NSA leaker Edward Snowden: Hero or Traitor?

[BigRedBuster]

So if you found evidence of a massive illegal government operation spying on its own citizens, and you could only expose it by breaking the law, you wouldn't expose it?

 

We're different, that's all I can say.

 

 

That is not what I'm saying at all. It is said that he has 3 to 4 lap tops with him with information he down loaded from all the surveillance computers at work. If he needed 3 to 4 computers to hold it all, I'm assuming there is one heck of a lot of info on those computers. I am sure China and Russia would absolutely LOVE to get their hands on those computers.

 

It has been said by Secretary of State Kerry that it is very possible that people will die because of what he has done. Now, just uncovering that they are doing illegal surveillance wouldn't cause that. If he has names and identification of operatives in other countries and other very important information about our intel operations on those computers and those fall into the hands of China and Russia, that can cause some very bad things to people who don't have anything to do with the wire tapping surveillance that he uncovered to the press.

[StPaulHusker]

So if you found evidence of a massive illegal government operation spying on its own citizens, and you could only expose it by breaking the law, you wouldn't expose it?

 

We're different, that's all I can say.

Sure I would. But I wouldn't run to China and Russia with the information under my arm either.

 

What information did Snowden give Russia and China?

I didn't say he did. I said he went to those places with the information in hand.

[knapplc]

So if you found evidence of a massive illegal government operation spying on its own citizens, and you could only expose it by breaking the law, you wouldn't expose it?

 

We're different, that's all I can say.

 

 

That is not what I'm saying at all. It is said that he has 3 to 4 lap tops with him with information he down loaded from all the surveillance computers at work. If he needed 3 to 4 computers to hold it all, I'm assuming there is one heck of a lot of info on those computers. I am sure China and Russia would absolutely LOVE to get their hands on those computers.

 

It has been said by Secretary of State Kerry that it is very possible that people will die because of what he has done. Now, just uncovering that they are doing illegal surveillance wouldn't cause that. If he has names and identification of operatives in other countries and other very important information about our intel operations on those computers and those fall into the hands of China and Russia, that can cause some very bad things to people who don't have anything to do with the wire tapping surveillance that he uncovered to the press.

 

 

If this guy knows anything whatsoever about data storage, and you'd have to believe he knows a little based on the kind of job he has, he doesn't have all his secret stolen data on (a) laptop(s). He's got it on any number of mass storage devices.

 

There's a lot of assuming going on here, and it's all focused on the whistleblower. Who does that benefit? Hmm...

[knapplc]

So if you found evidence of a massive illegal government operation spying on its own citizens, and you could only expose it by breaking the law, you wouldn't expose it?

 

We're different, that's all I can say.

Sure I would. But I wouldn't run to China and Russia with the information under my arm either.

 

What information did Snowden give Russia and China?

I didn't say he did. I said he went to those places with the information in hand.

 

 

What information does he have?

[BigRedBuster]

So if you found evidence of a massive illegal government operation spying on its own citizens, and you could only expose it by breaking the law, you wouldn't expose it?

 

We're different, that's all I can say.

 

 

That is not what I'm saying at all. It is said that he has 3 to 4 lap tops with him with information he down loaded from all the surveillance computers at work. If he needed 3 to 4 computers to hold it all, I'm assuming there is one heck of a lot of info on those computers. I am sure China and Russia would absolutely LOVE to get their hands on those computers.

 

It has been said by Secretary of State Kerry that it is very possible that people will die because of what he has done. Now, just uncovering that they are doing illegal surveillance wouldn't cause that. If he has names and identification of operatives in other countries and other very important information about our intel operations on those computers and those fall into the hands of China and Russia, that can cause some very bad things to people who don't have anything to do with the wire tapping surveillance that he uncovered to the press.

 

 

If this guy knows anything whatsoever about data storage, and you'd have to believe he knows a little based on the kind of job he has, he doesn't have all his secret stolen data on (a) laptop(s). He's got it on any number of mass storage devices.

 

There's a lot of assuming going on here, and it's all focused on the whistleblower. Who does that benefit? Hmm...

 

 

you're assuming also. I'm going off of reports that are in the news. There have been multiple reports about lap tops.

 

Even if he has them on "any number of mass storage devices." it is just plain stupid to run off to countries that wouldn't have a problem killing you for that information.

 

On a side note....I do find if funny that he does all of this in the name of justice and protecting the rights of human beings and then he runs off to countries that have a much worse record than the US in those areas and asks them to protect him.

[Junior]

http://www.slate.com...sa_secrets.html

 

Edward Snowden secured a job with a US government contractor for one reason alone – to obtain evidence on Washington’s cyberspying networks, the South China Morning Post can reveal.

 

For the first time, Snowden has admitted he sought a position at Booz Allen Hamilton so he could collect proof about the US National Security Agency’s secret surveillance programmes ahead of planned leaks to the media. "My position with Booz Allen Hamilton granted me access to lists of machines all over the world the NSA hacked," he told the Post on June 12. "That is why I accepted that position about three months ago." ...

 

Asked if he specifically went to Booz Allen Hamilton to gather evidence of surveillance, he replied: "Correct on Booz." His intention was to collect information about the NSA hacking into "the whole world" and "not specifically Hong Kong and China".

 

I'm planted firmly in the 'traitor' camp now.

If our gov't is secretly doing something evil or unlawful, is it okay to bring it out into the light of day?

 

Evil, maybe. Unlawful, yes. But hate it as much as you want, this wasn't "unlawful". A court granted them the authority.

[StPaulHusker]

So if you found evidence of a massive illegal government operation spying on its own citizens, and you could only expose it by breaking the law, you wouldn't expose it?

