If Obama is going to demand one thing from the Russians . . .

[Jacie]

. . . should it be the return of Robert Kraft's ring or NSA-contractor-turned-traitor Edward Snowden?

[SicEmBaylor]

Uh, Snowden is not a traitor.

[SCOUT]

Uh, Snowden is not a traitor.

trai·tor [trey-ter]
noun
1.
a person who betrays another, a cause, or any trust.
2.
a person who commits treason by betraying his or her country.

I honestly don't know what to think of Snowden. I would be interested in hearing your take on him.

[Midtowner]

He may have betrayed the government, but it was to inform the American people that our rights were being violated. I'll take that.

Dude's a hero.

[olevetonahill]

Uh, Snowden is not a traitor.


He may have betrayed the government,
but it was to inform the American people that our rights were being violated. I'll take that.

Dude's a hero.

Only a ****in Moran dint know that US Govt. was snooping on each of us.
So when He let the Chinks and the Rag heads and every one ELSE know dude became a ****in Traitor.

[badger]

I think it's been an open secret for awhile that the U.S. government spies on its own and others. How they did it? That was still technically a secret... well, not anymore

[FaninAma]

I think it's been an open secret for awhile that the U.S. government spies on its own and others. How they did it? That was still technically a secret... well, not anymore
And that makes it right? So if we knew then why is Snowden a traitor for confirming it?

[badger]

And that makes it right? So if we knew then why is Snowden a traitor for confirming it?

Trying to start an argument, eh? I recommend larger, bolder font with :les: before and [hairGel] after next time :)

I was just saying that the confirmation of spying was not, IMHO, what made him a traitor. Sharing how we spy, on the other hand, is something that is going to lead to groups like Al Quida (as already reported by mainstream media) to change so that it wouldn't be as susceptible to American spying.

I don't think Snowden realized how big his audience would be, much like our naive little Oklahoma soldier blabbing to WikiLeaks.

[jkjsooner]

He may have betrayed the government, but it was to inform the American people that our rights were being violated. I'll take that.

Dude's a hero.

He also told the world that we hacked Chinese computers. This is enough to jail him for a long time as far as I'm concerned.

[jkjsooner]

And that makes it right? So if we knew then why is Snowden a traitor for confirming it?

I frankly don't have a problem with them storing metadata about calls I made. As far as I'm concerned that's not my data anyway. It belongs to the carrier. If I don't want them to store and disseminate that information then I shouldn't make calls using their networks.

Had they listened to my phone conversations without a warrant then that would be another matter but everything I've read says they don't do that if I'm a US citizen and I believe nothing Snowden released contradicts that.

[FaninAma]

Trying to start an argument, eh? I recommend larger, bolder font with :les: before and [hairGel] after next time :)

I was just saying that the confirmation of spying was not, IMHO, what made him a traitor. Sharing how we spy, on the other hand, is something that is going to lead to groups like Al Quida (as already reported by mainstream media) to change so that it wouldn't be as susceptible to American spying.

I don't think Snowden realized how big his audience would be, much like our naive little Oklahoma soldier blabbing to WikiLeaks.

A bit defensive, aren't you? I just asked a question that goes to the heart of the logic of your premise. How can a a person be accused of being a traitor for giving information that is already public knowledge? And I agree,BTW. If there was anybody who was aware of the immense data storage facility being built in Utah that didn't understand what it is for then they are indeed naive or willfully ignorant. The basic question remains: how much freedom are we willing to give up for promises of more securtity? Apparently a hell of a lot.

[FaninAma]

I frankly don't have a problem with them storing metadata about calls I made. As far as I'm concerned that's not my data anyway. It belongs to the carrier. If I don't want them to store and disseminate that information then I shouldn't make calls using their networks.

Had they listened to my phone conversations without a warrant then that would be another matter but everything I've read says they don't do that if I'm a US citizen and I believe nothing Snowden released contradicts that.

