Just poking my head in to say thanks for a largely constructive discussion (so far) on a controversial subject.
As for me, I say "Traitriot!"
jg
Just poking my head in to say thanks for a largely constructive discussion (so far) on a controversial subject.
As for me, I say "Traitriot!"
jg
To England, George Washington was a traitor. To the colonies, he was one of our greatest heroes.
It is all just a matter of perspective really.
The word I'll use for now is "Whistle Blower" and leave it there.
To political for me....
LainfordExpress wrote: Well, I think the espionage charge is more appropriate after hearing some of the stuff on the news tonight. Apparently he also has the entire NSA roster, including undercovers? And he's bragging about it on YouTube? How stupid can you be? That has kidnapped family/murdered/blackmailed into turning over valuable information to people who wish to do Americans harm. At best it is carelessly putting lives at risk, at worst it's willful disregard for right and wrong.
That is disturbing.
It is disturbing he had the access (assuming he's not lying), but much more disturbing that he appears to have no concept of how to handle the info, and that he could put a great deal of people at risk by mis-handling it (intentionally or inadvertently).
I don't believe him. Looks like a braggart who wants to make people think he is more important than he is. A small fish, looking for his glory moment in the sun, though it is unraveling quickly.
An interesting perspective:
I don't know enough about him and don't follow the news enough to give an opinion on Snowden.
But I am glad the secret courts and warrantless wiretaps are now public knowledge.
The government is actively trying to destroy his credibility in a very public way. That ought to tell you all you need to know...
LainfordExpress wrote:z31maniac wrote: I'm terrified at anyone who think he didn't do a good thing. You are the reason I refuse to bring children into this terrible, messed up world.Yeah, rule of law is the worst. Seriously though, there has to be a legal way for this kind of thing to come out. He doesn't have a congressman? A senator? A well written anonymous letter to a reporter to starting looking into something? There are ways. Look at watergate. People can talk without putting others in danger. Feldt almost took his secret to the grave, Snowden could've made it to 50.
Seriously, the wording of the congressman asking questions after this came out tells me that he had signed the same confidentiality accord and already knew it.
Snowden appears to be in a odd spot; he appears to have broken his confidentiality agreement telling something that no one is surprised by and it looks like it isn't going to help him out and really is it going to help us out?
Domestic spying isn't new- this is more about recent rules that concern it. the cycle is- it happens, we find out, it's brought back in, and then over time laws are relaxed and we get back into it.
It's a cycle.
Now we will try to put it back down for a time.
NPR had a nice article about a congressman who is on the comittee who writes these laws- and he's not allowed to directly talk about the rules. So he spoke out against the flavor of them on the main floor- to a not very interested audience.
Lets put it this way- the group of people that was legaly elected to office made programs like this legal. Seems to be a good time to look back on that and change it.
I totally know this happened under Bush- second term, BUT I also know that had Kerry won in '04, it STILL would have passed. It does not matter of party- this is about "keeping us safe"- so the question is- how far do we go to keep us safe? And how safe do we really need to be? Figure that, send a series of notes to the people who represent you.
fujioko wrote: The NSA is unconstitutionally spying on citizens. Snowden broke his oath to tell us the truth about what is going on. I don't have a problem with that.
Yep. If I have to choose from one of the first two terms, I go patriot.
In order to have the access, he had a very high level security clearance. Along with this goes a very clear understanding that that material is not to be shared with anyone not having that same or higher clearance "and "need to know. He violated law and policy. There are avenues for whistleblowers and it does not appear that he attempted to follow them. Definitely an idiot and possibly guilty of espionage. He may be putting many peoples lives at risk, whether intentional or not.
Hal wrote:Streetwiseguy wrote: The guys a moron, I think.I'll go with this. He obviously doesn't care about anybody but himself and what he thinks is right. I have a couple neighbors who are now concerned because of the congress critters calling for the end of contractors with security clearances. And I know there some people on here that fit that category.
How the hell is government going to work without contractors with security clearances? I don't even see how that is possible.
If what he leaked is all above board, as the Gov claims, then how could he be a traitor? Its all good right?
I dont know why the Gov does not just leap to the endgame, put collars on people at birth that allow full monitoring. It would be cheaper, more effective and as long as congress says it is ok, then it would be ok right? After all, its for our own good and will ave us from TERRORIST
Any why is it that nobody has figured out that the entire combined Alqueda team could never do their job without the help of CNN, Faux News, and the idiots at the airport that keep telling me that the security level is "orange"?
It's the way Snowden did it. If he had blown the whistle and then stood there calmly with his hands out to accept the cuffs.. he would have been lauded as a hero. He probably could have pleaed it down and gotten out of prison in a couple of years.
