Snowden statue points to divide in US society: Is he hero or traitor?

[Blue_Tires]

A group of guerrilla artists' lofty, albeit controversial, goal of enshrining whistle-blower Edward Snowden among the ranks of American heroes was thwarted on Monday as New York City Department of Parks & Recreation officials promptly removed a bust of Mr. Snowden that the artists had installed atop a war memorial in Brooklyn, N.Y.

The group of artists, whose identities have not been confirmed, had fastened a custom-made bust of the former National Security Agency contractor to part of the Prison Ship Martyrs Monument, a memorial to Revolutionary War soldiers. The parks department quickly covered the unsanctioned bust with a tarp and removed it shortly thereafter.

But while the dance of discord played out by the activist artists and park officials may have amused local spectators, it is representative of a divide within American society: the split between those who view Snowden as a national hero and those who believe he is a traitor.

According to a January 2014 poll by the Pew Research Center, while public opinion is divided over whether the Snowden leaks served the public interest, most young Americans are supportive of Snowden.

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/USA-Update/2015/0407/Snowden-statue-points-to-divide-in-US-society-Is-he-hero-or-traitor-video

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

1. He performed an heroic act for the public good.

[KoKo]

41. ...!

[840high]

52. +1

[hifiguy]

53. +1 nt

[NCTraveler]

2. I don't find him to be either.

His actions are beneficial to all Americans.

[BlueCaliDem]

55. I find him to be both.

His actions were beneficial to some Americans but he's also turned to a malevolent dictator to reveal sensitive information about the United States. In the end, I'll choose the U.S. over Russia any day.

[Cleita]

3. Well, he's a traitor to the secretive Homeland Security gestapo enabled by

the Patriot Act of the Bush Administration. He's a hero to those of us who don't feel the government should be doing any snooping except when there is a suspicion concrete enough to get a search warrant first before snooping.

I just learned that any police agency who wanted to could have access to my library on line records without having to tell me and the librarian told me it was because of the Patriot Act. I hope they enjoy reading my Fantasy novels.

[randome]

4. Neither. He's a confused kid (despite his true age) who dreamed of being a 'somebody'.

[hr][font color="blue"][center]“If you're not committed to anything, you're just taking up space.”
Gregory Peck, Mirage (1965)[/center][/font][hr]

[sabrina 1]

22. He'sa courageous Whistle Blower. It is no surprise that young people are supportive of Whistle

Blowers while other, mostly Conservative Republicans detest those who expose malfeasance by their own government, particularly Bush policies that are still, tragically, in place. They prefer to wave their flags and shout 'support the troops' and turn a blind to everything and ANYTHING that might burst their misguided Patriotic ferver.

Young people are different in that regard, many have grown up watching Politicians lie, more information is available to them, and unlike the older, Conservative generation, they are not using TV to get their information.

Not to mention, it is their future that has been destroyed by those who want to keep secret what they are doing.

And in the future, Snowden, like Ellsberg will be viewed as a hero. Because the younger generation will remember what he did and risked for his country.

[Dawgs]

5. I like to think of him as a misguided hero. n/t

[sabrina 1]

23. For exposing that Bush's anti-Constitutional policies of massive spying on his own people is still

going on? Did you support those policies after another Whistle Blower, back then, first exposed them?

[Dawgs]

40. Not at all what I meant.

The right response would have been to ask why I feel that way.

[ronnie624]

6. It also points to the ignorance and apathy of the American public.

And to the fortification of a political power system that is geared for making profit for elites, instead of distributing resources equitably and securing the future of our civilization.

The Snowden statue symbolizes lots of things.

[tridim]

7. It shows that the Snowden/Greenwald/StandWithRand people are obsessed with Snowden.

But it's not about Snowden.

[ronnie624]

9. Your post makes no sense to me.

It's just jabberwocky.

[Marr]

16. It's the posting equivalent of scratching a dog so their leg starts kicking.

We have a small but dedicated contingent here who just instinctively start typing out random sneers when they see the name "Snowden". Like those dog kicks, it makes no sense, but they can't help it and it is sort of cute, so... whatever.