Well then. Let's suppose you become a judge with the duties to oversee the agencies that gather the data. Are you confident that they would not go back and gather embarrassing data on you to make sure you cooperate with their requests? It is already being strongly suggested that the NSA has been monitoring judges and elected officials in this country. Why do they need to do that?

[olevetonahill]

A bit defensive, aren't you? I just asked a question that goes to the heart of the logic of your premise. How can a a person be accused of being a traitor for giving information that is already public knowledge? And I agree,BTW. If there was anybody who was aware of the immense data storage facility being built in Utah that didn't understand what it is for then they are indeed naive or willfully ignorant. The basic question remains: how much freedom are we willing to give up for promises of more securtity? Apparently a hell of a lot.


Im not WILLING to give up a dayum bit. But tell me how to prevent it? Other than going completely Off the Grid.

[jkjsooner]

A bit defensive, aren't you? I just asked a question that goes to the heart of the logic of your premise. How can a a person be accused of being a traitor for giving information that is already public knowledge?

I think Badger already answered this. We knew this sort of stuff was going on but didn't know the details or have 100% confirmation. Knowing the details can be beneficial to our adversaries.

The bulk of this deals with international communications. Telling them we're spying on them can cause an international uproar. They may know it already but having an insider confirm it isn't good.

The same goes with his information about the NSA's hacking program. The Chinese probably knew darn well we were hacking them and we darn well knew they were hacking us. But, confirming it can cause problems with international relations. It also could give them a little detail they didn't already know.


The thing that gets me is that it was reported is the mid 2000's that foreign security agencies spy on US citizens and will report back to the US government. We're not talking metadata here and we're not talking about warrants or anything. While this might technically be legal since it isn't done by our government, this is much more troublesome but apparently nobody really cares.

[jkjsooner]

As far as giving up freedoms, I don't think I'm giving up much when the NSA searches my phone records to see if I'm calling a known terrorist. BFD.

I say "my phone records" but of course it's arguable that those records do not belong to me at all. In my eyes it's like me being on someone surveillance camera. They own the camera and the recording device. They can give that to the government without a warrant if they see fit to do so. If I don't like it I should stay off of their private property.

If anything, you could argue that Verizon or Google's rights are being violated not your's or mine. Just like the security camera, it's their data. In the case of audio conversations, the law clearly defines that that belongs to us. Even the carriers can't listen in on it or record it. But we're not talking about that.

I worry more about the fact that they can stop and frisk any Joe on the street in NYC without a search warrant and apparently the courts think that's just fine and dandy.

[BoulderSooner79]

I don't feel any less safe from terrorist due to Snowden's actions. Those guys know they are monitored in every way it is possible to be monitored. Otherwise, Bin Laden would have been captured or dead a looong time ago.

I DO feel a little safer from my own government due to Snowden's actions. He has opened up a national discussion and the NSA and other will be careful to stay within their legal bounds. But that will only last a while unless there are real checks and balances in place to keep it that way. The POTUS says the checks and balances exist, but without transparency there is no way to maintain real balance. If the NSA has the legal power of writing a gag order, that's no different than a crime boss extorting (or whacking) a potential witness against them.

As FaninAma says, we are willing to give up a lot of freedom (or at least privacy) in exchange for the PROMISE of security. People do this when they are scared and we only have to look back in our own history to McCarthy to see that is true. Fortunately, most the communism/cold war scare went away, but I don't see the terror threat ever going away.

I'm still not calling Snowden a hero, but I'm glad he did what he did. But I understand the government going after him full force too. I hope it ends up with some long term good given the price he is going to pay.

[jkjsooner]

I DO feel a little safer from my own government due to Snowden's actions. He has opened up a national discussion and the NSA and other will be careful to stay within their legal bounds. But that will only last a while unless there are real checks and balances in place to keep it that way.

Allowing Snowden to do what he did without consequences sets a dangerous precedent. You simply can't allow every NSA employee or contractor to decide what is worthy of releasing to the media. If we let each individual make up his own mind about what constitutes a violation of our rights then our security agencies will cease to exist.

