6 ms·

Why change the subject constantly? I was responding to- ask the average person who Snowden is And I told you who Snowden is. A coward, and a traitor to his fo

Why change the subject constantly? I was responding to- ask the average person who Snowden is And I told you who Snowden is. A coward, and a traitor to his former nation and people. He's easily exposed by looking at his actions. I have no position stated here on your various rabbit holes of whistleblower vs espionage, etc. I'm not a Constitutional scholar as you believe you are. What I can assure you, the ACLU and others would be more in front of abuse of power than you or some nerd here could ever pretend to be. Should he return "home" to show his courage, to follow through in his beliefs like actual national heroes have done throughout history. He harmed US and UK national security. He won't admit it (why would he, he won't even face justice in the "nation he loves") but they believe he handed over his harmful material to the Russians and Chinese for their protection. The guy is a Benedict Arnold, a scumbag, no matter how you slice it. Just because you like part of the information he exposed on surveillance doesn't change the rest, nor what the whole of his actions have revealed about his intentions and character. You've been duped by a false prophet.

user3939382 4y ago
> ask the average person who Snowden is It's not changing the subject. The point of that statement was that most people are completely unaware of these issues. People shouldn't know who Snowden is because of his personality they should know him because of the information he revealed. You seem obsessed with him as a person for some reason. > I'm not a Constitutional scholar You don't have to be a constitutional scholar to understand that recording everything everyone is saying all the time is a violation of the 4th amendment. By your logic, only scholars are able to have legitimate opinions on the crimes of the government, no matter how plain and obvious they are. It's a good thing your philosophy wasn't held by the millions of people whose pressure and marches got the 13th amendment passed, almost none of them constitutional scholars. > the ACLU and others would be more in front of abuse of power than you They are in front, apparently you don't realize that the security state is more powerful than the ACLU. They've constructed secret courts (FISA) with secret laws written with words with secret interpretations, all designed to make these criminal programs legally impenetrable. The EFF has been suing over these problems for years, and took several years to even get a court to recognize its standing. > you or some nerd here could ever pretend to be And what is the point of this derogatory disrespectful statement? That because the ACLU exists, technologists that understand the mechanics of these abuses better than anyone should shut up and leave it the "scholars"? > He harmed US and UK national security... they believe he handed over his harmful material to the Russians and Chinese He handed over his evidence of US crimes to journalists who published it. If his goal was to hand over secrets to foreign governments he wouldn't have had it published in the news. Your evidence-free conspiracy theory isn't logical. > Just because you like part of the information he exposed Like it? He exposed some of the most heinous crimes of the US govt, who would like it? You apparently have no problem with these programs, which have already chilled free speech and protest against the government, because (I guess?) you're not "a scholar" and therefore unable to recognize crime when it's in your face, and because the citizens shouldn't be concerned about being the victims of crime or standing up for ourselves because the ACLU exists (???) The points you're making are increasingly illogical. > You've been duped Duped by black and white evidence that even the government concedes was real? How does that work?
- BuckRogers 4y ago
  You missed the point. I'm not qualifying the information released, I'm qualifying his treason. I'm not commenting on the constitutionality of mass surveillance. He went about it the wrong way, then ran like a coward and hid like chicken little. Of course Snowden isn't going to admit he handed over intel to the Russians or Chinese, but it's most likely he did. Hence he's safe from justice today, right. Believe more in your hero though. I like my heroes to have an ounce of manhood and bravery like Russia's Navalny. Edward wouldn't have 1/1000th the struggle that man has faced. We could poison him, give him cancer, anything. He's not safe. He's just blessed to have been a traitor of America, rather than a totalitarian society like the one he resides in now. And yes, I do consider the ACLU more qualified to handle any potential US gov't abuses of Snowden. There won't be any. He's just a traitor and a coward in hiding. Hiding behind the same cheap rhetoric here about "unfairness". Yet he trusts the Russian system. You can't make this stuff up. But here you are.
  - user3939382 4y ago
    > He went about it the wrong way If you wouldn't mind, please explain the right way. He went to his superiors first, was told to shut up and go back to work. Even when he released the black and white evidence, James Clapper stood in front of Congress and lied about the programs under oath. > ran like a coward and hid Not before, but after you're in his shoes, where you have US intelligence trying to figure out how to rendition you to a CIA blacksite and have you unpersoned and murdered, you can judge his wish to stay alive. If he was a coward, he would have ignored the crimes the government was paying him to participate in like all the other people he worked with at the NSA. > it's most likely he did I'd argue the opposite. If his goal was to ferret intelligence to foreign countries he wouldn't have released anything to the press, the two actions are completely at odds. > I like my heroes to have an ounce of manhood and bravery He risked his life, and gave up everything he had, to expose these crimes to try and help his countrymen. That's enough manhood and bravery for me. > I do consider the ACLU more qualified to handle any potential US gov't abuses of Snowden The government is abusing Snowden without help from the ACLU right this moment by seeking his prosecution. You seem to have a very mistaken impression of the power of the ACLU. > He's just a traitor He literally did nothing to justify that label. The only traitors in this story are the people working for the NSA participating in these crimes against the American people. > Yet he trusts the Russian system. You can't make this stuff up. But here you are. You have strong opinions yet are uninformed. Snowden is in Russia because that's where he was during a flight layover at the moment the US State Department canceled his passport making it impossible for him to leave the country. If you're so angry he's in Russia (why would you care?) you can thank the US State Department.

