Obviously not everyone agrees with me. If you don't like how I state my beliefs, don't read my posts.
You missed the point. The point was you were putting your beliefs as fact, and from that "fact", you were assessing the situation under your beliefs.
I love when people say things like, "Snowden's information about that did not come as a surprise to me or anyone who has been paying attention." Again, you are not a special snowflake.
I never claimed to be, in fact, I know there are plenty of people who knew this information beforehand. The point I'm making is that Snowden did not come out with a "revelation".
The issue here isn't surprise. Nobody except for you has said anything about being surprised.
What exactly do you think "revelation" means?
The issue of "surprise" is the ultimate self-aggrandizing strawman.
It wasn't my word, and you argued with me when I argued it with the person who used the word. *shrug*
As for the rest of your post, knowing about other programs and believing that programs like PRISM and the Verizon program existed is, again, not the same thing as knowing that PRISM and the Verizon program existed.
:lol:
Yes and knowing that baby sparrows exist and believing that baby hummingbirds exist is not the same that as knowing that baby hummingbirds exist. After all, I've never seen one. :roll:
Sure we did. We may not have known the names, but we knew what was going on. We knew the government took data from cell phone carriers. We knew the government was collecting data on Americans, was constantly requesting more data on Americans. Of course we knew that.
You ought to be more accurate and precise with your language
You ought to quit playing word games when it's apparent you were one of the ones who didn't know. Just because you didn't know didn't mean others didn't. The fact you think I'm a special snowflake because I did know says quite a bit about what you didn't know.
Really?
Under which situation is he more able to continue to talk about what he knows, to any extent he wants...a) free; or b) in captivity?
Yes, and what exactly required him to not reveal everything he knew all at one time? :lol:
Snowden could have just told everything he knew all at once. But he didn't, he wanted to drag it out for maximum affect, and likely, for his own personal glory.
I agree that snowden is a coward, but not for the reasons you offer. He's a coward because in choosing to work for the NSA in the first place, he broke his own principles . And he did it for $$.
I wouldn't say that. If he suspected the wrongdoings, working for the NSA granted him the ability to confirm his suspicions. It would be considered an investigation.
The act of revealing the spying operation, however, was honorable
While I disagree with your word "reveal", I do NOT disagree it was the honorable thing to do to take it public. But what was not honorable was running away from it.
Realistically we have to protect our interests as a nation but we can't use that as an excuse to be abusive towards citizens and allies.
It's the battle of security vs. privacy, and I don't know if those two sides can ever work together.