Snowden set back civil liberties badly.

[gulliver]

He's a grotesque misfire. Anyone backing him is being foolish. Maybe the government shouldn't be doing something or maybe it should. But the last thing civil liberties backers needed was a guy like Snowden, the weakest possible vessel for the message.

His exaggerations and his flight to Hong Kong turn him into poison. Maybe if he comes back to the United States to actually make his case and accept whatever happens to him, then you can call him courageous. Foolish, crazy, yes. But he would then be courageous. I don't know which book has heroes in it who run away to save their own skins. Not mine.

[allin99]

1. lmao

[Cooley Hurd]

2. This has to be an ironic post...

Love it!!

[Monkie]

21. best laugh i have had all day so ty to the OP

love it irony or no irony it works for me.

[randome]

3. "...weakest possible vessel..." All too true.

Even his resume is forged. Why would we believe anyone who says "I saw things" but doesn't give us any evidence?

Someone who says "I'm not here to hide from justice" from his undisclosed location in Hong Kong?

I'll believe anything he says if he shows some evidence. So far there has been none.

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]

[Fumesucker]

4. You've been talking to those Houyhnhnms again, admit it

[gulliver]

15. I'll take that. n/t

[dairydog91]

5. This is pathetic.

But the last thing civil liberties backers needed was a guy like Snowden, the weakest possible vessel for the message.

So you basically have to be Jesus Christ 2.0 in order for information you leak to be taken seriously?

His exaggerations and his flight to Hong Kong turn him into poison.

Either what he revealed is true, or it's invented. So far, it seems that he revealed actual documents. Character assassination doesn't change that at all.

[morningfog]

6. How DU get so stupid, naive and authoritarian?

[cali]

23. the SQ is ever rising on DU.

[dairydog91]

24. With the internet, you never have to worry that we will hit Peak Derp.

[Union Scribe]

43. Peak Derp!

[gulliver]

33. The pro-Snowden folks really are kind of dictatorial here lately.

Not to mention abusive.

[Posteritatis]

41. There's been authoritarian streaks here for a long time

It's usually been issue-specific, but it does seem to be getting worse lately.

[MNBrewer]

7. Thanks for focusing on the messenger

Just like the anti-civil liberties crowd wants us to.

You have the talking points down pat on that, by the way. Congrats.

[carolinayellowdog]

8. this isn't about whether one "backs" a person, but a principle

from which no one is being distracted despite voluminous efforts from those who want to make it about backing some person or not

[boilerbabe]

9. UNREC.

[mike_c]

10. activate the propaganda 'bots, Sparky....

Sheesh.

[Downwinder]

11. Didn't your mother ever tell you,

"He who fights and runs away will live to fight another day?"

---

Demosthenes

When: 338 B.C.

The Story behind It: In August of 338 B.C., the Athenian orator and statesman Demosthenes was an infantryman at Chaeronea, where a great battle took place between the Athenians and the Macedonians. The Macedonians were victorious, and 3,000 Athenians died. Demosthenes fled from the battlefield and was subsequently censured because of his desertion. To anyone who later called him a coward, Demosthenes retorted, "The man who runs away may fight again." From that line is derived the modern day version "He who fights and runs away will live to fight another day."
http://www.trivia-library.com/b/origins-of-sayings-live-to-fight-another-day.htm

[backscatter712]

12. Another willing authoritarian quisling for my ignore list. *PLONK*

Welcome to the ranks of the dishonored.

[cali]

13. this is all getting beyond absurd.

this is not about Snowden. He certainly hasn't set back civil liberties in any way and feeble minded arguments certainly don't make that true.

The focus on destroying Snowden is sick shit. How about addressing the issues massive surveillance, the expense of said surveillance, the fact that there are 16 spy agencies, that we have a foreign policy so toxic that we have a need for an enormous national security apparatus, and on and on.

I'm so sick of so much fucking stupid.

[gulliver]

17. Of course the message isn't for you, I guess. n/t

[SomethingFishy]

22. The "message" if that's what you call this..

Is it's ok for the government to spy on you, to violate your civil rights because the guy who told you they were doing it is an asshole.

Fucking brilliant... really.

[gulliver]

26. Nope, that's not the message, but it is warm.

The message is that it's not OK for the government to spy on you, but Snowden made it a lot harder to stop.

[Vinnie From Indy]

32. The stupidity of this post is sublime

It deserves a place in a Museum of Stupid.

Cheers!

[gulliver]

48. I respect a your connoisseurship.

[Union Scribe]

44. Yeah, we've only got our government talking about it openly now

So no. He didn't.

[neverforget]

46. So by pointing out that the gov't is spying on us makes it harder to stop?

How can you stop something if you don't know about it?

[Bluenorthwest]

28. All attempts to use personal matters to destroy another because of politics are of the right.

What I think about the subject of such tactics is beside the point entirely. The point is that the tactics are vicious, small minded and definitive of a right wing authoritarian mindset coupled with a Rona Barrett style love of gossip and innuendo.
So I could think Snowden is Satan and still reject this crappy methodology for the shallow, poisonous distraction that it is. The individual is never the point. He's a non entity, not some 'vessel'. He leaked papers, he's not leading some movement or speaking for a people. Climb down off the word cheese and talk about the issues not about what was worn by the people involved and who keeps a tidy house.

[gulliver]

30. Not really. But prove it.

I'm happy to hear the argument that goes with the assumption.

[Bluenorthwest]

31. Prove what? You offered no comment nor counter to a word I said. 'Not really'? Not really

what? I say the very nature of the politics of personal destruction is right wing. You, in defense of that tactic, say 'not really'.
You make me laugh.

[Vinnie From Indy]

34. You have as much intent to debate this issue

rationally and objectively as my dog.

[gulliver]

35. Your dog must have some serious forensic aspirations then.

Because, I'm actually debating. What I am seeing in response couldn't be called debating though. Your dog would be a standout.

[Vinnie From Indy]

38. No, you are not debating!

You are slinging shit and engaged in character assassination in the hopes that the legions of very smart people here on DU are going to buy into it. Your OP is simply nonsense and not even a moderately well crafted attempt at character assassination.

[dkf]

14. Lol like its not our GOVERNMENT that has done that.

Your reasoning is completely messed up and backward.

[Apophis]

16. Wow.

I never thought this website would get this low, but here we are.

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

18. Riiiiiiight... the government spying on EVERY American was good for our civil liberties

and Snowden went and fucked up our big brothers program to keep us and all our civil liberties safe and secure in an undisclosed location.

[jsr]

19. Yep, he's making things worse for everyone

"He betrayed the privacy of us all. If federal security agencies can’t do vast data sweeps, they will inevitably revert to the older, more intrusive eavesdropping methods." - David Brooks 6/11/13

[lumberjack_jeff]

20. Concern trolling.

The cause of civil liberties would have been promoted by Snowden sitting down and shutting the fuck up?

[gulliver]

29. Snowden, yes.

It hasn't been shown that he has anything to say that wasn't already known anyway. He's all lossage.

[Poll_Blind]

25. Laughable if it weren't so genuinely out of touch. nt

PB

[99Forever]

27. But of course!

And up really is down and dark is light and slavery is freedom and.....

[magellan]

36. Not a misfire or a set back by any stretch of the imagination

It got people talking about government domestic surveillance. Everything we know the NSA has been doing is legal. That fact alone should outrage every American. (There's a lot we don't know that might be illegal; abuse is likely but not yet in evidence.)

FISA and especially the Patriot Act are wretched stains on this country. Together they enable the policy of secret, sweeping domestic spying. And we dare to call ourselves a democracy while electing and re-electing people who brought this crap into existence and voted 'yea' for the Patriot Act to be extended?

At least Nadler voted against the 2011 extension, along with 147 others in the House -- mostly Democrats. That should be the vote of everyone in Congress, and if it isn't they need to be replaced, full stop.

