Posted on 12/03/2013 8:04:04 AM PST by oxcart
Edited on 12/03/2013 1:16:33 PM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]
LONDON (AP) - The editor of The Guardian says his newspaper has published just 1 percent of the material it received from former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden.
Alan Rusbridger is being questioned Monday by Parliament's home affairs committee as part of a session on counter-terrorism.
(Excerpt) Read more at whlt.com ...
No.
It needs to be addressed within the US in the context of law and US security.
And it can be.
Snowden’s acts provided no pertinent information to further inform the American public, but did serve to strengthen enemies.
The bureaucrats are NOT seditious. They are simply traitors to their oath of Office. Not a one fights to uphold the Constitution or protect our individual privacy. They encourage larger government with every vote.
“I think you are saying the bureaucrats are seditious.”
Well, traitorous I think is a better word. They were entrusted by the people to operate within the bounds of the law and Constitution, and they have betrayed our trust, knowingly and intentionally.
No.
The original comment did not have any typos.
Sorry if I sounded snippy. I was to a large degree responding in kind I felt.
My initial comment responded to this comment:
“In the end, I believe the revelations divulged from this release will prove to Americans that its government is actively against them in a substantive manner.”
My initial comment pointed out the irony that Marxist anti-Americans are supposedly the champions for American freedom.
There could be a response to that. One can paraphrase the Bible and say what they meant for evil, God uses for good.
I am surprised that the response is to defend traitorous behavior and defend Marxists from England.
“Snowden’s acts provided no pertinent information to further inform the American public...”
So the wholesale data mining and spying on the American public by our so-called servants is not pertinent? It is to me!
I think Snowden is traitorous because he gave this to other countries that are enemies of the US.
The bureaucrats did not.
Traitor means selling out to an enemy. Sedition means going against the laws and in the case of the US means going against the American people but does not involve any other country.
The wholesale data mining and spying and the capabilities of the US government was well known long before Snowden provided information on details to our enemies.
This has been known for years before Snowden.
He just sold details to China and Russia and by consequence Islamic terrorists to make it easier for them to avoid surveillance.
“One man’s traitor is another man’s patriot. I sure don’t put the folks at the NSA in the latter category.”
Where do you put the Chinese Communist Party?
If Snowden had been working in the interests of the US and her people he would have done this quite differently and not given the information to the Chinese Communists and former Soviets. Or the Guardian.
Thank you. I appreciate the clarification.
“If Snowden had been working in the interests of the US and her people he would have done this quite differently and not given the information to the Chinese Communists and former Soviets. Or the Guardian.”
Wow, how do you know this? So you know for a fact that Snowden gave the Chi Comms all of his purloined files? It that’s true, you should be arranging to “testify” in front of the Congress on all of the stuff that “you know” about everything that Snowden has “done.”
And just how have you determined that Snowden hasn’t been working in the interests of the People of this country? What should he have done “differently?”
We all want to hear your solutions!
“The wholesale data mining and spying and the capabilities of the US government was well known long before Snowden provided information on details to our enemies.
This has been known for years before Snowden.”
Au contraire. It was suspected by those “in the know” about intelligence matters or the technical feasibility of such programs, but it was absolutely not public knowledge nor a verifiable fact. Now it is.
“He just sold details to China and Russia and by consequence Islamic terrorists to make it easier for them to avoid surveillance.”
You have some evidence to back up that claim, I suppose?
I will change sold to gave.
“I think Snowden is traitorous because he gave this to other countries that are enemies of the US.”
He revealed it publicly, so other countries found out as a consequence. There is no way to blow the whistle on this level of government misdoings without such an unfortunate side effect. However, that is not Snowden’s fault; it is the government’s fault for letting things get to the point where there was no alternative but to compromise our own security in order to inform the public.
“Traitor means selling out to an enemy.”
trai·tor
noun: traitor; plural noun: traitors
1.
a person who betrays a friend, country, principle, etc.
The word is entirely apt to apply to bureaucrats who betray the country and the Constitution, even if they do it for their own misguided principles or self-aggrandizement, rather than for a foreign power.
The article for this thread says 1% has been revealed publicly, so you are wrong about that.
What are you saying Snowden revealed that hasn’t been known for years?
Not a trick question on my part, I would like to hear what you have to say.
“Tell me who Snowden could take his concerns to? He would have been fired and the story buried forever. And you know that”
I don’t think I can respond to abject nihilism.
Your comment does reinforce my original observation that there is a subset of people, ostensibly conservatives, who see hostile foreign entities such as the Guardian, as their champion.
Cmon now, you are the one making the claims.
Please tell us all who Snowden could have gone to with his concerns.
Yes.
Sorry, I thought that post was directed at the defender of obama/nsa/status quo.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.