General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsSnowden did not reveal anything "illegal"
Snowden could not produce any examples of anything "illegal" during his NBC interview.
If he revealed massive illegal activity, he would have been able to get whistleblower protection for revealing government abuse. His own lawyers recognize that he has no standing in that regard.
Snowden supporters and advisers say Clinton's remarks were unrealistic and reflect several factual misunderstandings about his predicament. They say he could not have availed himself of whistleblower protections because he was not a government employee (he worked for contractor Booz Allen) and his claims would not have been viewed as exposing any impropriety because authorities in all three branches of government had blessed the NSA telephone program as legal. A federal judge not privy to the program before the leaks later ruled it unconstitutional, but that decision is on appeal.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024871696
During the NBC interview, Snowden dug himself into a deeper hole when he admitted, in his own words, that he took damaging information and distributed it and the only thing he has as a defense is that the recipients promised not to reveal the information.
Snowden is engaging in theatrics because he shot himself in the foot and his ever-changing message is an attempt to distract from the fact that he's screwed.
If not for him, the debate wouldn't have started on information that was already out there? Maybe, but admitting to stealing damaging information, releasing it and then assuring that it isn't going to be reveal is beyond idiotic. Does he think this helps his case?
Snowden's problem is that he knows damn well he screwed up with his actions overseas. The problem for his fans is that they need to keep hyping the dramatic nature of the information related to domestic surveillance activities to create the impression that he did something other than spark a debate in the U.S. That's all he did. He sparked a debate, which will lead to reforms. His allies aren't even convinced that such reforms will happen. So what has he done?
Snowden's information was already out there. Releasing it here and remaining in the country would have sparked the same debate. Such a debate would have likely fueled his case for leniency.
His fans don't want to focus on the fact that he admitted to stealing the information that sparked the charges. He's in deep shit, not for the information on domestic activities, but for the information that he admits is out there and still, he claims, hasn't been revealed. On that score, he's not about transparency, he's trying to save his ass. The Government is building it's case on the damage that information has done.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)It is just so completely beside the point.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)"It is just so completely beside the point. "
...you think the fact that he didn't reveal anything illegal and that he admitted to stealing damaging information on NBC is "beside the point"?
I guess it is if he plans to remain in Russia, but if his goal is clemency or a plea, it is very much a relevant point.
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)Don't like what he revealed being legal, there's your answer.
And I'd join you in the effort to repeal.
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)At this point, appealing to the legality of the patriot act is an instance of Godwin's Law.
MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)Seriously?
The Patriot Act is a Nazi reference?
SERIOUSLY?
If you honestly believe what you just posted, then there can be no rational discussion with you.
The SCOTUS upheld the most controversial part of the USA PATRIOT Act. John Roberts appoints judges to the FISA court in accordance with the USA PATRIOT Act.
So in a Democratic Republic, we convince our duly elected representatives to repeal or severely curtail laws we don't like.
We do not compare these laws to the slaughter of 6 million human beings in gas chambers.
PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)
MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)You change the subject from the USA PATRIOT ACt (domestic policy) and move to the old policy of the Iraq War.
You're all over the place here. Come back when you have a coherent argument.
PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)I am responding to your claim that we are nothing like those that Godwin's law references. I then called BS by stating that an illegal war waged by this country has resulted in the deaths of 1.5 million, so we are not much different.
The other argument you reference in in another sub-thread.
MohRokTah
(15,429 posts)#1 Your claim as to the number of deaths is spurious, nearly all estimates disagree by at least a factor of ten.
#2 Deaths in wartime are not comparable to running death camps.
#3 There was a coalition of forces, so arguning illegal war is spurious at best.
PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)50. You have logical discussion disorder.
#1 Your claim as to the number of deaths is spurious, nearly all estimates disagree by at least a factor of ten.
#2 Deaths in wartime are not comparable to running death camps.
#3 There was a coalition of forces, so arguning illegal war is spurious at best.
Member since: Fri Apr 11, 2014, 08:32 PM
Number of posts: 1,227
When I saw your deleted post, I figured what you were. Now I know what you are.
Bonx
(2,051 posts)I also have a penchant for facts & reason.
PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)For jumping into convos you were not invited. There are no facts or reason to think the iraq invasion was legal.
Bonx
(2,051 posts)I don't think you understand how this forum works.
PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)Noob
Bonx
(2,051 posts)or not.
hobbit709
(41,694 posts)Was properly called the Defense of the Homeland Against Terrorism Act.
My mother, who should know, has more than once commented on the similarities in the provisions of the law.
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)we have no choice but to take your freedoms, its the law.
hobbit709
(41,694 posts)FUCK THAT SHIT!
Leme
(1,092 posts)
mattclearing
(10,091 posts)
Cha
(296,848 posts)say but he said it anyway. 
Leme
(1,092 posts)it often depends on which judge or judges rule last. Legal for a while, illegal for a while, legal for a while etc.
bullwinkle428
(20,628 posts)That, my friends, is quite the trick! 
ProSense
(116,464 posts)LOL!
Recursion
(56,582 posts)We've known about this since 2005, and Congress even made a point of making mass collection legal with a fig-leaf warrant.
Mojorabbit
(16,020 posts)and yet you persist. It is breathtaking to watch.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)Anything? Beuller? (Other than Congress having made it legal?)
That memory hole really does seem to work...
PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)Ya, I have never quoted a bible verse before, but what the hey, it was first hit on my Google search for a quote.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)http://www.africa.upenn.edu/Articles_Gen/Letter_Birmingham.html
Civil disobedience is not fleeing to Russia.
PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)When there was a sense our our Nation and it's leaders would do the right thing in the end.
Those days are history.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)"MLK was from another era, before the fascist/authoritarian takeover"
...the good old days when MLK had it easier than Snowden?
The documents show the NSA also tracked journalists from the New York Times and the Washington Post and two senators.
Some NSA officials later described the programme as "disreputable if not outright illegal", the documents show.
The operation, dubbed "Minaret", was originally exposed in the 1970s.
- more -
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-24279394
Ellsberg's days was a piece of cake compared to Snowden's, right?
On September 3, 1971, the burglary of Lewis Fielding's office – titled "Hunt/Liddy Special Project No. 1" in Ehrlichman's notes—was carried out by Hunt, Liddy and CIA officers Eugenio Martínez, Felipe de Diego and Bernard Barker. The "Plumbers" failed to find Ellsberg's file. Hunt and Liddy subsequently planned to break into Fielding's home, but Ehrlichman did not approve the second burglary. The break-in was not known to Ellsberg or to the public until it came to light during Ellsberg and Russo's trial in April 1973.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Ellsberg#Fielding_break-in
PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)People were charge and convicted. What charges and convictions are happening to current offenders? Oh, none, because they have made legal via the Patriot act things which were historically illegal.
