I have been reading the praises of Edward Snowden

[Vietnameravet]

...and the condemnation of Obama and government spying, so much so, I just had to ask some questions.

I am open to changing my mind, even if you don't think so, but here are the questions I want answered.

I cannot see how my liberties have been taken from me and my freedom gone simply because some agency may track who I am in contact with, if they are doing that in an effort to stop another terrorist attack on this country. I realize this takes a bit of trust but are we all so jaded that we trust no one and think Obama is another Dick Cheney?

Just how is the NSA supposed to find terrorists without spying? If a suspected terrorist contacts someone here is the government to do nothing because someone might loose a bit of privacy? And how is the NSA supposed to know who is and who is not a terrorist without spying, which obviously involves checking emails from people who turn out to be innocent. Some talk about freedom but don't I deserve the freedom to be able to go where I please without fearing another terrorist attack?( Sure success is not guaranteed but cant we even try?)

And if there is an attack am I suppose to tell the victims, that is simply the price they must pay so no one will open my email or track my phone calls even if they are to suspected terrorists? My privacy trumps their lives?

And please answer this; How is this talk about loosing freedom and an out of control authoritarian state over the issue of spying any different from the NRA ranting about the same issues when gun buyers are asked to register their guns or have their backgrounds checked when they buy an assault rifle? Sounds like the same logic to me.

And on the matter of Ed Snowen..some say he is not the issue while others call him a hero. To me, he could have made the public aware of this spying in a way so as to preserve the secrets he promised to keep, but he didn't.

He had no right to take upon himself the authority to reveal counter-terrorism secrets, as long as he had legitimate methods of expressing his concerns. He had such methods but he chose not to use them. Instead, he took authority upon himself which no one granted him.

I think its obvious he lied when he pledged secrecy and he stole secrets he was to safeguard and that makes him a liar and a thief in my mind.

[Warren Stupidity]

1. The definition of "terrorist" will expand to include all civil disobedience.

The same way that RICO laws started out as "ok" because they were only going to be used against mafia bosses and ended up being used to prosecute an enormous variety of crimes committed by ordinary people, including people engaged in political dissent and civil disobedience, mass domestic surveillance will be, and most likely already has been, used to suppress dissent and to persecute people engaged in any activity the government decides is undesirable.

As a vietnam era vet you should know that prior government operations, such as cointelpro, were used in exactly this way to disrupt, intimidate, criminalize and persecute dissidents during the 50's 60's and 70's.

You trust the government that sent you to vietnam, the government that flat out lied about Iraq, to not abuse mass domestic surveillance?

[Vinnie From Indy]

2. What good is liberty if one must relinquish it in the name of safety?

If you truly want to understand this issue here is a bit to ponder:
https://www.eff.org/files/filenode/att/generalwarrantsmemo.pdf

[cascadiance]

3. I think most of us aren't just condemning Obama, but Bush and many other predecessors as well...

... who have all been a part of putting in these policies that totally VIOLATE our fourth amendment rights! Ben Franklin's warnings of those who would choose "safety" over civil liberties are as poignant today as they were when he was around. We wouldn't have had a Boston Tea Party or a subsequent revolution if the British government had the powers the NSA is trying to use on us today...

If spying on all of us makes them so much more damned effective in catching terrorists than not doing so, then WHY didn't they catch those kids doing the terrorism in Boston? I think we need to take a step back and ask ourselves what the true purposes are of what the NSA and related agencies and private contractors like Booz-Allen are doing now that they are using *fear* of terrorism and the need for safety from it to justify.

Even if there are sacrifices to our liberties that might at some point be necessary to protect our country, I think we as all Americans deserve to have oversight in place to make sure that we KNOW the extent of what is being done, so that we know how far they are going and not having it just be a black hole where they can do whatever they want.

Unchecked power here not only has control over squashing anything we might do that a select few at the top might not like, but it also serves as a tool to blackmail all of those in government to do their bidding to protect their secrecy and agendas for fear that those who would question it would also be outed. What is happening to Manning, Snowden, Greenwald, perhaps Michael Hastings, and others compared to the far better treatment that someone like Daniel Ellsberg doing the same things during his time received, is an illustration of a secret hidden government that is out of control now.

