• 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!

Is Snowden a traitor?

Read article ... Do you agree he is a traitor or disagree?


  • Total voters
    81
Sorry, unlike you, I won't heroize someone who renders aid to countries antagonistic to the US.

Unlike you I won't heronize those who wiped their fecal covered asses with the Constitution under the guise of security.
 
You were in the military. How do you feel about this guy exposing the programs that we used to anticipate Taliban movement and planning efforts, thus making it probable that more of your brothers and sisters will die?

You were in the military what does the couple of lines in you oath of enlistment say?


"I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic;"
 
I'm kind of in the middle on this, because nothing he did is really going to stop the Intelligence community from using technology to spy on whomever they choose. Now if there were evidence that the government were snatching US citizens out of the public for secret trials based on this surveillance, then it would be a different story.

It can be argued he went about it the wrong way and broke laws, but could he have done it any different and been effective?

He also said a couple things in his defense that are somewhat plausible.

He said he believed in the principle declared at Nuremberg in 1945: "Individuals have international duties which transcend the national obligations of obedience. Therefore individual citizens have the duty to violate domestic laws to prevent crimes against peace and humanity from occurring." Of course this was in reference to the soldiers involved in the Holocaust.

And also, "I didn't want to change society," but "wanted to give society a chance to determine if it should change itself."

Which too me he gained very little and actually lost on a personal level, and probably thought he was not being loyal to his government but was to his country. So, Catch 22 for him and harm to the intelligence gathering? I get the feeling, besides 'super hush-hush stuff', there's little China and Russia don't know about us.
 
You were in the military what does the couple of lines in you oath of enlistment say?


"I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic;"

That's right it does. I can't help but notice you didn't answer the question. Why did your little "hero" feel the need to put your brothers lives in danger? What provision of the Constitution protects the Taliban from SIGINT collection?
 
I know this may seem old news yet more is being released and a recent conversation with a friend does not view him this way.

I followed this story lightly and would like to dig more and hear your thoughts.

Here is an article that sums up my perspective so far. What do you think?

Yes, Edward Snowden Is a Traitor | The Diplomat

There can be no question about his being a traitor. Of course he is. He did a lot of damage and could have taken other measures that would have been less harmful. He should be wanted and 10 Millionen to anyone who delivers him.
 
I'm kind of in the middle on this, because nothing he did is really going to stop the Intelligence community from using technology to spy on whomever they choose.

Actually it does. All our SIGINT methods and technology have been "burned". It's back to square one. In the meantime, Russia now has proven that it has the ability to achieve
strategic surprise against the United States, meaning that probably many other entities can as well. Because our collection is now useless.


What Snowden did wasn't like publishing the name of the one agent who kills an American citizen. What he did was the equivalent of publishing the actual name of every single American agent out there in order to also publish the name of one agent who kills an American citizen.


He also said a couple things in his defense that are somewhat plausible.

He said he believed in the principle declared at Nuremberg in 1945: "Individuals have international duties which transcend the national obligations of obedience. Therefore individual citizens have the duty to violate domestic laws to prevent crimes against peace and humanity from occurring." Of course this was in reference to the soldiers involved in the Holocaust.

that's nice. I myself think that society would be better off and more moral without all those abortions. I am therefore morally correct in blowing up abortion clinics full of people, right?

OR, we can have Rule of Law in place of anarchy where every man feels the right to impose his beliefs over others.
 
Unlike you I won't heronize those who wiped their fecal covered asses with the Constitution under the guise of security.

He did horrendous damage to the USA that has increased the costs of doing business and the effectiveness of American policy. It was unnecessary, as the man could have gone another way.
 
Actually it does. All our SIGINT methods and technology have been "burned". It's back to square one. In the meantime, Russia now has proven that it has the ability to achieve
strategic surprise against the United States, meaning that probably many other entities can as well. Because our collection is now useless.


What Snowden did wasn't like publishing the name of the one agent who kills an American citizen. What he did was the equivalent of publishing the actual name of every single American agent out there in order to also publish the name of one agent who kills an American citizen.

You don't know that, unless Mike Rogers gave you clearance.




that's nice. I myself think that society would be better off and more moral without all those abortions. I am therefore morally correct in blowing up abortion clinics full of people, right?

OR, we can have Rule of Law in place of anarchy where every man feels the right to impose his beliefs over others.

You have a duty and obligation to follow your own conscience, if you don't then you're wrong.
 
To me the question is irrelevant. He is a criminal, and should be treated as such. He, based on what we know(and as always this is somewhat subject to revision if new facts come in), broke some very specific laws and should be prosecuted for such if we can ever get him in our custody. Whether you want to call him a traitor or not does not really matter, at least to me, but our laws do matter.

Nonsense...there are TONS of ridiculous laws.

So, by your standard, 'blacks' that went against racist laws in history were nothing more then law breakers and criminals. Same with women and other minorities. The same with Jews in Nazi Germany and on and on.

Anyone tha blindly follows EVERY law - regardless of it's morality - is a spineless, government-brainwashed minion in my book. I only follow the laws that I feel are just (or are not worth the hassle for breaking them).

Snowden appears to have broken the laws of America for the greater good.

Sure, he broke the law...but he made the world a noticeably better place for it...even if most of the spineless minions of the world are too blind to see it.

He is a hero and I hope others in similar positions have the courage to do EXACTLY what he did...again and again.


And those of you 'government brainwashed minions' disagree with me...guess how much I care?

When you take your blinders off and grow spines (on this issue) then I might spend time debating it with you.
But with closed-minded, faceless nobodies who obey laws no matter how harmful they are...PASS...I have more important things to do...like organize my sock drawer (in other words, everything else is more important).

On this subject; you are wrong, I am right...and if you are too blind to see it...tough.
 
Last edited:
You don't know that, unless Mike Rogers gave you clearance.

Russia achieved strategic surprise in pushing into Crimea. This isn't exactly a secret.

Here’s just a partial list of Snowden’s leaks that have little or nothing to do with domestic surveillance of Americans:

The classified portions of the U.S. intelligence budget, detailing how much we spend and where on efforts to spy on terror groups and foreign states, doesn’t deal with Americans’ privacy. This leak revealed the intelligence community’s self-assessment in 50 major areas of counterterrorism, and that “blank spots include questions about the security of Pakistan’s nuclear components when they are being transported, the capabilities of China’s next-generation fighter aircraft, and how Russia’s government leaders are likely to respond to ‘potentially destabilizing events in Moscow, such as large protests and terrorist attacks.’” The Pakistani, Chinese, and Russian intelligence agencies surely appreciate the status report.

Our cyber-warfare capabilities and targets don’t deal with Americans’ privacy. The revelation that the U.S. launched 231 cyber-attacks against “top-priority targets, which former officials say includes adversaries such as Iran, Russia, China and North Korea and activities such as nuclear proliferation” in 2011 has nothing to do with Americans’ privacy.

The extent and methods of our spying on China have nothing to do with Americans’ privacy.

British surveillance of South African and Turkish diplomats has nothing to do with Americans’ privacy.

The NSA’s successful interceptions of communications of Russian President Dimitri Medvedev has nothing to do with Americans’ privacy. This is not a scandal; it is literally the NSA’s job, and now the Russians have a better idea of what messages were intercepted and when.

Revealing NSA intercepts and CIA stations in Latin America — again, nothing to do with U.S. citizens.

Revealing a U.K. secret internet-monitoring station in the Middle East — nothing to do with U.S. citizens.

The extent and range of NSA communications monitoring in India. . . .

The fact that the United States has “ramped up its surveillance of Pakistan’s nuclear arms,” has “previously undisclosed concerns about biological and chemical sites there,” and details of “efforts to assess the loyalties of counterterrorism sources recruited by the CIA” . . .

The U.S.’s spying on Al-Jazeera’s internal communication system. . . .

What we know about al-Qaeda efforts to hack our drones. . . .

The NSA’s ability to intercept the e-mail of al-Qaeda operative Hassan Ghul. . . .

The NSA’s ability to read the e-mail of the Mexican president. . . .

The U.S.’s electronic intercepts of communications to French consulates and embassies in New York and Washington. . . .

The existence of NSA surveillance teams in 80 U.S. embassies around the globe . . .

NSA’s spying on OPEC . . .

NSA’s collecting data on the porn habits of Muslim extremist leaders in order to discredit them . . .

. . . none of these stories have much of a tie to Americans’ privacy....​

You have a duty and obligation to follow your own conscience, if you don't then you're wrong.

If so, then you also have a duty and and obligation to withstand the consequences of your actions when you choose the path of civil disobedience. You can't write the Letter until you are willing to go to the Birmingham Jail. For Snowden to offer up the defense that he felt morally obligated to engage in treason does not make him any less a traitor, and that he wasn't willing to actually go through with the hard, icky part indicates he's a bit more about himself.
 
Nonsense...there are TONS of ridiculous laws.

So, by your standard, 'blacks' that went against racist laws in history were nothing more then law breakers and criminals. Same with women and other minorities. The same with Jews in Nazi Germany and on and on.

Anyone tha blindly follows EVERY law - regardless of it's morality - is a spineless. government-brainwashed minion in my book. I only follow the laws that I feel are just (or are not worth the hassle for breaking them).

Snowden appears to have broken the laws of America for the greater good.

Sure, he broke the law...but he made the world a noticeably better place for it...even if most of the spineless minions of the world are too blind to see it.

He is a hero and I hope others in similar positions have the courage to do EXACTLY what he did...again and again.

Are you honestly trying to suggest that laws covering classified materials and espionage are ridiculous?
 
Are you honestly trying to suggest that laws covering classified materials and espionage are ridiculous?

I've seen people devolve to that argument a couple of times in the Snowden threads.
 
I've seen people devolve to that argument a couple of times in the Snowden threads.

It was the only argument in amongst the straw men that actually addressed what I said. It is a painfully stupid argument, but that is not uncommon.
 
Russia achieved strategic surprise in pushing into Crimea. This isn't exactly a secret.

Here’s just a partial list of Snowden’s leaks that have little or nothing to do with domestic surveillance of Americans:

The classified portions of the U.S. intelligence budget, detailing how much we spend and where on efforts to spy on terror groups and foreign states, doesn’t deal with Americans’ privacy. This leak revealed the intelligence community’s self-assessment in 50 major areas of counterterrorism, and that “blank spots include questions about the security of Pakistan’s nuclear components when they are being transported, the capabilities of China’s next-generation fighter aircraft, and how Russia’s government leaders are likely to respond to ‘potentially destabilizing events in Moscow, such as large protests and terrorist attacks.’” The Pakistani, Chinese, and Russian intelligence agencies surely appreciate the status report.

Our cyber-warfare capabilities and targets don’t deal with Americans’ privacy. The revelation that the U.S. launched 231 cyber-attacks against “top-priority targets, which former officials say includes adversaries such as Iran, Russia, China and North Korea and activities such as nuclear proliferation” in 2011 has nothing to do with Americans’ privacy.

The extent and methods of our spying on China have nothing to do with Americans’ privacy.

British surveillance of South African and Turkish diplomats has nothing to do with Americans’ privacy.

The NSA’s successful interceptions of communications of Russian President Dimitri Medvedev has nothing to do with Americans’ privacy. This is not a scandal; it is literally the NSA’s job, and now the Russians have a better idea of what messages were intercepted and when.

Revealing NSA intercepts and CIA stations in Latin America — again, nothing to do with U.S. citizens.

Revealing a U.K. secret internet-monitoring station in the Middle East — nothing to do with U.S. citizens.

The extent and range of NSA communications monitoring in India. . . .

The fact that the United States has “ramped up its surveillance of Pakistan’s nuclear arms,” has “previously undisclosed concerns about biological and chemical sites there,” and details of “efforts to assess the loyalties of counterterrorism sources recruited by the CIA” . . .

The U.S.’s spying on Al-Jazeera’s internal communication system. . . .

What we know about al-Qaeda efforts to hack our drones. . . .

The NSA’s ability to intercept the e-mail of al-Qaeda operative Hassan Ghul. . . .

The NSA’s ability to read the e-mail of the Mexican president. . . .

The U.S.’s electronic intercepts of communications to French consulates and embassies in New York and Washington. . . .

The existence of NSA surveillance teams in 80 U.S. embassies around the globe . . .

NSA’s spying on OPEC . . .

NSA’s collecting data on the porn habits of Muslim extremist leaders in order to discredit them . . .

. . . none of these stories have much of a tie to Americans’ privacy....​

The US military and Intelligence agencies are one big pain in the ass to other countries. We so overly dominate everyone it's obnoxious. They didn't have the right to tap our allies leaders cells.

All you're doing is re-pasting a bunch of stuff you don't even personally know is true. I said I was in the middle and that he did some things the wrong way.

We have satellites that the CIA can spot the eye color of a person when positioned. And I'm sure they use surveillance techniques that Snowden has no idea about.



If so, then you also have a duty and and obligation to withstand the consequences of your actions when you choose the path of civil disobedience. You can't write the Letter until you are willing to go to the Birmingham Jail. For Snowden to offer up the defense that he felt morally obligated to engage in treason does not make him any less a traitor, and that he wasn't willing to actually go through with the hard, icky part indicates he's a bit more about himself.

If the soldiers at the death camps in Nazi Germany had refused to gas those Jewish captives, would they have been considered national traitors? Yes, probably, but they would've been heroes to the world. It's not a great comparison but it is about following human conscience.
 
Are you honestly trying to suggest that laws covering classified materials and espionage are ridiculous?

Yes, until I SEE what these materials are and that they are clearly worthy of classification, then I am not for one minute believing the government.
As far as I am concerned, I believe NOTHING the government says...nothing. If they say something is secret, it means nothing to me until they prove it.
The only pass I will give them is on military secrets of a technological nature (or military secrets in general during wartime).


Now do you believe a 'black' in U.S. history who broke a racist law that was later deemed by the Supreme Court to be unlawful was just a criminal?

Yes or no?
 
Are you honestly trying to suggest that laws covering classified materials and espionage are ridiculous?

Are you honestly trying to suggest that laws covering classified materials and espionage which are unconstitutional, are fine with you?
 
The US military and Intelligence agencies are one big pain in the ass to other countries. We so overly dominate everyone it's obnoxious. They didn't have the right to tap our allies leaders cells.

YES THEY DO. THAT IS FULLY LEGAL AND FURTHERMORE IT"S TYPICAL. Collection on other nations is the IC's friggin job. It's why they exist in the first place.

oh. And I don't know if you missed this, but China, Russia, and Iran AREN"T OUR ALLIES.

All you're doing is re-pasting a bunch of stuff you don't even personally know is true.

It's all linked - feel free to peruse.

We have satellites that the CIA can spot the eye color of a person when positioned

That's fascinating to hear. What is the NIIRs resolution of that? Since you know so much about it....

And I'm sure they use surveillance techniques that Snowden has no idea about.

Well not from the NSA because he was an administrator meaning that that little bastard could download pretty much anything that wasn't gapped.

If the soldiers at the death camps in Nazi Germany had refused to gas those Jewish captives, would they have been considered national traitors? Yes, probably, but they would've been heroes to the world. It's not a great comparison but it is about following human conscience.

You are right, it's not a great comparison. It is in fact, a Godwin violation. But to flip it, if someone during WWII had decided to leak the Normandy invasion plans to the Germans so that it could be beaten at the beaches that would have been treason, too, regardless of whether or not they thought that Germany's ideals of racial purity were morally superior to our own.
 
Yes, until I SEE what these materials are and that they are clearly worthy of classification, then I am not for one minute believing the government.
As far as I am concerned, I believe NOTHING the government says...nothing. If they say something is secret, it means nothing to me until they prove it.
The only pass I will give them is on military secrets of a technological nature (or military secrets in general during wartime).


Now do you believe a 'black' in U.S. history who broke a racist law that was later deemed by the Supreme Court to be unlawful was just a criminal?

Yes or no?

If the government shows you the secrets, they no longer are secret.

Why do you keep trying to suggest I said things I didn't? Hint: I never used the word "just".
 
Are you honestly trying to suggest that laws covering classified materials and espionage which are unconstitutional, are fine with you?

I don't think the espionage act is unconstitutional. Maybe you could show me that SCOTUS ruling...
 
I don't think the espionage act is unconstitutional. Maybe you could show me that SCOTUS ruling...

the issue snowden stated was the government was engaged in unconstitutional activity.

can the federal government bind a federal employee with federal law, if the law is an unconstitutional law?
 
YES THEY DO. THAT IS FULLY LEGAL AND FURTHERMORE IT"S TYPICAL. Collection on other nations is the IC's friggin job. It's why they exist in the first place.

oh. And I don't know if you missed this, but China, Russia, and Iran AREN"T OUR ALLIES.



It's all linked - feel free to peruse.



That's fascinating to hear. What is the NIIRs resolution of that? Since you know so much about it....



Well not from the NSA because he was an administrator meaning that that little bastard could download pretty much anything that wasn't gapped.



You are right, it's not a great comparison. It is in fact, a Godwin violation. But to flip it, if someone during WWII had decided to leak the Normandy invasion plans to the Germans so that it could be beaten at the beaches that would have been treason, too, regardless of whether or not they thought that Germany's ideals of racial purity were morally superior to our own.



China sure sells us a lot of crap for a non-ally.

I'm sorry but you don't make a strong enough argument based on anything but assumption and biased emotional appeal for me to answer. Intelligence has a job to do in cooperation with allies, not on them without knowledge, though that is just one of those sneaky things they all know happens. I'm sorry but Snowden just didn't do anything that most of them weren't already aware of. It's really a big non event to the intel community, only to the public.

While you salute the spooks of our governments intelligence, I'll proudly recognize the higher principles our Nation stands for.
 
If the government shows you the secrets, they no longer are secret.

Why do you keep trying to suggest I said things I didn't? Hint: I never used the word "just".

I never said you did...now please answer the question.
 
Yes, until I SEE what these materials are and that they are clearly worthy of classification, then I am not for one minute believing the government.
As far as I am concerned, I believe NOTHING the government says...nothing. If they say something is secret, it means nothing to me until they prove it.
The only pass I will give them is on military secrets of a technological nature (or military secrets in general during wartime).

If they showed every secret to every U.S. citizen to determine if it should be secret, it wouldn't be secret.

Hey if you're pissed maybe you can go to a country that doesn't have ANY secrets.....oh wait.....that would be no country. I did hear there is no official government in the CENTER of ANTARCTICA, good luck to you there since you aren't happy being an AMERICAN and seems like you cheer Snowden. Maybe you and him can bunk up there.
 
the issue snowden stated was the government was engaged in unconstitutional activity.

can the federal government bind a federal employee with federal law, if the law is an unconstitutional law?

Again, you have not shown that the Espionage Act is unconstitutional.
 
Back
Top Bottom