I think there is a extremely high threshold to cross before a person with a security clearance would be justified for releasing classified information. That's even more true when there are avenues to address these concerns without releasing classified information to the public.

[BoulderSooner79]

Allowing Snowden to do what he did without consequences sets a dangerous precedent. You simply can't allow every NSA employee or contractor to decide what is worthy of releasing to the media. If we let each individual make up his own mind about what constitutes a violation of our rights then our security agencies will cease to exist.

I think there is a extremely high threshold to cross before a person with a security clearance would be justified for releasing classified information. That's even more true when there are avenues to address these concerns without releasing classified information to the public.

If you read my last sentence, I said that he is not a hero and I understand the government is forced to go after him. I'm just saying the side effects have been positive, IMO of course. I just hope it has lasting effects because the one thing for certain is that Snowden will pay dearly. He'll either rot in jail or be exiled from family and friends and be in hiding for the rest of his life.

[jkjsooner]

Not only will he be in hiding but the track record isn't good for guys like him. There was a story about military guys who defected to USSR or East Germany during the Cold War. For a short time they were put in front of cameras and treated as heroes. Then almost every one ended up living in poverty and some committed suicide. Once the host countries get what they want out of Snowden (and what Ecuador would want is the prestige of standing up to the US and pretending to be for freedoms) he'll be left to fend on his own - or worse.

[diverdog]

Uh, Snowden is not a traitor.

He is traitor. Walking off with NSA computers puts him in that category.

[diverdog]

Allowing Snowden to do what he did without consequences sets a dangerous precedent. You simply can't allow every NSA employee or contractor to decide what is worthy of releasing to the media. If we let each individual make up his own mind about what constitutes a violation of our rights then our security agencies will cease to exist.

I think there is a extremely high threshold to cross before a person with a security clearance would be justified for releasing classified information. That's even more true when there are avenues to address these concerns without releasing classified information to the public.

Exactly

[cleller]

He is traitor. Walking off with NSA computers puts him in that category.

Then carrying all the material off so that the Chinese and Russians can copy every scrap of it.

[Jacie]

Let me see if I understand what was said here.

By my count we got 4 for the ring, 3 for Snowden and 1 on the fence.

[MR2-Sooner86]

Edward Snowden is a hero of Julian Assange levels.

I think it's sad that a guy who tells the American people their own government is spying on them is safer in a communist country than his own.

[okie52]

Edward Snowden is a hero of Julian Assange levels.

I think it's sad that a guy who tells the American people their own government is spying on them is safer in a communist country than his own.

Telling the American people that they are being spied on by the US government may be heroic if he had confined himself just to that....telling the world that the US is spying on them and indicating that he will reveal US secrets regarding counter espionage makes him a traitor in my book.

But, admittedly, I haven't followed this that closely and could be missing some big details.

[jkjsooner]

I'd like to know why there wasn't an uproar over this?

http://yahoo.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-05-10-nsa_x.htm

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

"Telling the American people that they are being spied on by the US government may be heroic if he had confined himself just to that....telling the world that the US is spying on them and indicating that he will reveal US secrets regarding counter espionage makes him a traitor in my book.

But, admittedly, I haven't followed this that closely and could be missing some big details."-okie52


That seems right to me, too.

[jkjsooner]

Did you guys see that Lindsey Graham suggested we boycott the winter Olympics unless Russia gives up Snowden? I mean, c'mon.

[okie52]

Lindsay has to get tough with someone because he's been a doormat for illegals.

[SoonerorLater]

Did you guys see that Lindsey Graham suggested we boycott the winter Olympics unless Russia gives up Snowden? I mean, c'mon.

That'll teach those Ruskies. Without the American Curling Team the whole thing folds.

[cleller]

"If Obama is going to demand one thing from the Russians..."

It doesn't really matter what it is, because he's not getting anything from Putin?

[Bourbon St Sooner]

That'll teach those Ruskies. Without the American Curling Team the whole thing folds.

Oooh. That reminds me of how awesome women's curling is. Particularly the Swedish and Canadian teams.

[jkjsooner]

I'm confused. I see one hottie.

http://cloudfront5.curling.ca/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/TeamCanadaBernard.jpg

This is a little better.

http://www.thecurlingnews.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/VAN20100226-266V0159.jpg

[KantoSooner]

So, let's see.
First, I guess you'd start with the quetion of whether you believe that some activities of any government should be kept secret. Personally I think so. And I think that any government that doesn't have a clandestine intelligence gathering service is wilfully irresponsible. And I further believe that those who think everything needs to be in the public domain are effing children and I fear them voting, or going outdoors without a chaperone. We don't need to be involved in every decision and we don't need, or want, 24/7 access to all information. That's why we have a representative government.

Second, so, if you're going to have a representative government that keeps some of it's actions and information secret, then you'll need procedures to ensure that the people we delegate to do those secret actions are acting in a reasonable way. Do we have such a system in place now? Why yes, yes we do. Miles and miles and miles of oversight. Oversight by the executive branch, oversight by congress and oversight by the judicial branch. You don't trust the oversight? Fine, that's your prerogative, but by that fact you essentially are saying that you distrust our entire government, in toto. Again, your prerogative, but I'd strongly encourage you to grow up and start trying to be a part of the adult world and stop demanding to be personally in charge of everything.

Third, now just suppose that you're in a position of access to some secret information and see something that you don't believe is right. Are there protocols for bringing this to the attention of watchdogs who can effect corrective action? Why, yes, again; there are such protocols. (and, oh by the way, just because such instances are not reported on the front page of the paper doesn't mean they don't happen....they're secret, remember?)

So, to recap, there's a need for some stuff to be secret, what stuff and why are decisions made by our elected representatives and vetted by duly appointed judges. And let's not forget that the folks doing the secret stuff are.....us. There's not a special breeding farm in Idaho or someplace where intelligence professionals are farmed. They are people you sat next to in Poli Sci 101. The ones who really 'got' international current events. (partially because that's where a lot of recruiting goes on; the professors at our major colleges and universitites act as spotters of talent.) There are procedures to keep things between the lines and to provide secure paths through which doubts can be raised without compromising security.

Mr. Snowden, however, apparently decided that none of this was good enough for him. So he placed himself above the procedures, above the judges, above the elected representatives of the American people. It was somehow up to Eddie, all by his lonesome to make the judgement. So, we have a person from the pinnacle of his 29 years of life arrogating to himself sole authority to disclose what the other umpteen million of us had previously judged would be better left secret.

Whether his actions rise to the level of treason or simple theft is a question for lawyers. That Fast Eddie felt that he'd done at least something illegal seems pretty clear: You don't quit a six figure job and leave your pole dancing GF in Honolulu and run off to HK if you aren't pretty sure you've done something shady. and be assured, you don't get the hospitality of the Russian, or Chinese government without giving them something in return.

Snowden, and his supporters, are not heroes. They are not defenders of fundamental rights. They are naive punks who are frustrated that they are not being given what they, in their ego-driven little worlds, believe to be sufficient power over the world at large. And so they will break the toy that they can't have when and where they want it. Look at the photos of Snowden again. That's not the face of a stalwart defender of your rights. It's the face of a three year old getting ready to throw a tantrum because he can't have his way RIGHT NOW.

That he was given access to data that has and will cause damage to the country through it's release is too bad. It's a failure of proper recruiting and proper oversight. Heads should, and probably have, rolled. We need to fix what is fixable in the security system. We'll probably also have to come up with an entire new raft of intelligence gathering methods (though it would be tempting to simply keep this all running on the chance that NOBODY would believe we'd just keep relying on a completely blown process.) And, as for Mr. Snowden? Put an office on him, keep the pressure going at a low level so that he never sleeps a complete night again in his life. And otherwise? Forget him. He's unhireable by any international company and won't be able to live outside of pariah ****holes ever again. Mazeltov, Mr. Snowden! And now we close the door on you and you are gone. No better punishment for an egotist.