This violates our abilities to even live in society. Most of us can get along in this society without owning a gun, which IS a choice to own, not a requirement for people to live effectively. Even if we don't have phone systems or computers that can be monitored in a blanket fashion in violation of the fourth amendment, we still have to see doctors, etc. that put our medical and other private records online without our direct involvement and now they are also prone to this spying as well. We can't avoid it, and are all potential victims of character assassinations whether we choose to use a part of the system or not.

On the one hand, I blame Bush as much if not more for this problem than Obama, but we can't blind ourselves and say that Obama and others in this administration don't share responsibility for enabling this dangerous element of our society to go unchecked as well. This shouldn't be a partisan issue, and more and more surveys, etc. show as much concern by Republicans as us Democrats on what is going on, and as much enabling of what I view as criminal elements in both parties as well. This is NOT a partisan issue. It is an AMERICAN issue and one where we should demand our constitutional rights as AMERICANS to live as free Americans, and not under a Stasi-like police state, that should never be allowed to operate in this country. If Republicans come to me and try to blame this on Obama in their effort to join forces against this problem that I'm also concerned about, I will slap them down and say that if they want to work with me on fixing it, they need to not just focus on Obama as a problem, but the system as a problem that needs fixing. By the same token, I don't want to keep making excuses for what this administration may be doing that could be making things worse too. Avoiding partisanship is the only way that this gets solved.

Like Snowden or not, but by providing us the documents that showed that all Verizon customers were being spied upon, even if only "metadata" which I don't think was what they limited it to, he provided us all the "standing" that groups like EPIC, ACLU, and others needed to do the many lawsuits that are now being filed on behalf of those that are being spied upon so that our court system can examine these spying efforts more closely. For the government to shut this down with "state secrets" privilege is far more riskier than when they were earlier able to dismiss such suits because they "didn't have standing". We will thank Snowden for this many years from now, if we are able to fix these problems subsequently. Mark my words.

I may disagree with libertarian philosophy in many areas and therefore probably have a different world view than Snowden does on many topics, but on this issue, and what he did, he has my thanks for his courage and determination.

[The Straight Story]

4. I am ok with the govt tracking me, as long as I can do the same with them

Bet they would not go for that though....

[KoKo]

5. Why didn't Snowden go through "Proper Channels"...LINK

And they keep on Asking: Why didn't Snowdon Go Through "Proper Channels?"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023284246#post6

[Savannahmann]

6. You asked.

He had no right to take upon himself the authority to reveal counter-terrorism secrets, as long as he had legitimate methods of expressing his concerns. He had such methods but he chose not to use them. Instead, he took authority upon himself which no one granted him.

I think its obvious he lied when he pledged secrecy and he stole secrets he was to safeguard and that makes him a liar and a thief in my mind.

Yet those who implemented the various programs, administer the various programs, and are now working day and night to catch Snowden to shut him up also took an oath.

http://uspolitics.about.com/od/usgovernment/a/oaths_of_office_4.htm

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.

That oath has them swearing to defend the Constitution. Now, how do these programs which you have admitted exist, support and defend the Constitution? How does it support and defend the 4th Amendment? How does tracking and monitoring communications with Lawyers and Clients defend the 6th Amendment? By monitoring my communications because I post on a website which may be visited by someone who spoke to someone else in an email that is a suspected terrorist, how is the Constitution defended, or even supported?

What Snowden did was expose the truth, that our Government is Lying to us, spying on us, and treating us as subjects. Lincoln said that we were fighting to defend a Government of the People, by the People, and for the People. Is this that Government? Can we say that the Government is in any way Of, By, or for the people when the Government spends so much money spying upon those people?

You say they are doing it to identify and prevent acts of terror. Yet, none of the terrorism cases have been cracked because of it. Each claim that these programs have stopped terrorism, have been disproven and then later denounced. But let's set aside efficacy for a moment. Under that idealism, the ends justify the means. No matter what means you may employ, they are just and right so long as it achieves the outcome desired. Is that the nation you thought you lived in?

Under that principle, that the ends justify the means, there is no action we can not take, no crime we can not commit, so long as the ends justify the means. What great philosopher proposes that principle as a good means of governance? Those I can mention from history, are not considered greats at all.

So we have a program that violates the Constitution, and violates the oath of those who are inflicting this program upon us, on one side. Doesn't that make them not only liars, but traitors too? Haven't they not only violated the Constitution, but their oaths to support and defend the Constitution?

