Edward Snowden

[missmuffet]

 

 

 

I have held my thoughts on Snowden until I see all that he has done.  He may well have done much worse than tell the American people they are being spied upon.

 

The world is a dangerous place and if he has disclosed to the Russians and Chinese how we spy on them, he should be publically executed.

I agree other one.At first I thought of him as a hero and that it was a courageous thing to do.But then I was told that he may have done some dangerous things and made the U.S. vulnerable.The jury is still out for me as well.

 

Do you really believe your Government when they say Snowden has done dangerous things? Who has lied so far to the American people? Snowden or the US Government? The Government seems merely to be trying to save its own face, and has not produced a shred of evidence re. genuine harm caused by Snowden. Lots of embarrassment for the Government has been caused! Should people be executed for that in modern day America? The founding Fathers must be turning in their graves.

 

I kind of agree with you on this one, but I still haven't completely made my mind up. I think Snowden has done some things of merit, but on the other hand he may have damaged national security. I do know that I don't trust the Obama admin as far as I can throw them, and although I do not like or trust Putin either, he occasionally does some things that makes me think that Russia is more free than America at the moment.

 

I think for me, the jury is still out.

 

I am with you.I do not trust Putin either.

[Gandalf]

I support his actions, and so far I don't see how he has endangered anyone's life. Far from being a traitor and a spy, perhaps in my eyes, so far, he has done the right thing. Obscure as much as they want, the USA and UK governments were breaking their own laws, and a good few international ones as well.

 

Diverting the plane of the President of a sovereign country, elected by his people, while on an official trip, was sheer bully tactics, and the reward of that is yet to be reaped. It shows desperation and only goes to raise international public support for Snowden.

 

He has information about our cyber war activities with China that he tried to peddle for his safety.   We do not know yet how much he gave them or will give them in the future.  Same holds true for every country he is begging to stay in.

 

And sadly, our governments didn't break their own laws, at least the US didn't.  With the passage of the PATRIOT Act and a couple other laws that were widely supported when they were passed,  the US government gave themselves the right to do these things.

They gave themselves the right to eavesdrop on Luxembourg? Or divert and harass a foreign presidents plane? If this had been Airforce One what would have been the result?

Bombing! The oft used US response.

[Gandalf]

I support his actions, and so far I don't see how he has endangered anyone's life. Far from being a traitor and a spy, perhaps in my eyes, so far, he has done the right thing. Obscure as much as they want, the USA and UK governments were breaking their own laws, and a good few international ones as well.

 

Diverting the plane of the President of a sovereign country, elected by his people, while on an official trip, was sheer bully tactics, and the reward of that is yet to be reaped. It shows desperation and only goes to raise international public support for Snowden.

 

He has information about our cyber war activities with China that he tried to peddle for his safety.   We do not know yet how much he gave them or will give them in the future.  Same holds true for every country he is begging to stay in.

 

And sadly, our governments didn't break their own laws, at least the US didn't.  With the passage of the PATRIOT Act and a couple other laws that were widely supported when they were passed,  the US government gave themselves the right to do these things.

They gave themselves the right to eavesdrop on Luxembourg? Or divert and harass a foreign presidents plane? If this had been Airforce One what would have been the result?

 

They have always had the right to eavesdrop on Luxembourg.   There is no US law that would make such a thing illegal.  Countries have been spying on each other since the dawn of civilization, that will not change till the 2nd coming.   I am much more concerned with what they are doing to their own citizens.

So, it seems is Snowden, who believes the US government has been acting unconstitutionally by spying on its citizens without due cause.

[MorningGlory]

 

 

 

I support his actions, and so far I don't see how he has endangered anyone's life. Far from being a traitor and a spy, perhaps in my eyes, so far, he has done the right thing. Obscure as much as they want, the USA and UK governments were breaking their own laws, and a good few international ones as well.

 

Diverting the plane of the President of a sovereign country, elected by his people, while on an official trip, was sheer bully tactics, and the reward of that is yet to be reaped. It shows desperation and only goes to raise international public support for Snowden.

 

He has information about our cyber war activities with China that he tried to peddle for his safety.   We do not know yet how much he gave them or will give them in the future.  Same holds true for every country he is begging to stay in.

 

And sadly, our governments didn't break their own laws, at least the US didn't.  With the passage of the PATRIOT Act and a couple other laws that were widely supported when they were passed,  the US government gave themselves the right to do these things.

 

They gave themselves the right to eavesdrop on Luxembourg? Or divert and harass a foreign presidents plane? If this had been Airforce One what would have been the result?

 

Bombing! The oft used US response.

 

I'm only trying to b e a voice of reason when I say the following:

 

NO ONE diverts Air Force One as it is not a commericail aircraft and is accompanied by U.S. fighter jets at all times.  And, gandolph, if the U.S. bombed everyone who made us mad, half the world would be smoldering ruins.  Let's be fair here. 

[JDavis]

 

 

 

 

I support his actions, and so far I don't see how he has endangered anyone's life. Far from being a traitor and a spy, perhaps in my eyes, so far, he has done the right thing. Obscure as much as they want, the USA and UK governments were breaking their own laws, and a good few international ones as well.

 

Diverting the plane of the President of a sovereign country, elected by his people, while on an official trip, was sheer bully tactics, and the reward of that is yet to be reaped. It shows desperation and only goes to raise international public support for Snowden.

 

He has information about our cyber war activities with China that he tried to peddle for his safety.   We do not know yet how much he gave them or will give them in the future.  Same holds true for every country he is begging to stay in.

