To those calling Snowden a coward...

[Sunshine]

Its called having consequence for your actions..... Right or wrong.....

Yeppers. He told on Obama and lost his country.

 

[MikeK]

I'm sure that is what he is telling himself. That doesn't change my opinion. In obtaining a security clearance you atest that you will not divulge information you are made privy to. He decided to reneg on that agreement, which means his word means little. If he didn't want that responsibility, he shouldn't have signed the papers. No one held a gun to his head. If he later thought, as a matter of conscience, that he had to reneg on his word then he should have taken the consequences of that decision. He decided to run instead. As far as I am concerned, that makes him both dishonorable and a child.

So yes, I most certainly fault him for evading arrest. Not evading arrest was the only act which would have given him any legitimacy at all. Not an easy decision, but if he thought he was entitled to the responsibility of determining what was best for the country then he should have accepted the consequences of that responsibility.

Do you feel that what Snowden did benefits you and other ordinary American citizens who formerly believed their Fourth Amendment privacy protections were honored by their government?

Do you think it was okay for President Obama to unequivocally assure the public their phone conversations were not being monitored?

Do you believe Government has a right to ignore the Constitution?

 

[PratchettFan]

I'm sure that is what he is telling himself. That doesn't change my opinion. In obtaining a security clearance you atest that you will not divulge information you are made privy to. He decided to reneg on that agreement, which means his word means little. If he didn't want that responsibility, he shouldn't have signed the papers. No one held a gun to his head. If he later thought, as a matter of conscience, that he had to reneg on his word then he should have taken the consequences of that decision. He decided to run instead. As far as I am concerned, that makes him both dishonorable and a child.

So yes, I most certainly fault him for evading arrest. Not evading arrest was the only act which would have given him any legitimacy at all. Not an easy decision, but if he thought he was entitled to the responsibility of determining what was best for the country then he should have accepted the consequences of that responsibility.

Do you feel that what Snowden did benefits you and other ordinary American citizens who formerly believed their Fourth Amendment privacy protections were honored by their government?

Do you think it was okay for President Obama to unequivocally assure the public their phone conversations were not being monitored?

Do you believe Government has a right to ignore the Constitution?

No. I think he did no benefit to anyone. Of course, I did not formerly believe phone conversations were not being monitored. Of course they were being monitored and they were being monitored long before the current program. That was not new, it was an upgrade.

How do people think we identified terrorists cells in order to infiltrate them? Crystal balls?

BTW, I see how he is now releasing more documents and holding a press conference. So he decided he was not going to release everything at once and give the information to the public. Instead, he decided what you was going to let you see and when. What a great hero of the people.

 

[dblack]

I'm sure that is what he is telling himself. That doesn't change my opinion. In obtaining a security clearance you atest that you will not divulge information you are made privy to. He decided to reneg on that agreement, which means his word means little. If he didn't want that responsibility, he shouldn't have signed the papers. No one held a gun to his head. If he later thought, as a matter of conscience, that he had to reneg on his word then he should have taken the consequences of that decision. He decided to run instead. As far as I am concerned, that makes him both dishonorable and a child.

So yes, I most certainly fault him for evading arrest. Not evading arrest was the only act which would have given him any legitimacy at all. Not an easy decision, but if he thought he was entitled to the responsibility of determining what was best for the country then he should have accepted the consequences of that responsibility.

Do you feel that what Snowden did benefits you and other ordinary American citizens who formerly believed their Fourth Amendment privacy protections were honored by their government?

Do you think it was okay for President Obama to unequivocally assure the public their phone conversations were not being monitored?

Do you believe Government has a right to ignore the Constitution?

No. I think he did no benefit to anyone. Of course, I did not formerly believe phone conversations were not being monitored. Of course they were being monitored and they were being monitored long before the current program. That was not new, it was an upgrade.

Or downgrade, depending on how you look at it.

How do people think we identified terrorists cells in order to infiltrate them? Crystal balls?

How about in ways the don't violate the rights of innocent people?

BTW, I see how he is now releasing more documents and holding a press conference. So he decided he was not going to release everything at once and give the information to the public. Instead, he decided what you was going to let you see and when. What a great hero of the people.

Good to hear. I hope he keeps it up. Maybe with enough public pressure Obama will do the right thing.

 

[MikeK]

No. I think he did no benefit to anyone. Of course, I did not formerly believe phone conversations were not being monitored. Of course they were being monitored and they were being monitored long before the current program. That was not new, it was an upgrade.

Then you're a really smart fellow because you knew more than the majority of Americans, especially those of us who might have suspected that until Obama assured us it wasn't true.

Why do you suppose Obama did that?

How do people think we identified terrorists cells in order to infiltrate them? Crystal balls?

What terrorist cells? Are you talking about those two retarded characters who agreed to go along with a DHS undercover agents' bogus plot and plant a bomb in exchange for some new sneakers?

