He actually didn't personally release any documents, he gave them to reporters to release the information. That way there was no bias as to what was released. He gained nothing from this other than doing the right thing
He's gained plenty. Namely protection. He wouldn't be able to hide out in Russia if he didn't have valuable information to keep divulging occassionally.
The media has really played to Snowden as a hero. There is so much coverage of 1% of what he's done, and complete ignorance of the other 99% that's ongoing.
Great comparison! ISIS 'MURDERS' people based upon extreme views whereas Snowden pulled back the curtain to show people/organisations out there taking you for a mug and snooping on your private activities.
Hate America? I just finished serving 22 years in the UNITED STATES NAVY defending your right to talk crap online. Freedom isn't free. It costs a hefty F...... Fee. That was from "Team America" but it's true. Hero is a word I apply to my friends who died in the Marines when we served in Iraq together. How about you tell their family members that Snowden is on the same level as their fallen Marine. I'm sure that they would slap the taste out of your mouth.
How about you dedicate part of your life to defending this country you say you love so much. You're not speaking German right because people like me served. They paid the ultimate sacrifice. They aren't here to read your defense of a traitor. But I'm here. I'll listen to you. I'll even take your insult. This one is on the house. A gift from me to you.
Try to understand the importance of gathering intel and how damaging it is when your enemy knows how you collect data on them. How they can then hide better and pose a bigger threat to you.
You don't have the clearance to hear the real stuff the NSA or CIA has to say about what Snowden revealed. If they told you about it you'd probably run to Russia too and share an apartment with Snowden. Have you heard of security clearance levels? You know classified, secret, top secret????? Revelation at one level has a different significance than the other.
Could the NSA and CIA have gathered Intel in other ways? Sure. But they used the power that was given to them lawfully. And honestly I really don't care if they read my email as long as they catch terrorists and SO CALLED Americans who are threatening my country and trying to join ISIL to kill REAL Americans. Snowden stole classified information and fled to another country with that information. Breaking the law doesn't help his case any.
If you've served I salute you but you should know better.
Thank you for protecting your country. You did great.
Our government, though, not that great.
How did it help to protect the freedom to talk online for American Citizens?
I was against any military deployment in the Iraq. This violated their freedom to chose how they wanted to live. Economically they live now worse than before the invasion.
You were fighting for propaganda. Life lost to fulfil the wishes of mighty looking for more power.
As for Snowden. The government was violating the US constitution. Snowden has exposed that.
His actions led to some negative effect (danger in some other areas for US).
Nothing is without trade offs.
He did something which led to both - positive and negative effects.
He has changed something.
Let's focus on using this opportunity and change. Let's move to the better future.
If you will just crates his actions in a light of negativity, you will lose this opportunity to build a better future.
What can be done by Americans to capitalise on this information disclosure?
The problem with Snowden, isn't his whistleblowing revelations that the American government was spying on Americans. It's the fact that he stole thousands and thousands of highly classified files, that had nothing to do with intelligence gathering on American citizens, and then shopped them around the world.
He's only slightly more moral than Kim Philby.
It's mind boggling how many sources he's put at risk and how many intelligence operations he's compromised. Someday, we'll know how many lives were quietly ended in a dark alley on a dark night somewhere, because of information he decided that he had the moral authority to divulge to hostile foreign governments.
The problem with Snowden, isn't his whistleblowing revelations that the American government was spying on Americans. It's the fact that he stole thousands and thousands of highly classified files, that had nothing to do with intelligence gathering on American citizens, and then shopped them around the world.
He's only slightly more moral than Kim Philby.
It's mind boggling how many sources he's put at risk and how many intelligence operations he's compromised. Someday, we'll know how many lives were quietly ended in a dark alley on a dark night somewhere, because of information he decided that he had the moral authority to divulge to hostile foreign governments.
The UK is home to a hostile foreign government?
That's a silly comment that adds nothing to the discussion. He did not divulge information to the UK Government.
That's a silly comment that adds nothing to the discussion. He did not divulge information to the UK Government.
THIS is a silly comment:
"It's mind boggling how many sources he's put at risk and how many intelligence operations he's compromised. Someday, we'll know how many lives were quietly ended in a dark alley on a dark night somewhere, because of information he decided that he had the moral authority to divulge to hostile foreign governments."
He remarked that "a much bigger hammer" should fall on Apple if Cook reverses policies, since it would be a "betrayal of trust" and past promises.
LOL. I expect Apple to keep its promises because it's in Apple's marketing and commercial interest to do so. But if it ever breaks them, no "hammer" will fall on Apple. Instead, legions of keyboard warriors will defend Apple's new stance.
This has been proven over, and over, and over again.
Big screens were cumbersome. Until Apple did them.
Ads were bad, until iAds.
NFC payments were poor technology. Until Apple decided to use NFC for Apple Pay.
And so it goes....
Methinks Apple fans value Apple far more than their privacy, despite what they say.
That's a stupid theory. We aren't blind lemmings. Phablets are still cumbersome. Apple Pay is far better than NFC before it. Ads are still crap but iAds are less intrusive, right?
