Is Edward Snowden a Traitor or a Hero?

[docdeath]

Anyone who believes the NSA would have revealed ANY of the secrets Snowden took from them is delusional. If Snowden didn't do what he did, who knows how much deeper into our private affairs the NSA would be digging!
One lesson to be learned is that we all need to be highly skeptical of our government, otherwise we will be duped, over and over, and over again! These secret agencies are so well insulated, they have ZERO accountability to the general public.

 

[rbkwp]

funny not haha
, that an iregular plain ole bum from down under, 'just had this feeling' and it comes out on a relative mainstream, to some of us, media source , a week later
shows, what many others thruout the World could be thinking of, with the entire situation

of course LPSG link lovers can prove me wrong, by saying it never happened, i am OK about believing this written source ..

be ashamed America ..

Michael Hayden, the former director of the National Security Agency, has* invaded*America’s*television*sets*in recent weeks to warn about Edward Snowden’s*leaks and the continuing terrorist threat to America.


5 Companies That Make Money By Keeping Americans Terrified of Terror Attacks


5 Companies That Make Money By Keeping Americans Terrified of Terror Attacks | Alternet

 

[dandelion]

An interesting coda to the story is that the partner of a guardian journalist (who had interviewed Snowden) was detained at Heathrow airport under terrorist legislation yesterday. They apparently seized his phone and laptop. The news in the Uk is now buzzing with stories as to why terrorist legislation has been used against the partner of a journalist, who plainly isnt a terrorist.

 

[docdeath]

An interesting coda to the story is that the partner of a guardian journalist (who had interviewed Snowden) was detained at Heathrow airport under terrorist legislation yesterday. They apparently seized his phone and laptop. The news in the Uk is now buzzing with stories as to why terrorist legislation has been used against the partner of a journalist, who plainly isnt a terrorist.

It's probably the equivalent of our own "homeland security" bullshit laws.
Some knee-jerk collection of outrageous laws geared to detain anyone they want, under the most innocuous pretexts. Lucky he was a journalist, otherwise no one would have been alerted to his disappearance into the "system".

 

[Fuzzy_]

An interesting coda to the story is that the partner of a guardian journalist (who had interviewed Snowden) was detained at Heathrow airport under terrorist legislation yesterday. They apparently seized his phone and laptop. The news in the Uk is now buzzing with stories as to why terrorist legislation has been used against the partner of a journalist, who plainly isnt a terrorist.

Fuzzy has no doubt that it's something to do with the reporter... er... political activist Glenn Greenwald.

 

[rbkwp]

with stories as to why terrorist legislation has been used against the partner of a journalist, who plainly isnt a terrorist.








uuhm dandy
i am thinking many may also have been detained in Gitmo for 10 years or so,without trial, similar circumstances, we would never know unless a Snowden type escaped the Country
US version of Human rights
what the hell the mention of the cold war or Gay rights in Ru got much to do with such atrocities!

 

[deleted15807]

I have no problem with any of that. If Snowden's goal is to declassify information, he should do so for every instance. I don't know if he did or why he might give information to the Russians or Chinese, but the point of going to those countries was to make sure he was extradited back to the United States.

Are you disputing whether he's a patriot or a hero? Right now I'm gonna have fun and say he's an expatriate, but his goals so far as I've seen have been to inform the American public of how violated their privacy really is at the cost of his own awesome lifestyle. That takes courage and character.

He has a stunning lack of courage and character. You're advocating he should 'declassify information and do so for every instance'? Since you've lowered the decision making down to the individual level of what's classified and what isn't then the point of classifying information is now useless. 'Please publish this information if you disagree' should be stamped on every document?

Courage and character would demand that you make your accusations and face the consequences and the glory of your actions at home. Not running from the country whose allegiance you have now discarded.

Wherever he ends up you can be sure it won't be a country with the openness and freedom of expression he once had.

 

[dandelion]

Courage and character would demand that you make your accusations and face the consequences and the glory of your actions at home.

Ok then, if thats what you think, why dont the US secret service all go public and tell us exactly what they are doing? Why don't they all go to Russia, China, the UK, or wherever else they are busy spying, tell the local newspapers exactly what they have discovered, and wait for the local authorities to act?

Bet they dont, because that would be really, really stupid.

Are you saying all US secret service people are cowards beause they do not tell people what they are doing and face up to the consequences?

In the UK the affair of the arrested journalist's, partner rumbles on with widespread condemnation in the press. It would seem the authorities are going to defend their action by arguing he was a legitimate target because he may have been carrying information provided by Snowden, or information about him. The UK newspapers seem to have a consensus that, on the contrary, he has acted simply in the public interest by doing this (if he did). The issue may be akin to the head of state's plane which was forced to land in Austria because of suspicion Snowden might be onboard.

