NSA and further breached the keep

his mouth shut and do not divulge the information of the operation. Broken trust, something many needs to know about Snowden,

[rhett o rick]

15. And what Booz-Allen is doing to violate our Constitution dwarfs what Snowden did. But because they

are your authoritarian big daddy, you will forgive them. Booz-Allen wants Snowden punished and you side with them. You side with Gen Clapper, Mueller, and Comey, and the Republican spy programs thru and thru.

I suppose that when David fought Goliath, you rooted for Goliath. Always following the biggest bully because you mistakenly think you are safer with them. They dont love you. They will cast you aside.

The terrorists hate us for our freedoms and yet you are willing to give them away for the promise of security.

[Thinkingabout]

62. You need to do more research into why terrorist hate the US, it would be your great challenge.

[rhett o rick]

67. And you should not be so trusting of your government. Freedom requires vigilance.

Blaming Snowden is the easy way out. If you were truly worried about law breaking you would want to make sure that Booz-Allen isnt breaking any. But I dont think you really care so much about the law. You just want to shut up the little boy that pointed out the Emperor has no clothes. Terrorists hate us because we kill their children with impunity. We manipulate their governments to be able to have access to their resources. These are things done by a authoritarian empire that you want to preserve by lynching Snowden.

[Thinkingabout]

71. Do you use public roads for your transportation, enjoy having a defense department, enjoy local

utility service, etc then you can give the somewhat smooth operation of those services and protections to the gubermint. On lynching Snowden, maybe you should know what the penalties of espionage before you bring in the lynching story. Snowden has lynched his value already. Kinda like something is useless like a mosquito, Snowden is in the same class. He is not worth the lead it would take to kill him so why waste the lead.

[rhett o rick]

73. You have already tried and convicted Snowden, not a very liberal outlook.

I dont want Booz-Allen spying on all Americans. Apparently you do. Bow down to the almighty corporations.

[Thinkingabout]

76. I have not tried and convicted Snowden, you are wrong. I DON'T LIKE A THIEF. He is

useless, like a mosquito. He can just stay away, don't come back to the US, enjoy his thrills all by himself for all I care.

But you did not answer the questions about using public services so I assume you probably love the gubermint when you it fits your needs.

[rhett o rick]

78. If you call him a thief, then you have decided he is guilty. Are you Nancy Grace?

I dont hate the government. I hate those that bow down and let their government walk all over them. We need government and we need strong security and we need protection from terrorists. But we dont need to bow down and kiss the feet of Booz-Allen and the Republicans running our intelligence agencies. Freedom requires vigilance and not capitulation, not blind loyalty.

Do you support the Patriot Act? See this thread. http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023220667 I noticed you didnt post in it.

[Thinkingabout]

88. Perhaps if you di not want Snowden labeled as thief then you should have told him

Before he admitted to taking the files. He declared himself a thief. And BTW, before you chastise me for declaring Snowden guilty you are declaring me guilty of judging Snowden. Now is the question appropriate in asking you if you are Nancy Grace?

[nadinbrzezinski]

97. I just love the shift stirring

Did you know it is a sophisticated psy ops technique?

[Thinkingabout]

99. Sometimes honesty lightens your heart, soul and mind, it is good.

[nadinbrzezinski]

101. And your handle is one full cup of irony

[Thinkingabout]

112. I usually run with a full cup, life is good.

[nadinbrzezinski]

120. And it is time we say our good byes

*plonk*

Personally I am developing a case of little patience....

[rhett o rick]

125. My ignore list is growing. I began to notice that there are certain threads that "The Group"

wont touch. Of course anything about the NSA, FISA, TPP, XL Pipeline, Patriot Act, and Sen Warren.

[nadinbrzezinski]

134. Their fear is we all put them on ignore and they remain a loud

But small echo chamber.

They are not worth it.

[rhett o rick]

135. I agree. nm

[randome]

172. You probably didn't see my response to your previous post about this.

By ignoring everyone who disagrees with you, you create your own echo chamber by default.

That's okay. The rest of us will continue to look at evidence.

You just keep Ploinking away. Although I suggest you see a doctor about that.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font][hr]

[zappaman]

230. Ironic post of the day.

Probably the week...
Possibly the month...
Could be the year.

Congrats.

[Skidmore]

238. Ah, so much for freedom of speech.

[rhett o rick]

124. Yes but denial isnt good. nm

[sabrina 1]

245. Snowden is a Whistle Blower in the classic sense. All Whistle Blowers many of them

now considered to be heroes, are 'thieves'. Do you have a problem with Whistle Blowers for some reason? We have laws to protect them, in case you didn't know btw.

[Whisp]

110. funny how Norquist's 'drown the gobmint' has become so popular here lately.

Well, maybe not ha ha funny, but you know what I mean.

[rhett o rick]

121. You are misrepresenting me. I support the government but I dont grovel.

The government requires constant monitoring. I know that sounds like a lot of work. Much easier to just give your blind trust to your big daddy.

I think that being skeptical is a Democratic thing while unwavering trust is a Republican thing. So I am not surprised when the conservatives among us follow unwaveringly the Republicans running our security agencies. I dont trust REpublicans but I guess you do.

Why do I think you would defend Norquist if Pres Obama nominated him for something. Like Clapper, Mueller, Bernanke, Comey, Cote, Immelt, etc. All Bush Republicans and now apparently worthy of your adulation.

Do you consider yourself "politically liberal"??

[rhett o rick]

123. Every day we learn a little more about the activities of Booz-Allen/NSA

But then it appears you ignore these threads:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023281378

[Ford_Prefect]

143. Booz Allen/NSA keep on claiming they are only following orders.

Now where do you suppose they got that excuse from?

[rhett o rick]

147. It's called the Sgt. Schultz Syndrome.

Hogan's Heroes.

[Pholus]

163. Nope. A check shows you are not accurate in your assertion.

Method: Site Search using Google for terms

"norquist" and "site:democraticunderground.com" in the past month

14 results (including this reference)

Context of reference:

Jokes about Norquist ("Mr. Poopy Man" for example): 2
Reference to article's relation between "Taxpayer Protection Pledge" and Walker: 1
Reference to Koch Club or general association with Koch: 2
References to generally f'ed up Republican priorities in the budget: 3
Reference to the bathtub quote in the context of overzealous privatization: 1
Called a traitor to this country: 1
Namecalling towards people upset about Dragnet Surveillance: 4, twice from you.

I guess I'm having problems understanding how 14 references in a month meets some criteria for "popular."

[Swagman]

184. I know what you mean and I suggest

we should surround the enemy and isolate them with words that minimise the attempt to divide

[markpkessinger]

195. There is a very big difference between . . .

. . .being "anti-government," and refusing to extend blind trust to the government. Among those of us on DU who believe Snowden has done us a great service, you will find that most of us are quite supportive of government, so long as the activities the government is engaged in are both Constitutional _AND_ serve a legitimate purpose. So go ahead and compare us all to Grover Norquist if that is what you need to believe. But in doing so, you are being dishonest with yourself.

[TheKentuckian]

232. Might as well go Godwin. Where the Germans that wanted the ovens shut down Libertarians too?

A government that is captured by the corporations rather than a counter to them and that not only refuses to protect our rights but actively assaults them is a shitty investment.

There is no wisdom in the equally stupid polar opposite of Norquist's idiocy. Any government isn't good government, history is chock full of repressive and terrible government, it is the most common form throughout time.

Like fire, a marvelous servant and tool and a terrible master.

For crying out fucking loud, hollering Grover because folks don't believe in whatever silly unlimited government bullshit that always is supposed to be for the benefit of the people ends up as a campaign for corporate profit and fleeces us.

[sabrina 1]

246. It is?? Care to post something to demonstrate this? I'm more interested though in how

popular Bush policies have become among a small minority on DU lately. And I'm more than willing to demonstrate what I mean by that.

[Swagman]

183. honestly of all the Snowden attacks this is the weirdest

somehow tying in public services like roads into the debate.

sheer madness.

[Swagman]

182. ccrikey..now we must shoot Snowden so we can have free roads

the madness continues

[GoneFishin]

116. +1000

[Spitfire of ATJ]

30. His "employer" is an interesting word which raises the question,...

Since he worked for a private contractor.