Snowden? This isn't about him. This is about what we're willing to put up with from the people we elect to represent us. Sadly, I think many Americans were fucking clueless about what the government is doing until Snowden popped up...and the transparent attempts to make it about him rather than the morally and ethically reprehensible -- even unAmerican -- domestic spying are only clouding the issue more.

[nadinbrzezinski]

37. My, that is the kind of doublespeak Orwell would be proud off

how much does that gig at the Dept. of Truth pay?

[reformist2]

39. The less we talk about government tyranny, the freer we will be!!!

[mick063]

40. An analogy

Bin Laden is dead but he still won.

If he put his cause greater than himself that is.

I despise everything that Bin Laden did, but I acknowledge that he was ultimately successful in altering our daily lives (in a negative way).

Snowden could have been a good "Patriot" and lived a life free from being a refugee. I believe his actions were well intended regardless if they were clumsily implemented.

He will also alter our daily lives. Now it remains to be seen if it is positive.

If the public discussion, that Snowden brought about, brings about "reigning in" the spook bureaucracy from comprehensive data mining without due cause, then Snowden will have impacted us in a positive way.

If Snowden's actions bring about less transparency, an argument for surveillance expansion, and further efficiency in citizen spying, than Snowden was a failure.

It will take a decade or more to see how this plays out.

[catnhatnh]

47. You realize your little buzz phrase "lived life free from being a refugee"

Means spent life in prison, right?

[mick063]

50. I realize that some folks focus more on the individual than on the topic of citizen spying.

I try to refrain from commenting on such things because it lends credibility to an old Republican tactic. If you can't win the argument, then smear the messenger.

I responded to this OP because he took it to the level worthy of discussion. He talks of the long range impact of Snowden's action.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

42. As public concerns grow, Congress spooked over spying - Kansas City Star/McClatchy

Gosh, some people do care about the government trashing of their liberties and the constitution.

http://www.kansascity.com/2013/06/14/4293439/as-public-concerns-grow-congress.html


WASHINGTON — The American people are growing increasingly concerned about reports of domestic spying. And Congress isn’t sure how to respond.

The public’s views have been evolving over the past week and a half. When news broke earlier this month that the National Security Agency could tap data from phone and Internet companies, most people accepted the tradeoff between security and privacy. Members of Congress routinely defended the programs.

Not anymore. By week’s end, polls suggested a groundswell of concern and lawmakers were hearing from constituents. Conversations at the Capitol had a new hue: Sure, the government says it has safeguards in place so it won’t listen to my calls and read my emails – but can it ever really control some rogue operator? And where is all that data? Who’s in charge?

The politicians are in a fix. Administration officials have secret briefings and most lawmakers walk out tight-lipped, skittish about revealing any details or betraying any doubts.

[Yo_Mama]

45. I disagree

What this issue needed was public discussion. He made that happen.

It is not an issue of whether one personally admires Snowden - it is an issue of whether he is disclosing the truth, and if so, what that truth means for our society.

Since others have come forward to support some of his claims which were alleged to be false, I think he did us all a service.

In any case, you began this thread by saying that Snowden "set back civil liberties badly," and this seems to me to be a senseless statement. The essence of civil liberties is that they adhere to the individual. Whether Snowden is a good or a bad guy could have no effect on anyone else's civil liberties in a society which respected civil liberties. If you truly believe that Snowden's actions will restrict the civil liberties of others, then in essence you are conceding the point that we are a society which has abandoned civil liberties as a fundamental underpinning of human rights, and instead substituted a concept of "civil liberties if we can afford to allow them to the public". Which is exactly what Snowden says he is trying to work against.

[Bluenorthwest]

49. Dear Centrists,

Please get new, more talented people to make better, less cloying arguments. Thanks.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

51. aww

[Android3.14]

52. And that's why it's okay for the government to spy on

It's so simple.

[Th1onein]

53. You are joking, right?