It was a different time.
Snowden was not wrong to flee from these people who wish to further pursue injustice against the American public.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)"Snowden was not wrong to flee from these people who wish to further pursue injustice against the American public."
The Pentagon Papers, and Ellsberg did not flee.
Still, what does Watergate have to do with the current situation?
PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)Last edited Thu May 29, 2014, 01:17 PM - Edit history (1)
It speaks to the change in this Nation in regards to Justice. In the era of MLK, goverment officials were held accountable for their actions. That is not true today. They have carte-blanche to do whatever they want without accountability. Those that stand up and speak truth, ie Manning and Snowden will get taken down by the tyrants which have taken over our government.
Response to PowerToThePeople (Reply #22)
MohRokTah This message was self-deleted by its author.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)"It speaks to the change in this Nation in regards to Justice. In the are of MLK, goverment officials were held accountable for their actions. That is not true today. They have carte-blanche to do whatever they want without accountability. Those that stand up and speak truth, ie Manning and Snowden will get taken down by the tyrants which have taken over our government."
...again, fleeing is cowardice. Manning did not flee. There have been several prominent whistleblowers over the last several years who did not flee the country.
WASHINGTON — The Justice Department has dropped its investigation into a former department attorney who tipped off the media about the Bush administration’s warrantless eavesdropping program.
The department informed Thomas Tamm’s attorneys that he will not be prosecuted for the leak that then-President George W. Bush called a breach of national security.
Tamm has said he called The New York Times about the program because it “didn’t smell right” and he thought the public had a right to know.
The Times won the Pulitzer Prize for its 2005 story exposing the program designed to catch terrorists by eavesdropping on international phone calls and emails of U.S. residents without court warrants.
<...>
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/no-charges-for-man-who-leaked-surveillance-program/2011/04/26/AFt9o6rE_story.html
Thomas Tamm:
But if Snowden is returned to the United States, Tamm said, “I think with the right representation, and with the right way of presenting what he did, I think he’ll be able to put his life back together.” Tamm says he’d even be willing to be part of the defense team.
http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=A9C45FF7-E7EB-44AD-9C5A-D2C7F0B7F276
William Binney, Thomas Drake, and Tamm are whistleblowers who stayed and faced the consequences of their actions. They were not persecuted, they faced prosecution. They are not in jail. In fact, Tamm was the one who exposed Bush's illegal eavesdropping on Americans.
Snowden created a bigger problem for himself with the information he stole and revealed that was unrelated to NSA domestic activities. Fleeing to Russia did not help his cause.
Many people who oppose NSA overreach and recognize the value of the debate also don't approve of Snowden's actions that go beyond sparking a debate about the NSA's domestic activities. In the end, a trial is required to hold him accountable.
I stand with Jimmy Carter:
Susan Page
NEW YORK -- Former president Jimmy Carter defended the disclosures by fugitive NSA contractor Edward Snowden on Monday, saying revelations that U.S. intelligence agencies were collecting meta-data of Americans' phone calls and e-mails have been "probably constructive in the long run."
<...>
Does he view Snowden, now granted asylum in Russia, as a hero or a traitor?
"There's no doubt that he broke the law and that he would be susceptible, in my opinion, to prosecution if he came back here under the law," he said. "But I think it's good for Americans to know the kinds of things that have been revealed by him and others -- and that is that since 9/11 we've gone too far in intrusion on the privacy that Americans ought to enjoy as a right of citizenship."
Carter cautioned that he didn't have information about whether some of the disclosures "may have hurt our security or individuals that work in security," adding, "If I knew that, then I may feel differently." And he said Snowden shouldn't be immune from prosecution for his actions.
"I think it's inevitable that he should be prosecuted and I think he would be prosecuted" if he returned to the United States, the former president said. "But I don't think he ought to be executed as a traitor or any kind of extreme punishment like that."
- more -
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2014/03/24/usa-today-capital-download-jimmy-carter-edward-snowden-probably-constructive/6822425/
Bernie Sanders:
BLITZER: What about Snowden? Do you think that he committed a crime or he was simply a well-intentioned whistle-blower?
SANDERS: Well, I think what you have to look at is -- I think there is no question that he committed a crime, obviously. He violated his oath and he leaked information.
On the other hand, what you have to weigh that against is the fact that he has gone a very long way in educating the people of our country and the people of the world about the power of private agency in terms of their surveillance over people of this country, over foreign leaders, and what they are doing.
So, I think you got to weigh the two. My own belief is that I think, I would hope that the United States government could kind of negotiate some plea bargain with him, some form of clemency. I think it wouldn't be a good idea or fair to him to have to spend his entire remaining life abroad, not being able to come back to his country.
So I would hope that there's a price that he has to pay, but I hope it is not a long prison sentence or exile from his country.
BLITZER: You wouldn't give him clemency, though, and let him off scot-free?
SANDERS: No. BLITZER: All right, Senator, thanks very much for joining us.
<...>
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1401/06/sitroom.02.html
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024292659
I stand with anyone who recognizes that one doesn't have defend Snowden, Putin's tool, to be on the "right side of history."
Senator Blumenthal: prosecute Snowden, overhaul FISA courts.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023425884
Rep. John Lewis: "NO PRAISE FOR SNOWDEN-Reports about my interview with The Guardian are misleading"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023427908
From the beginning, it was clear that Snowden broke the law (http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023439290). There was a point where even Snowden supporters accepted that he knew he broke the law. Snowden said it himself.
Fleeing the country and releasing state secrets did not help his case.
His actions since then have only made the situation worse.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023035550
Vattel
(9,289 posts)MLK obviously over-generalized here. It is not always true that "one who breaks an unjust law must do so . . . with a willingness to accept the penalty." Those who operated the underground railroad prior to the civil war broke an unjust law but quite rightfully evaded the punishment for doing so. It is difficult to imagine a case where someone who breaks an unjust law would be required to accept decades in a supermax prison.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)So now Snowden is Harriet Tubman?
The "dumb" arguments are the ones trying to dismiss every other struggle as equal or lesser to Snowden's. He's a coward for fleeing given that he claims his goal was to start a debate about NSA domestic overreach.
He knew that was bullshit given that he admits to taking and distributing unrrelated information.
Vattel
(9,289 posts)The point of the example of the underground railroad was to show that MLK was over-generalizing, not to suggest that Snowden was comparable to Harriet Tubman in virtue. That sort of distorting one's opponent's position undermines your credibility.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)"The point of the example of the underground railroad was to show that MLK was over-generalizing"
...point of your comment was to diminish MLK's principled position, a statement from a jail cell, to excuse Snowden's cowardice.
uponit7771
(90,302 posts)
treestar
(82,383 posts)And Eddie is screwed.
Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)If what he revealed isn't secret, and everyone already knows it, why bother hiding it in the first place and why pursue somebody who reveals known facts?
ProSense
(116,464 posts)Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)So, where's the harm in it being released. And, again, if what he released is already "out there" why was it secret in the first place and why is the government pursuing him?
ProSense
(116,464 posts)Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)And, again, I ask if everything he revealed is already known it is not "secret", so why is the NSA pursuing him? And, again, why was it being kept secret?
ProSense
(116,464 posts)Do you really not see it? I mean, it's not like the OP is a really long read.
Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)but for the information that he admits is out there and still, he claims, hasn't been revealed.
That's all he did. He sparked a debate
If it's not secret and all it did was to spark a debate. Where's the harm? And, why is the NSA charging him with stealing "secrets"?
ProSense
(116,464 posts)randome
(34,845 posts)Every single one.
And you already know how this goes. The majority of what Snowden stole was already known to us. Methods and practices he revealed to other countries were not.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]“If you're not committed to anything, you're just taking up space.”
Gregory Peck, Mirage (1965)[/center][/font][hr]
Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)i.e.:
"Jenny told Bob that his wife is cheating on him."
"He already knew that."
"But, Jenny told him that."
"So, what?"
Recursion
(56,582 posts)I was too broad earlier: he didn't reveal anything new about domestic surveillance, at least not to those of us without retrograde amnesia.
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
(14,733 posts)and threw millions out of work do anything 'illegal', no matter how many lives they destroyed.
Sometimes things that are wrong aren't actually illegal.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)"And neither did most of the bankers who wrecked the economy and threw millions out of work do anything 'illegal', no matter how many lives they destroyed. Sometimes things that are wrong aren't actually illegal."
The banks actions were immoral and unethical and brought down the economy. Some banks did engage in illegal activites and were prosecuted.
The NSA debate is about capabilities and procedures. It's about overreach.
Again, Snowden could have sparked the same debate, leading to the same focus on reforms, without shooting himself in the foot.
The Traveler
(5,632 posts)and Constitutionality. And cases cannot be brought before courts without establishing standing, which the rubber stamp secret process makes impossible to establish. Pretty neat scam they got going there.
I worked in the DoD/Intel community for over a decade. Snowden's material showed ME how things have changed. And buddy, they have not changed for the better.
It's obvious to me you are passionately OK with this stuff. Which is fine. But for me, it is a deal breaker. If it is the position of the Democratic Party that these policies are OK, then I must eventually break with the Democratic Party.
Why, you ask? Oh, let me dash off a few quick reasons.
1) You cannot have a economic policy that focuses on globalization while inserting surveillance technology into exportable communications infrastructure components, and then in an almost ad-hoc manner use that to inform various corporate interests. And, yes, that has been done and has/will damage legitimate American enterprises.
2) We know from both Snowden and other sources that American intelligence apparatus and product has been used to suppress political activism. Checks and balances, anyone?
3) We have a court system that is, in terms of achieving consistency of sentencing outcomes, remarkably nuts. Affluenza defenses. The demographics of our prison population. The privatization of prisons. Etc. This provides a context which, in my view, makes all this stuff particularly scary.
4) The very fact that this is going on has had a major chilling affect on speech and especially organization of dissent. And don't tell me that hasn't happened for you will be asking me to ignore the evidence of my own experience. And I don't do that, man.
5) To support this regime of broad and deep surveillance, we are seeing that secret law and interpretation of law is now considered legitimate ... which provides a serious WTF moment.
Trust me, I could go on, but lunch break is over. Work, ya know. But I gotta wonder ...
Would you feel so sanguine about this were these powers of surveillance placed in the hands of a (god forbid) freshly elected President Rick Santorum????
Again, you are clearly jiggy with this, and that is your right. I remain absolutely opposed. And, yes, it is in every way a deal breaker. I will not be part of a coalition that implements and maintains a national security state.
Trav
ProSense
(116,464 posts)"Again, you are clearly jiggy with this, and that is your right. I remain absolutely opposed. And, yes, it is in every way a deal breaker. I will not be part of a coalition that implements and maintains a national security state. "
...of that changes my point. Snowden could have created the same focus and started the same debate without fleeing the country.
Instead, and after all this time, he goes on TV to admit that he took damaging information and distributed it, but sought to assure everyone it's still secure.
The Traveler
(5,632 posts)dodges the issue, in what I feel (and I could be wrong about this, Pro, so I ask your indulgence in advance) is an effort to support the Party and President (which usually I find laudable) in the face of considerable criticism. You make it all about Snowden, and his slightest inconsistency or shift in position. But the broader issue ... are we witnessing the construction of the infrastructure of totalitarian rule?? ... is one you seem to consistently avoid.
And so we do seem to have a collision in values, and in the context of this subthread (which attempts to compare the surveillance issue with the bankster issue) my comment does in fact address your point. Rather directly, I think.
"Legal" doesn't mean "Constitutional" (which is why we have constitutional cases that overturn law). "Legal" doesn't mean "wise". And "legal" sure as hell has no obvious relationship to ethics, or justice, anymore.
A recent study established a quantitative assessment that the American system of governance now functions identically to an oligarchy. The combination of that with a broad and deep regime of domestic surveillance is something I find greatly perturbing. Daniel Ellsberg disagrees with your assessment of Snowden and the value of his disclosures. Why should I, given my reservations and concerns about this collision of issues, regard your case as being stronger than Ellsbergs?
For all your words, you have not made that case ... at least not insofar as I am concerned.
Clearly, we will not speedily come to concurrence on these matters.
Trav
ProSense
(116,464 posts)"Your point dodges the issue, in what I feel (and I could be wrong about this, Pro, so I ask your indulgence in advance) is an effort to support the Party and President (which usually I find laudable) in the face of considerable criticism. You make it all about Snowden, and his slightest inconsistency or shift in position. But the broader issue ... are we witnessing the construction of the infrastructure of totalitarian rule?? ... is one you seem to consistently avoid."
It's all about Snowden, until it's not.
Snowden's predicament is separate from NSA reform. He may have sparked the debate, but he will be held accountable for his actions that went beyond that.
Snowden is seeking clemency, and the NSA is still being scrutinized.
The Traveler
(5,632 posts)From which I must deduce that issue is not important to you.
We just stand in separate places on the matter. Sobeit. Time will tell which of us is more correct.
Trav
Cha
(296,848 posts)john miller @deaconmill
Follow
Obviously Snowden didn't report wrongdoings to superiors. If he had, they would have realized he was accessing material he had no right to.