[ronnie624]

19. Lol.

[malokvale77]

28. Perfect...

except the one in question is not at all cute (outside the avatar).

[treestar]

45. I'd be careful, those who point that out are not always innocent themselves.

There are plenty of random smears on Hillary, for example. Plenty of instinctive typing of certain memes regarding her, and other, and there is random fandom of Eddie that's just as instinctive. This kind of post about how people debate almost always applies to both sides.

[Marr]

60. Not in my experience.

When there's an agenda to be pushed, you typically have one side that offers little but sophistry, misdirection, and personal attacks.

[Rex]

71. YEP. And the always defend the establishment. Such an old and boring act they play.

Sadly some still seem to fall for it, without reading what they type. Oh well...we are progressives and have to put up with them, like you said it is a small number here.

[sabrina 1]

24. It's about our RIGHTS and anyone who stands up for those rights WILL be supported by

the people. How strange that you think a nation, grateful to those who take great risks on their behalf are 'obsessed'.

Airc, when Bush's illegal spying program was first revealed by another Whistle Blower, Democrats hailed that Whistle Blower as 'courageous, brave, a hero'.

Were Democrats 'obsessed' in your opinion at that time? Were they WRONG to be outraged over those policies, because they WERE?

Where did YOU stand on those whistle blowers, there were a few of them?

And don't bother telling us 'it's all been fixed' because we know it hasn't been. As Snowden's, the latest Whistle Blower, leaks have proven.

[BlueCaliDem]

56. Yep. 100% agree. eom

[treestar]

44. How did Eddie get to be a hero on

economic issues like "profit for elites" and "distributing resources equitably?" If he's a hero, it's only for exposing any wrongful spying on the part of government. It is my understanding he is a libertarian, so that would mean he's against equitable distribution by government.

[ronnie624]

46. Since terrorism scarcely even rates as a threat to the average US citizen,

and the NSA's surveillance is directed primarily at Americans, it can be reasonably surmised, that its purpose is political in nature, and not necessarily to defend us against terrorism (a reversal of our completely self-serving policies would do far more). It serves the political power establishment, plain and simple, and its goal is to facilitate the continuance of the political/economic status quo.

What does economics have to do with politics? Only everything. The primary reason for a political power establishment, is drive the development of civilization and technology in whatever direction the establishment's values lie. Ideally, it would serve the interests of the common good, instead of a tiny fraction of the human population.

[treestar]

47. that's a wild assumption

and ineffective in America.

And Eddie is still a libertarian. Giving him credit for this is so out there. What is it about Eddie that he inspires this?

If I were given credit for what I do to such extreme, I would be responsible for all justice and peace. Why not limit it to what it is? How come it has to stretch out this far for this particular person? Next he'll get credit for curing cancer.

And terrorism does rate for the average American. Remember 911 and how much wallowing there was in it? Yes, they care about it.

[ronnie624]

54. I like to discuss the corruption of the power establishment in the US,

and how it can be reformed, not "Eddie".

"Eddie" is a distraction, meant to pull peoples' attention away from weighty issues. I'm not easily distracted by simplistic propaganda.

I didn't say terrorism doesn't rate for the average American, I said "scarcely even rates as a threat to the average US citizen", and that is a fact that is easily demonstrated with sound statistics. Peoples' fears of terrorism are used to manipulate them into supporting our policies of resource dominance in the ME and elsewhere.

[treestar]

59. I think some people are determined to find as much corruption as possible

and exaggerate it when it is not there.

There may be some but it's not so all pervasive.

And you can acknowledge the worry of terrorism without having to advocate middle east wars. Or "massive spying on Americans" though that is hardly happening.

[Rex]

65. And some are determined to play CYA for any corruption found, at all costs.

[ronnie624]

87. Legislation and policy establishment

are almost completely beholden to monied interests, and our Supreme Court equates freedom of political speech with buying political influence. A government that functions on behalf of a minority through influence peddling instead of the common good, is the very definition of corruption.