[okie52]

I agree with you Kanto. No hero in my eyes at all...more likely a traitor.

There may be something to be said for revealing that the government may be spying on its citizens if it is unlawful, but never reveal any intelligence it may be securing from/about other countries.

[KantoSooner]

It's always going to be a balance. In some ways it's an expansion of the debate over evidence gathered by the police: what is admissable? what can cops go after? Under what circumstances?
It's also kind of a Heizenberg (sp? apologies) problem: the information in this realm is only worth something if it's secret...and it can't be secret if it's debated publically.
You also can't have too broad a group vetting the programs for the same reason that our first national spy master, Benjamin Franklin opined, "Three can keep a secret, provided two are dead."
All these taken as understood, I'm personally pretty comfortable that a workable balance has been reached between the country's need for intelligence and the individual's right to privacy.

[okie52]

I don't have a problem with someone going through a whistle blowers channel to expose bad things in government...like maybe spying on citizens without judicial approval. I do have a problem with someone undermining national security. Every country is spying on every other country...I don't think that is a secret...but just how they are doing it probably is a secret.

[rock on sooner]

Hard to understand how Snowden got into his position..high school dropout
but clearly a computer geek, I guess computer geekness is paramount. Kanto,
you said you were comfortable with the apparent balance the intelligence groups
have toward citizens. I agree, to the point that people like Manning and Snowden
are genuine traitors and deserve to not function as free men. Clearly, Snowden
knew he was doing something illegal when he bolted from Hawaii, hot GF and a
six figure job. His fate and future are bleak...bad tasting drink, failed braking
system on his car, hit and run victim or some such.

To alert our enemies to what extent we go to keep track of them and how we
do it can only be described as treason. For anyone to argue otherwise is pure
folly, imo.

[olevetonahill]

Hard to understand how Snowden got into his position..high school dropout
but clearly a computer geek, I guess computer geekness is paramount. Kanto,
you said you were comfortable with the apparent balance the intelligence groups
have toward citizens. I agree, to the point that people like Manning and Snowden
are genuine traitors and deserve to not function as free men. Clearly, Snowden
knew he was doing something illegal when he bolted from Hawaii, hot GF and a
six figure job. His fate and future are bleak...bad tasting drink, failed braking
system on his car, hit and run victim or some such.


To alert our enemies to what extent we go to keep track of them and how we
do it can only be described as treason. For anyone to argue otherwise is pure
folly, imo.

Right On Rock On.

[jkjsooner]

Kanto, I wish I could have said that half as good as you just did. Great and eloquent post.

[olevetonahill]

Kanto, I wish I could have said that half as good as you just did. Great and eloquent post.

Kanto is a Master
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-_dRSA31lfwk/TnvGAlCNbEI/AAAAAAAAByM/KUAFs_8pugQ/s400/wordsmith.jpg

[KantoSooner]

I'm blushing.

thank yew, thank yew vurry mush.

[olevetonahill]

I'm blushing.

thank yew, thank yew vurry mush.

Or Maybe hes a Master
https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRkgeedvt2zviiwkwwwNgp5-2ASgu56yhSjm6JhKm2pU0J74seh

[KantoSooner]

This is where someone says that thing about this not being worth anything without pics.

[jkjsooner]

This is where someone says that thing about this not being worth anything without pics.

Yes, and to keep it on topic - pics of hot Russian women. I'll start.

Alex Ovechkin is a lucky dude.

http://sportsblog.bethubb.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/Maria-Kirilenko-2.jpg

[KantoSooner]

We welcome the slight diversion into the often under-discussed topic of 'Hot Russian Women'. It's a topic that deserves much, much more profound investigation. Please forward any further pictorial evidence you have so that we all share a common database prior to commencement of a full-blown interlocution.