Snowdon is a dummy

You SHOULD worry about the US becoming a surveillance state, who could at some point start to kill dissenters or just jail them forever without trial, like you are already doing in Gitmo...

HAHAHAHA Yes of course, I want the terrorists to win...
Could you be more ridiculous?

If the NSA could prove that they helped stop one single attack, they would do so, without revealing too much about their means of inquiry.

They are NOT able to present any evidence, simply because they are unaware of any single threat which they help prevent...

This guy gives away national security information against the laws of this country, and he complains that the president and vice president are attempting to deny him asylum.

What does he expect? A million dollar reward and a two week vacation at a five star resort?

All individuals who receives (sic) a Top Secret clearance must sign a "Nondisclosure Agreement."
If he signed the Non-Disclosure Agreement, he had no right to disclose state secrets. It's a legal contract enforceable by the laws of this country.

That's no excuse to reveal national security information. What's his sacrifice?
The NSA's interception of electronic traffic of US citizens doesn't affect our "freedoms" if they don't act on anything they learn from them. I've not seen any evidence that they have. Scare tactics only produces (sic) fear of the unknown.
Facebook and other commercial enterprises in the US probably has more personal information on citizens, but they use it "presumably" to advance their business - and not to use it in any negative manner.

When you talk about "probable cause," I have to ask, what harm have (sic) any citizen suffered from their collection of electronic data? I know of none.

As for a large number of foreign citizens being monitored, why are you so concerned about non-citizens who may be a terrorist? All countries perform intelligence on other countries; that's a fact you can take to the bank.

I'll tell you that there's a huge difference between what Ellsberg revealed about the Vietnam War that has no comparison to Snowdon's revelations.

The Vietnam War was started on false accusations in the Gulf of Tonkin which gave Johnson the authority to start that war.

That's a FACT: All governments spy on each other. We know for a fact that Israel spies on the US; there's proof of that. To think otherwise is to believe in santa clause (unreal).

Snowden committed treason, and should pay the price for it. He promised in writing to keep information he learns in his job confidential. He lied, and talked to our enemies. That's treason.

Anyone suggesting he is a hero is, in my opinion, WAY off base.

In any case, whether one feels he is a hero or a traitor...he is a citizen and he is entitled to a fair trial.

His father claims America has made him "a stateless person."

He is not a stateless person at all...and America is willing to give him refuge...and a fair trial of his peers.

Come back, Edward.

Sorry but I am not one who wish to give up my freedoms for the false claims that by spying on the bulk of the human race will somehow guarantee safety from terrorist threats.

In fact focusing the kind of resources needed to set up such a massive surveillance state is mostly wasted efforts.

What I find amazing is that only one generation or so separated world war one with it ten of millions dead and far more cripple for life and a repeat performed in world war two.
How in the hell do you sell turning Europe back into a slaughterhouse after such a short period of time?

The anti-Snowden camp just can't get their act together. The only thing they can do when faced with arguments about the risks of mass spying to democracy, is insult Snowden and us, calling us haters of America and "terroists". Laughable. All this time, we have been casting pearls of wisdom before swine. Oh well...

I guess it all depends on what exactly you are up to... If it's a threat to most of us, to our peace of mind and security; if it's morally or politically objectionable or dangerous; if it's unconstitutional; if on a pure intell plane it is wasteful and inefficient; then it serves the public good to disclose the information Snowden disclosed.

Why we should even dream of giving up any of our freedoms and privacy rights over such a minor threat compare to all the others far greater threats we as a nation had face in our history is beyond me.
Not to mention the fact that giving up those freedoms is not likely going to gain us any more security.

Do not forget that there are newspapers editors and reporters that legally are as "guilt" as Snowden happen to be and yet the politicians seems to have zero will to try to enforce those laws again them even those they are not on foreign soil and can be arrested within an hour.
So the idea that Snowden must face a trial due to his "crimes" as the law is the law seems not to follow.

Revealing that they stopped a specific attack would reveal too much about intelligence methods.

The point being: do you think this Mark Felt/Deep Throat deserved a fair trial,?(since he leaked privilege info to the media just like Snowden did)

Quote:

Revealing that they stopped a specific attack would reveal too much about intelligence methods.

That is not true. The NSA could for instance reveal the specifics to some senate intel committee, without publicizing it urbi et orbi. But they haven't, simply because they are unaware of any single terror attack that they helped stop. It IS that simple.

"Courage has to have a purpose" makes a better bumper sticker than a logical, sustainable point in discussion.

Thought I was going strong...and that I would solve it in short order. When bang...up against a "cannot be."

That is not true.

The NSA could for instance reveal the specifics to some senate intel committee, without publicizing it urbi et orbi. But they haven't, simply because they are unaware of any single terror attack that they helped stop. It IS that simple.

January 13, 2014 
The New America Foundation releases a report on the effectiveness of NSA bulk data collection. The report is authored by Peter Bergen, David Sterman, Emily Schneider, and Bailey Cahal and labels defenses of the program as “misleading” and “overblown.”

Do NSA's Bulk Surveillance Programs Stop Terrorism?
A in-depth analysis of 246 individuals recruited by al Qaida or like-minded groups, and charged in the U.S. with an act of terrorism since 9/11, shows the contribution of NSA's bulk surveillance programs to these cases was minimal, and that traditional investigative methods were more helpful.

Click here to read our full report, "Do NSA's Bulk Surveillance Programs Stop Terrorists?" You may also click on the selected NSA-related plots below or browse all terror plots detailed on the site.

READ: President Obama's Own Experts Recommend End to NSA Phone Data Spying

President Obama's Own Experts Recommend End to NSA Phone Data Spying
Dec. 18, 2013
By BRIAN ROSS
BRIAN ROSS More From Brian »
ABC News Chief Investigative Correspondent


via WORLD NEWS

Quote:

"Courage has to have a purpose" makes a better bumper sticker than a logical, sustainable point in discussion.

"Courage should have a purpose" is perfectly defensible. To take risks, even very small risks, for no good reason or with no specific gain in sight is simply absurd. Who would like to risk the lives of his children or his job, even if that's a remote risk, just for the sake of informing dudes on A2K about something they have no business and no interest knowing anyway? That'd be quite stupid.

And if you can't see that, you ARE stupid, balls and all...

Quote:

Thought I was going strong...and that I would solve it in short order. When bang...up against a "cannot be."

Maybe you could try and use your balls to solve it? See whether that works for you... ;-)

PLEASE, ENLIGHTEN ME! How do you know the precise details of what has gone down?!