How much secret information has been outsourced?

[go west young man]

36. Or used to make his employer rich?

After all they are owned by the Carlyle Group and we all know who that really is. The neocons combined with the Cheney/Bush admin. I wonder how many bets they have made on the stock market with all the internet access they have. The whole thing reeks of corruption.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

45. What would be hilarious at this point is if the place they were saving everything was in Russia.

[hootinholler]

65. Well the new server farm is in Utah

Close enough.

[Thinkingabout]

64. How much secret information has Snowden outsourced? Did Snowden get paid?

If Snowden received a paycheck and was under the direction of a supervisor then he was an employee. Was he under direction of his supervisor to steal files and give information to foreign media news source?

[rhett o rick]

129. How much secret information has Booz-Allen outsourced? Do they hold allegiance to America?

They are owned by the Carlyle Group which isnt even an American company. So we are letting internationally own companies spy on us.

Do you support repeal of the Patriot Act? Even if the repeal was sponsored by a Democrat? http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023220667 Yes you have to choose between the DEmocrats that want to reign in the Patriot Act and the REpublicans Clapper, Mueller and Comey that want to keep the Republican authoritarian legislation. I hope you choose to side with Democrats.

[Thinkingabout]

136. I am not familiar with the contract with Booz-Allen, I do not know what requirements of their

responsibilities. I have not researched the Patriot Act very much and do not know what details I may or may not agree with. I do know some changes have been made. I have read information on some of the results of the Patriot Act and this may have lead to changes in the Patriot Act. In the world we live in today is not the same as it was in 1940, travel is easier and faster, communications are much better and our lives will need to accommodate the changes we have today and what may be in our future.

From some of the information I have read recently on Comey I find he is very ethical and expects those around him to hold to the same character. Mueller and Comey offered their resignations because of the warrantless wiretapping which was later corrected.

[rhett o rick]

140. Ok let's look at what you said. Mueller and Comey participated in illegal spying and

not only did they not get fired and prosecuted, they were forgiven because the "offered to resign". And then they get hired by President Obama. WTF. Are we saying that there were no competent Democrats that could do the job and I DONT KNOW, uphold Democratic principles??

And I love the part about how the illegal wiretapping was corrected. Says who? Do you think we can just take their word that they stopped the illegal wiretapping? What did Gen Clapper cross his Republican heart and hope to die? They committed crimes and were not punished in the least. That's called enabling. Why wouldnt they continue? What's the worse that could happen?

The secrecy thread is being pulled and the Booz-Allen spy machine is being unraveled.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023282003

Be on the side of transparency, freedom, and liberty. Shun those that want secrecy and tyranny.

[Thinkingabout]

157. I think I am beginning to see a problem here, your group are about 10 years too late with your facts

Start with this information and get the real details, I think you will feel better about the USA when you know the truth.

Domestic wiretapping investigation[edit]

Director Mueller, along with Acting Attorney General James B. Comey, offered to resign from office in March 2004 if the White House overruled a Department of Justice finding that domestic wiretapping without a court warrant was unconstitutional.[11] Attorney General John D. Ashcroft denied his consent to attempts by White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card and White House Counsel Alberto R. Gonzales to waive the Justice Department ruling and permit the domestic warrantless eavesdropping program to proceed. On March 12, 2004, President George W. Bush gave his support to changes in the program sufficient to satisfy the concerns of Mueller, Ashcroft and Comey.[11] The extent of the National Security Agency's domestic warrantless eavesdropping under the President's Surveillance Program is still largely unknown

[questionseverything]

175. the rest of the story

While, to his credit, he immediately began raising concerns, the program was still in existence when the New York Times exposed it in December 2005. This was a year and a half after Comey's hospital showdown with Gonzales and Card. In fact, the warrantless wiretapping program was supported by a May 2004 legal opinion (pdf) produced by the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel and signed off by Comey, which replaced the 2001 legal opinion Comey had problems with.

This, of course, raises the question: just what illegal surveillance program did Comey oppose so much he would resign over it? Last weekend, the Washington Post provided a new theory: the Marina program, which collects internet metadata. Now, the Senate has an opportunity to end the theorizing and find out what exactly Comey objected to. It's a line of questioning that senators should focus doggedly on, in light of the recent revelations in the Post and the Guardian.

[questionseverything]

148. about comey

http://www.bradblog.com/?p=10123

>>>

But the Director of the ACLU's Washington Legislative office, Laura Murphy, cautions that "Comey...also approved or defended some of the worst abuses of the Bush administration during his time as deputy attorney general. Those included torture, warrantless wiretapping, and indefinite detention."

[Thinkingabout]

158. I think you need to look at the dates of the information you have and check the ACLU on their

decisions after some of these events occurred. This was 2004, things has changed.

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2007/05/15/12881/comey-silence/

There was a bedside visit by Gonzales to Ashcroft and Comey was present and Ashcroft told Gonzales Comey was in charge at the time of the visit because of Ashcroft's condition.

[questionseverything]

174. as of july 9th 2013

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/07/09-5

The final stain on Comey's record was his full-throated defense of the indefinite military detention of an American citizen arrested on American soil. In a June 2004 press conference, Comey told of Jose Padilla, an alleged al-Qaida member accused of plotting to detonate a dirty bomb as well as blow up apartment buildings in an American city. By working for al-Qaida, Padilla, Comey argued, could be deprived of a lawyer and indefinitely detained as an enemy combatant on a military brig off the South Carolina coast for the purpose of extracting intelligence out of him.

It turned out that Padilla was never charged with the list of crimes and criminal associations pinned on him by Comey that day. When Padilla was finally convicted – in a federal court – in August 2007, it wasn't for plotting dirty bomb attacks or blowing up apartment buildings. Rather, he was convicted of material support of terrorism overseas. During his indefinite military detention, Padilla was tortured.

[Thinkingabout]

198. In what year did this happen?

[lark]

109. What about the bigger breach of trust from the government?

They are choosing to lie repeatedly, even to the SCOTUS, in order to keep breaking the constitution. Reporting on the bigger breach is not nearly as heinous as the actual breach of faith from the government as well.

We all know that a great many of the Snowden detractors are actually the people that refuse to believe that their beloved president would ever be a part of something bad, so ergo, what's been happening isn't bad. However, when Bush did it, only not as much, it was heinous back then.

[Phlem]

130. "Broken trust, something many needs to know about Snowden"

Riiiiight.

Broken trust. something that happens in our politics everyday, But hey let's pick on Snowden.

[Swagman]

181. odd that people are more upset about Snowden "breaching

trust" than their own government lying to them about beginning wars in Iraq and Afghanistan where tens of thousands of innocent people die.

And all forgotten so very quickly as the war criminals walk free...but hey there's a brand new enemy and his name is 'Snowden'.

[randome]

187. He's not an enemy. He's a pathetic loser.

No evidence of his claims. Unable to admit he was wrong about 'direct access'. Showing classified information to China and giving it to media like Der Spiegel. No valid escape plan.

Remember "I am not here to flee from justice."? Add 'hypocrite' to the list.

If he wants to change the world, he needs to show evidence of his claims.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font][hr]

[sabrina 1]

244. I think I've asked this before but please post something to back your claim that Snowden

'showed classified information to China'. We have HIS statement regarding who he gave information to. But absolutely nothing to back up this claim. If you have something please post it otherwise I will assume you are merely repeating one of those 'talking points' with no basis in fact.

[randome]

248. At this late stage you still don't know what he did?

http://legalinsurrection.com/2013/06/snowden-reveals-classified-records-to-hong-kong-newspaper-as-leak-investigation-heats-up/

Do you also want to deny he gave info to Der Spiegel that they characterized as 'dangerous' to NSA workers' lives?

IOW, Der Spiegel exercised responsibility. Snowden did not.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]There is nothing you can't do if you put your mind to it.
Nothing.[/center][/font][hr]

[sabrina 1]

251. To the MEDIA. He was interviewed by the foreign PRESS AFTER

the release of the leaks to a US blogger and newspaper.

He did NOT, as you are attempting to imply, 'hand over information to the Russians'.

Didn't think you could back that up.

To go over what just transpired here. You claimed Snowden had handed over 'classified material to the Russians' implying he went to the Government of a foreign country.