Now, let's talk about Snowden. Tell me what legal principle exists that prohibits someone from providing information on an illegal act? A lawyer even if you are the client, can not stand by and remain mute if you inform him of a criminal act. Yet Attorney Client Privilege is one of our oldest understood Civil Rights, and it doesn't protect the attorney from conspiring to commit an illegal act. If you tell your plans to commit an illegal act, your Priest is not protected by Religious Privilege. Nor is your Doctor protected by Doctor Patient confidentiality. So none of those groups are protected if you inform them of an illegal act.

But somehow, we are operating under the assumption that Snowden was not only protected, but bound to maintain silence regarding illegal actions. So let me get this straight. Our Government can break as many laws as they want, and hold people to the strictest interpretation of silence, while we grant no such immunity to others with longer held privileged communication protections?

Do you see now why your post is such an ill conceived effort? To accept those arguments, then the Constitution does not mean a thing that it says, and we are not the enablers, the empowering force of our Government, we are subjects to it. I should point out that the last time a Government considered the people of this nation subject to it's whims, this nation fought the war of 1812. The time before that was the Revolutionary war.

Either that document must mean what is says, and the oaths of those many elected, hired, appointed men and women are themselves just as large a liar if not worse than Snowden, or the nation is doomed. If we are not a nation of laws, all lesser laws extending from the highest law of our nation, or we are nothing more than a Banana Republic, and the great document may as well be written in pencil. If we are such a ship, that has slipped our anchor line in a storm, then we deserve the inevitable dashing upon the rocks that will follow.

What do we ask our Troops to fight and possibly die for? We have become the epitome of that we detested a generation ago, what will we be in another generation?

[Vietnameravet]

7. Okay thanks for your post but

I totally disagree..the oath Snowden took and the pledges he signed were more than the simple one you posted,, When given access to secret information you must sign a form that pledges you not to reveal what you are shown or given access to.. It goes further than the simple oath you posted.. I KNOW ( even today I have access to confidential information much less serious than what he did and I have had to sign a lot more than that, and understand I will be fined and imprisoned if I reveal what I given and believe me, its trivial) ..and Snowden swore to more than just that oath He took a pledge and violated it..


And you assume the program is being done illegally...,.that is the basis for much of what you post....,.,.but you cannot make that assumption ....i know it's fashionable but it's not true ..But, for the sake of argument , assume that it is true.. then Obama should be immediately impeached for conducting an illegal spying operation and lying about it..Is that what your propose?



And finally I hardly think reading emails or checking on who posted what to a website means the Constitution does not mean anything,.,spying has always been part of counter intelligence and nothing in this is new...If the information were abused or used for political purposes that would certainly be a serious matter,,,.but nothing like that has been revealed..

In my mind all this talk of ending freedom is so overblown...like the NRA that howls about gun control..I lived in a country which was a dictatorship and to equate the two is overblown. way over blown....

However, i sincerely appreciate your post and your thoughts! Keep in touch..

[Bluenorthwest]

10. You suck at this. The 'I came to characterize' agenda is far too clear, your lexicon

far too overblown. 'All this talk of ending freedom'?? As if there is 'all this talk' about freedom ending rather than actual criticism of furtive attempts to play end runs around the 4th Amendment.
Dull.

[Vietnameravet]

13. Thanks for the polite reply,.,.

[Bluenorthwest]

14. I'm not interested in answering duplicity with kindness.

You got an honest criticism and you failed to address any of the content you just whined about being criticized. You could explain why you feel the need to claim 'hero worship' and 'all this talk about freedom ending' with high drama in a thread that purports to be a quest for honest discussion, but instead you went with the whine.

[Vietnameravet]

24. Maybe you should learn to read..that might help

[leveymg]

38. If you want to find terrorists inside the US, watch "our" terrorists the CIA lets in. Every major

attack going back to the '93 WTC bombing though the Boston Marathon bombing, with 9/11 and the Underwear Bomber in between, was the work of known terrorists the CIA or DoD had let in as part of a larger covert operation.

We could go back to the Pre-Patriot Act FISA regime and be far safer if we only insisted the CIA do its business differently and controlled its operatives. Terrorism against us is more often than not blowback from terrorism we commit against others.