4:00 PM - 29 May 2014
10 Retweets 2 favorites
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)You have perceived clearly the poster's purpose for being on this site, reflected in an average of 30-40 posts per day of such uncritical support, including weekends and holidays, and regardless of the administration's actual policy or position.
For example, in 2006, when Democrats were united against the revelations of spying under Bush, the poster was vehement that such spying was unacceptable and could never be made legal:
Prosense: "Spying on Americans was, is and will still be illegal."
ProSense (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-15-06 08:53 AM
Original message
Edited on Wed Feb-15-06 08:53 AM by ProSense
Bush is spying on Americans: opponents and activist groups. The law can't
be changed to make that legal. The Republicans are trying to pull a fast one with this "law change" tactic by framing the illegal spying as warrantless spying on terrorists; therefore, the law is being changed to give Bush the authority to spy on terrorist. Spying on Americans was, is and will still be illegal. Bush committed crimes by illegal spying on Americans and breaking existing FISA laws.
I'm sure all criminals would love to have a law passed that retroactively absolves them of their crimes.
Since Democrats took the White House and adopted the spying policies, however, the poster has engaged in a relentless campaign of daily posting to divert the conversation from the spying to the whistleblower:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4641649
This list of your Snowden OPs is a bit short, I know-- but it only covers about a month and half's worth of time last summer. I'm sure you must have made hundreds more posts about this subject you don't care about since, but I can't be bothered to compile an updated list.
OP Beyond his Moscow airport limbo, indignities await Edward Snowden ProSense Yesterday General Discussion
OP Greenwald To Appear At Town Hall For N.J. Senate Candidate Rush Holt ProSense Yesterday General Discussion
OP When It Comes To Extraditions, Russia Often Cooperates ProSense Saturday General Discussion
OP Glenn Greenwald To Testify Before Congress ProSense Friday General Discussion
OP ERIC HOLDER TO RUSSIA: We Will Not Torture Or Seek The Death Penalty For Edward Snowden ProSense Friday General Discussion
OP Senate pushes sanctions on nations aiding Snowden ProSense Thursday General Discussion
OP Bolivia forgives European countries for air space incident ProSense Wednesday General Discussion
OP Updated: Fugitive Snowden to stay for now at Moscow airport: Russian lawyer ProSense Wednesday General Discussion
OP Attitudes Shift Against Snowden; Fewer than Half Say NSA is Unjustified ProSense Wednesday General Discussion
OP Senator Slams Domestic Spying: ‘Secret Law Has No Place In America’ ProSense Tuesday General Discussion
OP Snowden plans to settle and work in Russia – lawyer to RT ProSense Tuesday General Discussion
OP Leaker Snowden hopes to be able to leave airport by Wednesday: lawyer ProSense Jul 22 General Discussion
OP Pew poll: Many Venezuelans want better relations with the U.S. ProSense Jul 20 General Discussion
OP Biden calls Brazil's Rousseff over NSA spying tensions ProSense Jul 19 General Discussion
OP U.S. court renews surveillance program exposed by Snowden ProSense Jul 19 General Discussion
OP Two U.S. senators suggest moving G20 from Russia over Snowden ProSense Jul 19 General Discussion
OP Kerry talked to Venezuela about Snowden: US ProSense Jul 19 General Discussion
OP Oath Keepers Heart Edward Snowden! ProSense Jul 19 General Discussion
OP Russia says knows of no plan for Snowden to seek citizenship ProSense Jul 19 General Discussion
OP Snowden has no crediblity, and deserves no thanks. ProSense Jul 18 General Discussion
OP Guardian Journalist to Write Book on Surveillance ProSense Jul 17 General Discussion
OP What did Jimmy Carter mean by this ProSense Jul 17 General Discussion
OP Sen. Tester Calls On Snowden To Return To America To ‘Face The Music’ ProSense Jul 17 General Discussion
OP "PHOTO: Application for temporary asylum in Russia written by #NSA leaker Edward #Snowden" (WTF?) ProSense Jul 16 General Discussion
OP Edward Snowden Declares Himself Torture-Proof ProSense Jul 16 General Discussion
OP Fugitive Edward Snowden applies for asylum in Russia ProSense Jul 16 General Discussion
OP Carl Bernstein: Greenwald 'out of line' (updated) ProSense Jul 15 General Discussion
OP Greenwald: Snowden Docs Contain NSA 'Blueprint' ProSense Jul 14 General Discussion
OP N.S.A. Leaks Stir Plans in Russia to Control Net ProSense Jul 14 General Discussion
OP Greenwald tries to do damage control ProSense Jul 13 General Discussion
OP Snowden documents could be 'worst nightmare' for U.S.: journalist ProSense Jul 13 General Discussion
OP Russia 'has not received' Snowden asylum bid ProSense Jul 13 General Discussion
OP Carney responds to question about Snowden meeting with human rights groups. ProSense Jul 12 General Discussion
OP Obama Spoke With Putin On Snowden, ‘Cooperation On Counter-Terrorism’ ProSense Jul 12 General Discussion
OP Greenwald: Snowden asylum 'unlikely' to stop me from publishing leaks ProSense Jul 12 General Discussion
OP If Snowden's case as a whistleblower is so strong, why is he afraid to face the consequences? ProSense Jul 12 General Discussion
OP How the Snowden Affair Became a Freak Show ProSense Jul 12 General Discussion
OP Edward Snowden caught in asylum catch-22 ProSense Jul 12 General Discussion
OP Updated: US ambassador to Russia disputes claim sent message to Snowden ProSense Jul 12 General Discussion
OP Russia says Snowden could stay if he stops harming US ProSense Jul 12 General Discussion
OP "Big news is that #Snowden is applying for political asylum in Russia" (updated) ProSense Jul 12 General Discussion
OP Purported E-Mail From Snowden Asks for Meeting With Rights Groups ProSense Jul 12 General Discussion
OP The ACLU's own text contradicts its case for Snowden's asylum bid. ProSense Jul 12 General Discussion
OP Brazil May Seek to Speak With Snowden as Spy Allegations Spread ProSense Jul 10 General Discussion
OP Which Other Countries Are ‘In Bed’ With The NSA? ProSense Jul 10 General Discussion
OP Brazil lawmaker: US spying won't hurt relations ProSense Jul 10 General Discussion
OP Snowden: I never gave any information to Chinese or Russian governments ProSense Jul 10 General Discussion
OP Fugitive Snowden likely Venezuela bound, says U.S. journalist (Greenwald) ProSense Jul 9 General Discussion
OP Wikileaks: Snowden Has Not Formally Accepted Asylum Anywhere Yet ProSense Jul 9 General Discussion
