Eric Holder Says Edward Snowden performed a public service

Darrell said:

He also leaked critical information about the US spying on Germany, G8 summit, China, etc. Did he really need to reveal that we allegedly tapped the German Chancellor's phone?

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

Those things are very minor compared to the betrayal by and blatant disregard of the 4th amendment by the US government for spying on the American people. The government whining about Swoden releasing those things amounts to a arsonist whining that the person who called the cops on him threw a pebble at his house.

Tigerace117 said:

Everybody spies on everybody. And everybody knows that. It's part of life and it's not exactly, in the grand scheme of things, all that bad either.

If innocent people got disappeared over info the NSA thought they had acquired then I'd be upset. But frankly we asked for more security and this is what we're getting, whether we like it or not.

Click to expand...

Snowden was a whistleblower and he did perform a public service by exposing the unconstitutional and illegal activities of the NSA but, as Holder also pointed out, the manner in which he blew the whistle was criminal and he released more information than was necessary.

If the NSA believed that what it was doing was essential to national security then they should have made their case before a FISA court instead of just doing it and hoping their criminal espionage against the American people wouldn't be exposed.

jamesrage said:

Those things are very minor compared to the betrayal by and blatant disregard of the 4th amendment by the US government for spying on the American people. The government whining about Swoden releasing those things amounts to a arsonist whining that the person who called the cops on him threw a pebble at his house.

Click to expand...

After 9/11, everybody was complaining about the lack of intelligence, right? Everybody wanted to feel more secure, right? The people who took part in 9/11 were in our borders, so they were here for awhile. Facebook, Google, and Apple collect more information on you then the US government, but it's different because they're corporations and not government entities.

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk

Napoleon said:

Snowden was a whistleblower and he did perform a public service by exposing the unconstitutional and illegal activities of the NSA but, as Holder also pointed out, the manner in which he blew the whistle was criminal and he released more information than was necessary.

If the NSA believed that what it was doing was essential to national security then they should have made their case before a FISA court instead of just doing it and hoping their criminal espionage against the American people wouldn't be exposed.

Click to expand...

Once again--- after 9/11 people asked for more security. This is more security. People are "shocked" but in truth you can't have it both ways. You can't ask the government to do everything it possibly can(which, of course, means the gloves come off) to stop terrorism and then complain when you don't like what they're doing.

Snowden was completely unprofessional at best, and a total scumbag at worst. He wanted public celebration of himself, but he also didn't actually want to have to deal with the results of his actions, hence the flight to Russia.

Tigerace117 said:

Once again--- after 9/11 people asked for more security. This is more security. People are "shocked" but in truth you can't have it both ways. You can't ask the government to do everything it possibly can(which, of course, means the gloves come off) to stop terrorism and then complain when you don't like what they're doing.

Click to expand...

Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.

Click to expand...

Benjamin Franklin

Tigerace117 said:

Once again--- after 9/11 people asked for more security. This is more security. People are "shocked" but in truth you can't have it both ways. You can't ask the government to do everything it possibly can(which, of course, means the gloves come off) to stop terrorism and then complain when you don't like what they're doing.

Snowden was completely unprofessional at best, and a total scumbag at worst. He wanted public celebration of himself, but he also didn't actually want to have to deal with the results of his actions, hence the flight to Russia.

Click to expand...

Asking for additional security does not negate the government's obligation to provide that security leveraging methods that fall within the boundaries of the Constitution and the law nor does it authorize government agencies to bypass the checks and balances which ensure that is the case. You can have it both ways. That's what the FISA courts are for. The criminal aspect to these programs lies just as much in the manner of their implementation as it does with the acts conducted under them, some of which have no national security justification (ex. spying on the Senate Intelligence Committee). Nobody asked the CIA and NSA to go rogue and exposing the fact that they did was indeed a public service.

Celebrity said:

Eric Holder, who really wanted to put Edward Snowden in jail, now says he performed a 'public service' The Verge

Yeah, it was a real kick in the behind for US espionage. Remind me again how black ops isn't able to just "extradite" him? Does Snowden still have something Eric Holder wants, or is he trying to craft his own image here in US politics?