Thanks for your service and apologies for breaking into this conversation, but it's my understanding that as a Marine (or any enlisted member of the armed services) one must take an oath to protect and defend the Constitution from enemies foreign AND DOMESTIC. If the Congress, the President or a branch of government are openly or secretly violating the Constitution, that's a problem. A huge fundamental problem.
Some say the 2nd amendment is absolute. So any law restricting that right is unconstitutional. So if I wanted to sell a gun where it's banned, I should be considered a hero for defending the constitution?
Note I don't like guns and I support many gun control laws.
That's a stupid theory. We aren't blind lemmings. Phablets are still cumbersome. Apple Pay is far better than NFC before it. Ads are still crap but iAds are less intrusive, right?
Some say the 2nd amendment is absolute. So any law restricting that right is unconstitutional. So if I wanted to sell a gun where it's banned, I should be considered a hero for defending the constitution?
Note I don't like guns and I support many gun control laws.
People who run around calling themselves patriots seldom understand the true meaning of the word. Patriotism does not mean marching in goose step, respecting authority, and doing what you're told. Patriotism is fighting for the values your country stands for, even (especially) when that means fighting those within your own government who have betrayed those values. Hitler, Stalin, Mao... all homicidal despots who committed atrocities under the banner of patriotism.
Exposing the NSA spying on America was laudable. Exposing US intelligence efforts in/against other countries was treason. Yes, he did that as well. He can be both sinner and saint.
Some say the 2nd amendment is absolute. So any law restricting that right is unconstitutional. So if I wanted to sell a gun where it's banned, I should be considered a hero for defending the constitution?
Note I don't like guns and I support many gun control laws.
It is as absolute as any other natural right that is acknowledged by the Bill of Rights. The Bill of Rights was not written to create rights, but to acknowledge existing natural rights, including the right to defend ones self and family and property.
You support laws that increase insecurity, make it so people cannot defend themselves, and are in essence slaves to the government for their own protection? Gun Control has been shown to not have positive effects on safety, security, etc. This is by government sponsored research. At best the many gun bans that have been studied have been shown to have a neutral effect, and at worst, a negative effect.
The 2A is also as absolute as the 1A, 4A, or any other.
Edward Snowden is a steadfast beacon and national treasure. He destroyed his life to blow the whistle on agencies that were breaking the law and going down a very slippery slope. Attempts by others to blow the whistle were thwarted by the government. They left the American people no choice.
That's a silly comment that adds nothing to the discussion. He did not divulge information to the UK Government.
THIS is a silly comment:
"It's mind boggling how many sources he's put at risk and how many intelligence operations he's compromised. Someday, we'll know how many lives were quietly ended in a dark alley on a dark night somewhere, because of information he decided that he had the moral authority to divulge to hostile foreign governments."
I see - so rather than explain why you disagree with that observation (which is, in fact, quite accurate, but no matter), you decided to make a stupid one of your own. And then deflect criticism by pointing fingers elsewhere. Very mature and helpful.
Illegal and oppressive acts by government agencies are an issue. Another issue is disclosure of large amounts of classified military information.
Why did the Guardian only decide to release 1% of what they received from Snowden? Web space is cheap.
The 1% that was released, is bad stuff. Pisses me off that the NSA has these programs (though I assumed something along those lines since I was quite young). I'm happy that info was disclosed, in spite of the illegality of disclosing it.
Still, that other 99% is why an openly corrupt government like Russia's <span style="line-height:1.4em;">would agree to take Snowden in. Nothing is free, and it is likely that Russia and China (and who knows who else) have classified information that has weakened our military and put US lives in danger.</span>
I confess I haven't really followed this all that closely but didn't Snowden leave all the information with his selected journalists before going to Russia?
I see - so rather than explain why you disagree with that observation (which is, in fact, quite accurate, but no matter), you decided to make a stupid one of your own. And then deflect criticism by pointing fingers elsewhere. Very mature and helpful.
Your original response was a non sequitur. I respond to a diversionary comment that was unrelated to the discussion.
I confess I haven't really followed this all that closely but didn't Snowden leave all the information with his selected journalists before going to Russia?
Comments
He actually didn't personally release any documents, he gave them to reporters to release the information. That way there was no bias as to what was released. He gained nothing from this other than doing the right thing
He's gained plenty. Namely protection. He wouldn't be able to hide out in Russia if he didn't have valuable information to keep divulging occassionally.The media has really played to Snowden as a hero. There is so much coverage of 1% of what he's done, and complete ignorance of the other 99% that's ongoing.
They're essentially the same thing.
Hate America? I just finished serving 22 years in the UNITED STATES NAVY defending your right to talk crap online. Freedom isn't free. It costs a hefty F...... Fee. That was from "Team America" but it's true. Hero is a word I apply to my friends who died in the Marines when we served in Iraq together. How about you tell their family members that Snowden is on the same level as their fallen Marine. I'm sure that they would slap the taste out of your mouth.
How about you dedicate part of your life to defending this country you say you love so much. You're not speaking German right because people like me served. They paid the ultimate sacrifice. They aren't here to read your defense of a traitor. But I'm here. I'll listen to you. I'll even take your insult. This one is on the house. A gift from me to you.
