You were anti-Snowden before, krellin? That seems off for you.

Chaqa - I didn't have much of an opinion, other than that he arguably committed treason, and it seemed there may have been another method for him to do what he did. But I now think it is naive to think he could have approached Congress or some other organization to expose what needed to be exposed.

It is clear now that the government has blatantly lied about much of who he was, what he was, and what he did. The claims of harm do to the release of his information have never been demonstrated. On and on, it seems the government is the constant liar, the bad actor.

I think Snowden broke the law....but I think he did so, and endangered his life...as a Patriot.

His interview with Brian Williams is *fascinating*, and I highly recommend watching it if you have the chance.

I plan on watching it, but I forgot it was on today. I've been a huge Snowden supporter since the get-go.

who is sowden is he knew?

I still don't trust this guy...at all.

An attention-seeking, self-important schmuck who could've expressed his views in any manner of different ways, and instead chooses to do so in such a way that just puts people off!

...But enough about krellin. ;)

I would never call Edward Snowden a patriot.

That's not to say he's a bad guy, and this is something that I'd like to think we could move past, by 2014, splitting the world into patriotic good guys and stock bad guys. That goes for everyone involved in this--Snowden, Kerry, Obama...well, Putin, we can all agree, is a bastard, but still.

The nasty little fact that the Snowden-ites either forget or else don't care about is the fact that, fair or not, Snowden's actions hurt the diplomatic standing of the United States, and at a time when that standing and ability to court allies and international opinion is more important than it has been in years (see the crises going on in Ukraine and Syria for just a sample of why US diplomatic clout vs. Russian clout is important right now.)

Perhaps no one wants to speak the seemingly-unspeakable nasty little truth of politics, so I'll be the one to do it--

There's a fine balancing act in ANY political system that wields considerable power--so you can exclude Denmark, Sweden, and other such comparatively-small model nations, THEY don't have to worry about being an economic or military superpower dealing with nuclear weapons, it's easy to be saintly and transparent politically when your nation is so paradisaical and unencumbered--and sometimes, that balancing act, like it or not, MAY involve withholding the truth.

It's morally repugnant, I'm not arguing that at all--but unfortunately, there ARE cases where there's a difference between the morally-good and politically good, and cases where the latter might be more important for the long-term preservation of the former.

What the NSA did was inexcusable, don't mistake this as a defense of THAT--I'm instead asking to you to consider whether the pros of what and HOW Snowden did what he did will, long-term, outweigh the cons.

Look at Ukraine, for example. When has US-European solidarity been more important since the fall of the Berlin Wall than right now? And instead? The US and EU can't get their act together while pro-Russian forces are effectively plunging the nation into civil war...one Putin's all too happy to see his neighbors engage in.

Could we have stronger unilateral action against them had not the fact of Chancellor Merkel's phone being tapped been revealed? Perhaps, perhaps not.

But it wouldn't hurt.

And like it or not, Snowden HAS hurt the diplomatic standing of his country, HAS hurt the United States of America in a very REAL way...and, again, for someone claiming to be so afraid for his life, he seems to have carved out quite a niche for himself as pulp hero...how many interviews and press releases is this now? I'm sorry, I'm just a bit confused, I thought the general idea of lying low in a foreign country was to...um...lie low...and NOT be an attention-seeking, interview-giving machine.

I won't here of demonizing or anointing this man--

He has hurt this nation's political influence at a time when it really does need it, and however personally you may feel betrayed by PRISM, that fact should not be ignored, because it is a real and tangible fact. Ask yourself--what is the price of this revelation done in the way it was done? In the short-term, we had outrage over PRISM...we may even get reform...but what about the long-term?

What is the long-term effect of a diplomatically-weakened US, of the ties between the US and Europe being frayed with Russia mobilizing once more and the Middle East growing more unsettled by the day (a situation which Russia has ALSO contributed towards, what with Putin's supporting Assad and stonewalling any UN action against him?)

Like it or not, it MAY have been better diplomatically and, thus, in the long-term, better for the future of not just our nation but others as well had the truth about the NSA's actions been revealed differently or, in some cases, particularly those regarding European allies, not at all, at least for the time being.