Now for the facts. Snowden did what whistle blowers do. he released material exposing wrongdoing to the MEDIA HERE. Foreign media reported it, as they do. He went to Russia with the intention of seeking asylum knowing that in the US today Whistle Blowers are an endangered species, and especially after the torture of Bradley Manning.

Please TRY to keep the facts straight, it makes this forum look bad when people distort the facts.

[markpkessinger]

193. Those are all things Daniel Ellsberg did, too . . .

. . . Is Ellsberg in need of one of your 'broken trust' lectures as well?

[randome]

194. Ellsberg had proof. Snowden has PowerPoint slides.

Big difference.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]There is nothing you can't do if you put your mind to it.
Nothing.[/center][/font][hr]

[markpkessinger]

196. The NSA has not denied the substance of Snowden's revelations . . .

. . . and while there might be a detail or two that Snowden didn't get exactly right, but if the information he leaked had been essentially false, the government shouldn't be upset with him for disclosing it. If information is classified, then it's a pretty safe bet it is substantially true. Otherwise, why classify it in the first place?

[randome]

197. You're making assumptions.

Any time someone takes national security documents to foreign countries, you can bet the government will be 'upset' with him.

He showed Chinese journalists the IP addresses we use to spy on them. He gave sensitive data to Der Spiegel, which said it would have endangered agents' lives if they had not redacted it.

If Snowden had anything near the access he claims, or was anything like the 'genius' some want to think of him as, he would have obtained evidence of his claims. He did not provide evidence because he could not get that deep into NSA.

Carl Bernstein agrees that from what we've discovered, it seems that the safeguards and restrictions on use of personal data are pretty strong.

If you or anyone else want to take up arms to defend your metadata records, go for it. But it seems like a waste of time to me when we have so many more important issues to address.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]There is nothing you can't do if you put your mind to it.
Nothing.[/center][/font][hr]

[markpkessinger]

199. Let's see . . .

. . . did we declare war against China, and nobody bothered to tell me?

[randome]

203. No war. It's still a crime to show classified national security documents to other countries.

Snowden has elevated himself to the role of 'decider-in-chief'. To hell with the Supreme Court and the rest of our democracy, Snowden will tell us what's best!
[hr][font color="blue"][center]There is nothing you can't do if you put your mind to it.
Nothing.[/center][/font][hr]

[BehindTheCurtain76]

37. hahaha

Your problem is that you believe the lies...the premise of your beliefs is the problem...not your use of logic. NSA isn't there to protect you from terrorism...they are there to control the American people...2 million of which are in prison. They are there much like an evil villain from an old James Bond movie...they are there for GREED and CONTROL. They are there to do the dirty work of the .01% and as NSA whistleblower Russ Tice said explicitly, they are monitoring politicians, federal judges, lawyers, journalists and activists for leverage and blackmail purposes and very little monitoring of terrorists compared to that. I love how Obama came out and heaped praises of love and admiration on George Bush Sr much like Clinton did...these two charlatan impostors were slipped in when we were sick of Bush representation and they were meant only to hold the country over and make sure nothing good got done for the people before another Bush could be installed to carry out their absurd,heinous, demonic ravings of lunacy. Jeb will be back for 2016 and anyone who believes as Obama stated that Bush Sr is kind and gentle is a victim of propaganda...he was never kind, gentle or even a wimp. He murdered hundreds of thousands in El Salvador and then Panama...then it was fuel air explosive bombing of Iraqis and then making their children sick to die....all for oil...he also began private prisons and amped up the drug war at home as he admittedly set up our intelligence agencies to import vast quantities of cocaine and heroin into the US. And now Obama praises him...if you dont feel like a fool yet then you are doing something wrong. Im sure nowadays anyone in power standing up to this horrific hoodwinking bamboozlement will be investigated and blackmailed by the NSA which is simply the Stasi on steroids which given the opportunity could make the Nazis look like amateurs.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

46. They are there to maintain the staus quo.

[BehindTheCurtain76]

51. 100% agreed

until they can bring in another Bush as they have since 1980 to wreak havoc on the world...maybe the Bush family really does make human sacrifices to God knows what.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

52. I keep thinking they want to drastically lower the population.

[BehindTheCurtain76]

54. they do

Well they definitely want to lower it's IQ and they have succeeded...as far as the population? They want to lower it but keep enough to be slaves.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

56. Conspiracy types have LOVED this....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgia_Guidestones

It calls for the population to be reduced to 1/10th it's current state.

You can guess what the top 10% would say about who should stay.

[BehindTheCurtain76]

57. Coincidence Theorists

It's Henry Kissinger who was initially chosen to head the 911 Commission and who has been labeled a war criminal who flat out stated after he was Sec. Of State that he wanted to reduce population to ease the strain on resources we coveted....he also said that whoever controls the food supply controls the world. I understand that your afraid to be labeled a conspiracy theorist because of your personal insecurities and desire to be accepted by the group but facts are facts whether you see them as reality or not. The Georgia Guidestones are vague although they were payed for by a wealthy elitist in the know. These charlatans who rule us and wish a feudal state upon us are very involved and they dont waste their time watching reality TV or blogging on news sites...they have bigger fish to fry and have to answer to their peers. I personally believe they want us dependent on them for everything from energy resources to food and water and want us to pay them for it all...Obama has sucked up to them like a lowly worker and Bush Sr is like a middle manager...money rules and every one else can go to Hell in their eyes.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

93. The Bohemian Grove is the one that cracks me up....

I can't look at Newt Gingrich without picturing him naked, beating on a tom tom.

[BehindTheCurtain76]

166. Bohemian Grove

Thats why they freak out when a reporter asks about their gay toga parties at the Grove...they know if people saw what they did it would be all over for them.

[Th1onein]

218. You GO, BehindtheCurtain76!

Sing it!

[BehindTheCurtain76]

234. Lol

Give Thanks and Praises

[JDPriestly]

40. Our government can identify North Korean ships without collecting the metadata on you and me

and the rest of the law-abiding citizens in the country.

Intelligence is important in government. But it needs to be focused on those who likely pose risks to the people, not on the people themselves. Why is the US government spying on the American people? On American citizens?

That is the question.

It is wrong for a government to pretend to be democratic, to have free elections and then collect the metadata on all the candidates and all the voters. That is incompatible with the freedom we need to elect our own government.

I stand with the groups that are challenging this program in court, and I am grateful to Snowden for providing the documents that have been needed to prove the allegations of other whistleblowers about the existence and scope of the program.

If it hasn't already, the surveillance will destroy the remnant of democracy that remains in the aftermath of the Citizens United decision.

[Hissyspit]

44. "it wasn't his decision to make"

Really?

[mike_c]

87. "security" and "safety" will ALWAYS be invoked to justify clamping down on civil rights....

A nation's character is revealed by its response to threats that challenge its principles. The people will always demand safety and security. The challenge is to provide it as well as possible without compromising your principles in the process. There can be no democracy in a secrecy and surveillance state, so the notion that we can defend democratic principles by creating a surveillance state is ludicrous, and demonstrates our willingness to throw away freedom like a cheap trinket.

[reusrename]

95. Do you think he would be gagged if he were in custody, or would he be free to speak out?

I'm curious what people think about this. Would it make any difference in your opinion?

[Blanks]

153. At this point - it would be suspicious...

If he were in custody and something happened to him. He has gotten too much attention for them to water board him.

Since he has so many worshippers - his every move would be monitored if he were to turn himself in and stand trial for whatever they charge him with.

This is one of the many reasons that I am not among those who put him on a pedestal. If public opinion is behind him; he can come back and let our justice system decide his guilt or innocence.

There's precedent to find him innocent, he just needs a good legal team.

[reusrename]

154. Fine, he wouldn't get publicly tortured, I can buy that. But would he be gagged?

Would he be restrained from speaking out? Would he be legally silenced, like Sibel Edmonds, for example?

You do understand the question, right?

Microsoft is currently under a gag order.

[Blanks]

155. It's not a complicated question...

My question to you is: why would you think I have any idea whether he'd be gagged or not?

I expect he wouldn't be able to discuss it. I understand that's typically the case in on-going investigations.

I'd think he'd have enough sense to say whatever he wants said before he turns himself in.

