Edward Snowden Interview

[Danimal]

Aloha_Shooter: Don't take this as an attack, but more of a thought experiment. What would you do if you were a government contractor with access to the information that Snowden used? Would you keep quiet like so many before making off hand comments leading to rumors, or selectively bring things to light that you (and pretty much everyone else in the US) would agree are in direct violation of the US constitution? If there is a line between patriot and traitor, where is it drawn, and how could Snowden have done things differently in order to preserve our national security all while revealing the direct violations to the US constitution?

I do not think that there is a right or wrong answer to this, but we can all agree that some of the information provided by him was beneficial in exposing corruption at a level that was previously only brought to light in a tin foil hat. There are obviously certain pieces of information that he leaked that were damaging to the US, but what is damaging now will be common knowledge one day and talked about on the history channel like the Manhattan project of WWII. Point being that the information he exposed no longer has any bearing on the future other than the US has to change tactics now rather than later. The moment his first leak came out, someone somewhere knew exactly what information he had access to, and the entire US government knew that it was going to come out. His first several leaks focused on exposing corruption, and later ones came out after a significant amount of time. This you might say was on purpose in order to allow the US to shift its position prior to potentially damaging information being revealed. Then the truly damaging information was used as a bargaining chip to countries that wanted to know, but only as hindsight after changes had been made. One might argue that only reason this information came out in the first place is because he would have been "silenced" by the US govt had he stayed on US soil.

[Aloha_Shooter]

[QUOTE=hatidua;1507143]Snowden is merely pealing back the curtain that Obama has in front of the peering at each of us, if you support Obama, it would make sense to oppose

Mmmmm ... it's in Obama's interest that you focus your attention on Snowden and keep pecking away at the national security apparatus he really doesn't care about so you don't see what he's done to the IRS and DOJ. The IRS told Nixon to shove off when he tried to politicize it but bent over backwards to carry out Obama's (so far as we know now) unexpressed desires, much like Henry VIII asking if no one would rid him of this troublesome priest.

[Danimal]

Since the 1990s people have been warning us that EVERYTHING you do online, every phone call, ever credit card purchase, was "ingested" (to use Snowden's term) into a massive digital database. These people were usually laughed off as "kooks." What Snowden did was verify this. Not only that, but he alleged the existence of an international intelligence apparatus operating outside of any government oversight, of which the NSA supposedly was only a part. I found it interesting that he defended his actions by claiming it was not "treason" since he revealed it to American journalists for free rather than to another government for profit. I do not know anything about the nature of the leaked documents, nor do 99% of the American people. What the media is reporting, for the most part, is simply that "the NSA" (or whoever) is collecting ALL online and digital activity into a database, storing it forever, and occasionally misusing it. It is about time the average citizen was made aware of that, but Snowden is no hero for violating his oaths and breaking multiple laws. He could've gone about this another way, without releasing his "proof" to the general public and getting all our allies pissed off at the United States. I doubt anything will change, and in 6 months it will be forgotten, and a year later Snowden will be found dead of "natural causes."

The fact that he is alive right now makes me think that he is a little smarter than most people give him credit for. He has walked a line so narrow to get to where he is at now that I really wonder how smart this guy really is. World leaders of other countries cant stand up to the US govt as long as he has. Also our allies are pissed at us for what our government did, not what Snowden said.

[Aloha_Shooter]

Aloha_Shooter: Don't take this as an attack, but more of a thought experiment. What would you do if you were a government contractor with access to the information that Snowden used? Would you keep quiet like so many before making off hand comments leading to rumors, or selectively bring things to light that you (and pretty much everyone else in the US) would agree are in direct violation of the US constitution? If there is a line between patriot and traitor, where is it drawn, and how could Snowden have done things differently in order to preserve our national security all while revealing the direct violations to the US constitution?

Danimal, I've already thought about that and there are ways to handle that. The first and foremost is that if you're truly a whistleblower and don't trust the IG for some reason, you can go to a friendly Congressman or Senator (Rand Paul would seem to be a natural choice) instead of a foreign reporter. You don't hand over gigabytes of information revealing ways and means to foreigners.

His first leaks were on ways and means of intelligence collection -- not corruption. Ways and means -- revealing that was damaging immediately on release. It's like telling Japan on August 10th, 1945 that we'd shot our wad with Fat Man and couldn't drop another atomic bomb if we wanted to.

Contrary to John Cusack's Grosse Pointe Blank, the NSA doesn't have assassins running around shooting leakers. Hell, I think most of the geeks there don't know much about firearms beyond what they see in videogames.

[Rabid]

I do not think a politician would release any of this information to the public because they would go to jail for it. I am glad Snowden poked the bees nest here and abroad because the only way to get change is to have public leverage. The best way to get public leverage is with an incident, just ask the anti-gunner's.

[Mick-Boy]

For the people who think the standard avenues for Whistle Blowers are open for people in the intelligence world, look up the name William Binney.

Federal whistle blower protections don't seem to apply if you're blowing the whistle on the Federal Government.

[KestrelBike]

For the people who think the standard avenues for Whistle Blowers are open for people in the intelligence world, look up the name William Binney.

Federal whistle blower protections don't seem to apply if you're blowing the whistle on the Federal Government.

Funny how the media didn't mention let alone compare Binney when manning and snowden were in the spotlight, at least not that I noticed.

[Danimal]

Danimal, I've already thought about that and there are ways to handle that. The first and foremost is that if you're truly a whistleblower and don't trust the IG for some reason, you can go to a friendly Congressman or Senator (Rand Paul would seem to be a natural choice) instead of a foreign reporter. You don't hand over gigabytes of information revealing ways and means to foreigners.

His first leaks were on ways and means of intelligence collection -- not corruption. Ways and means -- revealing that was damaging immediately on release. It's like telling Japan on August 10th, 1945 that we'd shot our wad with Fat Man and couldn't drop another atomic bomb if we wanted to.

Contrary to John Cusack's Grosse Pointe Blank, the NSA doesn't have assassins running around shooting leakers. Hell, I think most of the geeks there don't know much about firearms beyond what they see in videogames.

The intelligence collection was predominantly regarding US citizens (but also applied to everyone else in the world) and it represents a gross misuse of power and is a prime example of everything wrong with our government. That is corruption, that is spying on your own people and it goes against everything we stand for as a nation with regards to privacy and freedom. He could not have said "this is how we spy on the US citizens, but rest of the world we do something different so don't worry" there is no separation. What was being done that concerned foreign governments was the same thing happening in the US and you cant oust one without the other. I also agree with Rabid in that I would not trust any politician with this information. Kinda like telling a murderer that you just won the lottery and haven't told anyone yet.

I do agree that the information lost was harmful to our nation. I ask these questions because I do not know the answer. You can not have people running around doing what Snowden did and maintain any kind of security as a nation. While I see your point regarding the NSA, I think that you and I would be surprised if we knew the actual extent of the worst deeds done by the ruling elite that populate the government, and the tools they employ in the NSA, IRS, CIA, ATF and many other agencies. You don't need an agency full of assassins, just one or two good ones that are employed for very specific purposes. Their tactic as of late is simply to label the person in question as a terrorist while misconstruing, exaggerating or downright lying about the circumstances surrounding the individual. Then strong arm foreign nations to give them up and kill or lock them up in broad day light as the world watches lulled by the propaganda blasting main stream media.

I think that he did what he did, precisely the way that he did it, because he knew that was the only way he could get the information out. What he said needed to be said, and anything short of absolute proof and divulging of exact information would have been swept under the rug and hushed before it ever could be verified or made public knowledge. Maybe I am giving him too much credit, but maybe not. I think that our government has become corrupt to the point of being a risk to the nation on a completely different level. Protecting the secrets of a criminal organization will keep the criminals safe and sound to do their bidding, but knocking them down also exposes those who were under their "protection".

[Danimal]

For the people who think the standard avenues for Whistle Blowers are open for people in the intelligence world, look up the name William Binney.

Federal whistle blower protections don't seem to apply if you're blowing the whistle on the Federal Government.

I am glad that you posted this. I have never even heard of him. I was in the military when this was happening, so I guess that might have shielded me from the rest of the world. It is a prime example of what happens when you speak out without divulging anything specific. He testified on multiple occasions that the NSA was in direct violation of the constitution, but never cited specifics because he knew what would happen if he did. He was subjected to FBI raid after raid to try and discredit his account and they never found anything, and all charges were dropped. But I have never heard of him, so I bet that there are many people out there that have never heard what he had to say.

[Mick-Boy]

Danimal, if you've got ITunes, look up the podcast "Common Sense" with Dan Carlin. Binney did an interview on there a couple of months ago that was really eye opening in a concerning sort of way.