Snowdon is a dummy

The issue is more simplistic than it seems; the inability to receive a fair trial.

I will defend my choice of words for one simple reason

keep it mind this is a linguistic argument

If something is 'simple,' it does not necessarily require easy manufacture.

The difficulty of a fair trial is that it's not Snowden V United States of America but Snowden V NSA

I support Snowden if not only for the reason that finding him guilty would send a very disturbing message to the world.

I have also looked at the facts and they all seem to support the choices that he made. The facts also support him being found guilty at trial.

Since the NSA is not on trial, Snowden has clearly violated the law of the United States and for that reason I believe he will be found guilty when the inevitable trial concludes.

I also predict that the sentence will be that he is forced to take hormones and change his last name to Plowedout.

**** the entire **** and this is why I feel that way: Chelsea Manning leaked documents and was found not-guilty of aiding the enemy. We so often forget why laws were initially created. Espionage is dangerous at times of war when tensions are flaring. It is meant so that we can legally execute spies and defectors who have turned against America. Both of these people have chosen to put their political views above themselves because of the love that they have for America, our world, and humanity.

The law is blind to all of this, their actions are not on why they're on trial, their motivations are not why they are on trial, only the laws that they broke is why they are on trial.

God Bless Our United States

For most part, I agree with you all about orally, he seems a bit unhinged, I hope his extreme rather violent views are not held to be typical.

However, he does have a one small point, didn't Snowden claim he gave all documents up to journalist? I could be mistaken, but I thought I remembered something like that being said sometime or another.

To say nothing of the American firms that are losing tens of billions of dollars of business as no one trust them not to be in bed with the NSA.

revelette2 wrote:

So, how can he release more documents relating to Brazil or Britain if he gave them all to those various people?

Presumably, because these people will release documents if and when he asks them to release them...

Quote:

Putin would have to make that decision.
What's in it for him?
What is in it for Russia?
Why would extending the term of asylum not be a better choice?

You have not taken note that the relationship between the US and Russian is not at a friendly point and the US had placed economic sanctions on Russia and Russia in turn are threatening to have our astronauts walking to the space station.

So giving the finger to the US in a manner that a large percent of the world would support is what would be in it for Putin.

The issue is more simplistic than it seems; the inability to receive a fair trial.

Like Putin maybe?

He would be confronted with evidence of his crimes.

Range told broadcaster ARD on Wednesday evening that questioning the Chancellor was "not on the agenda". He added that there were also no plans at the moment to question former NSA contractor turned whistleblower Edward Snowden who leaked evidence about a mass surveillance programme by the NSA.