[reusrename]

205. I figure you responded to me with a non-sequitor.

I have no idea why you did that. I was trying to focus this back to the question.

If you don't understand the significance of being gagged, perhaps you should consider Dr. King's letters from the Memphis prison.

Silencing political opposition is truly an un-Amercan response. How can anyone not see that?

[randome]

169. Even if he was gagged during the trial, what would prevent him from speaking out afterwards?

[hr][font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font][hr]

[Bluenorthwest]

185. Ask Bobby Seale, who was literally gagged and bound by the court to force him to

stop declaring that the attorneys in the Chicago 8 trial were not representing him. Here's his website, you can email him and ask him what he thought about being gagged. Do you have the courage to do so? I highly doubt it. But you should.
http://www.bobbyseale.com/

[randome]

186. Are you talking about something from 50 years ago?

When racial polarity was still very high?

Not sure I see the relevance. Snowden could have blabbed all he wanted about the 'injustice' of phone metadata but if that's your 'line in the sand', it's a pathetic lowering of standards.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font][hr]

[DisgustipatedinCA]

192. Thank Christ racial polarity has been completely fixed since then

I believe it's customary to add the word Derp in this space.

[reusrename]

204. Nothing.

Sibel Edmonds is beginning to be allowed to speak. The war she tried to prevent a dozen years ago lasted ten years.

I guess you'd be fine with Snowden exposing these crimes years from now after the statutes of limitations have expired.

It doesn't seem right to me. Seems flagrantly un-American.

[randome]

206. If Snowden had crimes to expose, I would back him 100%.

He has not exposed anything but his own naivete. The best he could manage to steal was a legal warrant regarding metadata that the courts have ruled for decades was not protected under the 4th Amendment.

Was that worth all this time and energy? Snowden's desire to protect our precious metadata rights?

With everything else that is going on in the world, this?
[hr][font color="blue"][center]There is nothing you can't do if you put your mind to it.
Nothing.[/center][/font][hr]

[reusrename]

213. This is the most important thing going on in the world.

Absolutely, without a doubt, the most important thing in the world today.

Our social networks have never been mapped like this before, and it's very dangerous.

Our 1st Amendment right to freely associate and peaceably assemble are what's at issue here.

Once our ability to organize political resistance is snuffed out, we have lost our liberty.

This road leads to the return of slavery.

I have difficulty relating to folks who deny science.

[Th1onein]

221. You don't think wholesale spying on the American people is something that needs to be exposed?

"Legal" or not, I assure you, the American people both deserve to know and have the RIGHT to know. They can tweak the laws, and have their "secret" interpretations of them all they want, but we have the right to know, and we have the right to privacy.

And I, along with quite a few other people, are damned glad Snowden had the balls to give us the information that he gave us.

So should you be.

[Th1onein]

219. Yeah, right. Sure.

Really? REALLY?

[Lady Freedom Returns]

96. +1

[Maedhros]

105. Tyrannical federal security agencies and the craven citizens that grovel beneath them

are both enemies of democracy.

[caseymoz]

173. No intelligence gathering is straw man

or a gross misunderstanding.

[Chan790]

177. Glad someone gets it.

I didn't vote for or work for the campaign of President Obama to undo the security policies and foreign policies of GWB...I wasn't that concerned with them under Bush. I supported the President to unfuck our domestic and economic policies and pursue something that has been a priority for me for years...universal healthcare.

[B Calm]

247. K&R

[quinnox]

3. they are unknowingly representing the 1%

very good OP.

Anyone who is on the side of the 99% is on Snowden's side. Period.

[Thinkingabout]

12. Never, where do you come up with 99% being on Snowden's side. You have a incorrect conclusion.

[rhett o rick]

16. You are correct. There are a lot of the 99% that bow down to the almighty authoritarian state.

Those fighting for freedom and liberty have to fight the 1% and their minions.

[Thinkingabout]

17. And apparently some bow down to Sniwden and his puppet masters.

Don't let you strings get too twisted

[rhett o rick]

68. I bow down to the Constitution which you are so quickly wanting to give up because you let your

big brother government scare you. "The terrists will get you." I bow down to those that have the guts to speak out against the almighty authoritarian government that you worship. Snowden isnt alone. There are quite a few speaking out now. Do you hate all of them? Do they want to burst your FAITH in Herr Clapper unt Herr Mueller?

Wake up and smell the oligarchy.

[Thinkingabout]

108. If your statement is true about bowing to the Constitution, then abide by the Constitution. Just

because I choose to be a law abiding citizen sure does not make me bow to anyone or government. See again you seem to live on judging me, again are you Nancy Grace.

[rhett o rick]

113. I wonder if you unwavering law abiding righteousness would prevent you from running a stop

sign to save a child. Booz-Allen is violating the Constitution and you seem not to be concerned. You seem bitter because Snowden opened this terrible can of worms that you would rather be not mentioned.

I would hope an open-minded "politically liberal" person would wait until we learn more before rushing to judgement. I wish you would try to maintain perspective.

Arent you curious if Booz-Allen/Carlyle Group are violating the FISA Law? Do you support the FISA law as currently being enforced?

[LiberalLovinLug]

164. you go Rick!

Its amazing how long these frightened authoritarians can last trying to find a leg to stand on but your thoughtful logical comebacks are great to read.

They are more concerned that one single American has violated an employee confidentiality contract than a giant corporation like Booz-Allen violating every Americans civil rights and expectations of privacy. It baffles the mind.

[KittyWampus]

25. apologies to Rhett. Mea Culpa.

Very sorry.

[go west young man]

38. Post 4 in your link is not by Rhett o Rick.

Its by someone nicknamed Quinnox.

[KittyWampus]

77. Thanks so very much for setting me straight. I posted an apology to Rhett!.

[flamingdem]

32. How about Pussy Riot, do they bow down to the authoritarian state

Snowden awfully quiet on abuses in Russia

[JDPriestly]

42. Does the fact that certain other countries are authoritarian make it OK to betray our Constitution

and install an authoritarian regime here?

[ronnie624]

80. We'll have to let the Russians worry about that.

Our duty, as citizens of the United States, is to our own constitution.

[flamingdem]

82. So put blinders on to make Snowden's choices okay?

That's hypocritical

[ronnie624]

84. I don't know what you mean.

As a US citizen, I'm in no position to do anything about the Russian government's abuses against its people. I'll have to let them worry about that.

What is truly hypocritical, is criticizing other governments in the world, when the conduct of my own is far worse.

[ohheckyeah]

227. That reminds me of an ex....

I couldn't mention something he did wrong unless I chronicled 5 or 10 things I had done wrong.

Grow up.

[ohheckyeah]

226. That's ridiculous...

why would be talk about the abuses in Russia? It's not about Russia, it's about the NSA abuses. Russia isn't his home country that claims to be democratic and that has a 4th Amendment.

[Egalitarian Thug]

235. Not unknowingly at all. The same names backing the same side on the same issues. n/t

[Marr]

4. "Fearmongering and intimidation are not indicative of a government acting in good faith."

Well put.

[Cleita]

5. You know what's strange?

It seems the ads on DU are triggered by certain words and phrases when you open a thread. When I open the Snowden or Greenwald are traitors and every thing else vile threads, ads for the Heritage Foundation, various other right wing websites, vile anti-Obama ads and right wing blogs pop up. Anybody else,whose not a star member notice this?

[OnyxCollie]

7. I've noticed that the ads have disappeared.

I'm not a star member, and I haven't done anything different.

One day I looked up and noticed the ads were gone.

I miss the Snog tee shirt girls.

[nadinbrzezinski]

10. Yup

I just smile

[hueymahl]

39. I get TIVO adds

Just vistited them - DU uses tracking cookies to place adds. What does that say about where you have been?

[Cleita]

89. I have been mostly to DU. If what you say is true, those ads would show up on all the news

sites I visit and they don't. All DUers go to right wing sites to do research now and then. I haven't for a long time.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

119. Cookies? So how do we get the Snog tee shirt ads back?

A search for "tee shirts" doesn't seem to do it.

[JoePhilly]

69. The ads you get are based on YOUR google searches.

Try this ... look at the top right corner of one of the ads and notice the little sideways triangle.

Hover over it. Its says "adchoices". Click on it.