[leftstreet]

8. Where are these 'praises of Edward Snowden?' n/t

[Vietnameravet]

9. Come on man..they are everywhere..he is a hero..to some and they have said it..

[leftstreet]

11. Here at DU? Did you maybe mean Obama?

I haven't really seen hero worship of Snowden. Lots of positive reinforcement for whistleblowers, but that's not exclusive to Snowden. That generally always happens here

[Vietnameravet]

12. well I think if you check you will find Snowden refered to as a hero in several posts....

[leftstreet]

16. Search function just finds snark 'hero' threads

You know, the not-so-bright apologist types accusing people of treating Snowden as a hero

They do this kind of stuff all the time

boring

[Vietnameravet]

28. Maybe you should learn to read..that might help

[morningfog]

30. At least you have a solid go to.

[AllINeedIsCoffee]

44. LOL.

WH Petition. Edward Snowden Is a Hero
http://www.democraticunderground.com/102353

Why Edward Snowden Is a Hero
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022994058

Snowden will go down a hero for my generation
http://election.democraticunderground.com/10023123618

Just Released Video: Whistle-Blower And Hero... Edward Snowden... In His Own Words...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022978352

"I am raising a GLASS to EDWARD SNOWDEN A TRUE AMERICAN HERO"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1018407545

And that's with excluding replies. Those are OPs.

[leftstreet]

45. Only 2 of those were generated by DUers

And one was in the lounge



Compared to the avalanche of Snowden-is-a-Traitor-Smoke-Em-Out threads....

[Number23]

23. Don't entertain it. That type of "I din't see nothing!" is a waste of time

We're all going to sit here and pretend that DUers didn't post threads of Snowden's pic and half of GD fell all over themselves to post how awesome he was, the breathlessness over which noble country would grant him asylum, or the numerous times he's been compared to Paul Revere. Yeah, that was all in our heads.

[Vietnameravet]

26. You got it...!!! now they just dont see what they were so full of last week..

praise for a liar and thief..

[emulatorloo]

42. It is totally disingenuous and a quick google proves otherwise

Search terms: democraticunderground Snowden hero

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023166428
http://www.democraticunderground.com/102353
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023123618
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022994058

Got other things to do but google will turn up a ton more for you.

[bemildred]

15. I posted one.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/101669240

Just to see what would happen. Not much it seems.

I like Ed, he seems like a nice kid, but it's a bit over the top. The prose is not bad though.

[leftstreet]

17. Ah I saw that

The author of the article used the term 'hero,' not a DUer. I think the OP here is claiming hordes of DUers routinely refer to Snowden as a hero

I just haven't seen it

[bemildred]

19. About that, I can agree.

Maybe a few. And a lot of it's not about Snowden. Even Snowden says it's not about Snowden.

But there is a good deal of purple prose on both sides in the media. I watch it kind of like TV. The standards for un-ridiculed arguement here are higher. People talk back.

[kentuck]

18. There's too much confusion...I can't get no relief...

[Logical]

20. They have you scared! It is working! n-t

[Pretzel_Warrior]

33. what does that mean? he doesn't sound scared--just prudent

you're the ones running around with your hair on fire saying "authoritarianism!!" "fascism!!"

[Logical]

47. Lol, gullible much? n-t

[madokie]

21. I very happily added my name to the recommend list

snowden is a vehicle to use to get at the black man in the whitehouse to some here. I'll always believe that.

[Vietnameravet]

25. I agree

[struggle4progress]

22. Here's my run-down of the issues:

The prospect of a gigantic NSA infrastructure that could be abused to track anybody's social network should worry us

A good administration will tend to obey the law and respect privacy rights; a bad administration will tend to ignore the law and disregard privacy rights -- but when the infrastructure exists, the possibilities for serious abuse by a bad administration are much increased

The security-privacy trade-offs are extraordinarily complicated. We can state platitudes nobody in their right mind wants to trade enormous governmental intrusion for minor security gains, and similarly no one should want exposure to enormous security risks to avoid minimal governmental intrusion. Beyond such platitudes, the trade-offs may require judgments calls that simply reduce to pure opinion

Transparency is a good for democracy, and opaqueness often covers corruption, but the world is also a bit of a poker game, and it can be quite unwise to tip your full hand to all the other players. We either need to modify our laws to protect the sort of whistle-blowing that exposed the Bush administration's torture of prisoners and its illegal wiretapping activity, or we need a whistleblower protection movement with enough political clout to protect such people. On the other hand, activities such as Bradley Manning's release of 750K documents, the vast majority of which he cannot possibly have examined, and which he seems to have released for purely ideological reasons or perhaps because he was personally disturbed, do not really qualify as whistleblowing and do not deserve protection