Like it or not, international politics is a game for keeps and cutthroats--not one for saints and self-proclaimed firebrands.

Hell, after all, what GAME are we all here to play (when we're not, you know, arguing about God, gun control, President Obama, whether Vergil or Virgil is the spelling one should go with...you know, the important things!)

How would a game of Diplomacy go if everyone told the truth...don't you have to lie, occasionally, to find your way to a win?

Lies are part of the deal, and frankly, anyone shocked by the fact the US government had PRISM at all should be laughed out of the building, so to speak, for being so naive and credulous in the age of the Internet. Really, were you all that shocked? Were you just completely blown away? And was the confirmation of that ever-suspected violation of privacy, egregious though it WAS, worth the US being hurt diplomatically at a time when it and the EU need to be stronger than ever...lest there be very real consequences, home and abroad?

Do you not care about those far-off long-term diplomatic consequences, so long as you can sit at home and go about your inane lives in the certainty you're not being watched...until the next, better spy program comes along, of course? (The genie's out of the bottle, people.)



The honor of being called a "patriot" in this sense should be conferred upon the few, the very, very few people who really do provide an invaluable service to their country.

Maya Angelou died yesterday.
She was a tremendous poet, the voice of millions, one of America's finest.
Was she a "patriot?
I honestly don't know.

But I sure as hell won't throw away that honor on someone as murky and circumspect as Edward Snowden...

And if he doesn't like it, he can just complain about it at his NEXT little interview.

**Applause**

In his interview with Brian Williams (which I caught half of) I was quite surprised at how reasonable of an arguement he made.
I guess I kind of expected him to come across as a wack-job anarchist and instead he used reasonable arguements to convince me that he was a reasonable person who did what he did for reasonable reasons and I had misjudged his motives.

And I am actually a person who thinks that if the NSA wants to track who I call and for how long they can knock themselves out, i just think we should all be aware of it and shouldnt be done in secret, and it should be something we as a nation discuss and decide upon.

I'd have to agree with krellin about Edward Snowden being a Patriot, but him committing treason I'm not so sure, in this country the only power given to the people in government is from the constitution, and no were in the constitution dose it give the government power to go around with our bully military and killing hundreds of thousands of people over seas, and it doesn't give them permission to spy on it's citizens, it's clear that our government is out of line, unconstitutional laws are not laws, so where in the constitution did ES commit treason by informing the American people that our government is spying on us, what if someone leaked a video where our government is killing American citizens without trial, would that be treason to? we have to determine who's doing right and who's doing wrong, did you read who the government considers could be a terrorist? it includes people who have blue jeans missing fingers veterans people who pay by cash or credit card and the list go's on just about everyone is, according to the list thy came out with, and because you could be a terrorist they can detain you as long as they want and kill you with out a trail, sure that's ok and fun and games when it's happening to other people but when it comes to you it's not.

That's a bunch of crap, obi, and I expect better from you.

To refrain from blowing a whistle because it "hurts the standing" of the one your whistling on is silliness. Any loss of face on the international level is due to the governments reaction to snowden, not to his actions. America DESERVES to have its influence degraded when it pulls suckheaded stunts like this one. If somebody did it every time, they would stop pulling suckheaded stunts.

You know what I find fascinating?

People who really believe the NSA is out of control, but who post about it on the internet.

Haha well I don't think they're "coming to disappear me" out of control. But the internet is a fine tool to share information. It's very difficult for a government to stop it, even in highly censored countries. This is only good for the people.

dyager - you are a fool to say "It's OK for the NSA to violate my constitutional protections and monitor my phone". Next step is the NSA showing up on your doorstep randomly to search your home....jusssst in case.

Any idiot that exchanges liberty for safety will soon find themselves safely and willingly confined ina police state, wondering what the fuck happened.

As for charges of treason, sure he may have commited treason, technically speaking. As did the founders of this nation when they rebelled against a corrupt government, and the Declaration of Independence *calls* for treason against a corrupt government. So I have no problem with Snowden’s treason, and think a government that is actually about the good of the American people will acknowledge the righteousness of his treason and pardon him. As it stands, all three branches of the government *have changed* their behavior in certain areas in acknowledgement of the truth of Snowden’s claims about the unconstitutional behavior of the government.