 

We're different, that's all I can say.

Sure I would. But I wouldn't run to China and Russia with the information under my arm either.

 

What information did Snowden give Russia and China?

I didn't say he did. I said he went to those places with the information in hand.

 

 

What information does he have?

Quote from the link of the SCMP:

He spent the time collecting a cache of classified documents as a computer systems administrator at Booz Allen Hamilton.

 

We don't know all he has because he is only releasing what he decides to screen. He said he is doing this so as not to dump a huge amount of info to the public.

[knapplc]

OK, so let's presume (arguendo) he has that data. And it's bad for him to have it.

 

That means the government has this info, too. He would have gotten it from them - that's what he claims and that's why they want him.

 

Are we really trusting the government with this data? Especially if they keep it so loosely secure that Edward Snowden can steal it?

[BigRedBuster]

Knapp,

 

You seem to be making an argument where there isn't one.

 

Most people are upset that the government was doing the surveillance on it's citizens that they were doing. If Snowden has the information, the government still has it too. It's not like he stole a car and they want it back. As a citizen of this country, I don't want Russia, China or Cuba to get their hands on that information even if it was gathered in a manner the government shouldn't have been doing.

[knapplc]

What argument am I making?

[Whistlebritches]

Let me start this off with a disclaimer that I'm not actually a tinfoil hat wearing conspiracy theorist...

 

 

I'm not saying he doesn't have a cache of classified documents but I'm not sure I really believe any of sources that says that he does. The NSA could potentially get someone else to do the dirty work for them if China or Russia or whoever else thinks he has a bunch of information on multiple laptops. There are a lot of people pissed off about the US government legally ignoring the fourth amendment and if they can paint Snowden as a traitor who is trying to sell secrets to China it will help their cause. It feels like a distraction.

 

The NSA isn't nearly as stupid and inept as they're trying to portray themselves in the media and his idea that they don't really know where he is located is almost comical.

[zoogs]

If it is protecting and saving American lives then I don't have that much of problem with it.

 

That sounds a little horrifying, doesn't it?

 

Snowden's guilt is a molehill next to the mountain of guilt our government has perpetrated. Both are in violation of the law. The greater wrong is that of the government, not Snowden.

 

I agree with this. However, I don't know if I can find what Snowden did very admirable. Whatever information he's given or not, he's afforded these rival countries diplomatic victories against the US, which they may gleefully exploit to their advantage in any way (the cyberwarfare spat with China [a noble bastion of not observing or controlling their citizens if I've ever seen one] comes to mind in particular).

 

All seems to be a little traitorous to me. Of course given their respective situations, all he can do is play the angelic whistle blower card, and the US could hardly have simply yielded to this sort of security breach. The reality is probably a little less black and white on all sides. It's just weird to find the US in this position. We're the country that Russian and Chinese defectors should be escaping to, not the other way around. Although both ways have happened before and will again, and it's a credit to our society that we at least are willing to openly consider and debate the idea of celebrating what he's done.

 

And about the NSA activities themselves. On the one hand, it sounds horrifying. On the other, all of this metadata is more or less sitting out there. Technology to analyze and gain increasingly useful insight from it is going to be developed. It's a cyber arms race and the U.S. needs to be at the forefront of that. What we need now is our laws to catch up with our tech. That's always a back and forth, no? Even one or two election cycles ago, there was no way for a campaign to know as much about the entire country's voters as the data-mining team working for the Obama campaign knew in 2012. Technology, not unscrupulous politicians, has always radically reshaped society and always will be that driving force. The laws to limit it and deal with it always come later.

 

--Please correct me if I'm wrong about any information I assumed up there, I'm sure there's been some misinformation or other about this circulating in the news and I don't know how up to date I am. I am sure I haven't followed the story as closely as others.

[zoogs]

So if you found evidence of a massive illegal government operation spying on its own citizens, and you could only expose it by breaking the law, you wouldn't expose it?

 

We're different, that's all I can say.

Sure I would. But I wouldn't run to China and Russia with the information under my arm either.

 

What information did Snowden give Russia and China?

 

This is what's being talked about there, right?

 

http://www.eweek.com...essages-report/

 

Snowden has told the South China Morning Post that the U.S. government is spying on Chinese citizens by reading their text messages, among other offenses, the paper reported June 23.

 

"The NSA does all kinds of things like hack Chinese cell phone companies to steal all of your SMS [short Message Service] data," Snowden said, according to the report. He added that NSA had targeted individuals in Hong Kong and on the mainland.

[knapplc]

I don't find his flight to known enemy countries admirable at all. His problem is, where's he going to go if he wants to flee prosecution? Any U.S. ally is just going to hand him over to the feds and he'll be in Leavenworth before he can say "espionage."

 

 

[zoogs]

Yeah, definitely. What else could he do?! And it's a shame that we're the kind of country now that puts people in that situation.

 

All that said, here's another interesting take on the Chinese decision to refuse extradition. Sorry for all the posting, I'm catching up on a lot of this just now.

 

Believe it or not, China likely allowed Snowden’s exit as a favor to the U.S.

 

 

In that thinking, then, when the Chinese government declined to shelter Snowden, perhaps it believed it was communicating that it would not humiliate the United States in the same way that the United States humiliates China by granting asylum to political dissidents. The fact that this gesture took the form of allowing Snowden to flee to Russia has understandably offended Washington. But what we saw as a statement of “America can’t tell us what to do” may well have been meant instead as, “America, this Snowden guy is bound to cause problems between us, but we value our relationship so we’re getting rid of him.”

That's interesting, and I'm wondering if the US response to this whole episode is maybe not as good as it could have been.