user3939382 4y ago

> ask the average person who Snowden is It's not changing the subject. The point of that statement was that most people are completely unaware of these issues. People shouldn't know who Snowden is because of his personality they should know him because of the information he revealed. You seem obsessed with him as a person for some reason. > I'm not a Constitutional scholar You don't have to be a constitutional scholar to understand that recording everything everyone is saying all the time is a violation of the 4th amendment. By your logic, only scholars are able to have legitimate opinions on the crimes of the government, no matter how plain and obvious they are. It's a good thing your philosophy wasn't held by the millions of people whose pressure and marches got the 13th amendment passed, almost none of them constitutional scholars. > the ACLU and others would be more in front of abuse of power than you They are in front, apparently you don't realize that the security state is more powerful than the ACLU. They've constructed secret courts (FISA) with secret laws written with words with secret interpretations, all designed to make these criminal programs legally impenetrable. The EFF has been suing over these problems for years, and took several years to even get a court to recognize its standing. > you or some nerd here could ever pretend to be And what is the point of this derogatory disrespectful statement? That because the ACLU exists, technologists that understand the mechanics of these abuses better than anyone should shut up and leave it the "scholars"? > He harmed US and UK national security... they believe he handed over his harmful material to the Russians and Chinese He handed over his evidence of US crimes to journalists who published it. If his goal was to hand over secrets to foreign governments he wouldn't have had it published in the news. Your evidence-free conspiracy theory isn't logical. > Just because you like part of the information he exposed Like it? He exposed some of the most heinous crimes of the US govt, who would like it? You apparently have no problem with these programs, which have already chilled free speech and protest against the government, because (I guess?) you're not "a scholar" and therefore unable to recognize crime when it's in your face, and because the citizens shouldn't be concerned about being the victims of crime or standing up for ourselves because the ACLU exists (???) The points you're making are increasingly illogical. > You've been duped Duped by black and white evidence that even the government concedes was real? How does that work?

BuckRogers 4y ago
You missed the point. I'm not qualifying the information released, I'm qualifying his treason. I'm not commenting on the constitutionality of mass surveillance. He went about it the wrong way, then ran like a coward and hid like chicken little. Of course Snowden isn't going to admit he handed over intel to the Russians or Chinese, but it's most likely he did. Hence he's safe from justice today, right. Believe more in your hero though. I like my heroes to have an ounce of manhood and bravery like Russia's Navalny. Edward wouldn't have 1/1000th the struggle that man has faced. We could poison him, give him cancer, anything. He's not safe. He's just blessed to have been a traitor of America, rather than a totalitarian society like the one he resides in now. And yes, I do consider the ACLU more qualified to handle any potential US gov't abuses of Snowden. There won't be any. He's just a traitor and a coward in hiding. Hiding behind the same cheap rhetoric here about "unfairness". Yet he trusts the Russian system. You can't make this stuff up. But here you are.
- user3939382 4y ago
  > He went about it the wrong way If you wouldn't mind, please explain the right way. He went to his superiors first, was told to shut up and go back to work. Even when he released the black and white evidence, James Clapper stood in front of Congress and lied about the programs under oath. > ran like a coward and hid Not before, but after you're in his shoes, where you have US intelligence trying to figure out how to rendition you to a CIA blacksite and have you unpersoned and murdered, you can judge his wish to stay alive. If he was a coward, he would have ignored the crimes the government was paying him to participate in like all the other people he worked with at the NSA. > it's most likely he did I'd argue the opposite. If his goal was to ferret intelligence to foreign countries he wouldn't have released anything to the press, the two actions are completely at odds. > I like my heroes to have an ounce of manhood and bravery He risked his life, and gave up everything he had, to expose these crimes to try and help his countrymen. That's enough manhood and bravery for me. > I do consider the ACLU more qualified to handle any potential US gov't abuses of Snowden The government is abusing Snowden without help from the ACLU right this moment by seeking his prosecution. You seem to have a very mistaken impression of the power of the ACLU. > He's just a traitor He literally did nothing to justify that label. The only traitors in this story are the people working for the NSA participating in these crimes against the American people. > Yet he trusts the Russian system. You can't make this stuff up. But here you are. You have strong opinions yet are uninformed. Snowden is in Russia because that's where he was during a flight layover at the moment the US State Department canceled his passport making it impossible for him to leave the country. If you're so angry he's in Russia (why would you care?) you can thank the US State Department.