• 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!

Snowden embraces American flag in WIRED photo shoot[W:511]

Kal'Stang said:
Umm...just how is he enabling Putin? Last I knew Putin was in charge LONG before Snowden came to the scene.
Click to expand...

He means enabling Putin's actions by deterring actions that oppose him.
 
Kal'Stang said:
Umm...just how is he enabling Putin? Last I knew Putin was in charge LONG before Snowden came to the scene.
Click to expand...

Snowden releases information damaging US-European relationships when doing so makes it harder for them to respond in a coordinated manner to major moves on the part of Russia. Given that he is effectively being run at this point by Putin's administration, that is not a coincidence.

That's just on the OSINT side. On the high-side, I'm sure that the FBS and GRU are loving the data he brought them.
 
JasperL said:
I must be missing something with Snowden, because there are a lot of people on the left and right who are normally civil liberties advocates who despise the guy. We know the head of NSA has no problem looking into a camera and lying to the Congress and the public about what the agency is doing. We now know the CIA spies on Senators investigating past wrongdoing and is more than happy to delete/disappear documents that reveal wrongdoing. We know that going through the chain of command is futile. The Obama administration is brutally cracking down on leakers, and is as we speak threatening to jail journalists for failing to reveal their sources, in their prosecution of leakers who revealed illegal activity by the intelligence agencies.

So in a broad sense, without endorsing everything Snowden has done, I'm not sure what someone wanting to expose the extent of the police state in the U.S. is supposed to do? The NSA was simply operating without meaningful restraints, including gathering near blanket coverage of all electronic communications in the U.S., of everyone. And every check on their ability to sift through the data from non-terrorists (aka innocent Americans charged and suspected of no crimes) has been shown to be window dressing, ineffective.

I guess I don't understand how a person can complain about the near total police state we live under, with our government having nearly unrestricted access to ALL our communications, then demonize a person who took a huge risk to expose it all. Sure, he's imperfect, and undoubtedly has made mistakes, but the venom directed against him by civil liberties advocates is really puzzling to me. I don't like that he's hiding out in Russia, and before that China, but the U.S. makes it impossible for him to seek refuge in any other country, so we can't exactly complain that he's not traveling because the U.S. has made that impossible. And I don't expect him to be arrested and voluntarily go to solitary, never to be heard from again, which is what the U.S. did to Manning, for far LESS.
Click to expand...

I haven't seen criticism of Snowden from genuine civil liberties advocates, especially not from the left. All the facts show that he is a legitimate whistle blower.
 
Hard Truth said:
All the facts show that he is a legitimate whistle blower.
Click to expand...

....Er...all the people that really disagree with the laws that he broke like to ignore that he broke laws, you mean. Snowden disclosed nothing illegal, just things that some people wish that were illegal.
 
cpwill said:
Snowden releases information damaging US-European relationships when doing so makes it harder for them to respond in a coordinated manner to major moves on the part of Russia. Given that he is effectively being run at this point by Putin's administration, that is not a coincidence.

That's just on the OSINT side. On the high-side, I'm sure that the FBS and GRU are loving the data he brought them.
Click to expand...

1: Relations were already damaged. Remember Bush? Obama hasn't exactly fixed that ya know.
2: Leaking that information did not stop the ability of the NSA to still collect data. Its not like anyone in this day and age can stop using telephones, computers etc etc. Even in Russia.
3: Russia has never really been "friendly" towards the US anyways.
4: Snowden probably wouldn't have given Russia any info (if he even did) if the US government hadn't hemmed him in Russia. Snowden probably wouldn't have even fled if he hadn't been so sure that the government would go after him for informing the public of the NSAs wrongdoings. Why was he so sure? Look at the governments past history of going after anyone and everyone that exposed their wrong doings and you will have your answer.
 
OldWorldOrder said:
....Er...all the people that really disagree with the laws that he broke like to ignore that he broke laws, you mean. Snowden disclosed nothing illegal, just things that some people wish that were illegal.
Click to expand...

Except that what the NSA did WAS and IS illegal. Violating some ones Right to Privacy is a violation of Constitutional Law. And no jury rigged, fake "court" can change that fact.
 
Kal'Stang said:
Except that what the NSA did WAS and IS illegal.
Click to expand...

According to people that are much more versed in American law than you- and in an actual legal position to make such rulings- no.

