On-Topic Edward Snowden: NSA Whistleblower Revealed, Interview

[Corny]

Care to explain me how I would support the guy buy stopping to use all those companies that you listed?

Apart from that, it seems that you believe to know more about my life than you do. From those companies, I use the services of one. And that only because it's mandatory for my work.

But again, this is not helping the guy at all. This is not going to show the NSA anything. And again, I'm not talking about the NSA here, nor about your law-abiding government. Maybe you really should read my posts again

 

[big_guy]

Just two quick points: (1) It would be useful for all here to read the recent op-ed commentary of David Brooks in the New York Times.
(2) Someone in this thread asserted that Fox "(Faux" news was painting Snowden as a great hero. To the contrary, he is being described by commentators as a traitor. Sincere, but treasones. It might be useful to watch what is actually being said before making "Faux" criticisms.

 

[Kulindahr]

Weird...


This is the place where the unworkable idealism meets reality on these discussion forums.... lol

Talk about a loaded poll. It's a great example of "the question is wrong".

 

[Kulindahr]

Why don't you brush up on your reading comprehension skills...

You sure as hell haven't made a peep about Google and other American technology companies assisting the NSA...

That's why I asked you why you haven't. I feel that if you support what Snowden has done, which you've said you do, you can easily abstain from doing business with the companies that Snowden felt stole Americans' information.

You should be willing to do something...anything...besides talking about it.

On a side note: If you've gone back to using Google, Microsoft Office or called using an iPhone, then I guess you're just talk. Snowden is looking at many years in jail, and a supporter all the way from Germany, can't even abstain from using a product of a company Snowden was targeting. ***shakes head***

What good are you to him, and his "cause," if you can only offer words? (Not a rhetorical question. I'm serious.)

Could you stop whining about COrny having the conversation he wants and not changing it to the one you want?

 

[Kulindahr]

What would you suggest apart from words that offer moral support Corny (and I for that matter) should do?

That you support imprisoning Snowden it would be sensible to ask you what you are doing to expedite the incarceration of Snowden?

That's a good question. We US citizens can sign the petition I linked above, but others can't do much except perhaps demand that their governments rebuke the US for trying to become the world's god-government, knowing everything about everyone.

 

[Kulindahr]

Just two quick points: (1) It would be useful for all here to read the recent op-ed commentary of David Brooks in the New York Times.
(2) Someone in this thread asserted that Fox "(Faux" news was painting Snowden as a great hero. To the contrary, he is being described by commentators as a traitor. Sincere, but treasones. It might be useful to watch what is actually being said before making "Faux" criticisms.

I read it -- here's the link, for others:

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/11/opinion/brooks-the-solitary-leaker.html?_r=0


And I call him a demagogue on the issue, because he comes down to this:

Is the information so grave that it’s worth betraying an oath, circumventing the established decision-making procedures, unilaterally exposing secrets that can never be reclassified?

What secrets that "can't be reclassified" did he expose? I've seen numerous analyses saying he didn't reveal anything classified, so there's really no basis for action against him except that he's embarrassed people by revealing their underhanded actions and their disdain for human liberty and privacy.

The only real item of substance he told us is that the government isn't just listening, it's recording everything and will never throw it away. Given that there's no authority anywhere in the Constitution for such a thing, he should be considered a patriot for his action.

If Obama had a pair, Snowden would get the next Presidential Medal of Freedom.

 

[tigerfan482]

What secrets that "can't be reclassified" did he expose? I've seen numerous analyses saying he didn't reveal anything classified, so there's really no basis for action against him except that he's embarrassed people by revealing their underhanded actions and their disdain for human liberty and privacy.

The only real item of substance he told us is that the government isn't just listening, it's recording everything and will never throw it away. Given that there's no authority anywhere in the Constitution for such a thing, he should be considered a patriot for his action.

If Obama had a pair, Snowden would get the next Presidential Medal of Freedom.

Did you not see any of the material that he gave to the Guardian that they reprinted? The material is CLEARLY classified. This guy is a low-life scumbag who broke the law (consequently, the only actual person to have broken the law in this whole matter) in the pursuit of a selfish agenda. He made a commitment to guard secrets he was given access to and he is not the arbiter of what is classified and what isn't. There are/were numerous channels for him to go through to protest actions he finds illegal or improper. He chose the path that was illegal and, either directly or indirectly, damaged capabilities that not only fight terrorism but also deter our foreign adversaries. And like I've said before, if you review any of the information that was released by the Guardian, there is no evidence of the government illegally targeting (monitoring, collecting, etc.) against ANY Americans. The only thing that comes close to that is the Verizon warrant which is a) legal collection since a court did grant the warrant and b) legal collection in that the Supreme Court has already previously ruled that metadata (phone numbers, call duration, etc.) is not data that has any reasonable expectation of privacy since it is shared with a third party in a transaction.

 

[Lostlover]

When the time comes I will financially support his legal defense. Right now I see no credible recipient of that commitment. I see no benefit from gratuitous gestures, such as boycotting Google would be, even if you could do it.

So...your answer is to continue using Google, and to have Google send data to the government about your internet usage, right after you said you support a guy who leaked information about Google sharing this data in order to prevent it from happening in the future?

Isn't that not a textbook circular argument?

 

[Lostlover]

Good intentions are fine but they amount to words only.

When you finally get round to cuffing Snowden drop us a line.

I was being facetious in the first paragraph. Maybe I should have used this smiley -->

 

[tigerfan482]

So...your answer is to continue using Google, and to have Google send data to the government about your internet usage, right after you said you support a guy who leaked information about Google sharing this data in order to prevent it from happening in the future?