Click to expand...

Holder says a lot of stupid things. Just gotta tune him out like his friend Al Sharpton.

So the public service that Snowden did was spark discussion... and people think it is wrong to spark discussion about the government spying on citizens?

reinoe said:

Eric Holder is a liar.

Click to expand...

He's had a mixed career, but I think he's generally a scumbag.

Snowden did get a ( much needed ) conversation going. About that, Holder is correct.
Snowden also leaked classified information. He conveniently and cowardly fled to country, to Russia of all places, where he still remains, hoping to be granted asylum elsewhere, the little coward.
Snowden put our country in jeopardy, put countless lives at risk. Was it worth it? Do we really think that what he put to light was worth the ramification? If so, he should turn himself in and face the consequences of his actions no matter what they are.

In the video of the debate, it was mentioned by the side against that allies of American espionage may no longer be able to trust Snowden's terra firma or its native people. I guess this will increase our ability to talk openly about espionage without being sly, paranoid or nationalist. However, there seem to be two implications from the leak of allies info, that American intelligence can no longer be trusted with sensitive information and that the credibility of American agents may have been downgraded in the long term, not only compromised, especially in light of spying on our allies.

Μολὼν λαβέ;1065914150 said:

Benjamin Franklin

Click to expand...

Didn't see this before. Better late than never: :memorial_

Darrell said:

After 9/11, everybody was complaining about the lack of intelligence, right? Everybody wanted to feel more secure, right? The people who took part in 9/11 were in our borders, so they were here for awhile.

Click to expand...

I believe the issue was agencies not communicating with each other.Not a overall lack of security.

Facebook, Google, and Apple collect more information on you then the US government, but it's different because they're corporations and not government entities.

Click to expand...

The privately owned businesses do it too argument doesn't fly. The bill of rights is a restriction on the government, not privately owned businesses. What I do on Facebook is between me and Facebook. Not me,Facebook and the US government. What I do on my phone is between me and phone company Not me,my phone company and US government. What I do on google is between me and google.Not me google and the US government.

Lovebug said:

Snowden did get a ( much needed ) conversation going. About that, Holder is correct.
Snowden also leaked classified information. He conveniently and cowardly fled to country, to Russia of all places, where he still remains, hoping to be granted asylum elsewhere, the little coward.
Snowden put our country in jeopardy, put countless lives at risk. Was it worth it? Do we really think that what he put to light was worth the ramification? If so, he should turn himself in and face the consequences of his actions no matter what they are.

Click to expand...

Its not really that black and white. The corruption at the NSA ran all the way to the top. The director himself was personally involved in these programs; even hatching a plan to use collected data to humiliate and raise questions of credibility against anyone who tried to expose it. That, coupled with the fact that the Senate Intelligence Commitee was being monitored, meant that the only way to be sure this unconstitutional and illegal activity was brought out of the shadows was to leak the classified information directly into the public domain.

Did the release of that data put national security and lives at risk? I'd say NO. The value of those programs as it relates to counter-terrorism efforts is dubious at best and the evidence revealed in the leaks shows that those programs were primarily used for other unethical, illegal, and/or nefarious purposes. The right thing to do, as it relates to this information, is to regard Snowden as a whistleblower and provide him with immunity. It would be a travesty of justice indeed if Snowden were punished while the perpetrators of perhaps the most extensive constitutional violation and government conspiracy in our nation's history walk free.

However, there's also the matter of the other classified material he released. It is a tome of material that is completely unrelated to the above scandal and was released in his personal moral crusade against international espionage and the classification system. For that he should pay the price under the relevant statutes.

jamesrage said:

I believe the issue was agencies not communicating with each other.Not a overall lack of security.



The privately owned businesses do it too argument doesn't fly. The bill of rights is a restriction on the government, not privately owned businesses. What I do on Facebook is between me and Facebook. Not me,Facebook and the US government. What I do on my phone is between me and phone company Not me,my phone company and US government. What I do on google is between me and google.Not me google and the US government.

Click to expand...

EULA's are getting out of hand these days. At least companies aren't sharing information, or so they say.