Not really considering we are sadly in a quasi war with terrorist groups and just completed an actual war and may feel the need to help the UN intervene in many other areas where terrorist groups threat world stability and general peace, you know, like ISIS.
Snowden is a traitor, but that does not mean you are wrong to sympathize with him. But he is still traitor, I can’t support his actions but I can at least understand those that do.
Silly.
I don’t think he’s a hero or a traitor. He comes across as a not terribly bright guy who refuses to fix his glasses. More seriously, he fucked himself over for no good reason. He could have accomplished his goals without becoming a fugitive.
His acolytes, though. Gah, what bunch of naive and tiresome boneheads.
No.
Next stupid attempt to evade the issue…?
An interesting article about the program but at most it only has small relevance to the options available or not available to Snowden to address the issue. Binney, in fact, demonstrates another way.
Snowden’s whole point was that, no, actually, we hadn’t. He exposed a violation of US law.
No, he was not, and neither were you.
/Begin stereotyping
I wonder if Americans, more so than other countries, like their heroes to be unambiguously good guys. Snowdon broke the law to deliver a bunch of documents which, whilst confirming a lot of what was suspected about US government spying, didn’t contain a smoking gun of government evil.
Certainly he didn’t reveal anything that created a personalised bad guy for people to hate instead. If there was a bad guy, he’d be a good guy. No bad guy? Well, here’s this somewhat inept contractor who broke some laws, revealed some murky but hard to understand secrets, and went to Russia. How do we classify him? Good guy or bad guy?
He’s not wearing a uniform, and the people in uniforms are saying he’s a bad guy. Must be a bad guy then.
/End stereotyping
He handed over classified national security information to our enemies.
No more so than to Americans and their allies.
He may have exposed things you don’t agree with, but I can’t think of anything he’s revealed that actually broke a law. If anything, his main point are that laws are too deferential to the government. What law are you thinking of?
Do people in the US still really think in terms of “enemies”?
The word itself sounds pretty odd.
When you view the world in simplistic terms and inapt analogies, “friends” and “enemies” is all you can really understand.
Er, no. What he demonstrates is that “going through the system” doesn’t work, and that calls to do so are simply attempts to make the issue go away without addressing it, a la Mitt Romney’s “quiet rooms”.
Is it OK to give the bomb schematics to the Nazis because you also gave them to New Zealand?
Again, let’s be factual here. Whether Snowden ever tried to “go through the system” is highly doubtful. link.
Do yourself and everyone else a big favour and stop trying to use analogies. You suck at them. Either give factual examples of demostrable harm done to a single American as a result of Snowden revealing NSA’s programs or stop with the histrionics.
The Supreme Court has ruled that no American has been able to demonstrate that the NSA’s programs have harmed them in any way. So, there’s that.
Revealing classified programs is inherently harmful to all Americans.
Is it OK to give the bomb schematics to the Nazis because you also gave them to New Zealand?