General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsIs Edward Snowden a Hero? A Debate With Journalist Chris Hedges & Law Scholar Geoffrey Stone
Last edited Wed Jun 12, 2013, 03:25 PM - Edit history (4)
VIDEO:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=cKmkxptPLSw
Edward Snowdens decision to leak a trove of secret documents outlining the NSAs surveillance program has elicited a range of reactions. Among his detractors, hes been called "a grandiose narcissist who deserves to be in prison," (Jeffrey Toobin of the New Yorker), whos committed "an act of treason," (Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein, chair of the Senate intelligence committee). To supporters, Snowden is a hero for showing that "our very humanity [is] being compromised by the blind implementation of machines in the name of making us safe," (author Douglas Rushkoff), one whom President Obama should "thank and offer him a job as a White House technology advisor," (American Conservative editor Scott McConnell). We host a debate with two guests: Chris Hedges, a senior fellow at the Nation Institute and former Pulitzer Prize-winning foreign correspondent for the New York Times; and Geoffrey Stone, a professor at the University of Chicago Law School. Stone served as an informal advisor to President Obama in 2008, years after hiring him to teach constitutional law.
Guests
Chris Hedges, a senior fellow at the Nation Institute, he was a foreign correspondent for the New York Times for fifteen years and was part of a team of reporters that was awarded a Pulitzer Prize in 2002 for the papers coverage of global terrorism. He is the author, along with the cartoonist Joe Sacco, of the New York Times bestseller "Days of Destruction, Days of Revolt."
Geoffrey Stone, professor at the University of Chicago Law School. Served as an informal advisor to President Obama in 2008, years after hiring him to teach constitutional law.
http://www.democracynow.org/2013/6/12/is_edward_snowden_a_hero_a
cali
(114,904 posts)KoKo
(84,711 posts)I can't seem to get the Video to post on DU...but, it's available at the site.
xiamiam
(4,906 posts)Hedges was clear and a bit disgusted with him.. Stone, well I'm not impressed
snappyturtle
(14,656 posts)KoKo
(84,711 posts)Hedges did. Also Amy Goodman reading that transcript of his former comments seemed to kind of throw him a bit. He was looking kind of twitchy toward the end. Still, it was good to hear him. He's the lawyer who hired Obama in Chicago...so he was a good spokesman for probably reflecting and defending the views that he feels PBO has about the revelations as well as himself. I thought that Hedges counter was excellent though.
snappyturtle
(14,656 posts)the constitutional law class, Stone got entangled with his present day evaluations of the Snowden situation. His ambivalence between PBO and Hedges got in his way. So we don't agree entirely. imho
KoKo
(84,711 posts)I didn't express it as well as you just did, though. I did think his ambivalence between PBO and Hedges did get in his way.
snappyturtle
(14,656 posts)under the circumstances. Hedges is a formidable foe.
Junkdrawer
(27,993 posts)Something you'll rarely see on McPravda...
Thanks for posting.
KoKo
(84,711 posts)figured no one would bother. The transcript should be out soon at the "Democracy Now Link" for those who don't have bandwidth to watch the video.
Catherina
(35,568 posts)University of Chicago Law School. informal advisor to President Obama. after hiring him to teach constitutional law.
former dean of the University of Chicago Law School. LMAO!
Thanks Koko. That was interesting and also very perturbing. I'm glad Amy had Chris Hedges there to make mincemeat out of that troglodyte.
Posted on 2013 June 12
In this Democracy Now! debate with former New York Times Middle East Bureau Chief Cris Hedges, Stone makes a critically important point about Obama: Whatever he does is accomplished with a Con Law profs finesse, with all the requisite whereas-es and wherefores. Thus, what he does is moral, immoral, or otherwise certain to pass the scrutiny of legislatures and a Supreme Court which hews to the neoliberal line, a doctrine that arose from a cadre of scholars from where else? fficial&client=firefox-a" target="_blank">the University of Chicago.
...
http://richardbrenneman.wordpress.com/2013/06/12/obamas-patron-and-the-fate-of-the-free-press/
pnwmom
(108,977 posts)has come to light.
KoKo
(84,711 posts)You are referring to something else in your own post.
pnwmom
(108,977 posts)KoKo
(84,711 posts)pnwmom
(108,977 posts)KoKo
(84,711 posts)pnwmom
(108,977 posts)KoKo
(84,711 posts)because I don't see you as a TROLL.
I hope you respect ME the same way. I like to see different opinions...but not Lock Down and Trashing.
pnwmom
(108,977 posts)KoKo
(84,711 posts)pnwmom
(108,977 posts)WillyT
(72,631 posts)KoKo
(84,711 posts)Is Edward Snowden a Hero? A Debate with Journalist Chris Hedges & Law Scholar Geoffrey Stone
Edward Snowdens decision to leak a trove of secret documents outlining the NSAs surveillance program has elicited a range of reactions. Among his detractors, hes been called "a grandiose narcissist who deserves to be in prison," (Jeffrey Toobin of The New Yorker), whos committed "an act of treason," (Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein, chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee). To supporters, Snowden is a hero for showing that "our very humanity [is] being compromised by the blind implementation of machines in the name of making us safe," (author Douglas Rushkoff), one whom President Obama should "thank and offer him a job as a White House technology advisor," (American Conservative editor Scott McConnell). We host a debate with two guests: Chris Hedges, a senior fellow at The Nation Institute and former Pulitzer Prize-winning foreign correspondent for The New York Times, and Geoffrey Stone, a professor at the University of Chicago Law School. Stone served as an informal adviser to President Obama in 2008, years after hiring him to teach constitutional law.