The Running off to China, Russia, and who knows where else while talking about it on the net and with foreign governments that is now destroying his credibility
alfadriver wrote: Figure that, send a series of notes to the people who represent you.
That's part of my problem. I live in MD, so my people don't actually represent me.
z31maniac wrote: I'm terrified at anyone who think he didn't do a good thing. You are the reason I refuse to bring children into this terrible, messed up world.
At what point in time was the world not terribly messed up?
The interesting thing to me, and the issue that I wrestle with, is the definition of traitor: one who betrays another's trust or is false to an obligation or duty.
He had an obligation to keep the secrets that the government entrusted him with. It is important for the government to have a level of secrecy, it goes with National Security. We have to trust that our elected officials are working in our best interest and working to keep us safe. By that definition, according to the Government, he is a traitor.
BUT
People have and obligation and a duty (IMHO) to stand up for what is right. Not doing so is what got a lot of Nazis in trouble: you can't just blindly follow orders and do something that you know is wrong. So by the same definition, to the American people, he might not be a traitor.
It comes down to if you think that what he exposed is a big deal and if the American people had a right or a need to know. Personally, I do not, so I say he is a traitor. IMO, people were not being harmed by the action, in fact they were being protected, so he jeopardized an awful lot just to expose something that conspiracy nuts can rant about. But I tend to be naive and trusting, so I am glad others are more passionate about the topic, just in case.
mad_machine wrote: It's the way Snowden did it. If he had blown the whistle and then stood there calmly with his hands out to accept the cuffs.. he would have been lauded as a hero. He probably could have pleaed it down and gotten out of prison in a couple of years. The Running off to China, Russia, and who knows where else while talking about it on the net and with foreign governments that is now destroying his credibility
This is where he loses me too. Had he stayed here and made a stand against the gov't I would buy that his only motive is to expose a wrong doing. By running off to a communist country to protect his freedom it looks somewhat sinister or at least self serving. That those countries are willing to help him makes it appear as though he gave them some kind of classified info that they feel is valuable, which makes him seem like more of a spy than a whistleblower.
What, no mention of Ethel and Julius Rosenberg yet?
Sultan wrote: At what point in time was the world not terribly messed up?
Right before the Horrendous Space Kablooie. < /Calvin and Hobbes >
fujioko wrote: The NSA is unconstitutionally spying on citizens. Snowden broke his oath to tell us the truth about what is going on. I don't have a problem with that.
The issue is more than this.
the NSA did NOT do anything unconstitutional. Why do I say that? because what they did has been ruled constitutional by the courts already, last time they went to court over it. Wait... you didn't know that? Well, how about that they have been doing this over a decade, and the whistle has been blown MULTIPLE TIMES on it so far? Yep, and those blowers didn't charged, the news came out, people got outraged, then went back to watching the Kardashians and whatever other crap took over like it always does.
He didn't show anything new. He didn't show anything that people that are calling for him to be tried for treason didn't actually already know of.. or at least should have known of. and the courts already ruled this as constitutional, in a prior case.
BUT! he did it WRONG. He broke ranks, and ran, before saying , "look at this". And he seemingly tried to sell the info, rather than actually just be a whistle blower (on info that was already blown anyway, in 2003, 2006, 2007, 2009, and 2011). Those other blowers told america, and stood there, didn't run. he told other countries, and ran.
it is not the info, it is the way he did it.
LainfordExpress wrote: There are ways. Look at watergate. People can talk without putting others in danger. Feldt almost took his secret to the grave, Snowden could've made it to 50.
Feldt would never have talked if he had been appointed Director of the FBI. He wasn't and instead became a vindictive putz, not the hero he's claimed to have been.
Who knows what really tweaked Snowden and motivated his actions? At this point, all we know is that he is a whistleblower who may be a traitor and did himself no favors by escaping to a country antagonistic to the US.
The "truth" may be out there but no one has revealed it - yet.
He's a dirtbag and his kind are a blight on anyone that holds a security clearance. He's many things but not limited to a traitor but he's the farthest thing from a patriot there is.
This is the first I've discussed the subject. I have more on my mind but will leave it out. The security clearance is more than checking a box on an application, it's a higher calling with a greater responsibility. The ethical crux here is where we all struggle to make sense of it and we can't make it a black and white issue. It just isn't.
I hear he drives a fox body coupe......
In reply to Gasoline:
What a horrible person.
fujioko wrote: The NSA is unconstitutionally spying on citizens. Snowden broke his oath to tell us the truth about what is going on. I don't have a problem with that.
This, he likely also swore an oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States as well as protect American interests. So, in my book, he has broken no laws. He brought out an illegal act by an American agency as he should be constitutionally bound to do.
IMO, those seeking "justice" for his actions are the traitors.
You'll need to log in to post.