It would seem UK spies have already forced Guardian journalists in the Uk to destroy information in their possession (though the chap being intervied said that other copies existed abroad)

It also appears that the power to stop people used by the authorities is already in process of being curtailed, with anyone arrested being required to be given legal advice within one hour and the total time they may be held without further action being curtailed. Hasnt come into force yet, though. In this case the chap was held for the maximum time currently allowed. Typically the authorities do not hold anyone this long but make up their minds much quicker, making it odd they held this chap so long and raising the suspicion they were just trying to frighten him. In other words, trying to force the press to drop a legitimate story.

 

[dandelion]

The Guardian editor has been talking more about his computers. It would seem British secret services demanded he either hand over the information or destroy it. Rather than hand it over, he chose to destroy it. The alternative would have been to take the matter to court, which would have potentially taken a year to resolve and in the meanwhile he would not have been able to talk about the case. He has also said that copies exist in their US offices, where they are free to make use of them because of US laws protecting the press. So all in all, the UK secret services just insisted he smash up his computers for the fun of it.

It would seem the Guardian possesses information much more 'harmful' than what they have made public. Harmful to whom, I'm not sure.

I heard the US president denied asking for this all to happen, but the statement said something about the white house being kept informed. It would seem the UK prime minister was also informed about what was happening.

 

[dandelion]

Apparently no one is interested in the spread of the story into the UK. Curious.

Today the former lord Chancellor from the previous government stated his view that use of the particular legislation to hold the journalist's partner was unlawful. The government has argued that because he may have been carrying 'stolen' secret information, then it was legitimate to hold him. Lord faulkner (the job title translates to the governments head law officer) seems to think this is not correct. He stated that unequivocally the law does not apply to anything the person might be carrying, but solely to the issue of whether he personally has carried out acts of terrorism or is suspected of planning to. So it is immaterial what he might be carrying. Seems likely the case will end in court to decide on firstly the interpretation and then whether the law as resolved is consistent with the human rights act.

Moving on, it seems the prime minister personally sent a senior civil servant plus secret service agent to ask the Guardian to return files to them. It seems likely the US president was informed, though the news suggests the white house is distancing itself from acting against journalists. At the same time the home secretary is denying any personal responsibility for the action against the journalists partner, though she admits to having been advised in advance that it was planned. Funny all these top ministers didnt talk to each other or personally decide what to do, in an issue which they now say is of such vital national interest.

Persistently politicians kep being asked whether their claims of 'national security' are not really pretexts to cover official embarassment at what has been going on.

On a slightly different note I happened to discuss security measure at nuclear power plants in the UK. (brought to mind by the self-inflicted disaster in Japan). It would seems that some time in the last 30 years these have been hugely increased. I can't help wondering why if our security services have been doing such a good job over these years, why all this extra security is now necessary.

 

[B_underguy1]

I find Rusbridger's allegations difficult to credit and I don't trust him at all. In fact the whole Snowden saga all seems a bit off somehow.

Remember it was the Guardian that led the smearing of Julian Assange.

 

[rbkwp]

Apparently no one is interested in the spread of the story into the UK. Curious.

Moving on,......... Funny all these top ministers didnt talk to each other or personally decide what to do, in an issue which they now say is of such vital national interest.

Persistently politicians kep being asked whether their claims of 'national security' are not really pretexts to cover official embarassment at what has been going on.






Think
some of us may be happy to read confirmation thru your posts as to what we hear in the media reports dandelion, i certainly do anyway Thanks ..

related stuff ..


After the UK's Scandalous Detention of a Journalist's Partner, It's Becoming All Too Clear What Kind of a World We're Heading to


After the UK's Scandalous Detention of a Journalist's Partner, It's Becoming All Too Clear What Kind of a World We're Heading to | Alternet




so what does NZ do the next day .. Has to be the USA influence




GCSB Bill Passed Into Law - politics - national | Stuff.co.nz

 

[deleted15807]

Ok then, if thats what you think, why dont the US secret service all go public and tell us exactly what they are doing? Why don't they all go to Russia, China, the UK, or wherever else they are busy spying, tell the local newspapers exactly what they have discovered, and wait for the local authorities to act?

Not sure at all what your point is. If you think you have a problem with the oath you took then quit. Or go to Congress. Or go to the press. Do not go to China and Russia dumping everything you know about everything you could fit on your laptop. Snowden lacked the courage to stick around to defend his actions.

