• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Edward Snowden, defector [W:139] (1 Viewer)

There are several people who dedicate their lives fighting for electronic privacy and who would never consider working for a corrupt institution like the NSA even though they have the skills to do so, and you want to call Snowden a "hero" ? :rolleyes:

I am not calling Snowden a hero for taking the job at NSA. But he gave up a fairly cushy job/life to release information to the public. That is the heroic deed, not what he did beforehand.
 
The idea that Snowden informed the dumbed down masses of the American public is ludicrous.

It's precisely because they're dumbed down masses that they couldn't deduce that the NSA would abuse its power, in spite of the government's claims that it wouldn't, and those same dumbed down idiots are still going to take the government's word over Snowden's, and they are. . .

In the end, Snowden did nothing--the people who believe him already knew the NSA was treasonous, and the ones who did not know (i. e. the dumbed down masses) believe the NSA is still just protecting Americans and not abusing its power.

Do you have evidence that these masses are completely behind the NSA?
 
I meant it as that he went to a place where human rights are not valued and then began preaching about free speech and privacy so.. :lol:

His options were limited. Do you think most Russians approve of their government's human rights violations?
 

This however is different to what was being suggested. What appeared to be being suggested was that originally he had the mind of those he worked for.

If anything this raises him in my estimation. He went to see if what people were imagining but not working on was true. It was. He is providing the proof. No excuses for not working for change now.

It is a very common strategy for getting information you cannot get otherwise. TV companies do it regularly, for instance sending people in pretending they are bona fide workers in order for instance to film abuse of the vulnerable.
 
This is ridiculous.

You cannot know what he knew, so you cannot say that he knew anything.

And since you do not know what everyone thinks, then you cannot know what they think about ANYTHING unless they tell you.

Your penchant for inexactitude is borderline staggering.

Articles were published all over the place in several newspapers about the NSA's unregulated data-mining well before Snowden "outed" the information. You must've been asleep.

Even otherwise, no one in their right mind believes that the US obeys the law when it comes to anything. Snowden: the US broke the law; it violated the Constitution!! Oh my, quel surprise :rolleyes:
 
I am not calling Snowden a hero for taking the job at NSA. But he gave up a fairly cushy job/life to release information to the public. That is the heroic deed, not what he did beforehand.

Heroic deed would've been to refuse the NSA job in the first place, like many hackers do.
 
NO need to gather evidence. Everyone already knew that the NSA were spy-crazy law breakers.

1.) He went in with the intention of gathering NSA information to release to the public.

2.) Even if you don't accept his claim, it totally debunks your claim that he only cared about the money (he took a paycut by taking the job).
 
Heroic deed would've been to refuse the NSA job in the first place, like many hackers do.

You said unless the person was trying to infiltrate that place. That is exactly what he claims he was doing.
 
Articles were published all over the place in several newspapers about the NSA's unregulated data-mining well before Snowden "outed" the information. You must've been asleep.

Even otherwise, no one in their right mind believes that the US obeys the law when it comes to anything. Snowden: the US broke the law; it violated the Constitution!! Oh my, quel surprise :rolleyes:

Were any of the 'first responders' that died in the World Trade Center on 9/11 heroes?
 
I genuinely hope that Trittin is honest about that and that it's not just pre-election populism.
If a German head of state had the guts to do that I'd hang up a picture of that guy on the wall of my room.

It really is "that guy", because it certainly won't happen with Merkel.

No it won't happen with Merkel that is true, or certainly at the moment. If the post I was responding to is in any way correct http://www.debatepolitics.com/europe/165184-edward-snowden-defector-7.html#post1062007004

then I would say just keep at it. I think you are the people most likely to be able to achieve this because of your past - on straight moral lines of human rights, free speech and democracy.

If you did this, people would have to ask why.
 
Does anyone know what the maximum sentence is based on the charges against him?
 
Does anyone know what the maximum sentence is based on the charges against him?

I think it is death.

Maybe not because Fox News is suggesting it



I have heard Assange say they are wanting the death sentence for this ....and for journalists who report it.
 
Last edited:
I have heard Assange say they are wanting the death sentence for this ....and for journalists who report it.

If they do eventually get Snowden I doubt they will go for the death penalty. Would be too much public backlash.
 
I think it is death.

I have heard Assange say they are wanting the death sentence for this ....and for journalists who report it.