You'll end up on a page that describes how adchoices uses your google searches.

Bottom line: Whatever ads you are seeing, you are seeing them because of your own search behavior, not the behavior of others.

[ronnie624]

81. You're only partly correct.

It also says the ad choices are based on your potential interests, which are expressed every time you click on a thread about a particular topic.

[Cleita]

85. I don't think so.

Words on the threads sent are what trigger the ads. For instance threads on health care seem to trigger all kinds of health ins, nursing schools and other medically related stuff. Maybe that's true on other websites but not this one.

[Cleita]

86. I don't use google. I use duck, duck.

[backscatter712]

106. Click on the ads!

It costs them money, DU gets a piece, and you're not buying their shit anyways. WIN!

[Cleita]

122. I do. The ones I'm interested in.

Many are about green issues like solar panels and cruelty free, eco-friendly products,

[backscatter712]

128. That's fair, but I was suggesting clicking the RW ads, as a way of draining their resources!

[Cleita]

131. Didn't think of that. Good idea especially the bank and

credit card ads.

[Whisp]

127. I get a lot of Game ads and I understand that, but for some reason

dating ads too, and I swear that I had an ad or two that had nothing to do with anything I typed in here at DU because it was a personal matter.

That ad scared the shit out of me, unless it was pure coincidence, I dunno. but how the hell did that ad know to pop up just on that particular day for that particular private matter?

Others I have noticed a lot lately is 'impeach Obama'.

these seem to be more random than what I type or what the thread subject is. I think. I'll look closer.

[Cleita]

132. I get some really nasty ads about Obama and Michele too!

Probably it's their names that trigger them.

[BlancheSplanchnik]

8. well written

I haven't been involved in the is he/isn't he debates. And I'm not sad about that!
Just happened to read this thread....good post

[brush]

11. Yeah but after he exposed

the government's breach of trust he breached his citizenship trust by giving classified information to foreign countries.

Sorry, he may be a whistle blower but he himself blew it when he committed treason.

Guess it's apropos that he's in diplomatic limbo in the Moscow airport with nowhere to go because he's a tainted hero, and at the same time, a traitor.

What do you do with that?

[Thinkingabout]

13. K & R

[JDPriestly]

43. This information should not have been classified in the first place.

The terrorists and other enemies probably figured out long ago that communicating electronically was a problem.

The only people in the dark are the American people.

I just don't think it is treason to tell the voters what their government is doing behind their backs.

[brush]

75. Sorry, Snowden is not the one that gets to decide

what info to give to foreign governments.

He overplayed a hand that started out to be a good one.

[JDPriestly]

146. We the people should decide. Thanks to Snowden and other whistleblowers, we at least know

what decision we need to make.

[brush]

159. Don't get me wrong

I like what he did with exposing the NSA info gathering, but providing classified info to foreign governments, to me is off limits.

He went too far.

[JDPriestly]

200. Did he provide any information that would give aid and comfort to an enemy?

I think our government classifies far too much information.

In my opinion, this program should not exist on such a vast scale, and a program of this nature on a far, far smaller scale should not be a secret. There is utterly no reason for this to be a secret.

Getting specific pen registers or information in a specific criminal case may be kept secret, but not this kind of program.

For one thing, the whole idea is impractical. Sooner or later, the existence and make-up and details of the program is bound to be discovered or made public. And we Americans do not like this program.

[Th1onein]

222. WE are the ones who get to decide. It's called CONSENT OF THE GOVERNED.

Unfortunately, those who govern us decided we didn't need to know. And, fortunately, for us, Mr. Snowden thought that was wrong, and spilled the beans.

Thank God he did.

[reusrename]

98. You're wrong, he never approached any foreign countries about anything but amnesty.

He never contacted anyone but media outlets regarding the NSA spying.

You're repeating something that just isn't true.

There are a lot of folks here spreading lies and you seem to believe some of them.

[brush]

137. Ahhh . . . you don't know that anymore than I do

You think the Chinese are going to let an opportunity like that slip away?

[reusrename]

138. Holy crap, your right. Imagine all the secrets they stole when Obama was there!

They can sneak into your thoughts and stuff!

[brush]

160. Keep it serious please nt

[reusrename]

165. You think the Chinese are going to let an opportunity like that just slip away?

How can I take you seriously? You just make things up out of thin air.

Snowden has not contacted any foreign governments about any of this stuff. He publicly requested asylum. That's all there is to this.

[brush]

167. What are you talking about? You not up on the story too well

if you think that all he did was expose the domestic operations of NSA. He released information in China how the US is spying on other countries, which could easily endanger lives of operatives from this country and others.

It's not news that we spy on other countries, and of course, they also spy back (you wouldn't be doing a very good job of national security if you're not actively trying to find out what your enemies and potential enemies are up to), he also exposed information on ins and outs of it and the extent of it, which is causing a huge backlash.

The backlash of course is somewhat self-serving because like I said, other countries have their own spying operations.

[reusrename]

237. He spoke to the press. Not the Chinese government.

You repeat a lie that he leaked stuff to the Chinese government and then you really want people to take you seriously?

Either you don't know the difference between the Chinese press and the Chinese government or else you are woefully misinformed.

I think you know the truth about this and you're intentionally being dishonest about it, but that's just my opinion. If you tell me you're just ignorant of the facts, then I'll take you at your word for it.

[Th1onein]

223. Come on, now, Brush. You repeat a lie, and we call you on it, and you say shit like....

but, but you think the Chinese are going to let him get away with all that information? Geezus.

YOU SAID HE GAVE SECRETS TO FOREIGN GOVERNMENTS. That's what you said. We called you on the lie, and then you said, well, they took the secrets. NOT a good argument.

You expect people not to make fun of you for that?

[brush]

231. It's not just the Chinese

Governments around the world are upset now that they are aware of the information Snowden revealed about our covert operations.

Tell me that is not true.

Snowden overplayed his hand. In my view he was snookered by Greenwald who has harbored a huge grudge against the President. Snowden in his naivete helped him further his agenda now he himself is in limbo in a Moscow airport with nowhere to go. He was used.

[Th1onein]

233. Snowden revealed that we were spying on everyone.

He didn't "give information to the enemy."

You know, Brush, these guys that are spying on us aren't doing it to protect us. They're spying on judges, congressmen/women, governors, all kinds of people in authority, even the president.

They're trading information about everyday people with other governments. Those other governments are spying on Americans, and the NSA is spying on foreign people, and they're trading that information, so that it's all "legal." It might be legal, but it's not right.

They've cooked up secret interpretations of the law, and they are using that to justify spying on us. In the wrong hands, this is very, very dangerous. The American people shouldn't give that kind of power to anyone.

It's not about terror, Brush. It's about power. And it's wrong. And it puts the very people that they are professing to "protect" in grave danger.

[brush]

236. Like I said

He was used by Greenwald:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023286691

[Th1onein]

239. You can repeat yourself time and again, Brush. But the fact still remains:

Snowden did a good thing. He did it at great personal expense. And you should be grateful to him.

[brush]

240. I've said all along

that he did a service to the country. But he also tainted himself by coughing up classified information to foreign entities.

He's a whistle blower who got in over his head, urged on by Greenwald it seems, and he went over the line and committed (I know it's difficult to get your head around it) treason.

Too bad. I think he was used.

[Th1onein]

241. The treason charge is disputed and, IIRC, debunked.

But go ahead and repeat it. That's how propaganda works, I hear.

I'm glad at least that you admit he's a whistleblower.

[brush]

242. I've posted that a couple of time before

He's in a difficult situation (limbo in an airport) and what to make of him is just as difficult.

I think he was used.

[Th1onein]

243. He was certainly of use to the American people and our democracy, that's for sure.

Thank God he did what he did.

[pnwmom]

14. What YOU don't get.

Many of us who are Snowden skeptics distinguish between his claims that the NSA is engaging in US internal surveillance -- which should be investigated and debated -- and his leaking about the NSA and the CIA spying on foreign countries.

The NSA shouldn't be spying on our citizens on American soil. But the NSA and CIA are set up to spy on foreign countries, and his leaking about that is damaging to national security.

[deurbano]

19. Why is it okay to spy on innocent citizens of other countries?

Why is privacy only an American right?