Sorry you don't like the ruling. Write a letter or something.
 
Kal'Stang said:
1: Relations were already damaged. Remember Bush? Obama hasn't exactly fixed that ya know.
Click to expand...

That is dumb. Saying that relations have had problems in the past does not mean that new problems are not problems in the present or future.

2: Leaking that information did not stop the ability of the NSA to still collect data. Its not like anyone in this day and age can stop using telephones, computers etc etc. Even in Russia.
Click to expand...

In fact it did, because people change the way they act in order to avoid collection. That's why means methods and capabilities are such closely held secrets.

3: Russia has never really been "friendly" towards the US anyways.
Click to expand...

Which is precisely why Snowden taking them all that data and then helping them achieve their geopolitical goals is so disastrous.

4: Snowden probably wouldn't have given Russia any info (if he even did) if the US government hadn't hemmed him in Russia. Snowden probably wouldn't have even fled if he hadn't been so sure that the government would go after him for informing the public of the NSAs wrongdoings. Why was he so sure? Look at the governments past history of going after anyone and everyone that exposed their wrong doings and you will have your answer.
Click to expand...

Snowden chose to go to Russia. The Government has a strong history of putting people who commit espionage on trial, where Snowden would have had all the advantages to demonstrate that he was not guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt. He chose not to avail himself of that opportunity, rather demonstrating what he thought of his likelihood of being able to pull that off was.
 
Kal'Stang said:
Except that what the NSA did WAS and IS illegal. Violating some ones Right to Privacy is a violation of Constitutional Law. And no jury rigged, fake "court" can change that fact.
Click to expand...

You are free to disagree with SCOTUS if you like (I do on plenty of things), but under our system of government they are the arbiter.
 
Redress said:
Two separate things.

1: NSA spying

2: Snowden spying

The problem so many have is that they cannot think of them as two separate things. To use a historical example: Benedict Arnold had some pretty good reasons for being pissed off at the revolutionary army and continental congress. This does not excuse his turning coat.
Click to expand...

But without Snowden spying and releasing the information we wouldn't know about the extent of the illegality that has been occurring. Snowden revealed the level of Big Brother that's going on. That alone is commendable.
 
obvious Child said:
we wouldn't know about the extent of the illegality that has been occurring.
Click to expand...

Again, it seems like many people on this site have an inability to discern what is illegal and what they wish were.

This isn't nitpicking: this is the biggest part of this issue.
 
obvious Child said:
But without Snowden spying and releasing the information we wouldn't know about the extent of the illegality that has been occurring. Snowden revealed the level of Big Brother that's going on. That alone is commendable.
Click to expand...

Which directly impulsed Sensenbrenner to move thru a bill (AFA) with bi-partisan support for comprehensive reforms to the NSA. Besides federal judges, retired judges, law professors, constitutional lawyers and many more all find the NSA domestic spying reprehensible, but a direct violation of our fourth amendment.
 
OldWorldOrder said:
According to people that are much more versed in American law than you- and in an actual legal position to make such rulings- no.

Sorry you don't like the ruling. Write a letter or something.
Click to expand...

It doesn't take a rocket scientist or constitutional scholar or a lawyer to know that mass collection of private data without probably cause against millions of completely innocent people is against our Right to Privacy.
 
cpwill said:
That is dumb. Saying that relations have had problems in the past does not mean that new problems are not problems in the present or future.
Click to expand...

The same could be said of blaming Snowden for Russia's current "hostility" towards the US.

cpwill said:
In fact it did, because people change the way they act in order to avoid collection. That's why means methods and capabilities are such closely held secrets.
Click to expand...

So Russia now uses nothing but paper and couriers in all that they do now? Including making calls outside of Russia? Puhleeze. :roll:

cpwill said:
Which is precisely why Snowden taking them all that data and then helping them achieve their geopolitical goals is so disastrous.
Click to expand...

He never meant to stay in Russia. IE: He never meant to give them anything. It was being hemmed in by the US that forced his hand in that.

cpwill said:
Snowden chose to go to Russia.
Click to expand...

