I certainly don’t think that at all. Why should someone who’s goal is to promote basic human rights limit that to only the rights of Americans? They’re called “human rights” because all humans are supposed to have them. Why shouldn’t Snowden be concerned with rights of all people all over the world, as opposed to merely the rights of American citizens.
That said, you claim the government hasn’t used QUANTUM to spy on American citizens. The government (and the New York Times) say this, but who in their right mind would trust the government (or the New York Times) at this point? Throughout my lifetime and long before that, the government has flagrantly lied about it’s unconstitutional violations of people’s rights: warrantless wiretapping, torture, … You name it, they lied about it.
Let’s put it this way: I would rather your life and mine are endangered a little than all of our rights are endangered a lot. Many of us believe that what the NSA is doing endangers our rights a lot. It is then reasonable to place our lives in danger somewhat to eliminate that violation
So, he was right to expose some of the methods that the US uses to spy on, say, the Chinese military because we’ve been violating their right to privacy?
That’s a really, really unique view. I wonder why it hasn’t been expressed before?
Karl Gauss suggested, in post #4, that Snowden should have removed any information relating to intelligence gathering involving foreign countries. I was explaining why I rejected that argument. Human rights don’t involve exclusively American citizens.
I find it extremely doubtful that the Chinese military, or any military, learned anything useful because of Snowden. No one has offered an iota of evidence that they did so, and I’m not convinced by the “national security threat” boogeyman. Throughout my lifetime, and especially since 9/11, the federal government has been using threats to “national security” to justify more and more power and money for itself, and less and less freedom and privacy for the rest of us. I view it all as pure hooey. The government wants money and power for its own sake, not because of “national security”.
Oh, all he did was reveal the methods we are using to protect ourselves for people bent on our destruction, no biggie. :rollseyes: He is clearly a traitor. It is my sincere hope we hunt him down, try him, and string him up.
Well, you do seem to be correct that the People’s Liberation Army and the Russian FSB haven’t put out press releases thanking Snowden for improving their counterintelligence efforts. On the other hand, if our intelligence officials said that Snowden has seriously harmed our espionage efforts, you wouldn’t believe them. I guess we’ve set up the perfect unfalsifiable issue: we probably won’t know the truth of how much damage he did for many years.
But we do get to debate why you think Vladimir Putin or Ayatollah Khameini, along with their military and intelligence apparatuses, have a right to privacy that the United States is somehow obligated to respect.
Frankly, I think it ranks among one of the most ridiculous things I’ve seen asserted (or at least implied) in Great Debates.
How about our allies and their citizens? Do they have any rights in your opinion? I’m not talking about the military here, but personal communications between civilians.
Due to my putting a sign on my lawn stating “This house is protected by X alarm system”, anyone plotting to, say, break into my home knows they need to cut my phone line first. Do you think this action made anyone in my family safer from a break-in?
No. We haven’t done anything. The CIA and NSA broke the law and said they don’t and now we don’t believe them. Little boy who cried wolf and all that. They’ve shown that they lie. Why should we believe them? If your wife keeps cheating on you and you keep catching her and everytime she says “no I’m not. You’re damaging our relationship,” who’s wrong in that scenario?
Good to know that my life and the lives of thousands of others are less important than your vague need to feel assured that the government can’t see the pictures of your family vacation you emailed to grandma.
I don’t believe any of my rights have been violated by the NSA.
Its a waste of resources to spy on foreign people who have no information useful to the security or interests of the United States; but no, they have no privacy rights. That is the law, and I think it’s reasonable.
When I brought up the issue of spying on the Chinese military, it sure didn’t sound to me like you took issue with me asking whether we were violating their privacy. You simply said that the Chinese probably know we’re spying on them already, a rather silly statement since every country knows every other country is spying on them; the issue is how they are being spied upon.
So why don’t you explain which foreigners have privacy “rights” and which don’t? If you think Putin has a privacy right, just say it, or say he doesn’t. And where are these “rights” to be free from espionage written down, exactly? I would like to see the text of this supposed right you’re referring to.
Yanno, I realize you’re trying to make a rhetorical point here, but come on. Dismissing the other side so cavalierly is hardly going to get your point across.
You get that there’s a balancing act here, right? On the one side are principles of privacy, freedom from government intrusion, and governmental transparency (among others), and on the other the cost of those principles. You believe the latter outweighs the former; other believe differently. For you to crap on those principles simply because you do not weigh them as heavily is pretty foolish.