[Spitfire of ATJ]

34. That's one point I made to someone recently...

While we are in the middle of a debate in this country over levels of privacy in Europe they are NOT.

We violated the law over there and thus a whole bunch of treaties we have with our allies.

[pnwmom]

49. Who says we're "spying on innocent citizens of other countries"?

Why would we waste American resources doing that?

http://www.vanityfair.com/online/eichenwald/2013/06/prism-isnt-data-mining-NSA-scandal


However, targeting is not done willy-nilly. The system is subject to review by the judiciary, the Congress, and the executive branch. Both the attorney general and the director of the N.S.A. must make a determination that they “reasonably believe” a person they wish to target is, in fact, a foreign national outside the country whose activities raise national-security concerns for the United States. That standard, of course, is lower than probable cause, which is a small part of why any information obtained can’t be used in a criminal case.

Courts established under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act review these determinations and must approve the targeting. (Much has been made of the fact that these approvals appear to be given frequently, with some saying the F.I.S.A. courts are just rubber stamps. I disagree; given the requirements for prior review and assessment at the top of the executive branch, a high approval rate for subpoenas would be expected. I’d be more concerned if they were frequently rejected, because that would signal the executive branch was probably attempting to abuse the system.)

Now, anyone who discusses this process without also mentioning minimization procedures is also either very uninformed or intentionally hyping the story. Minimization is a term of art in the world of NSA intercepts which essentially means “stay out of American citizen’s business.” If information about specific Americans (or even foreigners inside the United States) is captured, those details must be removed from all records and cannot be shared with any other entity in the government unless it is necessary to understand and interpret related foreign intelligence or to protect lives from criminal threats. But passing intelligence information to criminal investigators requires several layers of review and is not easily approved; minimization procedures are meant to insure that information collected by the NSA isn’t used in routine criminal investigations.

In other words, the NSA doesn’t give a damn about you swapping recipes with your Aunt Edith—or even your decision to email your drug dealer (foolish as that might be.) And the NSA doesn’t get to establish the minimization procedures on its own—those, too, have to be approved by the FISA courts.

In the past, some minimization procedures bordered on the absurd: for example, pre–9/11, the rules said that the name of companies based in the United States could not be used in communications transmitted from the N.S.A. to other intelligence or law-enforcement bodies. So, suppose the N.S.A. learned through signals intel that a known terrorist was flying at noon on June 20 from Frankfurt to New York on Delta flight no. 2012. Any communication could identify the terrorist, locations, date, and time; however, the C.I.A. and F.B.I. couldn’t be told they were flying in on Delta. Based in Atlanta, you see.

As for the purported secrecy of this program—folks haven’t been listening. Section 702 was widely debated and parsed through by the Congress before its adoption in 2008 (under the Bush administration). It was widely debated and parsed through by Congress before its re-authorization in December 2012 (under the Obama administration). Any supposed expert who feigns surprise here is, once again, either uninformed or hyping.

SNIP

[Th1onein]

225. Quick! Someone tell us which number this is under the Surveillance Apologist Manifesto!

I'll make it easy for you. This is the "But it's all legal" excuse.

[Thinkingabout]

61. Do you think there are not any spies in the US? Do you think by accident the 9/11

Bombings occurred without any "spying"? Do you think by accident they flew out of Boston without planning? Do you think they enrolled in pilot classes by accident? They had their spies right here in the US.

[reusrename]

102. Sounds like some kind of conspiracy.

Are you saying the attack on the towers was a conspiracy?

[Thinkingabout]

107. Never said it was a conspiracy and personally don't think it was.

[bhikkhu]

18. Truth and reconciliation weren't really the issue after 9/11

It was more who screwed up and how can we fix it. For better or worse we got the Patriot Act, and years of reorganizing intelligence agencies.

On the other hand, a bit of truth and reconciliation should have been on the schedule after the Iraq war debacle. The bush crowd was too busy covering their asses after that, changing the subject rather than addressing the failures.

But with that said, none of that has anything to do with an intelligence agent running away to China and Russia with laptops full of classified info. What does that do for us?

[Spitfire of ATJ]

47. I thought it was "covering everyone's asses".

[Waiting For Everyman]

20. Some apparently don't believe in whistleblowers.

We're supposed to just keep our mouth shut and keep doing our jobs regardless of illegality or unconstitutional acts going on. We don't believe in rectifying anything; whatever is wrong, let it stay wrong. Whatever is wrong is inevitable and will always be so, we don't want to bother thinking it could or should change -- that's naive.

People also don't give a crap about the oath to uphold and defend the Constitution. Another thing that doesn't matter, the Nuremberg standards, and human rights.

Loyalty to the boss and the boss' rules is ALL THAT MATTERS. It's easy to see why we have problems. We have a couple of generations who mostly don't give a crap. Ohhhh... but they have lots of opinions about all these things that don't matter to them... and all of those opinions are negative and defeatist.

There's no good healthy sense of defiance or self-worth. No! We want everybody crawling in the dirt. If anybody tries to do anything more than a commonplace act, they are to be smacked back down into the dirt.

Where does whistleblowing fit into that? It doesn't. They reject the whole idea of it.

Fortunately, there is a percentage of people who do get it. If anything is going to improve about the world, it will come from them.

[noise]

217. There is massive double standard when it comes to the

notion of "specialness." Critics say "How dare Snowden appoint himself arbiter of leaks! Who does he think he is!" He saw abuse of power and felt leaking was worth the risk of government retaliation. I guess that makes him guilty of believing people should not be subject to unreasonable data collection efforts.

OTOH some government officials and intelligence officials would have the public believe they are so special that they should be celebrated when they claim they cannot do their job without trashing the Constitution and making a mockery of the Geneva Conventions. The proof that vast counterterrorism powers are required to prevent terrorist attacks? Unsubstantiated claims based on classified information. How sick is this?

If anyone in government truly believes they need the crutch of massive, intrusive surveillance and the power to have murder lists then by all means please find another line of work. Why should anyone accept this police state garbage?

[Mnemosyne]

21. Hear, hear. nt

[DeSwiss]

26. K&R

[center]''Not to enlighten one who can be enlightened is to waste a man.
To endeavor to enlighten one who cannot be enlightened is to waste words.
A wise man wastes neither men nor words.''

~Confucius [/center]

[ReRe]

28. I always wondered what was going to happen back in 1989....

.... when the Berlin Wall fell and the Cold War ended. Well, now I know. Now, something monstrous in our government has sworn out a new and improved Cold War. On us.

[hueymahl]

41. +1

[Spitfire of ATJ]

50. The Cold War was a scam....

Behind the scenes our people and their people were getting together for parties with lots of "booze and broads".

This is why the CIA misses the old days. No booze in the Middle East.

[Douglas Carpenter]

29. the main thing that the "Snowden is a traitor" crowd who happen to be Democrats don't get is that

just because something occurs while a Democrat is in the White House does not make it right - Especially considering that 90% of them would be in total attack mode if a Republican was in the White House. The other things that the "Snowden is a traitor" crowd who happen to be Democrats don't get is that this total surveillance state that is now at least in theory under the command of a President they trust will sooner or later be under the command of a President they don't trust.

[randome]

63. If you see this debate in terms of 'crowds', you have already lost.

The only thing that should matter is evidence. Snowden has not provided evidence to support his claims. He seems incapable of admitting he was wrong about 'direct access'.

He was never able to get personal data to support his claims, which implies that it is strongly protected. Carl Bernstein agrees with this.

And then there is this all-time classic: "I am not here to hide from justice." Uttered from his 'undisclosed location' in Hong Kong before he ran to Moscow to hide from justice.

Show us the evidence and this debate will be over.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font][hr]

[CakeGrrl]

94. +1000. Any thread starting off with the

"What they don't get" theme is a loser. Just another invitation to pile on, bash others who don't think 100% in lockstep, and is not really there to engage debate.

[reusrename]

104. What is it that you don't understand about the direct access?

Third party vendors contract with the service providers and the NSA to provide direct access.

The providers don't give direct access to the NSA, they give it to the third party who in turn gives it to the NSA.

Why is that so difficult for you to comprehend? No one is denying this. There are companies that advertise this capability and this service.


http://www.subsentio.com/service-providers/electronic-surveillance-standards/



In the industry it's referred to as "safe harbor" or "lawful compliance."


This way the telecoms still enjoy their not-so-plausible deniability.


You seem to be saying that Snowden should admit to it whenever he's wrong. Do you folks ever hold yourselves to this same standard?

Of course not, why should you? It's so pathetic.

[questionseverything]

144. this article shows he was not wrong about direct access

http://www.themediaconsortium.com/reporting/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/affidavit-bp-final.pdf

My name is Babak Pasdar, President and CEO of Bat Blue Corporation. I have given this affidavit to
Thomas Devine, who has identified himself as the legal director of the Government Accountability
Project, without any threats, inducements or coercion.

I have been a technologist in the computer and computer security industry for the past nineteen years
and am a "Certified Ethical Hacker" (E-Commerce Consultants International Council.) I have worked
with many enterprise organizations, telecommunications carriers, as well as small and medium sized
organizations in consulting, designing, implementing, troubleshooting, and managing security systems.
This statement is to make a record ofmy concerns about the privacy implications for our society from
what I personally witnessed at a major telecommunications carrier, as summarized below.

~snip~

Our plan that evening was to migrate a set of users to the new firewall, and then determine if and how it
impacted access and functionality. We started testing and, all-in-all, the small users test migration went
very well. The test went so well that we then set out to migrate over 300 sites that were carrier owned
or affiliate locations. These 300 or so sites were mostly sales offices. We migrated the locations by
redirecting their traffic to the new firewalls. All was going extremely well. As the night went on you
could feel the relief taking over the anxiousness everyone had felt earlier.

At one point I overheard C1 and C2 talking about skipping a location. Not wanting to do a shoddy job
I stopped and said "we should migrate all sites."

C1 told me this site is different.

I asked, "Who is it? Carrier owned or affiliate?"

C1 said, "This is the 'Quantico Circuit.'''

I remember that he paused and looked at me as did C2. I inquired, "Quantico, Virginia? Is this a store
location?"

C1 responded, "No."

"Is it what I think it is?", I asked.

[reusrename]

151. I believe the Quantico Circuit is used for live surveillance.

I'm not sure if this includes access to the provider's metadata index, or if it just allows access to live message content. Of course each individual message has it's own metadata contained in the message header, but that's not exactly what I mean by the metadata index. That index is what allows the relevant customers to be associated with the individual messages. That's my understanding of it.

In addition, there is a monster database where all digital communications are stored for later retrieval.

There's a more detailed conversation beginning here and continuing for the next four posts.

[questionseverything]

156. only live message content

does not make me feel much better

pg 5 of the pdf says billing,text and vcr's set up everywhr

ty for ur reply and explaination

[randome]

170. Still no evidence, just this guy's word, same as Snowden's.

Evidence will win you this debate.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font][hr]

[randome]

171. Yet all the telecoms say that's not happening.

Your link is subtitled 'Your lawful compliance partner'. Sounds sinister, doesn't it?

NEXT!
[hr][font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font][hr]

[reusrename]

201. Direct access is lawful compliance. It's the identical thing.

You're the one who claims it's sinister and therefore it isn't happening.

And none of the telecoms is denying it. Not a one.

[randome]

202. Why would they deny turning over data authorized by a warrant?

How is that any different from serving a warrant to get school records or financial records?

The 'direct access' Snowden initially spoke about was the NSA monitoring anyone they damned well pleased in real time. He later walked that back and one of the PowerPoint slides he stole supported the idea that 'direct access' meant something more like a secure FTP server, not real-time monitoring.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]There is nothing you can't do if you put your mind to it.
Nothing.[/center][/font][hr]

[reusrename]

207. Snowden never walked anything back. That's false.

Do you have a link to this real-time claim you just came up with? I never heard such a claim.

I believe you are mixing up message content and metadata.

They are apples and oranges and are handled differently under this policy.

[randome]

214. So why didn't Snowden get evidence that message content is being gathered?

Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. But until I see some evidence, I don't understand the vitriol.

And here is where Snowden 'conveniently' talks about 'direct access' meaning something different from what he said initially.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023032903
[hr][font color="blue"][center]There is nothing you can't do if you put your mind to it.
Nothing.[/center][/font][hr]

[reusrename]

220. You don't believe that all digital communications are being stored?

I don't know what you would accept as proof here. I don't think Obama has ever denied it.

Under the FISA law it's referred to as "inadvertent collection" or some such terminology. Snowden talks about this in the link you provided.

There's a Utah data center with yottabytes of storage for this purpose.

Thanks for the link, by the way. It says exactly what Snowden has been saying all along. Perhaps you have been misunderstanding the plain language he's using. The policy is super complicated and multi-layered in order to circumvent satisfy all of the legal requirements.

If you look at the discussion in this subthread, there are four posts back and forth that sort of describe the PRISM system in more detail. Funny thing is, once you understand how it works, neither the administration nor the telecoms nor Snowden are saying anything contradictory (except for some outright perjury in the case of Clapper and other).

[quaker bill]

66. What about the crowd that simply finds him uninteresting?

[GliderGuider]

70. "the government has breached its trust with the public"

Exactly true.

[Zorra]

74. Their OP's are all so annoyingly trite, boring, and provincial. "Blah blah blah, traitor, blah blah"

For the first time in ten years I am considering using the ignore function.

[AllINeedIsCoffee]

79. "Blah blah blah freedom and liberty blah blah 1984 blah blah hero blah blah." nt

[quinnox]

145. I know, its always the same stupid and boring talking points

They don't have any imagination whatsoever, and just have to regurgitate the same idiocy, time and time again. Even their fellow authoritarians must be getting sick of it.

[mike_c]

83. neither is obsessive secrecy....

The notion that if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear works both ways. So rather than hurl platitudes at one another, we and our government should embrace transparency, not secrecy. There can be no democracy when the government operates in secret, using secret courts to adjudicate secret laws for secret agencies with secret purposes. I mean, nothing says "Through the rabbit hole" quite so thoroughly as the United States, erstwhile champion of freedom, turning into a surveillance and security state nearly overnight. History will not remember this as our greatest hour.

[WillyT]

92. HUGE K & R !!! - THANK YOU !!!

[Mr.CT]

100. I am new here what is K&R ?

[Kali]

142. kick (the thread back to the top of the page)

and recommend (button in lower left of the Original Post)

welcome to DU

[shawn703]

103. There sure is a lot of tinfoil hattery in this thread

[polichick]

111. "When the government fears the people, there is liberty...

When the people fear the government, there is tyranny."

Thomas Jefferson


edit: typo

[KoKo]

114. I just posted these snips from Harper's interview with Glen Greenwald...

they go along with your Jefferson quote, I think:


Alex Mierjeski It’s astounding, the predictability with which any given administration responds to these sorts of leaks.

Greenwald: It’s just a natural instinct for people in power to want to hide what they do, because secrecy is the lynchpin for abuse of power, and transparency is the antidote to it. This is not only a tenet of America’s founding, but of political theory in general, that that’s the only way power can be checked. And people in power don’t want to be checked.



Greenwald: The real measure of how free a society is isn’t how its good, obedient servants are treated; it’s how dissidents are treated. And if you go and do any kind of investigative journalism and talk to whistleblowers, or talk to people who are dissenting or are otherwise engaged in activism against the government, or journalists who do that, you find this incredibly disturbing, intense climate of fear. Nobody will talk unless they’re using very sophisticated encryption technologies.

[polichick]

117. Such important truths - I'm disappointed that Pres. Obama...

has embraced the secrecy after his incredible speeches on transparency. I hope he hasn't been threatened into it but wonder.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

126. Well fucking said!

It's not about Snowden.

It's now what the government believes it can or cannot do, and if We the People are going to allow it. Give them an inch, and they'll take a mile.

With every revelation comes a "New Normal" over corporate/governmental overreach. This is unacceptable in a Democratic Republic.

[ProSense]

133. What

There has not been any sort of truth or reconciliation effort after 9/11. Instead government officials exhibit a grandiose sense of entitlement as they conduct themselves in a "we are above the law" manner. It is extremely arrogant to sweep away massive Bush administration betrayals of the public by claiming "we need to move on for the good of the country." Or to suggest that investigating torture is somehow tantamount to criminalizing politics.

The reason so many people support Snowden is because his leaks are based on the idea that the government has breached its trust with the public. The word of government officials isn't good enough to justify all this power and secrecy. Fearmongering and intimidation are not indicative of a government acting in good faith.

...the "Snowden is a hero crowd" doesn't get is that revealing U.S. state secrets in other countries have nothing to do the above.

Bush's illegal spying was exposed in 2005 by Thomas Tamm. The notion that criticism of Snowdens actions that led him to reveal U.S. state secrets to other countries and find himself stuck in Russia have anything to do with anyone's opinion of the government is hogwash.

You appear to expect people to overlook his actions overseas simply because there is a debate ongoing about NSA domestic programs. Not going to happen.

Snowden is a delusional and self-important clown. He and Greenwald (and their supports) have done everything to help make the story about them.

First, Greenwald announces that he has enough information to bring down the U.S.

Snowden follows by declaring he's immune to torture.

He's applying for temporary asylum in Russia.

Doesn't get any more bizarre than that. Well...

Edward Snowden Declares Himself Torture-Proof
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023275112

If Snowden's case as a whistleblower is so strong, why is he afraid to face the consequences?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023236549

Sen. Tester Calls On Snowden To Return To America To ‘Face The Music’
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023281426

[Luminous Animal]

161. He doesn't have access or know all the keys. That is why torture is useless.

[creon]

139. No

I do not regard Snowden as a traitor. Nor, is he a hero.
I regard him as a very naive and foolish young man. He is a naive and foolish young man who has found himself in a very tough spot.

He has very few options left. Basically, he has two: get Russia to take him in; return to the USA.

Getting refuge in Russia buys him some time; returning to the USA puts him in a court, facing 30 years in prison.

[Corruption Inc]

141. Well said, excellent point that cannot be ignored or underestimated

The American people were told to "look forward" when we all knew that criminals were what we would see when we looked forward as the criminals were never held accountable for their crimes.

So what have we seen? Criminal bankers, torture camps still open, wiretapping of every American, continuous war profiteering, criminal for-profit health insurance scams, completely dysfunctional Congress, criminal courts, continuous civilian killing, whistle blower retaliations, massive propaganda networks getting even bigger, decreasing wages, no economic recovery, austerity measures, sequestrations, entire states being destroyed by criminal GOP policies, declining education levels and an overall decline in every way of life for every American outside of the 1% of super rich.

Every incident just makes it more obvious too, the resentment of the people just keeps getting more deeply seated until almost all trust in government is gone.

[Fearless]

149. The Nixon treatment.

[truedelphi]

150. K & R n/t

[truedelphi]

152. Regarding Nine Eleven - ample evidence existed prior

To the event. It came from our own NSA, and also the intelligence offices of at leat four different foreign nations.

Condi Rice told Willie Brown NOT to take the flight he was planning from SF to NYC on Sept 11th. She later mentioned that fact on CNN TV - May 2002 or 2003. Everyone in SF area knew Willie Brown had been told to stay away from the airlines and NYC on 09-11-2001.

So despite there being ample warning from major intel sources re: the 09-11-20101 event, it still happened... So how would more surveillance have helped??

How does giving Big Brother ever damn "inalienable right" we possess from birth to grave going to make the next time be different?

I will never believe that the Total Surveillance State is about anything but the profit factor. A great percentage of the nation's 1.2 trillion dollar annual subsidy of the military is being scheduled to go into Surveillance processes, personnel, construction, equipment etc.

Follow the money.

[BornLooser]

162. I Pledge Allegience to the...Woah Now Justa Hold On Ah say Ah say Hold On just a cotton pickin'...

[YoungDemCA]

168. I think they *do* get that

Which is precisely why they are doing their damnedest to shut the discussion and controversy down.

[warrprayer]

176. (snork)...

...

[Tx4obama]

179. What the Pro-Snowden crowd doesn't get: Snowden is an admitted felonious criminal

Snowden openly and publicly admitted to committing federal crimes.

Therefore he should be arrested and stand trial.

[Phlem]

209. Agreed.

And whomever outed Valarie Plame Wilson and her husband should be arrested and stand trial. No?

-p

[ohheckyeah]

228. What a shame -

it took committing federal crimes to uncover even bigger federal crimes against us all. I really don't care that he stole the documents or that it was a federal crime....I care that the feds are committing bigger crimes.

[Bluenorthwest]

188. The folks who go after him by and large have also gone after LGBT rights and activists

with a similar abandon, they have blasted Dan Choi, they say 'gays have plenty of rights' and 'there is only one right you don't have'. Do a DU search on them as you find them, you will see that this is the case.
Same lot has always attacked Glen Greenwald for being gay as much as for the opinions they don't agree with, they are a batch of bigots hurling vicious rhetoric.
They loved Rick Warren, dug Donnie McClurkin, claimed Dan Choi was an 'attention seeker' and so forth.
Look 'em up.

[Vic Vinegar]

189. snowden is fine but you won't get a platform around him

Snowden isn't a traitor but he certainly is a spook; the man only a while before said that "leakers should be shot in the balls" which makes it seem that Snowden is some sort of mechanism from the anti-Obama warhawks in the Pentagon for fractionating activism over the petty issue of email reading for the life and death issue of economics and possible deployment of troops in Syria. This reminds one of Daniel Ellsberg who was part of Operation Phoenix which was designed to kill anyone who could read or write in South Vietnam and who was very much like Dr. Strangelove about nuclear war; and then some how had a Damascus road conversion and published the Pentagon Papers which blamed all the crimes of Vietnam on the Army and Nixon instead of the CIA.

Now you don't need to believe that to believe that we already knew about phone tapping via Echelon since Bill Clinton, we already knew about the patriot act provisions etc. What did Snowden give us that we didn't already know? Nothing!

The only way you are going to get enough political mass traction to tame the beast of privacy invasion is via building the platform on the existential economic issues that have always moved mountains and via that movement gain the political clout to repeal such heinous invasions of privacy. If you go at the issue head on you won't get any where and as the leisure of Americans is undermined by further economic cutbacks there will eventually be NO capacity of even organizing against these injustices head on.

Point is we must focus all our energy temporarily onto the problem that all working class Americans care about: the economy. When the economy is fixed then you can go after everything else that is broke. Necessity first, reform second. Be practical. Have the pessimism of the mind and the optimism of the will!

[flamingdem]

208. interesting, thanks

n/t

[Waiting For Everyman]

210. Nope, Sensenbrenner says NSA will get fixed much faster than you think.

Whoa: Watch the PATRIOT Act’s author warn Congress might cancel the spying program

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/07/17/whoa-watch-the-patriot-acts-author-warn-congress-might-cancel-the-spying-program/

[ohheckyeah]

229. Absolute wrong....

you strike while the iron is hot. If this is left to die down, nothing will ever change. It isn't likely to as it is.

[exlrrp]

190. Oh boy, another Snowden Thread

with more people telling each other what to believe.
Gee its been minutes and minutes since the last one

[MrMickeysMom]

191. Maybe this is where we separate the wheat from the refined white flour...

After all, I'm not seen as the normal Democrat, according to the "DLC party platform" for a long time, certainly through 9/11 (see all my dungeon comments in DU-2... on second thought, don't).

Are we incapable of being stretched and pulled into self-reflection, even if we don't like everything we see?

[arthritisR_US]

212. I agree with all that you have said but I just

don't envision Snowden as a hero or whistleblower. There is too much about him that leaves me suspect.

[Coyotl]

224. Paul Revere was a traitor.

Traitor can be a good thing. It all depends on who is betraying whom.

[Puzzledtraveller]

249. Kicked!

[shawn703]

250. However, the "Snowden is a hero crowd"

are all pacifists and those with a "even foreign surveillance is bad" worldview. Either that or they are very selective of the facts and will deny until their blue in the face what Snowden revealed about foreign surveillance to targeted countries. A couple of others think he should get a pass on telling China how we spied on them because he told us about domestic surveillance too. It's very hypocritical to complain about Bush officials being above the law when you put Snowden above the law. Somebody who truly is about justice would think both Bush and Snowden should answer for their crimes, not just one of them because you disagree with him while the guy you agree with gets a "get out of jail free" card.