Isn't that not a textbook circular argument?

I will say this right now. Might as well accept it. Most Americans will act outraged because they weren't informed about everything the government is doing, but when they do find out, they won't do anything about it. It does nothing more than satisfy the curiosity they have about the unknown. This is why things are classified. Keeping them secret serves a useful and productive purpose. Releasing them does absolutely nothing. What has changed since this guy released this information? Americans haven't stopped using Google, Yahoo, Apple, etc. but I bet you the adversary has.

 

[palbert]

Edward Snowden has told the South China Morning Post that the US has been hacking Hong Kong Chinese electronic activity since 2009.

According to documents the Post says it possesses but hasn't yet verified, the use of PRISM to monitor Chinese electronic activity has been taking place since 2009.

"We hack backbones—huge Internet routers, basically—that give us access to the communications of hundreds of thousands of computers without having to hack every single one," Snowden said.

http://news.yahoo.com/edward-snowden-says-nsa-snooping-china-since-2009-151848288.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/12/edward-snowden-us-extradition-fight

(*starts rereading James Clavell's Noble House*)

 

[palbert]

So...your answer is to continue using Google, and to have Google send data to the government about your internet usage, right after you said you support a guy who leaked information about Google sharing this data in order to prevent it from happening in the future?

Isn't that not a textbook circular argument?

May be. May not be. I can live with circumstances as I understand them. The only one I need to justify my actions to is myself.

 

[Lostlover]

Care to explain me how I would support the guy buy stopping to use all those companies that you listed?

Apart from that, it seems that you believe to know more about my life than you do. From those companies, I use the services of one. And that only because it's mandatory for my work.

But again, this is not helping the guy at all. This is not going to show the NSA anything. And again, I'm not talking about the NSA here, nor about your law-abiding government. Maybe you really should read my posts again

No. No.

You're not getting it.

Snowden let America know that the government was being assisted by these tech companies in order to get our phone and e-mail logs of our activity online. These tech companies are co-conspirators (or accomplices) with the government. You can't, as you've done, hail Snowden as a hero and let these tech companies off the hook. It's lighting both ends of the stick. It's duplicitous. It's hypocrisy to hold these two, opposing beliefs at the same damn time: Snowden a hero and continue using Google as your search engine (for example).

No, I'm not presuming to know you personally. I'd imagine you'd use at least one of those companies in your life however. Is that too much of a stretch?

So, why are you continuing to use one of these companies' services? That company is just as "guilty" as NSA in all of this.

 

[Lostlover]

May be. May not be. I can live with circumstances as I understand them. The only one I need to justify my actions to is myself.

Thank you for your honesty and I mean it.

 

[opinterph]

… the government was being assisted by these tech companies in order to get our phone and e-mail logs of our activity online. These tech companies are co-conspirators (or accomplices) with the government.

Does it matter that these co-conspirators (tech companies) were acting under federal court order to provide data to the NSA?

 

[Jack Springer]

I will say this right now. Might as well accept it. Most Americans will act outraged because they weren't informed about everything the government is doing, but when they do find out, they won't do anything about it. It does nothing more than satisfy the curiosity they have about the unknown. This is why things are classified. Keeping them secret serves a useful and productive purpose. Releasing them does absolutely nothing. What has changed since this guy released this information? Americans haven't stopped using Google, Yahoo, Apple, etc. but I bet you the adversary has.

Makes you ask the question .... who do they want to spy on? Targeting spying on enemies is ok with me -- but spying on every American citizen --- why?

It makes you ask another question -- does Obama see everyday Americans as the enemy?

 

[JayHawk]

Talk about a loaded poll. It's a great example of "the question is wrong".

So what question should be asked? Are you implying people don't know what they are talking about? I can buy that logic. but do so with a ton of skepticism... it is wall to wall everywhere.

 

[JayHawk]

Makes you ask the question .... who do they want to spy on? Targeting spying on enemies is ok with me -- but spying on every American citizen --- why?

It makes you ask another question -- does Obama see everyday Americans as the enemy?

You mean with his use of the prgram started by Bush and endorsed by both parties senior leadership... hell defended by them... so you are saying Obama, Bush, McCain, Feinstein, Graham, and a slew of others are all viewing america as the enemy... or what are you saying besides..

OBAMA OBAMA OBAMA OBAMA

 

[Lostlover]

Does it matter that these co-conspirators (tech companies) were acting under federal court order to provide data to the NSA?

Does it matter whether the companies were acting under federal court orders or not if their users' data are still being passed on to the NSA?

Of course it doesn't matter. The result is the same.

Google, Yahoo! and Bing aren't the only search engines out there.

Basically, what you have here is a bunch of people that want to bitch and moan without lifting a finger--almost literally--by putting in a few extra keystrokes to find a non-compliant search engine that didn't report their activities to the NSA.

Laziness isn't an excuse for being an armchair critic.

 

[Jack Springer]

You mean with his use of the prgram started by Bush and endorsed by both parties senior leadership... hell defended by them... so you are saying Obama, Bush, McCain, Feinstein, Graham, and a slew of others are all viewing america as the enemy... or what are you saying besides..

OBAMA OBAMA OBAMA OBAMA

He's the head guy, the supposed leader, the big fish ... but so far he's the "dumb one" who's not talking.

This version of spying is bigger, grander, more expansive than anything Bush had in mind.

Isn't it time to let Obama take a little responsibility?