General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsNYT editor's blog: Snowden’s Questionable New Turn
By DAVID FIRESTONE
When Edward Snowden first began leaking documents he purloined from the National Security Agency, he seemed to have a clear sense of purpose. He wanted to let Americans know that their government was secretly spying on the phone records of millions of innocent citizens, infringing on their civil liberties, and that it was demanding information on some of the Internet traffic flowing through American computer systems.
<...>
Mr. Snowdens actions, though illegal, exposed programs that many people, including lawmakers of both parties, believed had gone too far. The leaks showed how the intelligence community had used the cover of secrecy to expand and abuse its domestic surveillance powers, surprising even people who had written the post-9/11 laws on which these powers were supposed to be based. They have spurred a useful and important debate on whether those laws should be changed.
In the last few days, however, Mr. Snowdens leaks have taken a questionable turn. He told the South China Morning Post that the United States had hacked into many Chinese computer systems, including those at universities and businesses. And yesterday he showed documents to the Guardian revealing that the N.S.A. and its British counterpart had spied on politicians from around the world who attended the 2009 G-20 summit in London....The N.S.A. was created to spy on overseas communications, and there is no serious debate about whether it should be doing so. Revealing that it was monitoring the computer traffic of foreign countries, and listening to their leaders, sheds no particularly useful light on the N.S.A.s mission, or what most people believed its activities to be....In an online chat today with readers of the Guardian, Mr. Snowden expressed outrage that the United States would hack into civilian computers overseas, which he called nakedly, aggressively criminal acts. And he came up with an odd formulation for what the N.S.A. should and shouldnt be doing overseas:
Congress hasnt declared war on the countries, he wrote. The majority of them are our allies, but without asking for public permission, N.S.A. is running network operations against them that affect millions of innocent people.
So apparently he believes that the United States shouldnt engage in spying except for countries with which it is at war. Of course, were not at war with any countries right now, only with Al Qaeda and its allies, so that would mean shutting down all non-terror spying activities. The idea that we should unilaterally discard a practice however distasteful used for centuries by virtually every country that can afford a spy service is naïve. Every industrialized country spies on every other, in part to learn just how much they are being spied on. What exactly was it he believed the intelligence world did when he first started making money by working for it?
http://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/06/17/snowdens-questionable-new-turn/
ProSense
(116,464 posts)longship
(40,416 posts)Important information that shows the extent of this spying, beyond that which has been revealed up to now.
He also claims that his freedom, and his very life, is in danger.
So, Mr. Snowden, why wait to release this other information now while you have the eyes and ears of the world, many on your side? Why waste this opportunity? Why hold anything back just at the point where you have everybody's attention?
I am firmly in the belief that these revelations are important, although we've all known about them for years whether people want to admit that fact or not. I don't like the extent of this at all, although some are inevitably conflating the extent of it.
But I still cannot figure out this Snowden guy. Maybe he is just out of his depth and is making irrational decisions. Maybe he's being manipulated by people who might want to milk this thing (doubtful).
But I cannot think that any rational person would withhold information if he honestly thinks that it should be released and who simultaneously thinks he is subject to being apprehended at any time and thus prevented from releasing it.
His story is a very strange one. Without making any judgement I just do not understand it.
FarCenter
(19,429 posts)For example, if a server somewhere doesn't get an "I am well" message from him, it releases an email blast of documents to news outlets around the world.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)"His story is a very strange one. Without making any judgement I just do not understand it."
...the reason Snowden is tripping all over his claims of domestic spying is because it was a distraction, the "bombshell" loaded with inaccuracies to blow up the story. It's seems clear to me that his goal was to embarrass the U.S. He seems preoccupied with spying on other countries.
Think about some of his claims:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023032903#post12
This is also curious:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023035095
longship
(40,416 posts)Mainly for lack of any evidence other than circumstances, which cannot tell people what's in the guy's mind.
But I have found this guy's story a bit weird from the beginning, starting with a guy with no education and no apparent stable CV getting a secret clearance in the first place. As a previous holder of such a clearance, this bothers me.
Then, there's the releasing of secrets via Power Point slides, which contain no specifics which in turn leads to inevitable conflation and suppositions on their interpretation. Of course, the more paranoid amongst us sees the worst case scenario, sets their hair on fire and start running around DU calling people names.
Myself, I am very concerned about this, and have been since these policies were put in place years ago. But I gladly voted for Barack Obama twice knowing full well that he would not likely be able to stop them from happening.
I only hope that the resolution to this does two things.
1. Helps us see the folly of it.
2. Doesn't hurt the Democratic Party's chances in future elections.
I am also sure that the GOP will do their best to see that those two goals are not achieved.
randome
(34,845 posts)Look at his resume. Much of it doesn't hold up. He apparently didn't understand what a secure FTP server is.
I suspect he has spent most of his life 'faking' his way past people and problems. And in the end, he could no longer distinguish between his image of himself and reality.
I really think that's at the root of all this.
[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]
moondust
(19,984 posts)and he doesn't understand the ABCs of threat assessment and contingency planning?
Scurrilous
(38,687 posts)This thread was alerted on. The alert failed miserably (0 - 6).
ProSense
(116,464 posts)Kooky!
randome
(34,845 posts)[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]
Floyd_Gondolli
(1,277 posts)As we've seen around these parts lately.
longship
(40,416 posts)At least they'll not be able to use the alert again for 24 hours.
That says something.
Major Hogwash
(17,656 posts)Last edited Tue Jun 18, 2013, 01:22 AM - Edit history (1)
The Romans had spies, so his argument doesn't hold water.
As to him being "the decider" as to what the United States intelligence community should be doing, well, he's like George Dubya . . a moron.
One man does not decide what this country does or does not do.
Snowden is a thief who stole secret documents from the NSA and who is now publishing them.
That's not the stuff of heroes.
warrprayer
(4,734 posts)have you posted ripping on Snowden so far? I think at least 15.
Cali_Democrat
(30,439 posts)Suck it up.
warrprayer
(4,734 posts)JURY RESULTS
A randomly-selected Jury of DU members completed their review of this alert at Mon Jun 17, 2013, 04:45 PM, and voted 2-4 to LEAVE IT ALONE.
Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: Snarky comment got a snarky comment in return. Let them hash it out. It is a discussion thread after all.
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT and said: Bully BS, and I agree with the alerter about the pack mentality. I can name 3 of the pack right off my head. Hide this, this poster is an ass.
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT and said: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: Oh, please. Suck it up is right.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: Perhaps he should have used different wording, or perhaps we are too sensitive, however, this can be rebuttal easily instead of censoring it
Cha
(297,240 posts)So, who did die?
... made it worth posting. glad you enjoyed!
ProSense
(116,464 posts)"How many threads have you posted ripping on Snowden so far? I think at least 15."
...bothered by all the threads on Snowden?
Maybe you should take a break or hide them.
warrprayer
(4,734 posts)... but this Snowden bit seems to have seriously rattled your cage. The tone of your posts regarding this seem to be dripping not with sarcasm, but desperation.
Katashi_itto
(10,175 posts)ProSense
(116,464 posts)http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023035550
sibelian
(7,804 posts)OMG!
Will he sprout horns? Maybe his face will go all snarly like David Boreanez in "Angel".
You know what I think? I think there will be another event where he will "become" a traitor at some point in the future. And then another...
And then another...
Cha
(297,240 posts)regarding this are beyond Desperate. You poor poor little hysterical thing
I'm being attacked by a pack of pit bulls in the Olive Garden!
longship
(40,416 posts)Read it, or not.
Believe it, or not (Ripley?).
Attacking a DUer for making a post from the NYT on an apparently important DU topic is inappropriate, and arguably childish.
If you don't like what's in the NYT article, don't read it, or rebut it rationally. There's also DU tools to protect people here from being exposed to opinions that don't agree with theirs, if they wish.
I choose to not use them as I find contrary arguments important.
treestar
(82,383 posts)There a just different people doing it. Like a little team.
usGovOwesUs3Trillion
(2,022 posts)Why are some having such a problem with that?
That is a HUGE difference than what has been practiced in the past.
These fucking liars and their backers have been lying to us about the purpose, too!
"It is only to keep us safe, targeted at TERRORIST" LIE
It is to watch EVERYONE, and to gain political and economical advantage over others, pretty much rigging the system, and they wonder why no one has any faith in them any more, the fucking total LOSER SCUMBAGS!
warrprayer
(4,734 posts)that is the bedrock of this whole affair.
Major Hogwash
(17,656 posts)What are you going on about?
usGovOwesUs3Trillion
(2,022 posts)Are you paying attention?
randome
(34,845 posts)[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]
Scurrilous
(38,687 posts)Union Scribe
(7,099 posts)You can't stop this issue now. By all means, continuing securing the empty barn's door though.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)"You've lost."
...have I "lost"?
I'm not the one hiding in Hong Kong with supporters begging for a Presidential pardon.
"You can't stop this issue now. By all means, continuing securing the empty barn's door though."
You're right, the issue isn't going away, and I'm just part of the discussion.
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)That's an honest question.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)"Have you posted a single OP regarding the leaks that wasn't inline with the federal government?
That's an honest question."
...work for the NSA?
I mean, I have no idea who you are, but here you are asking me questions about my posts. I can only conclude that people who resort to this kind of question really hate other people's opinions.
I'll give you a few links, and beyond that I don't care what your opinion of them are. I'll provide a few links if only to keep you focused on the issues instead of me.
Another misleading media report implies that warrantless wiretapping is legal.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023026724
Remember whistleblower Thomas Tamm?
http://election.democraticunderground.com/10023032225
"With today's lawsuit, the ACLU is now attacking Section 215 on three legal fronts"
http://election.democraticunderground.com/10022997462
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)You and several other people have been FLOODING this board with posts disparaging Snowden and building up support for the Obama administration. One or two posts would be unremarkable. Dozens of posts? That's a campaign.
If you're going to be a party shill, at least be forthcoming.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)"You and several other people have been FLOODING this board with posts disparaging Snowden and building up support for the Obama administration. One or two posts would be unremarkable. Dozens of posts? That's a campaign. "
...welcome to DU, and learn to deal with it. No one cares if you're pissed off that people don't buy Snowden's bullshit.
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)It's more so the fact that at literally every turn, you are there to toe the line for this administration. It's transparent and I think a lot of people are starting to notice.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)"It's not so much that you don't buy Snowden or his "bullshit."
It's more so the fact that at literally every turn, you are there to toe the line for this administration. It's transparent and I think a lot of people are starting to notice. "
...another just-arrived poster engaged in psychobabble and self-declaring to think for "a lot of people."
Enjoy your stay, and don't make me start...
treestar
(82,383 posts)It is indeed quite naive to think we can be the only country not doing it.