What serious, reasonably competent terrorists, such as the Tsarnaev brothers, do you suppose are stupid enough to communicate openly and substantively via such ordinary channels as the telephone network and the Internet? Do you think these people are as stupid as our government obviously knows most of the American public is?

BTW, I see how he is now releasing more documents and holding a press conference. So he decided he was not going to release everything at once and give the information to the public. Instead, he decided what you was going to let you see and when. What a great hero of the people.

What kind of documents and information is he releasing now? Do you know? How is it harmful to the American People? Specifics, please. Are there military secrets? Does any of it contain information which is nearly as potentially damaging to U.S. interests as was the retaliatory exposing of CIA undercover agent Valerie Plame Wilson by such Bush Administration conspirators as Cheney, Armitage, Libby, et al? Did government make this kind of noise about that outrageous act of treason by members of the Executive Branch? It barely made the six o'clock news -- and no one received the slightest degree of punishment for it.

If you have no specific answers then you are spewing a lot of jingoistic nonsense about something you know absolutely nothing about.

 

[PratchettFan]

No. I think he did no benefit to anyone. Of course, I did not formerly believe phone conversations were not being monitored. Of course they were being monitored and they were being monitored long before the current program. That was not new, it was an upgrade.

Then you're a really smart fellow because you knew more than the majority of Americans, especially those of us who might have suspected that until Obama assured us it wasn't true.

Why do you suppose Obama did that?

How do people think we identified terrorists cells in order to infiltrate them? Crystal balls?

What terrorist cells? Are you talking about those two retarded characters who agreed to go along with a DHS undercover agents' bogus plot and plant a bomb in exchange for some new sneakers?

What serious, reasonably competent terrorists, such as the Tsarnaev brothers, do you suppose are stupid enough to communicate openly and substantively via such ordinary channels as the telephone network and the Internet? Do you think these people are as stupid as our government obviously knows most of the American public is?

BTW, I see how he is now releasing more documents and holding a press conference. So he decided he was not going to release everything at once and give the information to the public. Instead, he decided what you was going to let you see and when. What a great hero of the people.

What kind of documents and information is he releasing now? Do you know? How is it harmful to the American People? Specifics, please. Are there military secrets? Does any of it contain information which is nearly as potentially damaging to U.S. interests as was the retaliatory exposing of CIA undercover agent Valerie Plame Wilson by such Bush Administration conspirators as Cheney, Armitage, Libby, et al? Did government make this kind of noise about that outrageous act of treason by members of the Executive Branch? It barely made the six o'clock news -- and no one received the slightest degree of punishment for it.

If you have no specific answers then you are spewing a lot of jingoistic nonsense about something you know absolutely nothing about.

I suppose the rest of america prefers to remain ignorant, or at least not think about it. The fact that the NSA is an intelligence gathering agency which deals primarily in electronic data is no great secret. They been doing this stuff since their creation in 1952. All you had to do was pay attention.

Did Obama lie? Of course he did. Presidents lie all of the time.

I never said the man did us harm. He really isn't that important. He perhaps caused some heartburn and inconvenience but no great harm. What I said was that he did no good. And he didn't. He changed nothing and acheived nothing. He's got his 15 minutes - that's about it.

 

[Wry Catcher]

No. I think he did no benefit to anyone. Of course, I did not formerly believe phone conversations were not being monitored. Of course they were being monitored and they were being monitored long before the current program. That was not new, it was an upgrade.

Then you're a really smart fellow because you knew more than the majority of Americans, especially those of us who might have suspected that until Obama assured us it wasn't true.

Why do you suppose Obama did that?


What terrorist cells? Are you talking about those two retarded characters who agreed to go along with a DHS undercover agents' bogus plot and plant a bomb in exchange for some new sneakers?

What serious, reasonably competent terrorists, such as the Tsarnaev brothers, do you suppose are stupid enough to communicate openly and substantively via such ordinary channels as the telephone network and the Internet? Do you think these people are as stupid as our government obviously knows most of the American public is?

BTW, I see how he is now releasing more documents and holding a press conference. So he decided he was not going to release everything at once and give the information to the public. Instead, he decided what you was going to let you see and when. What a great hero of the people.

What kind of documents and information is he releasing now? Do you know? How is it harmful to the American People? Specifics, please. Are there military secrets? Does any of it contain information which is nearly as potentially damaging to U.S. interests as was the retaliatory exposing of CIA undercover agent Valerie Plame Wilson by such Bush Administration conspirators as Cheney, Armitage, Libby, et al? Did government make this kind of noise about that outrageous act of treason by members of the Executive Branch? It barely made the six o'clock news -- and no one received the slightest degree of punishment for it.

If you have no specific answers then you are spewing a lot of jingoistic nonsense about something you know absolutely nothing about.

