General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWhy the Snowden Story Frustrates Me
There are several parts to the story that are tough for me:
My own cynicism
I don't like the NSA being able to search through any American's information, all under a very secret (and apparently not very stringent) form of due process. But I already figured they were doing just that. Nothing Snowden revealed was surprsing to me. I get the feeling it's that way with many Americans. And, in all honesty, I don't think one thing will change as a result of Snowden's leak in regards to the NSA or other surveillance programs. The American people don't care enough, and even if they did, our political system is set up in such a way that they have limited to no recourse, given that both parties are behind it. I suppose people could elect more liberal Democrats, but I've seen some pretty liberal Democratic Reps defending the NSA, so I'm not sure that is really a solution either.
My understanding is that once the technology is there, the government will utilize it. There is no stopping that. The best that can be done is heavy open regulation of such tools, but even if regulations called for open due process on the NSA, I would think they would have a secret due process for "really dangerous" situations etc., and it would be hard or even impossible to ever know for sure the government is playing above board at all times. Am I too cynical about it? Maybe. But that cynicism made me sort of go "meh" to the whole situation. I see others very passionate about this story that share the same values I do, and it bothers me that I just don't feel it.
I think Edward Snowden should be prosecuted and dislike the guy's tactics
I know that Snowden isn't really the story, but I'd think I would at least admire the guy who had exposed a spying program because of his love of privacy and think he shouldn't be prosecuted, but I don't.
Here is a supposed whistleblower, one that revealed important details to the US spying on its own citizens, and yet I actually think he should be prosecuted. The only thing I'd change is his possible jail sentance from decades to something like 5 years. It's because of the political cover and usefulness he has now played for repressive regimes. He says it was an act of conscious, but if that was the case he would've stayed in the US and accepted the consequences. If he did that, it would've focused the story on the NSA and any punishment would look very heavy handed.
Can I really blame a guy for not wanting to risk spending the rest of his life in jail for the right to privacy, something I hold dear? Well, it just seems that by running away, to Hong Kong of all places, he's undermined it being just about his conscious or even about his love of the right of privacy, but that's it's also about him and he doesn't mind giving other repressive regimes political cover and pwer. Hong Kong is no liberty paradise, and Moscow, where he is now... well it's a downgrade in a couple ways. I just don't see the point of relying on other repressive regimes, who will use you for their own purposes, to defend a right to privacy. It seems utterly stupid and hypocritical, not to mention harmful to the population of those regimes. It undermines the message, even though I know it's not about Snowden. So here I am, a supposed progressive, thinking Snowden should be prosectued and finding him utterly unhelpful to any fight for the right to privacy. A weird place to be I suppose.
Libertarian hypocrisy and naivete
Snowden seemed to have libertarian leanings, and a lot of the support for Snowden is from libertarians. I can't stand libertarianism. It is a terrible and naive ideology that indirectly supports the status quo and the powers that be. In some ways, Snowden is doing just this by giving political power and cover to repressive regimes as part of his flight.
A reminder of how conservative the Democratic Party is
I already know the Democrats are a moderately conservative party, relative to the world, but these sorts of episodes make it painfully clear, especially the support of the more conservative Republicans of the President and of this program. Which adds to my cynicism. Maybe it's just a feedback loop.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)there fore he can not hide under this act. I don't think it was about him "exposing the programs" but an intentional delivery of information he should not be revealing, he spied and lied and now charges of espionage is proper. If he is complaining and should we ever get him in custody and he is placed in prison guess what, he will have all his communications listened and recorded so he apparently likes this action.
I also agree with the libertarian leanings, I think this is the backings of the "cause" so many of the libertarian trolls to this sight has posted. Maybe the next time security clearance is given the background of close dealings with libertarian leanings should exclude this group from getting the clearance.
dkf
(37,305 posts)Egregious and rampant Breaches of our constitutional rights.
What an indictment of a "loyal Democrat". Loyal to who I would ask, certainly not the people.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)problem. Staying loyal in working within the Code of Ethics and not spying and running off at the mouth is disloyal.
dkf
(37,305 posts)They took an oath to protect the constitution. That is the code they should be following.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Edward Snowden? They do not seem to be the same. Also it is not the Code of Ethics of Edward Snowden either. He is a spy.
dkf
(37,305 posts)State.
What the hell happened to this country?
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Warrant. What has been happening with this country is causes has been declaring our Constitution invalid if it does not agree with their thinking.
dkf
(37,305 posts)If you can't recognize what is so damned obvious I can't convince you.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)the Amendment was added it is not valid then you are double talking. How can your Fourth Amendment rights be violated if they are not valid.
Downwinder
(12,869 posts)with our allies?
DirkGently
(12,151 posts)That's the ridiculous charge the administration has been abusing repeatedly. It's a WWI-era law designed to punish people for handing over top-secret military information to countries with which we are at war.
The conceit that we are now "at war," forever, with everyone, or that revealing information that is politically inconvenient is a crime, is a classic authoritarian abuse of authority.
Harmony Blue
(3,978 posts)the United States in "a perpetual war state" is bad omen for our republic.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)I do not have the right to make my own laws and decide which I might want to do. I do not have the right to spy and reveal this information to foreign countries or news media sources.
DirkGently
(12,151 posts)That's the problem we're talking about. And yes, if you come down in favor of the notion that government can imprison people for embarrassing it, conflating that to somehow harming "the country," that is authoritarianism.
Some people think that's a good idea. Fellows that wrote our Constitution did not.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)DirkGently
(12,151 posts)Thus the membership in the "Democratic Underground."
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Th1onein
(8,514 posts)Snowden told the American people, and the people of the world, that we were being spied on. He risked his life, his freedom, and had to give up his entire way of living for that. I don't think we can begin to thank him enough for his sacrifice.
To be accused of having libertarian leanings at this point, because we support what he did, and are grateful? Well, it just stinks to high heaven.
Shame on you.
Harmony Blue
(3,978 posts)and ignore what they rest of the world is writing and saying.
IMVHO.