And by what metric does one measure the level of corruption required to enable the invasion and destruction of another country, with rationalizations based on a pretext of lies and conspiracies, and to launch an endless "war on terror" that any reasonable, moderately educated person, through an examination of statistics alone, should know is complete horse shit? The invasion of Iraq is a crime that most Americans regard with an extremely shameful nonchalance, indicating some serious corruption of our culture, society and educational system as well. I don't know how I could exaggerate it.

This all has to be seen to, before we can even hope of successfully dealing with the impending crises just around the corner in the form of overpopulation, resource depletion and mitigating the damage we've done to our biosphere. I'll probably live out the remainder of my life in relative comfort, so I'm not fearful on a personal level, but we sure are leaving a mess for future generations, and our corruption might even be paving the way for the collapse of our civilization and maybe even the extinction of our species.

[Rex]

66. Well you will notice it is always the same players that play CYA for the CIA/NSA/FBI.

Why anyone would believe a single word they type, is a mystery to me.

[treestar]

75. The CIA NSA FBI

is always wrong. It's "authoritarian" to have a law.

Every cop is corrupt too.

Yeah, we know. You should get to do whatever you want and so should Glenn. And if things don't go your way, why it must be some evil people plotting!

[Rex]

76. Not always wrong, but with you always right.

Nice try. Funny you would mention Glenn.

[geek tragedy]

8. neither. nt

[whatchamacallit]

10. It's split between those who want to live in sunlight

and those who want to live in the dark.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

11. Hero. n/t

[truebluegreen]

12. Hero. nt

[sabrina 1]

25. Hero ... like Ellsberg

[truebluegreen]

38. Yes.

[One_Life_To_Give]

13. Both?

Yes we needed the confirmation of what had long been suspected. The data mining of everyday people by our own government. However that act is diminished by the handing of sensitive information to China and Russia. Most of us could think of many better ways to release the parts people needed to know without having to hand potentially sensitive information to those particular entities who are equally if not more repressive to their own people as well.

[Snow Leopard]

14. i'll vote Hero

[AtomicKitten]

15. He's a patriot.

A brave selfless patriot. I took my time coming to this conclusion, reading everything I could get my hands on. I am convinced. The question now is what are we citizens going to do about the information we've gleaned from his efforts.

[Marr]

17. Considering the fact that officials were flat-out lying to Congress about these programs...

...until information came out against their will, I think the 'criminal' and 'traitor' labels might be more aptly applied elsewhere.

[Ron Obvious]

18. A hero who risked his life and paid a large price...

... for informing the public of the wrongdoings and lies by their government.

[Zorra]

20. It's the old liberal/conservative divide. Liberals like whistleblowers,

conservatives hate them.

[malokvale77]

30. Which kind of makes one question...

the haters here on DU.

[Cha]

21. He's not a whistle-blower.. he's a hacker, a thief, a runner, an ignorant dumper of thousands of

docs.

He's a narcissistic, libertarian asshole who tries(with lies) to make our President look bad.

Here are the 13 most bizarre things from Snowden’s NBC News interview.

snip//

1) Snowden claimed he has “no relationship” with the Russian government and that he’s “not supported” by it. That’s odd, given how the Russian government has twice offered him asylum and one of his lawyers, Anatoly Kucherena, is an attorney with the Russian intelligence agency, the FSB (formerly the KGB). Tell me again why anyone should trust this guy?

3) Snowden said that no one has been harmed by his disclosures. Yet. Already, though, one of his documents escalated tensions between Australia and Indonesia, and another document endangered lives in Afghanistan to the point where Greenwald refused to publish the name of that country. It’s only a matter of time, sadly.

4) Early on, Snowden said, “I’m not a spy.” Later he famously confessed to being “trained as a spy.” Huh?

6) NSA can “absolutely” turn on your iPhone, which is “pretty scary.” This section was like whiplash. Snowden started out by sounding reasonable by defining that NSA only acquires data when “targeting” drug dealers or terrorists. And then, BLAM!, this shitola about NSA being able to turn on your phone. If true, why hasn’t this been disclosed from Snowden’s NSA documents?

MOre..
http://thedailybanter.com/2014/05/13-bizarre-things-edward-snowdens-nbc-news-interview/

snip//

On June 12 Snowden leaked specific IP addresses in China and Hong Kong the NSA was hacking to the South China Morning Post. Snowden also told SCMP that he intended to leak more documents later.

"If I have time to go through this information, I would like to make it available to journalists in each country to make their own assessment," the 30-year-old said. He added: "I did not release them earlier because I don't want to simply dump huge amounts of documents without regard to their content.

Greenwald told The Daily Beast that he wouldn't have disclosed the IP addresses, and that Snowden did it "to ingratiate himself to the people of Hong Kong and China.” That indicates Snowden was capable of leaking classified information after parting ways with Greenwald, Poitras, and MacAskill.

MOre..

http://www.businessinsider.com/when-did-snowden-give-up-the-nsa-files-2013-10

[ucrdem]

26. Yep. Scratch the shiny media image

and you find a RW nutjob about half a micron below the Paul Revere persona. And that's the polite version. Some of us figured that out immediately but I don't remember ever hearing it explained on CNN, or NPR either.

[Cha]

35. ..

[Major Hogwash]

32. Why is he hiding in Russia?

When people figure out that answer, they'll stop with all the sophomoric hero worship!
I guarantee it!!

[sabrina 1]

48. We know why he is in Russia, the US Government forced him to remain there by blocking him from

continuing on his way to the country where he had been granted Political Asylum. Moscow airport, like Hong Kong, was a stopover on his way to South America.

I too would like to know WHY the US Government would do something like that.

[Major Hogwash]

83. Hahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

What a crock of stew you brew!!!!!

[treestar]

43. on number 3 - why is it that Glenn decreed the material too dangerous?

I like the way it's Glenn who decides. LOL, he wasn't for transparency in that particular case? So he does admit there is some need for classified information. Thanks, Glenn.

The NSA turned my iPhone on this morning! Thanks NSA!!!!

Cha!

[sabrina 1]

49. Did you support Bush when another Whistle Blower first exposed this massive spying on the American

people? How about that Whistle Blower?

And neither Snowden nor Greenwald have EVER STATED THERE IS NO NEED for SOME material to be classified, so what are you rolling around the ground laughing at? In fact that is why Whistle Blowers hand documents over to the Press. It is why SNowden did so.

It is why Greenwald was so careful and released the information only after it had been vetted for anything that should remain classified.

[treestar]

50. Oh I don't know I guess I'd rather even Bush decide what should be classified

than Glenn Greenwald, but that's just me.

There is no massive spying on Americans. That's Eddie's first exaggeration. Why hypnotic power does he have over people that he will get them to repeat obvious non truth exaggerations as gospel. Over and over again?

Why are people making statues of this guy!????!!!!!!!

If we made a statue of Obama we'd get called out on it for hero worship!

[sabrina 1]

58. There are statues of Obama. There are statues of many other politicians. The statue of Snowden

was tongue in cheek, and hilarious actually. Followed by the hologram, after the expected removal, which was even more hilarious.

I always thought Dems had more of a sense of humor and would 'get' it when they saw it.

As for trusting Bush, amazing, after all the lies he told, after all the lives lost, all the torture, all the violations of Constituional Rights. You would trust him??

I would trust a journalist with a record of exposing Bush lies, over the fatal liar himself. But that's why I asked, I like to know where people stand when engaging in conversations with them.

[treestar]

62. I'd rather the President and Cabinet decide

because they were elected to do it, no matter who they are, over some random journalist.

Who elected Glenn to decide anything?

[sabrina 1]

63. Bush was not elected, both elections were stolen. Anyhow, never mind, I don't see the point of

any further discussion with someone who trusts Bush to be honest.

Or who fails to see how important a Free Press and courageous journalists, like Greenwald eg, are to a democracy.

[treestar]

64. he was elected

the stolen election thing is an absurd cop out. Admit it when you lose an election. Why look like Karl Rove?

Whoever is elected, however that came about, is the choice of the people and better than random people who take it upon themselves to steal our confidential information.