Mr Snowden's activity has encouraged Americans to discuss some of these issues, though unfortunately his activities also seem to have had all manner of other effects, such as possibly alerting the Chinese to US infiltration of some Chinese nuclear weapons policy sites, which seems a clear violation of the law. My current guess is that Snowden is a technically-competent fellow but very green regarding international relations and counter-intelligence work. I incline to the view that he is well-intentioned, and I do not know what damage he has actually done. On the other hand -- unless one wants to say that nothing should be secret and that every short-term government contractor with a security clearance has the right to take what he learns on the job and use it to promote his own personal foreign policy -- we cannot really tolerate little escapades like Snowden's

[Vietnameravet]

40. Nice!

[AllINeedIsCoffee]

27. K&R.

No one's liberties have been curtailed.

And no one can point to any tangible difference in their life since the implementation of these policies.

[Vietnameravet]

29. Thanks

[morningfog]

34. "Tangible difference in their life" shouldn't be the measuring stick.

[Pretzel_Warrior]

31. excellent analysis and questions

[Vietnameravet]

32. Honestly if anyone on this thread cannot find others full of praise for Snowden then

I cant help you.. But it does remind me of Rush who makes hateful comments and when called about them says he was only kidding..Bullshit..!

[morningfog]

35. When all else fails, compare them to rush!

[Vietnameravet]

36. All else did not fail ..the Rush thing was a bonus!

[morningfog]

37. You are working under the erroneous Waronterra, Inc. marketing assumptions.

[Vietnameravet]

39. whatever..

[morningfog]

41. Boogey boogey boo!

ETA: In seriousness, if you buy the fear they have been selling for well over a decade now, you would let them do anything. That is the only way we have gone so far down the rabbit hole. It's a ruse and lots of big corporations are making too much money to give it up now. Perpetual war and fear is big business.

[AllINeedIsCoffee]

43. Don't let people tell you the praise hasn't been strong. This is just scratching the surface:

WH Petition. Edward Snowden Is a Hero
http://www.democraticunderground.com/102353

Why Edward Snowden Is a Hero
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022994058

Snowden will go down a hero for my generation
http://election.democraticunderground.com/10023123618

Just Released Video: Whistle-Blower And Hero... Edward Snowden... In His Own Words...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022978352

"I am raising a GLASS to EDWARD SNOWDEN A TRUE AMERICAN HERO"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1018407545

And that's with excluding replies. Those are OPs.

[great white snark]

46. K&R. Excellent questions.

[jazzimov]

48. Actually, they are not reading our emails and spying on us.

While it may be true that they are collecting all of this info in a database, it is a restricted database and they can only access information that information if they are reasonably sure that it is not a US citizen talking to another US citizen inside the US. Of course, sometimes they do accidentally receive US Citizen info, but there are strict contingencies with how to deal with it. If there is reason to believe that it is relevant to a crime, then it has to be turned over and a probable cause warrant issued. Otherwise, it's destroyed immediately.

You raise some good questions, but many of them are unwarranted. Please go back to the original leaked documents themselves and don't read/believe the hype that is printed with them or here.

The NSA is NOT spying on US Citizens.

[randome]

49. Carl Bernstein said it looks to him like the safeguards and restrictions at the NSA are good.

I agree with him. It's too bad for Snowden that many of his stolen documents disproved his allegations. I guess that trouble he had getting through high school must have messed with his critical thinking skills.
[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]

[Savannahmann]

50. Keep believing that if you like

If it helps you sleep better at night, then by all means, believe it.

[snappyturtle]

52. If one buys the company line then that's the train of thought.

It's like they read to a point and feel OK when the gov't says they're
not spying on us but they never go on and read what the old whistle
blowers are saying, again, now that Snowden has the evidence. Nor, do
they put 2 and 2 and ask why is the gov't doing this in the first place.
The gov't has the tools to get the info they're mass collecting on an
individual basis when the case arise....one of the main points of the Amash/
Conyers amendment. It dumbfounds me considering the danger of the
NSA practices.

[lumpy]

51. Thank you.

n