Try to understand the importance of gathering intel and how damaging it is when your enemy knows how you collect data on them. How they can then hide better and pose a bigger threat to you.
You don't have the clearance to hear the real stuff the NSA or CIA has to say about what Snowden revealed. If they told you about it you'd probably run to Russia too and share an apartment with Snowden. Have you heard of security clearance levels? You know classified, secret, top secret????? Revelation at one level has a different significance than the other.
Could the NSA and CIA have gathered Intel in other ways? Sure. But they used the power that was given to them lawfully. And honestly I really don't care if they read my email as long as they catch terrorists and SO CALLED Americans who are threatening my country and trying to join ISIL to kill REAL Americans. Snowden stole classified information and fled to another country with that information. Breaking the law doesn't help his case any.
If you've served I salute you but you should know better.
Thank you for protecting your country. You did great.
Our government, though, not that great.
How did it help to protect the freedom to talk online for American Citizens?
I was against any military deployment in the Iraq. This violated their freedom to chose how they wanted to live. Economically they live now worse than before the invasion.
You were fighting for propaganda. Life lost to fulfil the wishes of mighty looking for more power.
As for Snowden. The government was violating the US constitution. Snowden has exposed that.
His actions led to some negative effect (danger in some other areas for US).
Nothing is without trade offs.
He did something which led to both - positive and negative effects.
He has changed something.
Let's focus on using this opportunity and change. Let's move to the better future.
If you will just crates his actions in a light of negativity, you will lose this opportunity to build a better future.
What can be done by Americans to capitalise on this information disclosure?
The UK is home to a hostile foreign government?
The problem with Snowden, isn't his whistleblowing revelations that the American government was spying on Americans. It's the fact that he stole thousands and thousands of highly classified files, that had nothing to do with intelligence gathering on American citizens, and then shopped them around the world.
He's only slightly more moral than Kim Philby.
It's mind boggling how many sources he's put at risk and how many intelligence operations he's compromised. Someday, we'll know how many lives were quietly ended in a dark alley on a dark night somewhere, because of information he decided that he had the moral authority to divulge to hostile foreign governments.
The UK is home to a hostile foreign government?
That's a silly comment that adds nothing to the discussion. He did not divulge information to the UK Government.
THIS is a silly comment:
"It's mind boggling how many sources he's put at risk and how many intelligence operations he's compromised. Someday, we'll know how many lives were quietly ended in a dark alley on a dark night somewhere, because of information he decided that he had the moral authority to divulge to hostile foreign governments."
And this was a silly response:
http://www.wired.com/2013/08/guardian-snowden-files-destroyed/
That's a stupid theory. We aren't blind lemmings. Phablets are still cumbersome. Apple Pay is far better than NFC before it. Ads are still crap but iAds are less intrusive, right?
Some say the 2nd amendment is absolute. So any law restricting that right is unconstitutional. So if I wanted to sell a gun where it's banned, I should be considered a hero for defending the constitution?
Note I don't like guns and I support many gun control laws.
http://www.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/06/28/us.scotus.handgun.ban/index.html
Ok so now we wait for SCOTUS to rule and not rely on a mid level analyst?
You're really reaching.
How so?
Why couldn't a gun seller decide the gun bans were unconstitutional? Isn't that violating someone's rights?
I guess as individuals we have certain biases about certain constitutional rights. That's why SCOTUS should decide it.
People who run around calling themselves patriots seldom understand the true meaning of the word. Patriotism does not mean marching in goose step, respecting authority, and doing what you're told. Patriotism is fighting for the values your country stands for, even (especially) when that means fighting those within your own government who have betrayed those values. Hitler, Stalin, Mao... all homicidal despots who committed atrocities under the banner of patriotism.
Exposing the NSA spying on America was laudable. Exposing US intelligence efforts in/against other countries was treason. Yes, he did that as well. He can be both sinner and saint.
Some say the 2nd amendment is absolute. So any law restricting that right is unconstitutional. So if I wanted to sell a gun where it's banned, I should be considered a hero for defending the constitution?
Note I don't like guns and I support many gun control laws.
It is as absolute as any other natural right that is acknowledged by the Bill of Rights. The Bill of Rights was not written to create rights, but to acknowledge existing natural rights, including the right to defend ones self and family and property.
You support laws that increase insecurity, make it so people cannot defend themselves, and are in essence slaves to the government for their own protection? Gun Control has been shown to not have positive effects on safety, security, etc. This is by government sponsored research. At best the many gun bans that have been studied have been shown to have a neutral effect, and at worst, a negative effect.
The 2A is also as absolute as the 1A, 4A, or any other.
I see - so rather than explain why you disagree with that observation (which is, in fact, quite accurate, but no matter), you decided to make a stupid one of your own. And then deflect criticism by pointing fingers elsewhere. Very mature and helpful.
Apples DNA is clearly against these peoples values.
I confess I haven't really followed this all that closely but didn't Snowden leave all the information with his selected journalists before going to Russia?
Your original response was a non sequitur. I respond to a diversionary comment that was unrelated to the discussion.
Yep.