[sabrina 1]

67. 'when YOU lose'? I am a Democrat, why do you address Democrats as 'you'? Shouldn't the pronoun

be 'we'?

And no, Bush did not win. The 2000 election was stolen with the help of the felons on the SC. I don't think there is any doubt about that anymore.

2004 was definitely stolen. We watched it happen.

But like I said, no point in trying to hold a conversation with anyone who trusts Bush more than independent fact reporting journalists.

[Rex]

69. Mask slipping a bit imo.

Why anyone takes his type seriously here is a mystery to me. I've watched this sad form of pretend for years and am always amazed at how they get away with it in plane site.

[treestar]

74. plane site?

You are attacking me for being a Democrat on a Democratic site.

Can't take much difference of opinion can you?

[Rex]

77. Funny coming from you.

Nice projection there. Glad it got to you.

[treestar]

72. you are using the most extreme language possible

nothing was stolen . The election was close and that allowed legal issues to come in. The Supreme Court are not felons for making a decision you don't like. There is a lot of debate on many issues. Closing your ears doesn't make it not so.

2004 was not stolen at all. We watched what happen? WE can admit when we lose an election if WE are realistic. LOL, you "caught" me there by the use of that word? No, the word "you" is often used in a sense of "you don't do this" to mean "one" as the British use (more clear). You are way more anti-Democratic than I will ever be, in fact I see almost constant criticism of Democrats and insults to those of us who try to defend them!

Trusting Bush more then Glenn is pretty faint praise. But why should I trust a journalist to guard national secrets? It is not their job to protect this country. Jesus H. Christ. Their judgment on the subject is not informed. They are not whistleblowers just because they managed to do a hacking. And no there are reasons they are not aware of why certain things should not be "transparent." Even Bush didn't want this country attacked. No president would. While he used 911 shamelessly as a Pearl Harbor to get us in unnecessary wars, it is odd that is not bad enough and we have to make up stuff to make Bush worse.

[Rex]

79. The election was stolen, the fact that only a small amount of people like yourself disagree

does not change it from being a fact. No matter how hard you try.

Again, nice try there!

[Major Hogwash]

84. Are you saying that President Bush was not President Bush?

Seriously??

[sabrina 1]

86. The SC are felons, five of them, not because people didn't 'like their decision', they are felons

because they violated the Constitution by interfering with an election, which is forbidden in the Constitution.

I'll take Vincent Bugliosli's expert legal opinion along with that of numerous other Constitutional scholars, over yours any day.

And Scalia KNOWS they violated the law of the land. Which is why they declared that THAT 'decision' would not set any precedents. Really? A hugely important SC decision that 'will not set a precedent'!! And it is why he becomes angry every time anyone asks him about that illegal theft of an election.

Snowden is a hero, as are all Whistle Blowers, and the SC Felonious Five stole the 2000 election in order to install Bush/Cheney in the WH.



Gore won that election, even with all the OTHER, now well documented election fraud that was perpetrated by the Bush Criminals.

[Rex]

68. 'Whoever is elected, however that came about, is the choice of the people'

Then why didn't the person (Gore) who had the most votes by the people, end up being POTUS?

Seriously, I know you try hard...but this post of yours is just sad on all levels.

[treestar]

73. Because of the Electoral College?

Geez Louise!

It is sad to follow the Constitution?

Let's not be so immature. We aren't being cheated just because we don't get what we want or don't win.

[Rex]

78. Why do you deny facts like they are immature and childish.

Yeah we all know why.

[Cha]

81. Treestar!

[arcane1]

27. Or none of the above?

[ucrdem]

29. Per the Pew poll, 18-29 year olds are evenly split on whether Snowden should be tried:

These youngest adults were the only age group without majority support for prosecuting Snowden — they split 42%-42% on whether the former NSA contractor should be tried.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/01/22/most-young-americans-say-snowden-has-served-the-public-interest/

So to say "most young Americans are supportive of Snowden" and leave it at that is overly simplistic, but then so is most reporting about Snowden, including Pulitzer Prize non-winner Greenwald's.