Actually Snowden was just passing through Russia. Remember, he couldn't even leave the airport for quite awhile because Russia didn't even want him at first.

cpwill said:
The Government has a strong history of putting people who commit espionage on trial, where Snowden would have had all the advantages to demonstrate that he was not guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt. He chose not to avail himself of that opportunity, rather demonstrating what he thought of his likelihood of being able to pull that off was.
Click to expand...

Oh yeah, I'm sure that they would have given him a fair trial huh? Tell me, where is Jullian Assaunge currently? Why is he hiding from the US Government again? Someone who isn't even a citizen and yet they want to charge him with Treason and all other kinds of federal criminal charges. Despite the fact that it is well known that journalists (and whether you like it or not he IS one) has known protections for "leaking" government info.
 
cpwill said:
You are free to disagree with SCOTUS if you like (I do on plenty of things), but under our system of government they are the arbiter.
Click to expand...

Except that it wasn't SCOTUS that passed out the "warrants" that "allowed" the NSA to do what they did. It was a FISA court. A Monkey Court that has absolutely NO oversight or accountability and everything that they do is hidden.
 
Kal'Stang said:
Except that it wasn't SCOTUS that passed out the "warrants" that "allowed" the NSA to do what they did. It was a FISA court. A Monkey Court that has absolutely NO oversight or accountability and everything that they do is hidden.
Click to expand...

And, its a rubber stamp court that gives out 99.7% of requests!
 
OldWorldOrder said:
According to people that are much more versed in American law than you- and in an actual legal position to make such rulings- no.

Sorry you don't like the ruling. Write a letter or something.
Click to expand...

cpwill said:
You are free to disagree with SCOTUS if you like (I do on plenty of things), but under our system of government they are the arbiter.
Click to expand...

Do you both agree that the ruling handed down in Plessy v. Ferguson was just fine for the 58 years it existed? I mean, it was the law after all...

I'll also remind you that the Fourth Amendment requires narrow and specific oversight for searches and seizures:

FISA Court Appears To Be Rubber Stamp For Government Requests : NPR
 
Kal'Stang said:
It doesn't take a rocket scientist or constitutional scholar or a lawyer to know that mass collection of private data without probably cause against millions of completely innocent people is against our Right to Privacy.
Click to expand...

This doesn't really comport with reality, though.
 
Kal'Stang said:
Except that it wasn't SCOTUS that passed out the "warrants" that "allowed" the NSA to do what they did. It was a FISA court.
Click to expand...

That is incorrect. Since the claim that the FISA court ruling allowing the collection of metadata in the form of point-to-point transmission records is a violation of the 4th Amendment, it's adherents have to deal with the fact that SCOTUS already dealt with that exact same data base, and ruled that it did not fall under 4th Amendment protection. The FISA court derived its' ruling from SCOTUS direction.

A Monkey Court that has absolutely NO oversight or accountability and everything that they do is hidden.
Click to expand...

:shrug: you can call it whatever epithet you like. Announcing to Mullah Omar McJihad that we intend to watch your gmail account from now on because we know that is where you are planning your CONUS-based attacks is amazingly stupid CT practice, which is why no administration of either party no matter what their personal inclinations or backgrounds will do it.
 
Gonzo Rodeo said:
Do you both agree that the ruling handed down in Plessy v. Ferguson was just fine for the 58 years it existed? I mean, it was the law after all...
Click to expand...

No- it was absolutely not "fine". However, it was the law. The alternative is to overthrow the system of rule of law and replace it with a system of rule of man - which history has demonstrated to be far more likely to lead to abuse. Ask yourself if you want a President Obama or a President Ted Cruz to be the one deciding what is and is not legal on any given day.
 
j-mac said:
What a putz this guy is....I hope when he is caught he spends the rest of his natural life behind bars.
Click to expand...

I hope he is pardoned and made a national hero. the only ones who should spend the rest of their lives behind bars are the traitorous rats in the NSA spying on Americans and elected officials who continue to allow the NSA to spy on Americans.
 
This is my first post. So, hello to all. :2wave:
As for Mr. Snowden. I would have to say the word "traitor" comes to mind. While the NSA may have been up to some no good, there are options available to a true "whistleblower" other than running off to our two biggest "rivals/enemies" seeking refuge giving up only he knows what information. I believe he should be captured, tried and judged accordingly.
This Hero Worship of him in my mind is not only silly, but downright scary. It worries me that so many citizens find this country so, well, disgusting? Not really sure what word to use there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom