Edward Snowden Is A Hero, Not A Traitor

Stop pretending this is a difficult discussion! We still hunt Nazis who followed orders and did as their Nazi government instructed. The better they did...the worse they are considered.

Obama and the US government broke the law, lied to the people and invaded the freedom and privacy of American citizens. THEY ARE THE NAZIS! Snowden did what everyone wishes Nazi camp guards had done...expose and refused to follow orders.

So...are you a Snowden supporter...or a Nazi sympathizer? Simple choice!!!

I think I could accept him as a hero had he took his information pretty much anywhere but ChIna or Russia. As a military vet anyone who served with me would tell you, I have stood up plenty of times to challenge authority without any fear whatsoever of the consequences for what I felt was right.. I commend anyone in the service who does, I like to think of myself as person of integrity and if a man isn't willing to stand for what he believes he doesn't really stand for anything. If one serves in any form of the government there loyalty is to the constitution and the American people, not one man. If not they have no business there or taking the oath. Running straight to Russia and China was traitorist, and could have put the entire country at risk... heard it over and over throughout my life, not what you did it's how you did it... how I see Snowdens actions.

originally posted by: swimmer15
I think I could accept him as a hero had he took his information pretty much anywhere but ChIna or Russia. As a military vet anyone who served with me would tell you, I have stood up plenty of times to challenge authority without any fear whatsoever of the consequences for what I felt was right.. I commend anyone in the service who does, I like to think of myself as person of integrity and if a man isn't willing to stand for what he believes he doesn't really stand for anything. If one serves in any form of the government there loyalty is to the constitution and the American people, not one man. If not they have no business there or taking the oath. Running straight to Russia and China was traitorist, and could have put the entire country at risk... heard it over and over throughout my life, not what you did it's how you did it... how I see Snowdens actions.

Disagree. If you look at how his flight went down, Russia was just about the only place he could go from where his passport got pulled. Here's a documentary that covers it in some detail:

If he had defected to Russia, switched sides as it were, I'd probably agree with you. That hasn't happened though, as far as I can tell.

Also, the more I think about it, Russia is probably one of the best places for him to hide out. At least, without dropping off the radar completely. Think about it. A fairly developed country with some tech capability, that is not beholden or indebted to the US. That is somewhat at odds with the US, really. They have no reason to want to turn him over to us, so no real motive to hunt him down on our behalf. US operatives can't operate there with impunity as they can in most of the rest of the world, at least not in Moscow. Almost anywhere else in the world he could've gone other than a cave or bunker, it would have just been a matter of time before he was identified by the technology network. Almost anywhere else in the world, US operatives could have gotten to him or pulled strings to have him nabbed by the local authorities.

If you can think of another place where he would even have a chance of staying hidden and relatively safe, do tell. I can't think of one. Africa? Not very safe. The jungle? Not very safe. China? They'd have snapped him up and wrung him out for whatever they could get. Any other developed nation? We'd have gotten to him in short order. You know it's true.

a reply to: TheBadCabbie

The voice to skull (psychotronic) weapons programs are an atrocity.

a reply to: TheBadCabbie

Very good thought provoking response, thank you sir!
I was under the impression he went to China first, am I wrong in that?

I will watch your documentary but not take it as gospel because at the end of the day, its difficult to not think deep down that Snowden isn't a CIA asset even today or a traitor.. even with the facts in my face I would feel I wouldn't be getting the whole story..I hear many people say many things about him and many opinions and one thing I think every one agrees on is he's increadably smart. With that said, .. my thoughts are in line with your thoughts reguarding China, but I don't see what would make someone think otherwise of Russia. Unless a deal was made what would make you think either country wouldn't snatch you up and get your info by any means necessary and throw his butt into a cell to rot? Because I can't fathom how a guy like him could not think that, I have to think his true intentions were to profit or disbelieve the narrative completely and think he's a CIA asset all along.
If wrong In my reasoning on Russia or anything I can accept it lol but I can't wrap my head around that. That he would think Russia of all places wouldn't take his info by force and treat him less than a dog for his efforts. He could have leaked everything with anonymity and taken a lot less risk in the states even if caught. In the states whistle blower laws would have likely protected him in this case, would have been difficult not to because a lot of people support what he did and I guarantee a lot more would have had he not given the impression that he was trying to hand over some of the greatest secrets ever heard of about the government, to China or Russia. Make people think he was safer in China or Russia is insane. He would have more control of the situation if he went to Bin Laden.

a reply to: swimmer15

No he never went to China as far as I know. He was in Hong Kong when he broke anonymity.

China seems to have pretty tight solidarity. They are the communist monster that we always seem to think of Russia as. Russia, not so much. They're not even calling themselves communists anymore, but even back in the day their institutions were fairly corrupt. Putin doesn't seem interested in running the country with an iron fist. Oh sure, he can smash anybody who gets in his way, but that's not the same thing really. If you don't want the thugs to come after you then, you don't give them a reason to come after you.

