Does your definition of “obey the Constitution” include “infringe the Fourth Amendment rights of 320 million citizens”? Mine doesn’t. Potayto potahto, right?
I’m not getting into this discussion. I just came to say that according to an item in today’s news he looked all over the FBI, CIA, and military files and found no evidence that aliens have contacted us.
Well that’s disappointing. Did he think to look for Elvis at all ?
The programs Snowden compromised did not infringe a single person’s 4th Amendment rights.
The 4th amendment protects us from warrentless wiretaps and other types of surveillance. The biggest thing to come out of the Snowden mess was blowing the whistle on the government doing exactly that.
I’m used to it.
Collecting metadata is not a “warrantless wiretap”, and moreover a warrant is still required to actually look at the collected data.
Not that an innocent person has any reason to worry about their metadata being looked at.
It’s my understanding that he was a low-level underling, working for a company contracted by the US Government, to deal with this information.
How much do you want to bet the contract spelled out in detail the sensitive nature of the information, and demanded that nothing be released to any non-authorized individuals?
Snowdon’s paylevel did not provide him the freedom to make judgments about the information. If he was never informed of the penalties for violating the restrictions, that still does not absolve him of his actions.
For all intents and purposes, he has the appearance of a little guy trying to make himself look important.
Little people who sneak sensitive information out of the workplace are called “spies,” and should be dealt with accordingly.
~VOW
How much money do you have to make to exercise moral or ethical judgement?
Riiight. I wonder what Freud would say about your cigar, my dude. Tell us about your mother. This is a safe space.
(It’s really not)
Is it your opinion that the government shouldn’t be allowed to classify anything? Or that any employee of an organization that keeps secrets should have the unilateral authority to decide what is and isn’t secret?
To put it another way, does the cashier at KFC have the right to tell the world about the elven herbs and spices?
If not, then you must acknowledge that certain decisions about what should or shouldn’t be known can only be decided by certain people within the organization.
Metadata is real, useful, personal data! It’s not some sort of imaginary type of “other” data.
Metadata is collected by companies on the Net all the time who turn it into real data that is amazingly personal.
To try and put metadata in a separate container is ignoring at a grand level how much private info on a person a large collection of metadata contains.
That is correct. Were you listening when they told us they were going to collect metadata on everybody in the country? Or did at the time you think metadata meant something besides all the data they could find?
We were told they were going to do this. If you didn’t listen that’s your fault.
And anyone with common sense knows there would be abuse of that data. If you didn’t know that it’s your fault also.