OP North Korea uses Snowden in propaganda video ProSense Jul 9 General Discussion
OP Snowden Mentioned ‘Direct Access’ In Interview With The Guardian ProSense Jul 8 General Discussion
OP Irony ProSense Jul 8 General Discussion
OP Here's what the Snowden videos did ProSense Jul 8 General Discussion
OP Glenn Greenwald: Edward Snowden "Satisfied" by Global Outrage over U.S. Surveillance Operations ProSense Jul 8 General Discussion
OP Snowden affair clouds U.S. attempts to press China to curb cyber theft ProSense Jul 8 General Discussion
OP Snowden Anticipated Being Accused Of Violating Espionage Act ProSense Jul 8 General Discussion
OP Josh Marshall: Kinda Curious What That Means (Ellsberg's claim) ProSense Jul 8 General Discussion
OP Der Spiegel: Do private companies help the NSA? Snowden: Yes. But it's hard to prove that. ProSense Jul 7 General Discussion
OP Snowden: Other nations use NSA surveillance info ProSense Jul 7 General Discussion
OP Snowden isn't a whistleblower because...the law. ProSense Jul 6 General Discussion
OP Glenn Greenwald: Edward Snowden Confirmed WikiLeaks Statement Was Written By Him ProSense Jul 6 General Discussion
OP A big "FU" to the United States by other countries? ProSense Jul 6 General Discussion
OP More on Venezuela's offer (Is everyone sure this isn't rhetoric?) ProSense Jul 5 General Discussion
OP Will Venezuela follow through on Snowden offer? ProSense Jul 5 General Discussion
OP White House: no comment on Venezuela's asylum offer to Snowden ProSense Jul 5 General Discussion
OP Icelandic Lawmaker Claims Snowden Expressed ‘Gratitude’ For Citizenship Vote ProSense Jul 5 General Discussion
OP Wikileaks: Snowden Has Requested Asylum From Six More Countries ProSense Jul 5 General Discussion
OP Who started the rumor about Snowden being on President Morales' plane? ProSense Jul 5 General Discussion
OP South American leftist leaders rally to Bolivia's side in Snowden saga ProSense Jul 4 General Discussion
OP Snowden’s asylum request rejected (Norway) ProSense Jul 4 General Discussion
OP What Kind Of Coward Is Edward Snowden? ProSense Jul 4 General Discussion
OP Obama, Merkel agree to talks on U.S. spying ProSense Jul 4 General Discussion
OP Russia shows growing impatience over Snowden's airport stay ProSense Jul 4 General Discussion
OP Updated: France, Italy reject Snowden asylum request ProSense Jul 4 General Discussion
OP The hyperbole is getting thick. ProSense Jul 3 General Discussion
OP Why Won’t Anyone Take Edward Snowden? ProSense Jul 3 General Discussion
OP Wikileaks Spokesman: U.S. ‘Obviously’ Responsible For ‘Outrageous’ Incident With Bolivian President’ ProSense Jul 3 General Discussion
OP Audio purportedly from inside the cockpit of Bolivian President Evo Morales’s flight ProSense Jul 3 General Discussion
OP Wikileaks Spokesman Insists Snowden Statement Is Genuine ProSense Jul 3 General Discussion
OP The Guardian: Snowden Is A Whistleblower, Not A Spy ProSense Jul 3 General Discussion
OP Why are countries still cooperating with the United States on Snowden? ProSense Jul 3 General Discussion
OP Why didn't Bolivia's President give Snowden a lift? ProSense Jul 2 General Discussion
OP Bolivia: Presidential plane forced to land after false rumors of Snowden onboard ProSense Jul 2 General Discussion
OP There Are 12 Million Stateless People Around The World, But Edward Snowden Isn’t One Of Them ProSense Jul 2 General Discussion
OP Updated: India, Brazil reject Snowden’s asylum request; Snowden withdraws request to Russia ProSense Jul 2 General Discussion
OP Rafael Correa: we helped Snowden by mistake ProSense Jul 1 General Discussion
OP Josh Marshall: "Snowden’s pretty screwed." ProSense Jul 1 General Discussion
OP Report: Edward Snowden Breaks Silence (updated) ProSense Jul 1 General Discussion
OP Who should Edward Snowden be compared to? ProSense Jun 30 General Discussion
OP Assange stands by Edward Snowden as Ecuador's Correa reprimands consul ProSense Jun 30 General Discussion
OP With Julian Assange Taking the Spotlight, Edward Snowden's Future Looks Grim ProSense Jun 30 General Discussion
OP Ecuadoran President Correa Gives VP Biden An Earful ProSense Jun 29 General Discussion
OP Am I missing something about the latest revelations regarding the EU? ProSense Jun 29 General Discussion
OP Analysis: Snowden's options appear to narrow in bid to evade U.S. arrest ProSense Jun 28 General Discussion
OP Jimmy Carter on Snowden: "He's obviously violated the laws of America, for which he's responsible." ProSense Jun 28 General Discussion
OP Ecuador cools on Edward Snowden asylum as Assange frustration grows ProSense Jun 28 General Discussion
OP Ecuador has no plans to halt commerce ties over Snowden: Correa ProSense Jun 27 General Discussion
OP Exclusive: Documents Illuminate Ecuador’s Spying Practices ProSense Jun 27 General Discussion
OP The Errors of Edward Snowden and His Global Hypocrisy Tour ProSense Jun 27 General Discussion
OP Ecuador Says Snowden Asylum Document Unauthorized ProSense Jun 27 General Discussion
OP Ecuador denies giving Snowden a travel document: report ProSense Jun 26 General Discussion
OP Spanish judge Baltasar Garzon says his legal team won’t represent NSA leaker Edward Snowden ProSense Jun 26 General Discussion
OP Russia spies may be chatting with "tasty morsel" Snowden ProSense Jun 25 General Discussion
OP Putin Says Dealing With Snowden Issue ‘Like Shearing A Pig’ ProSense Jun 25 General Discussion
OP Edward Snowden never crossed border into Russia, says foreign minister ProSense Jun 25 General Discussion
OP Op-Ed In Chinese Communist Party Newspaper Blasts Washington Over Snowden, Hacking ProSense Jun 25 General Discussion
OP Hayes Challenges Greenwald: Snowden Undermines Defenders If He Goes To Nations That Hate Free Press ProSense Jun 24 General Discussion
OP Greenwald: I Didn’t Even Know Snowden’s Name Until He Was In Hong Kong ProSense Jun 24 General Discussion
OP Snowden plans more leaks...will let foreign press decide if leaks endanger Americans ProSense Jun 24 General Discussion
OP Snowden’s Attorney: ‘He Never Anticipated This Would Be Such A Big Matter’ ProSense Jun 24 General Discussion
OP The problem with defending Snowden. ProSense Jun 24 General Discussion
OP Snowden is one issue and NSA oversight is another. ProSense Jun 24 General Discussion
OP Julian Assange Won’t Say When Wikileaks Began Working With Ed Snowden ProSense Jun 24 General Discussion
OP Report: Kremlin Says Russia Didn’t Know Snowden Was Coming To Moscow ProSense Jun 24 General Discussion
OP Why Ecuador? ProSense Jun 24 General Discussion
OP Which word best describes Snowden ProSense Jun 23 General Discussion
OP China Said to Have Made Call to Let Leaker Depart ProSense Jun 23 General Discussion