Besides, like you said, Snowden's a pretty smart guy. There are plenty of ways he could make himself useful to them without revealing state secrets, or spying for them. I suppose it was probably a crap shoot, but I'd think he would've had a better shot with Russia than China. Seems to have worked out for him so far. I agree with you that there is that possibility that he has been and still is working for the CIA. I don't know. I don't think he is, but I could be wrong.

a reply to: purplemer

I didn't know that, thanks for the info.

a reply to: Advantage

I'm not sure if I understand what you're trying to say here. Please elaborate.

originally posted by: RP2SticksOfDynamite
Snowden has my respect! Huge balls the size of a tennis ball!

originally posted by: Neith
a reply to: RP2SticksOfDynamite

I think his balls are bigger than tennis balls.

Bowling balls would describe Snowdens balls more accurately.

Hehe. I don't know guys, that might make for some difficult ambulation. I'm going to suggest that perhaps his testicles, though of regular size, are composed of a durable and resilient material, like tungsten or titanium. Nards of tungsten, then! Of course I'm not speaking from personal experience here, merely speculating.

a reply to: intrptr
a reply to: worldstarcountry
a reply to: Salander
a reply to: DBCowboy
a reply to: Riffrafter

Thanks for contributing guys. Here's a debate on Snowden between Chris Hedges and Geoffery Stone that was conducted by Democracy Now!

www.youtube.com...

a reply to: TheBadCabbie

Not sure if you know but Hong Kong is still China. They operate independent but are under Beijing leadership. One country 2 systems. The Snowden release from Hong Kong was a decision from Beijing. My assumption has been that he either had some crazy leverage or he shared stuff with them first. Likely what was given to the public was but a fraction of the info he actually had. Beijing maintains power over Hong Kong in military and foreign affairs, Snowden would not have been released without Beijing having the final say.

He gave them info on spies in the field, putting men and women who stand next to him in service in danger. In cases of the military and government agencies when people follow orders where the individuals actions are inhumane or against the UCMJ or military core values, that individual should be punished but that's for our courts to decide, and that its my duty to ensure I stop it and report it, if direct leadership ignores you go above all there heads or go to the media.. but you don't turn your back on the man serving next to you in the field and hand them over to the enemy or leave them for dead because you as an individual "think". In the ranks, we don't do that to even traitors, we bring them back and hope the system works as it should. If it doesn't we're not expected to go taking action, we work to fix the system. That's how it's supposed to work.

originally posted by: swimmer15
a reply to: TheBadCabbie

Not sure if you know but Hong Kong is still China. They operate independent but are under Beijing leadership. One country 2 systems. The Snowden release from Hong Kong was a decision from Beijing. My assumption has been that he either had some crazy leverage or he shared stuff with them first. Likely what was given to the public was but a fraction of the info he actually had. Beijing maintains power over Hong Kong in military and foreign affairs, Snowden would not have been released without Beijing having the final say.

One country, two systems, as you say:

Similarly, Hong Kong's legal system is completely distinct from Beijing. It remains based on British common law and is considered free and impartial. The Chinese authorities have no right to arrest people in Hong Kong. Like other countries, they must apply for an international arrest warrant.

Immigration and passport control is also separate from China. Visitors to Hong Kong, who usually receive visa free access, will have to apply for a visa to visit China. There is a full international border between Hong Kong and China. Chinese nationals also require permits to visit Hong Kong. Hong Kongers have their own separate passports, the HKSAR passport.

gohongkong.about.com...

Under the special condition of Hong Kong's high-degree autonomy, the territory is able to maintain an independent customs area and separate immigration policy from those of PR China. This separate exercise of customs and immigration, subject to conditional reviews, is recognised by foreign nations through their legislature, such as the United States-Hong Kong Policy Act. Hong Kong maintains an international border with PR China across 5 border control stations by land, 3 entry and exit points by sea and the International Airport.

en.wikipedia.org...

Hong Kong is rightfully proud of the near-universal respect of the rule of law. For many, it is what sets Hong Kong apart from the mainland and its reputation for honesty is one of the reasons that so many multinationals have based their regional headquarters in the city.

The police generally have the trust of the population -- although how this trust will be affected by the events of the past few days remains to be seen.

It wasn't always thus; until the creation of the Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC), a nongovernmental watchdog in the 1960s, graft was as much of a problem here as it is in China.

Hong Kong retains a legal system which closely mirrors the British one, another holdover from the colonial era, but one which prizes transparency and due process and is largely welcomed by the populace.

www.cnn.com...

He gave them info on spies in the field, putting men and women who stand next to him in service in danger.

Doubtful. We'd have heard all about it, if only for the purpose of trying Snowden in the court of public opinion. Official sources would at least be squawking about how he compromised operatives, rather than this noncommittal mumbling we've heard from them to date.

In cases of the military and government agencies when people follow orders where the individuals actions are inhumane or against the UCMJ or military core values, that individual should be punished but that's for our courts to decide, and that its my duty to ensure I stop it and report it, if direct leadership ignores you go above all there heads or go to the media.. but you don't turn your back on the man serving next to you in the field and hand them over to the enemy or leave them for dead because you as an individual "think". In the ranks, we don't do that to even traitors, we bring them back and hope the system works as it should. If it doesn't we're not expected to go taking action, we work to fix the system. That's how it's supposed to work.

