Edward Snowden DID Give Files to Russians, Chinese After All

a reply to: Wardaddy454

Did you watch his interview? Snowden doesn't "lecture". He was very limited to where he could find asylum...Russia was not his choice. What nice places offered him asylum?? Everyone turned him away.....even Russia made him live in an airport for 3 weeks!

THE SUNDAY TIMES’ SNOWDEN STORY IS JOURNALISM AT ITS WORST — AND FILLED WITH FALSEHOODS

This is the very opposite of journalism. Ponder how dumb someone has to be at this point to read an anonymous government accusation, made with zero evidence, and accept it as true.

Glen Greenwald demonstrates just how pathetic and subservient western media is.

a reply to: Kram09
It's not just western media that can be pathetic and subservient. Even on a conspiracy theory site, there are obviously plenty of people willing and eager to lap up state-approved 'news' articles from one side or the other.

No one here knows Snowden's true motivations. The case can be made that he is a traitor or a hero, but either way we have to rely on biased sources with a vested interest in labeling him. What we know without a doubt is because of Snowden's actions, conspiracy theory has become known reality. A suspected policy of civil rights violations is now undeniable. In light of that, I would have to see some pretty disturbing and irrefutable evidence to believe he is nothing but a traitor.

I briefly mentioned this story to a friend of mine who doesn't really get into conspiracy theories or anything. He is a very rational, cut and dry political type. He is reasonably familiar with the Snowden stories. I mentioned that supposedly it was recently officially ascertained that he had given his stolen information to Russia and China. My friend's response was that Putin probably made this claim as a PsyOps or that this was somehow contrived information, generally speaking.

originally posted by: Greathouse
Snowden is no hero that information first came out in 1988 and here's a 2000 version from 60 minutes giving the same information Snowden gave .

People were alleging that information a long time ago. What Snowden did is deliver tangible proof. In the legal world where people don't react without evidence there is a VERY big difference between the two.

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
Let's make one thing clear he didn't give them anything he sold the info

How do you think the Chinese were able to hack the fed govt for over a year. Thank you snowden you traitor

The Chinese were able to hack the US govt because of the very very abysmal security on their networks. Honestly, when a salesman finds the malware during a product demo that has been on the system for over a year... that has nothing to do at all with Snowden. Although the salesman probably did close the sale

originally posted by: iskander683
a reply to: WolfBytes

Call me old fashioned if you like, but if you take something without the permission of the person/organisation that the something belongs to, you are stealing.........he stole secret files. Fact, not speculation my friend.

In the eyes of many, that act was done to expose and even greater crime. Just because something is legal does not make it right and just because something is illegal does not make it immoral.

a reply to: iskander683

One cannot "steal" free information, old or not, age is no differ from the truth. I can see you really hate what america has become, like the old adage "love it or leave it."

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: Greathouse
Snowden is no hero that information first came out in 1988 and here's a 2000 version from 60 minutes giving the same information Snowden gave .

People were alleging that information a long time ago. What Snowden did is deliver tangible proof. In the legal world where people don't react without evidence there is a VERY big difference between the two.

I did not include the video in my post. There is no supposition in this 60 minutes segment that aired in the year 2000 . They stated exactly what was going on and other complicit countries involved in this attack on liberties .




The 1988 report on Echlon was even more specific .


Echlon reports 1972 and 1988

Nobody here knows the truth, but we've got a board full of self-sure fools. I'm going to be called arrogant for pointing this out LOL.

I leave judgment out of this one. There's too many complexities to properly assess the situation, and even if you know the facts surrounding his case, how these affect your perceptions of reality already flowing through your mind would bring about a possible judgment.

It seems the difference between patriot and traitor comes with either acceptance and success or rejection and defeat. I don't think anybodies hands are clean if we expand out enough. Traitor to a country... that is still morally in the right in the eyes of the world, or no?

Meh, let y'all duke it out. Sitting on the sidelines with this one.