 

And sadly, our governments didn't break their own laws, at least the US didn't.  With the passage of the PATRIOT Act and a couple other laws that were widely supported when they were passed,  the US government gave themselves the right to do these things.

 

They gave themselves the right to eavesdrop on Luxembourg? Or divert and harass a foreign presidents plane? If this had been Airforce One what would have been the result?

 

 

They have always had the right to eavesdrop on Luxembourg.   There is no US law that would make such a thing illegal.  Countries have been spying on each other since the dawn of civilization, that will not change till the 2nd coming.   I am much more concerned with what they are doing to their own citizens.

 

Ok got it! They can listen in to anyone's conversations as long as they are not American citizens.

 

A large national poll released Wednesday by Quinnipiac University found most Americans believe former NSA contractor Edward Snowden is a "whistle-blower" rather than a "traitor."

The poll, which surveyed 2,014 respondents June 28-July 8, found 55 percent of Americans think of Snowden as a whistle-blower, and just 34 percent say he is a traitor.

Respondents between the ages of 19 and 29 were most likely to say he's a whistle-blower, with 68 percent of that group saying so.

African-American respondents were the only demographic group with a plurality saying he's a "traitor." Of black respondents, 43 percent said Snowden is a traitor, 42 percent said whistle-blower and 14 percent didn't answer the question.

 

 

 

interesting poll, the numbers that support Snowden are just a bit lower than those that supported the PATRIOT Act that gave the Govt the power to do this.

 

I will say it again, I supported Snowden for his initial action, his actions since then have changed my mind. 

 

He went from whistleblower to traitor/coward when he tried to peddle state secrets for his own safety.

[JDavis]

 

 

 

They have always had the right to eavesdrop on Luxembourg.   There is no US law that would make such a thing illegal.  Countries have been spying on each other since the dawn of civilization, that will not change till the 2nd coming.   I am much more concerned with what they are doing to their own citizens.

 

So, it seems is Snowden, who believes the US government has been acting unconstitutionally by spying on its citizens without due cause.

 

 

and many people agree with him, but his message got tarnished when he choose to try and trade secrets for safety. 

[Steve_S]

 

 

 

 

They have always had the right to eavesdrop on Luxembourg.   There is no US law that would make such a thing illegal.  Countries have been spying on each other since the dawn of civilization, that will not change till the 2nd coming.   I am much more concerned with what they are doing to their own citizens.

 

So, it seems is Snowden, who believes the US government has been acting unconstitutionally by spying on its citizens without due cause.

 

 

and many people agree with him, but his message got tarnished when he choose to try and trade secrets for safety. 

 

 

That's to be expected, though. If the US government wanted to protect our state secrets there was an easy way to do that in issuing him a written guarantee of prosecutorial immunity regarding the revealing of domestic monitoring programs and anything connected to that, but we didn't. The government was more concerned about making an example of a whistleblower and it's not shocking that he chose the route that he did.

[other one]

 

 

 

do you not grasp the concept of the word "if" or is it that you don't comprehend the written words?

 

OK. So "if" Snowden has not disclosed issues of national security to the Russians/Chinese, what should happen to those in Government who have lied and deceived about what they have been up to? And what, also in that event, should happen to Snowden?

 

 

We're a nation of laws Gandolf, and whistle blowers do have some legal safeguards.  He should return home and let things proceed through the system.....   and all who have broken the law should be held accountable.  Snowden as well as the others.   One thing that many don't seem to understand is that to participate in civil disobedience, one must be prepared to shoulder the legal consequences.

 

Most everyone who signed our declaration of independence lost everything they had.   

[Steve_S]

 

 

 

 

do you not grasp the concept of the word "if" or is it that you don't comprehend the written words?

 

OK. So "if" Snowden has not disclosed issues of national security to the Russians/Chinese, what should happen to those in Government who have lied and deceived about what they have been up to? And what, also in that event, should happen to Snowden?

 

 

We're a nation of laws Gandolf, and whistle blowers do have some legal safeguards.  He should return home and let things proceed through the system.....   and all who have broken the law should be held accountable.  Snowden as well as the others.   One thing that many don't seem to understand is that to participate in civil disobedience, one must be prepared to shoulder the legal consequences.

 

Most everyone who signed our declaration of independence lost everything they had.   

 

 

This is an interesting question insofar as he's no longer in this land. He's now in Russia. Does he have to follow every law of every land simultaneously or just the one he is in? If russia grants him asylum, for instance, then he's not breaking any laws there, and he's under their legal jurisdiction at that point, as an asylum bearer.

[other one]

 

 

 

 

 

do you not grasp the concept of the word "if" or is it that you don't comprehend the written words?

 

OK. So "if" Snowden has not disclosed issues of national security to the Russians/Chinese, what should happen to those in Government who have lied and deceived about what they have been up to? And what, also in that event, should happen to Snowden?

 

 

We're a nation of laws Gandolf, and whistle blowers do have some legal safeguards.  He should return home and let things proceed through the system.....   and all who have broken the law should be held accountable.  Snowden as well as the others.   One thing that many don't seem to understand is that to participate in civil disobedience, one must be prepared to shoulder the legal consequences.

 

Most everyone who signed our declaration of independence lost everything they had.   

 

 

This is an interesting question insofar as he's no longer in this land. He's now in Russia. Does he have to follow every law of every land simultaneously or just the one he is in? If russia grants him asylum, for instance, then he's not breaking any laws there, and he's under their legal jurisdiction at that point, as an asylum bearer.

 

he is still an American citizen.  He may receive asylum, but in doing so, he can not return here without being subject to our laws.