OP Maybe Hong Kong is simply relieved to be rid of Snowden ProSense Jun 23 General Discussion
OP Schumer: ‘Putin Always Seems Eager To Put A Finger In the Eye Of The U.S.’ ProSense Jun 23 General Discussion
OP Sen. Paul To Snowden: Don’t ‘Cozy Up’ To Russian Government ProSense Jun 23 General Discussion
OP Greenwald Thinks Snowden’s Final Destination Is Still ‘Up In The Air’ ProSense Jun 23 General Discussion
OP NYT: Snowden "staying in an apartment... controlled by the Hong Kong government’s security branch" ProSense Jun 22 General Discussion
OP The ACLU message isn't going to help Snowden. ProSense Jun 22 General Discussion
OP Snowden spy row grows as US is accused of hacking China ProSense Jun 22 General Discussion
OP Snowden is going to be prosecuted. ProSense Jun 22 General Discussion
OP Greenwald: Snowden Charges Show Obama’s ‘Vindictive Mentality’... ProSense Jun 22 General Discussion
OP Is it OK to criticize Edward Snowden? ProSense Jun 21 General Discussion
OP NYT: Documents Detail N.S.A. Surveillance Rules ProSense Jun 20 General Discussion
OP Analysis: Why Edward Snowden isn't a whistle-blower, legally speaking ProSense Jun 18 General Discussion
OP What if Snowden didn't have authorized access? ProSense Jun 18 General Discussion
OP Greenwald is accusing President Obama of making "false" claims, but hasn't backed up his claims ProSense Jun 18 General Discussion
OP Where is the additional information Snowden says he's going to release? ProSense Jun 18 General Discussion
OP Iceland received informal approach over Snowden seeking asylum ProSense Jun 18 General Discussion
OP Excerpt: Obama talks NSA in Charlie Rose interview. ProSense Jun 18 General Discussion
OP Pew poll: Public Split over Impact of NSA Leak, But Most Want Snowden Prosecuted ProSense Jun 17 General Discussion
OP NSA veteran: "So he is transitioning from whistle-blower to a traitor." ProSense Jun 17 General Discussion
OP Glenn Greenwald Justifies Snowden’s Fear He Will Be Killed: U.S. ‘Targeted’ Americans In The Past ProSense Jun 17 General Discussion
OP NYT editor's blog: Snowden’s Questionable New Turn ProSense Jun 17 General Discussion
OP Edward Snowden Says More Info About "Direct Access" Is In the Works ProSense Jun 17 General Discussion
OP Snowden: Obama Should Call For Special Committee To Review NSA Programs ProSense Jun 17 General Discussion
OP Snowden: I Didn’t Reveal Any Operations Against ‘Legitimate’ Military Targets ProSense Jun 17 General Discussion
OP Snowden basically admits the "direct access" claim was bullshit. ProSense Jun 17 General Discussion
OP "the biggest intelligence leak in NSA history is answering your questions " ProSense Jun 17 General Discussion
OP Fleeing the country to avoid prosecution makes Snowden a coward. ProSense Jun 17 General Discussion
OP Edward Snowden To Participate In Online Q&A Today ProSense Jun 17 General Discussion
OP Edward Snowden 'not a Chinese spy' - Beijing ProSense Jun 17 General Discussion
OP DNI denies NSA analysts can tap calls without a warrant ProSense Jun 16 General Discussion
OP Jerrold Nadler Does Not Think the NSA Can Listen to U.S. Phone Calls ProSense Jun 16 General Discussion
OP Schieffer Destroys Snowden: ‘I Don’t Remember Martin Luther King Jr. Or Rosa Parks Hiding In China’ ProSense Jun 16 General Discussion
OP Hong Kong rallies in the rain for Edward Snowden ProSense Jun 15 General Discussion
OP Snowden’s Leaks on China Could Affect Its Role in His Fate ProSense Jun 14 General Discussion
OP While working for spies, Snowden was secretly prolific online ProSense Jun 14 General Discussion
OP Kevin Drum: ProSense Jun 14 General Discussion
OP Greenwald: Edward Snowden's worst fear has not been realised – thankfully (cites polls) ProSense Jun 14 General Discussion
OP Snowden Is Using 'Specific' Evidence of the U.S. Hacking China to Stay Out of Jail ProSense Jun 14 General Discussion
OP Snowden Is Not Welcome In The U.K. ProSense Jun 14 General Discussion
OP Leaker's Ties to China Probed ProSense Jun 13 General Discussion
OP Guardian "walked back the 'direct access' claim made in Greenwald’s original article" ProSense Jun 13 General Discussion
OP Report: Snowden Stored Documents On Thumb Drive ProSense Jun 13 General Discussion
OP Poll: Majority Says Snowden Did A Good Thing, But He Should Be Prosecuted ProSense Jun 13 General Discussion
OP Finding the right balance between security and liberty ProSense Jun 13 General Discussion
OP NSA Director Says Leaker’s Wiretapping Ability Claims Are ‘False’ ProSense Jun 13 General Discussion
OP Report: Feds Hunted For Snowden Before He Went Public ProSense Jun 13 General Discussion
OP Guardian issues statement in reply to Rep. Peter King ProSense Jun 12 General Discussion
OP Glenn Greenwald to Pete King: Bring it on ProSense Jun 12 General Discussion
OP Josh Marshall: Curious ProSense Jun 12 General Discussion
OP Greenwald: “We Did Not Want To Just Go And Arbitrarily Disclose Things’ ProSense Jun 12 General Discussion
OP ...Showed Hong Kong Newspaper Documents Revealing US Hacking Attacks On China (updated 2x) ProSense Jun 12 General Discussion
OP Edward Snowden Reportedly Gives Interview To Chinese News Outlet ProSense Jun 12 General Discussion
OP NYT editorial: Surveillance: Snowden Doesn’t Rise to Traitor ProSense Jun 11 General Discussion
OP Eugene Robinson: Edward Snowden’s NSA leaks show we need a debate ProSense Jun 11 General Discussion
OP Bush broke the law. President Obama followed it. ProSense Jun 11 General Discussion
OP AP Editor: Do Not Describe Edward Snowden As A 'Whistleblower' ProSense Jun 10 General Discussion
OP A Very Real Issue (private contractors) ProSense Jun 10 General Discussion
OP "Most significant" leak in history, and likely one of the dumbest. ProSense Jun 10 General Discussion
OP Glenn Greenwald: I Know Where Snowden Is ‘Generally’ ProSense Jun 10 General Discussion
OP Snowden Helped Guardian Reporter With Secure Communication System ProSense Jun 10 General Discussion
OP Ron Paul: ‘We Should Be Thankful’ For Edward Snowden ProSense Jun 10 General Discussion
OP The "biggest leak in US political history" ProSense Jun 10 General Discussion
OP DOJ: No Comment On Snowden ProSense Jun 9 General Discussion
OP What happens if you don't take the loyalty oath to Edward Snowden? ProSense Jun 9 General Discussion
OP What’s the Deal with Hong Kong? ProSense Jun 9 General Discussion
OP Josh Marshall on Edward Snowden ProSense Jun 9 General Discussion
grasswire
(50,130 posts)Geez.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)
ProSense
(116,464 posts)http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2461323
Prosense: "Spying on Americans was, is and will still be illegal."