As for obi’s *idiocy* (wahhhh…I don’t like labels, blah blah blah….except when Obi-fuck is the one applying them), of course Snowden is a Patriot. He destroyed his life, he risked his personal freedom, maybe even his life, for what he saw as the overall good of the nation – not the government, but the nation and people. He didn’t damage the government, any more than a surgeon ‘damages’ a person to remove a cancer. He gave up a very comfortable job to do something he in no way had to do, but choose to do because it was right, not to benefit self, but to benefit all. That is a Patriot.

"Any loss of face on the international level is due to the governments reaction to snowden, not to his actions."

Do I deny that?
No.
Does that change my position?
NO.

Because my central position doesn't depend on WHO is at fault for losing face, Snowden or the government--

I'm simply saying that 1. Snowden's revelations (which, again, were far from original) hurt the US's diplomatic standing and that 2. We NEED that standing now more than we have before in the last 10 years.

Answer me--

Was Snowden's "revealing" what was already so apparent to everyone with half a brain (again, was anyone really and truly SHOCKED that the US government used those means to spy on them...in the Age of the Internet? Who here is that naive?) REALLY worth the price of losing precious diplomatic capital...

When the country he's NOW holed up in is arguably in the process of forming a second Soviet Union and stonewalling, destabilizing Ukraine and stonewalling UN efforts to aid Syria?

What's more important--

The principles of truth, or the practicality of international and domestic politics, wherein--to quote the great and wise Dr. House--EVERYONE LIES?

And this is what's so intolerable about the smug Snowden-ites--

You're willing to stand up for principles on the soap box of your keyboard...
Boy howdy are you ever...
But when it comes to the practicalities of international politics?
When it comes to that little fact that Snowden's revelation hurt the US and may, in turn, make it harder or even impossible for the US to give aid to Syria, to Ukraine, to millions of people who really DO need US diplomatic intervention to enjoy the basics of liberty--that is, freedom from gunpoint and civil unrest, rather than the mere freedom of being able to surf the web in your easy chair without feeling uncomfortable?

And again, answer me THIS--if that's the Utilitarian bad that comes from all this, the very real and tangible negative...what's the tangible positive?

Reform?

Are you REALLY going to tell me the US government won't simply find a BETTER way of spying on its citizens...they'll just shrug their shoulders and go home shamefaced because a pasty contractor and some schmucks on the Internet caused a ruckus and embarrassed them?

Is that what embarrassed nations do--they just give up? Never try again?

Stand on your "principles" all you like--

They don't compare to the practicalities of the long-term fallout.

"Any idiot that exchanges liberty for safety will soon find themselves safely and willingly confined ina police state, wondering what the fuck happened."

Anyone who lives in a state PERIOD has already exchanged the liberty of the State of Nature for security, krellin...

A fact Hobbes, Locke and Rousseau ALL agree on.

I'm sorry, people--

Living in a free state doesn't mean the government has to tell you everything, or even tell the TRUTH on everything...because again, like it or not, lies are sometimes a political necessity.

And anyone who thinks otherwise can play me in Diplomacy and lose by being absolutely truthful about their moves every single turn.

It's a nasty, cutthroat business, politics, so you can get indignant all you want--

Politics are based on practical realities, NOT idealistic principles...

And at the end of the day, I'd rather my country have the diplomatic standing to challenge Russian support of Assad, to have the diplomatic ties intact to challenge Russia with the EU and save Ukraine, to have the diplomatic standing to enforce those ideas of liberty where others are not so free as us to sit around and debate it in this fashion.

And Edward Snowden sold that away for a "secret" anyone with common sense already had figured out in a post-Patriot Act world.

"America DESERVES to have its influence degraded when it pulls suckheaded stunts like this one. If somebody did it every time, they would stop pulling suckheaded stunts."

1. Who are YOU to decide what "America deserves," let alone what the world deserves by way of a weakened America in the face of Putinist Russia and his allies?