As a real hero once wrote:

I submit that an individual who breaks a law that conscience tells him is unjust, and who willingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment in order to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in reality expressing the highest respect for the law.
--Martin Luther King Jr.​

 

[Perados]

35 years jail for bradley manning - nearly non of the soviet russian spys, doring the cold war, had to face sutch a hard punishment

Should edward snowden return to the usa, he would only proof that he is one of the most stupid person on earth.
This judgement has nothing to do with a fair trial. Its just an example that you shouldnt care for moral and god given rights or act against "the interests" of the us goverment.

America is on a very dangerous way

 

[Perados]

As a real hero once wrote:

I submit that an individual who breaks a law that conscience tells him is unjust, and who willingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment in order to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in reality expressing the highest respect for the law.
--Martin Luther King Jr.​

So, mennings is a hero, cause he got to jail, but snowed, who did the same, isnt?

Lol, i would say you misinterpretate mr king - its importent that you show the unjust, no matter what happens to you (like go to jail)
But it isnt essential that you have to go to jail, to proof the unjust.

Its like you would say: if you save a childs live, while put your live on risk, makes you only a hero if you die...

 

[B_underguy1]

35 years jail for bradley manning - nearly non of the soviet russian spys, doring the cold war, had to face sutch a hard punishment

Should edward snowden return to the usa, he would only proof that he is one of the most stupid person on earth.
This judgement has nothing to do with a fair trial. Its just an example that you shouldnt care for moral and god given rights or act against "the interests" of the us goverment.

America is on a very dangerous way

Yep. While the mass murderers, torturers and war criminals get off scot free.

What a world.

 

[deleted15807]

Lol, i would say you misinterpretate mr king

I would say you don't understand Dr. King's message. Go back and read it again. Try removing your fervor for being on the opposite side of US government policy.

P.S. - I suppose from your viewpoint Nelson Mandela should have fled to London than say fight apartheid from within South Africa. Staying out of jail is the higher calling.

 

[dandelion]

Not sure at all what your point is. If you think you have a problem with the oath you took then quit.

He has, hasn't he?

Or go to Congress.

taking part here I discovered that someone else tried this approacjh already and got exactly nowhere. not a helpfull suggestion, then.

Or go to the press.

He has.

Do not go to China and Russia dumping everything you know about everything you could fit on your laptop.

Goodness, where to start. You just said that what he ought to do is go to the press. Well, OK, how? If he will be arrested and all his information siezed the first moment he does this, then it isnt very practical to stay in the US. To do what you suggest, he rather has to go abroad, and go abroad somewhere beyond the reach of the US authorities. You seem to be suggesting he should should try to tell the people what has been going on, but only do it somewhere he will immediately be silenced. I am sure that would suit the US, but honestly, how does that make any sense?

Snowden lacked the courage to stick around to defend his actions.

Well hardly. He's not really in any different position than he would be if he was locked in a US jail...except that he is still able to talk to the press.

As a real hero once wrote:

<b>

I submit that an individual who breaks a law that conscience tells him is unjust, and who willingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment in order to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in reality expressing the highest respect for the law.
--Martin Luther King Jr.​

</b>

I dont understand why you consider banishment to a foreign country with the future prospect of imprisonment is not accepting the consequences of his actions. King would be baffled why you do not see this. Whether King would agree this is a valid issue on which to make a stand is a different matter, but given the difficulties he experienced with covert operations, I think he probably would.

I read some of the biography of Rudolf Nureyev, who defected from russia to the US. The Russians then blackmailed his friends and relatives back home to write to him, beg him to return, denounce him and put all sorts of pressure on him to try to get hold of him again. I note the US has been using exactly the same tactics, and indeed the UK is doing the same to try to shut up journalists.

 

[Freddie53]

35 years jail for bradley manning - nearly non of the soviet russian spys, doring the cold war, had to face sutch a hard punishment

Should edward snowden return to the usa, he would only proof that he is one of the most stupid person on earth.
This judgement has nothing to do with a fair trial. Its just an example that you shouldnt care for moral and god given rights or act against "the interests" of the us goverment.

America is on a very dangerous way

You have no idea how wrong I wish you were.

 

[Perados]

You have no idea how wrong I wish you were.

I would love to be wrong - cause useually europe is stupid enough to follow america, blind.



@sargon
You really should rethink how you interpretate mr king - he used the example of "going to jail" to explain, that, even if you get judged as guilty you dont have to be guilty.

And for some people its a harder punishment to leave his country, as it would be to go to jail...

And if mandela would have reached the same goals in london as he did in jail, it would be fine for me.
Just like de gaul was fighting germany from abroad and not from a KZ... I still would call him a hero


Btw
More then one american offered members of the congress data about prism - all of them refused these data, cause they werent allowed to see them.
"go to congress" didnt worked