ProSense (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-15-06 08:53 AM
Original message
Edited on Wed Feb-15-06 08:53 AM by ProSense
Bush is spying on Americans: opponents and activist groups. The law can't
be changed to make that legal. The Republicans are trying to pull a fast one with this "law change" tactic by framing the illegal spying as warrantless spying on terrorists; therefore, the law is being changed to give Bush the authority to spy on terrorist. Spying on Americans was, is and will still be illegal. Bush committed crimes by illegal spying on Americans and breaking existing FISA laws.
I'm sure all criminals would love to have a law passed that retroactively absolves them of their crimes.
How many times have you posted that lame attempt at gotcha?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023119565#post116
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023187207#post21
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023169023#post168
Need more info on Bush's illegal spying, here you go:
<...>
The newly disclosed documents also refer to a decision by the court called Large Content FISA, a term that has not been publicly revealed before. Several current and former officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said Large Content FISA referred to sweeping but short-lived orders issued on Jan. 10, 2007, that authorized the Bush administration to continue its warrantless wiretapping program.
The Bush administration had sought a ruling to put the program, which had been exposed by The New York Times, on a firmer legal footing. Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales disclosed a week after the decision that a judge had issued “innovative” and “complex” orders bringing the program under the surveillance court’s authority. But when they came up for renewal that April, another surveillance court judge balked and began requiring cumbersome paperwork, prompting the administration to seek a legislative solution, an intelligence official later explained.
<...>
Two classification guides say that the N.S.A. used the orders during a transition to the enactment of the Protect America Act, an August 2007 law in which Congress legalized the program. It was replaced with the FISA Amendments Act in 2008.
- more -
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/12/us/how-a-courts-secret-evolution-extended-spies-reach.html
This is what I've been posting about for years. Bush was actually spying on Americans. He bypassed the courts, and Congress briefly made it legal.
http://web.archive.org/web/20081216011008/http://www.newsweek.com/id/174601/output/print
Note, this is inside the U.S. and involves bypassing the FISA court to actually "eavesdrop."
Republicans fought to make that legal, and succeeded in doing so before Democrats were able to force an expiration of the law.
From a post last year:
There have been a number of media reports using the same Obama quote to basically claim that he once called out Bush, but then embraced the policy. They are intentionally conflating a quote about the PAA with his position on the 2008 FISA amendments, which he voted for. They are not the same thing. The PAA was a Republican effort to absolve Bush.
While the article mentions that Obama voted against the Protect America Act (http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=1&vote=00309), there is no mention of the fact that the Act expired in early 2008.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protect_America_Act_of_2007#Legislative_history
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_Intelligence_Surveillance_Act#Protect_America_Act_of_2007
Here's Bush's statement at the time: http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2008/02/20080214-4.html
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023026724
The major problem with the FISA amendments is that it gave the telecomms immunity. Otherwise, it included several reforms. What it did not do was make Bush's illegal spying legal.
Here is information on the FISA law including the 2008 amendments.
Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 Amendments Act of 2008
- Prohibits the individual states from investigating, sanctioning of, or requiring disclosure by complicit telecoms or other persons.
- Permits the government not to keep records of searches, and destroy existing records (it requires them to keep the records for a period of 10 years).
- Protects telecommunications companies from lawsuits for "'past or future cooperation' with federal law enforcement authorities and will assist the intelligence community in determining the plans of terrorists". Immunity is given by a certification process, which can be overturned by a court on specific grounds.[20]
- Removes requirements for detailed descriptions of the nature of information or property targeted by the surveillance if the target is reasonably believed to be outside the country.[20]
- Increased the time for warrantless surveillance from 48 hours to 7 days, if the FISA court is notified and receives an application, specific officials sign the emergency notification, and relates to an American located outside of the United States with probable cause they are an agent of a foreign power. After 7 days, if the court denies or does not review the application, the information obtained cannot be offered as evidence. If the United States Attorney General believes the information shows threat of death or bodily harm, they can try to offer the information as evidence in future proceedings.[21]
- Permits the Director of National Intelligence and the Attorney General to jointly authorize warrantless electronic surveillance, for one-year periods, targeted at a foreigner who is abroad. This provision will sunset on December 31, 2012.
- Requires FISA court permission to target wiretaps at Americans who are overseas.
- Requires government agencies to cease warranted surveillance of a targeted American who is abroad if said person enters the United States. (However, said surveillance may resume if it is reasonably believed that the person has left the States.)
- Prohibits targeting a foreigner to eavesdrop on an American's calls or e-mails without court approval. [22]
- Allows the FISA court 30 days to review existing but expiring surveillance orders before renewing them.
- Allows eavesdropping in emergencies without court approval, provided the government files required papers within a week.
- Prohibits the government from invoking war powers or other authorities to supersede surveillance rules in the future.
- Requires the Inspectors General of all intelligence agencies involved in the President's Surveillance Program to "complete a comprehensive review" and report within one year
- The provisions of the Act granting immunity to the complicit telecoms create a roadblock for a number of lawsuits intended to expose and thwart the alleged abuses of power and illegal activities of the federal government since and before the September 11 attacks.[citation needed]
- Allows the government to conduct surveillance of "a U.S. person located outside of the U.S. with probable cause they are an agent of a foreign power" for up to one week (168 hours) without a warrant, increased from the previous 48 hours, as long as the FISA court is notified at the time such surveillance begins, and an application as usually required for surveillance authorization is submitted by the government to FISA within those 168 hours[21]
randome
(34,845 posts)Maybe we should all have mandatory breaks?