I suppose the rest of america prefers to remain ignorant, or at least not think about it. The fact that the NSA is an intelligence gathering agency which deals primarily in electronic data is no great secret. They been doing this stuff since their creation in 1952. All you had to do was pay attention.

Did Obama lie? Of course he did. Presidents lie all of the time.

I never said the man did us harm. He really isn't that important. He perhaps caused some heartburn and inconvenience but no great harm. What I said was that he did no good. And he didn't. He changed nothing and acheived nothing. He's got his 15 minutes - that's about it.

The fact that you don't know what he said or to whom makes your conclusion ludicrous. We do know he violated the terms of his employment and if criminal sanctions are a consequence of his work contract he will likely get more than 15-minutes of infamy.

 

[dblack]

I suppose the rest of america prefers to remain ignorant, or at least not think about it. The fact that the NSA is an intelligence gathering agency which deals primarily in electronic data is no great secret. They been doing this stuff since their creation in 1952. All you had to do was pay attention.

I have to push back here, PF, and suggest that you're the one who hasn't been paying attention. Since 9/11, the Patriot Act and the creation of the Dept. of Homeland Security launched a radical expansion of the secret surveillance state in the US. Up until Snowden's disclosure's we (the general public at least) haven't really had any clear idea of the extent of the increase, because it's all hidden from view. Your insistence that this is 'old hat' or 'business as usual' doesn't hold water. We're witnessing a fundamental change in our government and our society.

I never said the man did us harm. He really isn't that important. He perhaps caused some heartburn and inconvenience but no great harm. What I said was that he did no good. And he didn't. He changed nothing and acheived nothing. He's got his 15 minutes - that's about it.

Whether Snowden's disclosures do any good or not will depend mostly on the American public. If, as Daniel Elsberg hopes, the Snowden leaks inspire us to push back and reverse the descent into a police state, he'll have done a great deal of good. If not, he'll have sacrificed his freedom and his citizenship (and perhaps much more) for nothing.

 

[ABikerSailor]

A good point was brought up on Bill Maher tonight....................if you're worried about the government spying on you and listening to your phone calls, then why the fuck would you want to go and ask asylum in Putin's Russia?

Sorry................there may have been a time that Snowden could have been considered a whistle blower, but now, all I think he's doing is tooting his own horn in search of his 15 min. of fame.

 

[Esmeralda]

A good point was brought up on Bill Maher tonight....................if you're worried about the government spying on you and listening to your phone calls, then why the fuck would you want to go and ask asylum in Putin's Russia?

Sorry................there may have been a time that Snowden could have been considered a whistle blower, but now, all I think he's doing is tooting his own horn in search of his 15 min. of fame.

I agree completely. IMO he was never about doing the right thing for America; he was looking for attention, fame, notoriety. He set out to do what he did from the beginning with the only objective of making a big deal about himself.

 

[dblack]

A good point was brought up on Bill Maher tonight....................if you're worried about the government spying on you and listening to your phone calls, then why the fuck would you want to go and ask asylum in Putin's Russia?

Sorry................there may have been a time that Snowden could have been considered a whistle blower, but now, all I think he's doing is tooting his own horn in search of his 15 min. of fame.

I agree completely. IMO he was never about doing the right thing for America; he was looking for attention, fame, notoriety. He set out to do what he did from the beginning with the only objective of making a big deal about himself.

Second-guessing Snowden's motives is a distraction. What matters is what he's revealed. Period.

They're hoping we'll get pre-occupied with a cult of personality centered on Snowden's character (or lack thereof) and forget all about their secret police state. Don't fall for it.

 

[PratchettFan]

I suppose the rest of america prefers to remain ignorant, or at least not think about it. The fact that the NSA is an intelligence gathering agency which deals primarily in electronic data is no great secret. They been doing this stuff since their creation in 1952. All you had to do was pay attention.

I have to push back here, PF, and suggest that you're the one who hasn't been paying attention. Since 9/11, the Patriot Act and the creation of the Dept. of Homeland Security launched a radical expansion of the secret surveillance state in the US. Up until Snowden's disclosure's we (the general public at least) haven't really had any clear idea of the extent of the increase, because it's all hidden from view. Your insistence that this is 'old hat' or 'business as usual' doesn't hold water. We're witnessing a fundamental change in our government and our society.

I never said the man did us harm. He really isn't that important. He perhaps caused some heartburn and inconvenience but no great harm. What I said was that he did no good. And he didn't. He changed nothing and acheived nothing. He's got his 15 minutes - that's about it.

Whether Snowden's disclosures do any good or not will depend mostly on the American public. If, as Daniel Elsberg hopes, the Snowden leaks inspire us to push back and reverse the descent into a police state, he'll have done a great deal of good. If not, he'll have sacrificed his freedom and his citizenship (and perhaps much more) for nothing.

They "launched a radical expansion of the secret surveillance..." If they did this in secret, how do you know about it?