If it is death and he cannot get asylum his best bet would be to go to a country that will not extradite him if he faces the death penalty.
 
Does anyone know what the maximum sentence is based on the charges against him?

Whatever the justice department feels is politically viable. Between, Al-Alwaki, Manning and Gitmo, its quite abundantly clear that the rule of law has nothing to do with it.
 
Whatever the justice department feels is politically viable. Between, Al-Alwaki, Manning and Gitmo, its quite abundantly clear that the rule of law has nothing to do with it.

Conspiracy?
 
The idea that Snowden informed the dumbed down masses of the American public is ludicrous.

It's precisely because they're dumbed down masses that they couldn't deduce that the NSA would abuse its power, in spite of the government's claims that it wouldn't, and those same dumbed down idiots are still going to take the government's word over Snowden's, and they are. . .

In the end, Snowden did nothing--the people who believe him already knew the NSA was treasonous, and the ones who did not know (i. e. the dumbed down masses) believe the NSA is still just protecting Americans and not abusing its power.

Snowden speaks to this:
One week ago I left Hong Kong after it became clear that my freedom and safety were under threat for revealing the truth. My continued liberty has been owed to the efforts of friends new and old, family, and others who I have never met and probably never will. I trusted them with my life and they returned that trust with a faith in me for which I will always be thankful.

On Thursday, President Obama declared before the world that he would not permit any diplomatic "wheeling and dealing" over my case. Yet now it is being reported that after promising not to do so, the President ordered his Vice President to pressure the leaders of nations from which I have requested protection to deny my asylum petitions.

This kind of deception from a world leader is not justice, and neither is the extralegal penalty of exile. These are the old, bad tools of political aggression. Their purpose is to frighten, not me, but those who would come after me.

For decades the United States of America has been one of the strongest defenders of the human right to seek asylum. Sadly, this right, laid out and voted for by the U.S. in Article 14 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, is now being rejected by the current government of my country. The Obama administration has now adopted the strategy of using citizenship as a weapon. Although I am convicted of nothing, it has unilaterally revoked my passport, leaving me a stateless person. Without any judicial order, the administration now seeks to stop me exercising a basic right. A right that belongs to everybody. The right to seek asylum.

In the end the Obama administration is not afraid of whistleblowers like me, Bradley Manning or Thomas Drake. We are stateless, imprisoned, or powerless. No, the Obama administration is afraid of you. It is afraid of an informed, angry public demanding the constitutional government it was promised — and it should be.

I am unbowed in my convictions and impressed at the efforts taken by so many.

Edward Joseph Snowden

Monday 1st July 2013
[EMPHASIS ADDED BY BUBBA]
http://wikileaks.org/Statement-from-Edward-Snowden-in.html?snow

WHISTLEBLOWING
The disclosure by a person, usually an employee in a government agency or private enterprise, to the public or to those in authority, of mismanagement, corruption, illegality, or some other wrongdoing.
Whistleblowing legal definition of Whistleblowing. Whistleblowing synonyms by the Free Online Law Dictionary.
 
Conspiracy?

Its a documented fact that Al-Alwaki was killed in an attack ordered by the executive branch without trial. Its a documented fact that Manning was held beyond the 120 day limit in the UCMJ without trial. Its a documented fact that there are people in Guantanamo Bay who have been held for years without trial. My prediction that Snowden would not receive punishment based on the rule of law is based on a track record of consistent legal violations for more than 12 years. I don't think he would be executed or even given life in prison, but the only thing preventing that is public outcry, not legal principle from those who have demonstrated a disregard for it.
 
Whatever the justice department feels is politically viable. Between, Al-Alwaki, Manning and Gitmo, its quite abundantly clear that the rule of law has nothing to do with it.

Actually, they follow the rule of law (sort of).

Unfortunately, whenever they want to do something illegal, they just change the law to make it legal...or bend the existing ones until they are pretzel-shaped.

In Washington since 9/11, the end justifies ANY means.
 
Actually, they follow the rule of law (sort of).

Unfortunately, whenever they want to do something illegal, they just change the law to make it legal...or bend the existing ones until they are pretzel-shaped.

In Washington since 9/11, the end justifies ANY means.

Pretending that the government can meet the due process standard for killing someone by having an "informed high level official" say they are a threat is not bending the law, its taking the law out back and beating it to death with a shovel before pissing on its corpse.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom