Scott Shane in the New York Times: "It is still unclear whether Mr. Snowden, the 30-year-old former N.S.A. contractor now holed up at a Moscow airport, will escape punishment. But he has succeeded in opening the government spying’s trade-offs between civil liberties and security to the broadest and best-informed public debate in many years, even… READ THE REST
This is largest case of domestic espionage that has ever occurred in world history. The vast amount of law breaking and violations of the constitution is so great it can only be described as treason by the last two presidents and the NSA. Snowden has served his country with the cost of his life. No matter where Snowden is he will never experience freedom again.
I don't care about Snowden as a topic anymore. I care about what the NSA is doing, when it's gong to stop, and when the people that setup this country destroying system are tried in court. No debates - prosecutions.
Amazing the number of people running interference for the NSA and the government with Snowden's 'treason'. I've heard him described as a traitor and simply an asshole with ulterior motives(things like "He's just looking to get a juicy book deal!") but no real care to understand what he showed us...
It's likely those are people who can't imagine themselves committing an act of courage. Therefore, they can't imagine anybody else doing it either.
Unfortunately, 55% of Americans can't give Snowden asylum. Even if we use our democratic power to the utmost, it would take a long time to throw the authoritarians out of power - even if we were 100% united.
This is weird and ironic somewhat...
Because now we in Brazil have just the confirmation, via Snowden, about the privacy invasion of our communications by US.
By myself, I would not like a business partner (at least, is what US see on Brazil) to see my communications.
Well, forget Hitler. Is it possible to go back in time and assassinate the Koch brothers?
Oh I can answer that one. There will never be any prosecutions, ever.
I'd be really reluctant to call the guy a "hero". He's being pegged as a libertarian who just hated Obama. His personal motivation has tainted any "good" that may come of his actions.
Yeah, but the survey that shows this 55% is kinda shit. The question is buried at the end of a survey that emphasizes government's bad record of civil liberty abuses, so it seems like there is a built in bias. It also only offers two polar opposites for your choices: Snowden is either a whistleblower or a traitor. It doesn't really allow for expressing a nuanced opinion.
I don't care about Snowden as a topic anymore
You should, because the chilling effect from the way our government is treating him and other whistleblowers is very palpable. Journalists are shrinking away from investigative journalism as we speak. And, I can assure you that there's more whistleblowers out there who are rethinking the effect this all will have on their families, etc. if they come forward.
I commend your concern for the NSA spying itself and it's appreciated here, but please also try to understand the significance of Snowden's case as well. It's very interrelated to our overall outcomes as a republic down the road. Snowden's whistleblowing is just the tip of the iceberg, don't thwart others from coming forward by losing interest in his welfare.
Thanks for the article. They don't like this question:
Do you regard Edward Snowden, the national security consultant who released information to the media about the phone scanning program, as more of a traitor, or more of a whistle-blower?
Because of the words "more of" in the question. That's not a solid analysis for thwarting a poll. The question clearly shows which side of the fence people are on.
Do they honestly think that many people think Snowden is 40 percent evil traitor and 60 percent good samaritan whistleblower? That would only be a ridiculous anomaly fringe element in the poll.
Do Most Americans Really Think Snowden Is a Whistleblower? Yep.
Not any that end without the defendant richer with some fame attached...
He's being pegged on hating Obama, but he's pointed out in the Greenwald interview he waited for the current administration to correct the mistakes of the previous...
Why can't he be both?
Some of what he released was whistleblowing of illegal US behavior, some of it was information concerning legitimate old-school spying.
I don't see how this dude watched what went on with wikileaks and didn't think he'd be better off a) sticking with stuff that was clearly illegal, and b) running somewhere other than 2 of the 4 largest ideological adversaries of the US.
The whistleblowing part might have been good, but he unquestionably broke the law, and dug his own grave with the bad choices he made.
So much time spent analysing the postman, so little time spent reading the damn letter.
As things sit it is an unfortunate distraction, yes. If 90% thought he was just a whistleblower it'd be easy to just discuss the info he leaked. But there are so many people who don't believe him, that believe he's just an "attention grabbing fraud that wants to hurt Obama" it can't be discussed over their wailing...
Why can't he be both?
Because there's no such thing as a traitorous whistleblower. That's ridiculous. If he practiced destructive espionage for financial gain, etc. he wouldn't be called a whistleblower in the first place.
Here, let these 3 guys explain it to you:
That article is terrifying, when they were asked what's going to happen to Snowden. And nobody is in a better position to know.
Right, and people still seem to wonder why Snowden is seeking asylum instead of running into the waiting arms of the American military-industrial complex.
Ah, such a sweet, chilling embrace.
Now I have inspiration for a new painting.