[sabrina 1]

51. 'Should be tried' is different from supporting his decision. Most people know he broke the law and

so did he. So he knew he would be charged, and I would answer 'yes' to that question even though I support Whistle Blowers breaking the law IF and WHEN, to refer to the SC Decision on this, 'the information they release is information the People Have a Right to Know' which supercedes the Government's 'Need to keep secret'.

Still, I support the rule of law and would want to see an open trial with a jury with the world watching, unlike what happened to Manning and I am confident he would be acquitted based on that SC Ruling.

[Major Hogwash]

85. Most of the people under 30 years of age don't even know who Eddie is.

Despite the fact they are the first generation connected to the internet, with computers, pads, and cell phones!!

[malokvale77]

31. My only heros are my parents and grandparents.

I do believe that Edward Snowden is a true patriot.

I think it is a shame that we have so few.

[lovemydog]

33. Neither. i think his leaks served the public interest.

I think he should be allowed to return if he chooses, and that criminal charges against him should be dropped.

[JonLP24]

34. Neither

He was just a guy who saw something he saw was wrong and took a courageous risk to show it to us.

Snowden Archive
https://cjfe.org/snowden

[aikoaiko]

36. In this country? Most people don't know who he is or what he did.

[Stellar]

37. Snowden?

I really don't care what they call him. I just want him to go the f*ck away. I'm tired of the whole Snowden - is god and/or Snowden is the devil. Just go away, please.

[RiverLover]

39. Hero. /nt

[treestar]

42. One thing mysterious to me is

while I can understand approving of what he did, I don't see the need for the lionizing of him like this. That statue is just over the top.

If he hadn't run off to Russia, he'd have a lot more credit in my book. Though I don't think transparency means there should be no state secrets and no snooping.

[Smarmie Doofus]

57. That's easy. *Hero*. But the more interesting question is this:

Where are the ANTI-war memorials?

Where's the statue.... not only of Snowden, but of Ellsberg , of Manning?

The memorial to Dellinger, and the MILLIONS of people who resisted the VN genocide?

Where can I see a memorial to Jeanette Rankin ( only House vote against WW1). Where's Gruening's and Morse's? ( Only two votes vs. Gulf of Tonkin.)

Mr. DeBlasio: ( if you don't do it, no one else will) How about a NYC Lincoln Memorial? The text below the statue of the Great Emancipator could be the speech he delivered in the House of Rep. denouncing US aggression which precipitated the War with Mexico.

[H2O Man]

61. Yes.

He is both, and neither. Like most public figures, he is a projection of the individuals who hold opinions of him.

[Rex]

70. Obviously he is a traitheror. nt

nt

[Number23]

80. People who scream he's a whistleblower seem to always overlook that not only did he divulge

American intelligence services, he's also revealed the surveillance capabilities of nations that he is not a citizen of. This behavior is entirely inconsistent with a whistleblower but is entirely consistent with someone who released a trove of documents that he had not fully read or understood which he FINALLY admitted doing so with the John Oliver interview.

He almost started a major diplomatic incident in Australia.

Edward Snowden documents reveal Indonesian phone networks penetrated by Australian spies
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/edward-snowden-documents-reveal-indonesian-phone-networks-penetrated-by-australian-spies-20140216-32tyu.html

New Zealand spies on China, other Asian nations: Snowden papers
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/03/10/us-newzealand-spying-china-idUSKBN0M62FL20150310

(to which the vast majority of New Zealanders gave him either a hearty yawn or a "mind your fucking business" vibe. A change.org petition pleaded for 2000 supporters and got a whopping 82 https://www.change.org/p/no-john-key-snowden-is-welcome-in-new-zealand-support-the-nsa-whistleblower-edward-snowden)

I think he's a dumb kid (even though he's not even that young age wise) who was trying to be famous. His wildly divergent views (whisteblowers should be "shot in the balls" until he attempted to become one, of course) and his high tailing it to China and then Russia do not in any way convince me that he was a man acting on his principles.

The fact that his support is skewed so heavily towards the young and even THEY want him to come home and be tried should say it all.

[ZombieHorde]

82. Maybe a hero; definitely not a traitor. nt