2. Whether it "deserves" to have its influence degraded or not, I DARE YOU to say the world is better off in a practical way with US influence degraded vs. Russia. Tell it to the people of Homs, who've seen their city destroyed by a civil war Russia has prolonged for years now by stonewalling UN action against Assad...did the Snowden "revelation" and the US losing clout help their chances for liberty or intervention or salvation from this nightmare? Tell it to the people in Eastern Ukraine, where just today 14 were killed as pro-Russian forces shot down a chopper...do you think they benefited from frayed US-EU ties at a time when Russian and pro-Russian forces are at the doorstep and starting a civil war?

3. No. No they wouldn't. Because the Snowden leak won't stop US spying, or any spying...they'll just get better at it. And if their were revelations every time? They'd get around those too. Either you take the good with the ugly when it comes to your home government, or you live in a krellin-esque world where the government is some abstract force of Captain Planet baddies just waiting to have it out for you...in either case, you don't stand a chance, and that's the nasty little reality for you.

@ Krellin: "Any idiot that exchanges liberty for safety will soon find themselves safely and willingly confined ina police state, wondering what the fuck happened."

Interesting viewpoint. Do you oppose speed limits on public roads, then, for example?

@Krellin - Knowing what phone numbers you call is a far cry from people literally invading your home.

And honesty, whats the government going to do with that information? Know I dont call my dad as often as I should?

You privacy wackjobs are all the same. You say things like "drug sniffing dogs are a violation of my privacy cuz my smells are private", "Xray machines at airports are a violation of my privacy", "traffic cameras are one step away from the Gestapo"

You all need to learn that there are varying degrees to everything.

In either case, Snowden had a real interesting interview and should be watched by folks as it was completely reasonable.
As opposed to 90% of the people here

@Obi, to use a question from the movie Swordfish, if you could find cure for cancer, and all it took was to kill one innocent child, would you do it?

I've yet to hear a Snowden-ite answer, so let me restate that ultimate question of mine--

Compared to what we lost with the Snowden actions, and the real diplomatic damage done--and let's not beat around the bush, the damage was real, so it's not as if there was no negative in all this, there was a PROFOUND negative--tell me...

What have we gained?

The knowledge that we were being spied upon?
...Again...to whom was this "revelation" really news?
The "security" that we won't be spied upon?
...If they did it once, what makes you think they won't do so again...and better?
The moral victory of getting the truth out there?
...Was that victory for an abstract principle really worth the practical loss of diplomatic clout in the face of civil wars in Syria and Ukraine as Russia gathers strength?

Tell me...all you Snowden-ites who hail him as a patriot...

I said that to be considered as such, one had to have provided an invaluable service to one's country...

What was so invaluable--what was the value--what WAS the good, the actual good, that came from Snowden's little revelation and his subsequent career as an interview artist and cult hero?

Invaluable?
I think not...again, what about that surprised anyone? We COULD have lived without that statement, by definition, it's not invaluable...again, post-Patriot Act, if you were surprised by this, *I* am surprised by your naivete.
Valuable?
In a moral way, sure...now you have to argue that that moral victory outweighs the practical one, and again, I point to the rising death tolls in Syria and Ukraine, both of which are arguably in some way related to a weakened US diplomatic influence and a strengthened Russian one, so...by all means, make that argument, that affirming the already-obvious was worth more than that huge diplomatic blow and the actual lives now being lost because we're diplomatically at a loss with the EU...by all means, tell me revealing the obvious was worth more than human life and the sovereignty of a few nations (after all, it's not YOUR nation, so what should you care about the freedom of Syrians and Ukrainians, right? Just as long as YOU'RE free to surf the web and complain that nothing's being done about Syria and Ukraine, right?)
Are we any safer?
I don't know. Neither do you. Because if they could lie once, they could lie again (what a shock!) so your really don't KNOW if you're actually safer now, or now being watched by an even more-sophisticated spy system, now, do you?

Go ahead.