[hr][font color="blue"][center]No squirrels were harmed in the making of this post. Yet.[/center][/font][hr]
LiberalLovinLug
(14,164 posts)the very fact that we are having these rancorous arguments even on DU about what is acceptable in terms of a secret police Stasi state in a modern democracy are thanks to Snowden. He deserves The Medal of Freedom for his actions.
Using the legal/illegal argument is laughable. Bush was found to be illegally using telecom companies to scoop online activity of Americans, and poof! congress simply retroactively made it legal. According to the some, that's all it takes. Easy Peasy. Once the authorities decide that that is in your best interest...end of argument.
Logical
(22,457 posts)uponit7771
(90,302 posts)...equites at the bond level to other countries
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)
Helen Borg
(3,963 posts)Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)Now following politics is considered the norm.
It wasn't that long ago when following politics was considered to be "strange and wonky".
We can thank the Bush Years for the shift on people who have a brain and the Obama years for those that don't.
Swede Atlanta
(3,596 posts)The march toward an authoritarian government began much earlier than the GWB years but it picked up speed during those years.
Whether by design or negligence, GWB and his cronies (remember GWB said in one of his interviews it would be easier to govern if he was a dictator) presided over the terrorist attacks on 9/11. They then did what they should have done, gone after AQ and when the Taliban refused to give them up we went after the Taliban as well. The fact GWB didn't get OSB and didn't seem overly concerned about him reveals much about the events of 9/11.
This allowed them to usher in the Patriot Act which has little to do with protecting us from the bad guys but it gave the government new powers over ordinary Americans. You cannot open a bank account, purchase a home, even open a Post Office Box without giving information that is totally unrelated to what you are trying to do. It gave them cover for the new TSA which has nothing to do with keeping us safe in the air and everything to do with controlling the American people. It gave them cover to expand and engage in all manner of spying.
It gave local police forces cover to militarize themselves because they had to be ready to protect cities from bad guys.
Every one of these actions, whether legal or not, were done not to make us safer but to control us.
We knew the NSA was spying we just didn't know the extent of the spying. Why? Because the secret government won't tell anyone who would challenge the practices or want to have a public debate about them to even know about them or if they do they are threatened within an inch of their lives (and probably those of their families) if they told anyone. So our elected leaders vote for something because they feel pressured to and even those that don't vote for it cannot tell us what it is.
So we have to rely on the likes of Snowden to let us know what the h**l our government is doing. I don't care if their actions are legal under the Patriot Act or any other law. I want to know what my government is doing. If you don't care then I suggest you move to Russia or Iran or somewhere else. But I want to know.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)Whisp
(24,096 posts)Everything is under control.
Speed reader?
Cha
(296,848 posts)he said he sent to the NSA.. Worse Spy Ever.
The 13 Most Bizarre Things from Edward Snowden’s NBC News Interview
snip///
Last night, while watching Brian Williams’ interview with Ed Snowden, I actually agreed with Glenn Greenwald about something. Back in 2012, Greenwald referred to Williams as “NBC News’ top hagiographer,” using “his reverent, soothing, self-important baritone” to deliver information in its “purest, most propagandistic, and most subservient form.”
It’s worth noting at the outset that Greenwald flew all the way to Moscow specifically for the NBC News interview, and he appeared on camera with Snowden and Williams, answering questions from this so-called “hagiographer.”
snip//
1) Snowden claimed he has “no relationship” with the Russian government and that he’s “not supported” by it.
2) “Sometimes to do the right thing you have to break a law.”
4) Early on, Snowden said, “I’m not a spy.” Later he famously confessed to being “trained as a spy.” Huh?
snip//
12) “People have unfairly demonized the NSA to a point that is too extreme.” Why is Snowden an apologist for the surveillance state? Drooling! Vast!
snip//
"Ultimately, Snowden is his own worst enemy and his ongoing ability to say crazy things in a calm, collected voice continues. What’s abundantly clear at this point is that no one will ever land an interview with Snowden who will be as adversarial against the former NSA contractor as Greenwald has been in his own reporting in defense of Snowden. It’ll never happen."
MOre..
http://thedailybanter.com/2014/05/13-bizarre-things-edward-snowdens-nbc-news-interview/
Trust Buster
(7,299 posts).......for any reason at any time, then we wouldn't be able to sustain an intelligence community. Self serving excuses are not acceptable.
Swede Atlanta
(3,596 posts)I don't want to live in a police state. Perhaps you think it is fine. I don't.
So those of us who believe in transparency in government and want to have knowledge of what our government is doing simply want to know what is being done in our names. Yes it might make the job of the intelligence community a little harder but that is the price you pay when you live in a democracy and not a totalitarian state.
I am not suggesting some things are not worthy of security but when our secret government keeps even our elected leaders from engaging in an open debate about POLICY, not specific facts or data, then we are screwed.
We have become a nation ruled by a secret government. I have no doubt in my mind that even if Congress defended the NSA and all the other worthless rot out there they would continue to operate. They have become a government to and about themselves. They don't care about a Constitution.
uponit7771
(90,302 posts)... all or everything and it's countered with I don't want a police state?!
No, a country shouldn't be telling everyone everthing all the time for any reason...
It shouldn't be spying on everyone all the time for any reason either...
Being against both aren't opposing positions
n2doc
(47,953 posts)Art_from_Ark
(27,247 posts)they just "created their own reality", as noted by Karl Rove:
'The aide (Karl Rove) said that guys like me were "in what we call the reality-based community," which he defined as people who "believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality." ... "That's not the way the world really works anymore," he continued. "We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality—judiciously, as you will—we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors…and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do."[2]'
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reality-based_community
Major Hogwash
(17,656 posts)I think he shot himself smack dab in the middle of the forehead.
You can't die very easily from a foot wound, but if you put the barrel next to your forehead, there's a much better chance of inflicting death upon oneself the way Snowden did this.
I don't think he will live to a "ripe old age".
I think there is a good chance his body will be recovered years from now in Russia, once Putin gets all of the propaganda mileage out of him he can possibly get.
Brian Williams didn't help the situation by giving Snowden center stage, but with Barbara Walters out of action, maybe that's all Snowden could hope for.
I don't think this is going to end well for Snowden.
Certainly not the way he hoped it would.
So, I hope he enjoys the time he has in the limelight for now while he can, because the story he is telling has been unraveling for months.