Sometimes you can't work to fix the system from within. What do you think he's been doing since he came out? He probably could have preserved his anonymity and had no worries, but of course then he would not be able to have the pro-transparency voice that he does now. He's sacrificed his freedom in the name of telling the truth. He may never be able to go home now. If he does return to the states, it will most likely be in chains, to face trial and a long prison sentence.

I also can't help but wonder how you think he could have helped to fix this problem from the interior of a secret cell or even an 'official' federal prison. The government has years since decided themselves on this course of blatantly violating the US Constitution, and being as sneaky about it as possible. If I were him, I would have had absolutely zero confidence in seeing justice done on this score. I would've expected to be disappeared in short order, and he probably did too.

originally posted by: swimmer15
a reply to: TheBadCabbie


www.computerworld.com...

He did give them info on spies in the field, willingly or unwillingly he did.

the rest, you make great points and I value your perspective.

Snowden is a traitor. If he would have revealed only the domestic issues with the NSA and surveillance, I would call him a hero, but he went much further than that. There's a reason Russia has given him asylum, because Snowden damaged the US on the international scene. Snowden may think what he did was right, but he also has to accept the consequences of his actions. He should never be allowed to re-enter the US, unless he is locked up behind bars.

a reply to: TheBadCabbie

For how I think how he could have done internally, I don't know, I know time was of essence but I probably would have had a determined route before I took action and had an idea of who best to give the info too. Given the time with so many people angry with the Bush Admin I imagine it wouldn't have been hard to find a confidante in the senate and major liberal news organization. But I admit all routes even the one he took would have extreamly high risk and very difficult to juggle.

a reply to: swimmer15

Snowden went to Hong Kong, but not to the government, only as a private citizen in hiding. And he went to journalists, not foreign governments. Responsible journalists had the material before he went to Russia.

He learned from Drake and a few other whistleblowers' experience that going up the chain of command, staying with "administrative remedies" did not work. Whistleblowers are very much prosecuted by the US government.

He revealed the crimes of his government, and that is never wrong. That is always the right thing to do for the patriot.

He's both a hero and a traitor.

Hero because he revealed snooping on American citizens.

Traitor because he revealed the snooping done on other nations.

The latter is completely within the responsibilities of the federal government, the former is illegal.

Eric Snowden:
After following all that he did and his actions this can be stated:
The first that that needs to be very clear is this: The man is not a traitor as so many would proclaim him to be. The legal definition along with his actions and the state of the country dictates that.
Did he break the law, by his actions, the answer is yes, he did break the law. Any who have ever handled or gone through the procedure to handle classified information, can and will tell you that in the fine print of the documents that one must sign are the penalties for mishandling and or revealing said information to those who either are not cleared, or do not have a need to know.
Should he face a trial for his actions, yes, a trial by jury where the court is transparent and people can see the evidence, and hear the case, that a jury make that final decision.

Is Snowden a hero? I would say the answer is no, and here is how I come to that conclusion:


The number of documents that he released, is small compared to the sheer number that the man took and had access to. The problem that comes to mind is that this man first fled to Hong Kong, where he stayed there, a guest of the Chinese government. And then fled to another location, ending up in Moscow. Neither China or Russia have extradition treaties with the USA so they refused, and ultimately the man was granted asylum in Russia, on the orders of Putin. Now don’t you think that for one moment, that either or both countries intelligence agencies would have debriefed him and wanted access to and gotten those documents? The government has only stated that the damage to national security was tremendous. We the people will never be sure as to how much damage. And don’t you think that would make him a threat to national security?

His actions were noble, however, what he did, and where he ran to, pretty much puts his credibility into question. If he had stayed in the US and done this, and not ran, then it would be a very different story, but he ran right into the arms of another super power who now has all of the documents he had, and probably had access to, and that government is suspected in collusion with interfering with a US election.

a reply to: Salander

I agree with the last statement you made without a doubt. Like I said before anyone who takes the oath is taking an oath to the constitution and the people of the country, no one man.

With that said and out of the way.. it really isn't that simple about the Hong Kong situation. Link below states that Snowdens lawyer believes Beijing made the decision, which I am inclined to believe also because it most certainly would have been a foreign and possibly military issue. We make an assumption based on what the info he released contained but you have to omit it.. because when the decision was made by Beijing, they did not know all his info and wouldn't unless they scrubbed it and given the info they did know he had, they would have no choice but to assume it could be the highest level of importance, I mean what they did know was the CIA was spying on China, and how they where doing it... who in there right mind would say, ok let him take that to Russia and not be 100% sure what he was taking about the program and data they recieved about China?

I know this gives an opinion as to why they let him go and it makes sense, but without a great deal of real high info it's just opinion. But his lawyer believes the decision to allow him to be released and given the information they had to assume he could possibly have it makes perfect sense that there would be huge implications for Hong Kong officials if they did not include Beijing on this decision.

world.time.com...

At least admit there has to be a great deal of stuff going on behind the curtains with the Snowden story.. I mean we know a lot but come on, where talking three largest nations in the world and intelligence pertaining what could be of the highest levels of more than one