START OFF:
GEOFFREY STONE: Well, there is a federal statute that makes it a crime for public employees who have been granted access to classified information to reveal that information to persons who are unauthorized to receive it. So, from a simple, straightforward, technical legal standpoint, theres absolutely no question that Snowden violated the law. And from that standpoint, if hes tried, he will be convicted, and he is in fact, from that perspective, a criminal. Whether one admires what he did is another question, but it doesnt have anything to do with whether or not what he did was unlawful.
The question, why I think he deserves punishment, ishe said it actually himself in the clip that you played earlier: He said, "Im just an ordinary guy." Well, the fact is, hes just an ordinary guy with absolutely no expertise in public policy, in the law, in national security. Hes a techie. He made the decision on his own, without any authorization, without any approval by the American people, to reveal classified information about which he had absolutely no expertise in terms of the danger to the nation, the value of the information to national security. That was a completely irresponsible and dangerous thing to do. Whether we think it was a positive thing in the long run or not is a separate question, but it was clearly criminal.
AMY GOODMAN: Chris Hedges, your response?
CHRIS HEDGES: Well, what were really having a debate about is whether or not were going to have a free press left or not. If there are no Snowdens, if there are no Mannings, if there are no Assanges, there will be no free press. And if the pressand lets not forget that Snowden gave this to The Guardian. This was filtered through a press organization in a classic sort of way whistleblowers provide public information about unconstitutional, criminal activity by their government to the public. So the notion that hes just some individual standing up and releasing stuff over the Internet is false.
But more importantly, what he has exposed essentially shows that anybody who reaches out to the press to expose fraud, crimes, unconstitutional activity, which this clearly appears to be, can be traced and shut down. And thats whats so frightening. So, we are at a situation now, and I speak as a former investigative reporter for The New York Times, by which any investigation into the inner workings of government has become impossible. Thats the real debate.
NERMEEN SHAIKH: Well, Chris, how do you respond to the point that Geoffrey Stone made and how Snowden identified himself as an ordinary guy? Should any regular government employee or contractor be allowed to disclose whatever information he feels the public ought to be privy to, whether its classified by the government and his employer or her employer or not?
CHRIS HEDGES: Well, ifthat is what an act of conscience is. And reporters liveour sort of daily fare is built, investigative reporters, off of people who, within systems of power, have a conscience to expose activities by the power elite which are criminal in origin or unconstitutional. And thats precisely what he did. And he did it in the traditional way, which was going to a journalist, Glenn Greenwald and The Guardian, and having it vetted by that publication before it was put out to the public. Was it a criminal? Well, yes, but it wasI suppose, in a technical sense, it was criminal, but set against the larger crime that is being committed by the state. When you have a system by which criminals are in power, criminals on Wall Street who are able to carry out massive fraud with no kinds of repercussions or serious regulation or investigation, criminals who torture in our black sites, criminals who carry out targeted assassinations, criminals who lie to the American public to prosecute preemptive war, which under international law is illegal, if you are a strict legalist, as apparently Professor Stone is, what youre in essence doing is protecting criminal activity. I would argue that in large sections of our government its the criminals who are in power.
FULL TRANSCRIPT...POWER WATCH...BOOKMARK for WEEKEND OR WHATEVER...It's TRULY A GOOD WATCH. Sort of the BEST OF OBAMA...VS. the BEST OF CHRIS HEDGES! I kid you not! IF YOU CARE ABOUT OUR COUNTRY. WHICHEVER SIDE YOU ARE OWN in the Political Wars on the LEFT/RIGHT or WHATEVER...
http://www.democracynow.org/2013/6/12/is_edward_snowden_a_hero_a
snagglepuss
(12,704 posts)Squinch
(50,949 posts)antigop
(12,778 posts)BlueStreak
(8,377 posts)And most of the time, he was talking about what he considered to be settled law versus the bigger issues. In the cases where they did pin him down on the broader issues, he conceded what is obvious to many of us, that we have some fundamental problems in our system now, and are heading for disaster. Stone never did address Hedges' central argument, which is that this is part of an ongoing process to effective eliminate the possibility of a free press. I wish he would have commented on that, although I guess he felt he wasn't qualified.
But I am not sure his qualifications serve him well with regard to the 4th Amendment. He spoke as if he were the authoritative voice on that, but indeed there are many other scholars who do not agree with his position.
Hydra
(14,459 posts)He's assuming the Gov't led by President Obama is a benevolent entity, therefore even though there are legal issues, this overarching threat of terrorism is somehow bigger and more powerful than the rule of law.
I'm highly freaked out by the people who are suggesting rule of law isn't important enough to keep in place. That hand basket is big enough for all of us to fit into.