Tell me.

obi - you are an idiot. Your "if you live in a state you have already scrificed all liberty" argument is childish. You are not worth talking to, since you appear to the the logic and intellect of a 5 year old.

dyager - collecting all your phone/email/text/internet activity is *exactly* like invading your home. Would you object to them putting microphones in your home, and video cameras to record all you activity. SAME THING.

"if you could find cure for cancer, and all it took was to kill one innocent child, would you do it?"

Yes.

I'd rather be a despicable, horrible human being and, if there is one, go to Hell and save the lives of hundreds of millions rather than let those hundreds of millions die because I was too selfishly moral to save them when I could.

Killing that innocent child would be heinous and, again, Hell-worthy.

It wouldn't be a morally-right action.

But what's morally right isn't what's always practically-right, and what's practically-right is sometimes more important and, yes, more beneficial to society as a whole.

Killing another human being is reprehensible--

But not intervening in a genocide because you don't want to kill other human beings in a war to stop it is just as bad, if not worse...it's using the shield of faux principle-based morality to shield oneself from the practical realities and tough, grey-area, no-hero, no-win decisions crazies like myself like to call living in the real world.

I'd be an awful, awful person...but if it 100% guaranteed a cure for cancer, I'd kill that kid, and maybe kill myself afterward, but I'd do it to save those hundreds of millions around the world.

And I'd dare any of you not to do the same.

dyager - ‘the government can do no wrong – go ahead and watch me, I’m clean” types that trade your privacy for “safety” are fools. Your childish argument that collecting my private phone/text/email/internet activity is the equivalent to getting x-rayed at the airport demonstrates your complete lack of understanding. Nobody is forced to go to the airport, and doing so is voluntary. But it is arguably *impossible* to exist in modern society without using some form of communication devices, *all* of which are monitored – and therefore it is inescapable. Again…I guess you would be fully content with cameras in your home…after all, you are a perfect righteous citizen, correct? Fool.

"if you live in a state you have already scrificed all liberty""

And you, krellin, can't read...

"Anyone who lives in a state PERIOD has already exchanged the liberty of the State of Nature for security, krellin"

Where, there, did I say sacrifice ALL liberty, hm?

Where did Hobbes, Locke, or Rousseau say ALL liberty?

Believe it or not, it's a balancing act, it's a grey area, it's not clear-cut...

It's complex and nuanced...and maybe that's why you're having trouble with it, because it doesn't fit into your narrative of good guys and big- bad evil Obama-run governments out to getcha because you're a white Christian male who loves his guns and loves his freedom even more...

Just so long as that freedom doesn't extend so far as to giving a woman full control over what she does with her body in the bedroom or a doctor's office, of course.

Obi's pretty happy about all the Jews researched by the Nazis. After all, interesting information was gathered by expirementing on live Jews. Maybe we shoudl do it again, right Jesus Killer?

Idiot...

I've always said, you can't make a silk den out of a sow's den.

Obi, you are so deeply wrong on this that I don't even know where to begin. We'll mostly leave aside your terribly problematic utilitarian mindset, but with one question: What if the authorities believe that a powerful terrorist has vital information, and his only weakspot is love for his wife and family? Would you see them beaten or raped or killed in front of him, to make them talk? If not, why not? I mean, it makes America stronger.

But actually that's not even a good hypothetical, because you're entirely mistaken about the nature of international power. Soft power - economics, culture, society - is just as important for the USA as is strong power. America has historically been looked up to because of ideals. Admittedly our recent administrations have squandered this advantage to a great extent, but America didn't get to be free because it is rich and powerful; American became rich and powerful because it was free. Everything the US does to reject that historic role as a model for self-government and freedom is a blow to American international power.

And even that misses the real point. If the USA isn't a constitutional republic of the people, by the people, and for the people, then it's just another imperial venture, and why should anyone care if one empire replaces another? Who cares if you're being tortured and spied on and droned by the Chinese or the Russians or the Americans, if they're all amoral and unrepresentative?

The only particular loyalty anyone owes to the United States is the extent to which it adheres to universal principles of self-governance and human rights. There's not an American race or an American people, but a set of ideals embodied in a constitutional government. So long as the NSA and other government agencies violate those rights, we in turn have a lessened allegiance to the country.