Comment by adventured
12 years ago
It's far beyond special investigator time.
Obama should be impeached. Both Obama and Bush should be tried for criminal conduct. Both should be put in prison for decades for treason. Of course on top of that are the war crimes and general crimes against humanity both committed (torture, war, murder of thousands of civilians, and so on).
By the same reasoning you should impeach the majority of Congress (the same people who would vote for such an impeachment of the President).
Deal!
It wasn't too long ago that Obama himself said Ed Snowden was not a patriot. Said it then, will say it again. The hypocrisy just reeks.
Snowden isn't a patriot though.
Certainly he has revealed a lot of scary information about the government that the people needed to know about, but opposing the state (which is what Snowden seems to do) does not always equate to supporting the nation.
Some of Snowden's disclosures have been directly harmful to American interests without a corresponding harm being done to the American people that would have warranted that disclosure. For instance, his leak of details of NSA hacking attempts against China.
Likewise, his disclosures about spying against allied heads-of-state. Knowing what your friends truly think would be invaluable for American interests when negotiating. I certainly agree that spying on friends like that is distasteful, but revealing that can't possibly be said to have helped the American people.
> Snowden isn't a patriot though.
Yes he is. He gave up his life and comfort in order to reveal illegal, massive surveillance by the US Government and friends. That's what actual patriots and heroes do.
> Certainly he has revealed a lot of scary information about the government that the people needed to know about, but opposing the state (which is what Snowden seems to do) does not always equate to supporting the nation.
This kind of statement is a sophists trick used to justify the unjustifiable: "Spying is typically bad but he revealed spying done by our own government!"
> Some of Snowden's disclosures have been directly harmful to American interests without a corresponding harm being done to the American people that would have warranted that disclosure. For instance, his leak of details of NSA hacking attempts against China.
The NSA are the ones causing the actual harm. Also, China boogeyman card.
> Likewise, his disclosures about spying against allied heads-of-state. Knowing what your friends truly think would be invaluable for American interests when negotiating. I certainly agree that spying on friends like that is distasteful, but revealing that can't possibly be said to have helped the American people.
Sounds like 1984 Ingsoc. Diplomacy with "friends" should be honest. Not conducted as "trust but verify" Reagan-esque bullshit.
I certainly agree that spying on friends like that is distasteful, but revealing that can't possibly be said to have helped the American people.
Yes it can. I'll say it right now: It has helped the American people. It has helped us, by giving us knowledge we need if we are going to hold our government accountable. Lest people forget, government exists to serve the people, not the other way around. This ain't a monarchy, pal. Here we can, and should, hold our elected officials' feet to the fire when our government screws up or does things we don't approve of.
Now, in the end, the American people might decide to keep "Baaaaah"ing like mindless sheep and let our government off the hook, which is, I suppose, their right. But what Snowden did was absolutely the right thing, as you can't even think about having accountability unless you have transparency.
first; you seem to be saying that each leak in isolation has to weigh in favour of the american people. a more lenient judgement might be made by taking everything as a whole and seeing if the benefits outweigh the costs. and even when the advantage is not direct, it may come later - for example, the international pressure from the leaks about intercepting foreign heads of states might lead to reduced surveillance of americans.
second; perhaps here on the internet we need something more international. perhaps he is a patriot in an international sense - since he works for the rights of all people. i certainly appreciate what he's done, and i am not american. of course, an alternative is to say that i am the enemy. but then we get to the american duplicity - they seem to want to be our friends, shake our hands, but then treat us as second class people.
[i wondered whether to include british duplicity with gchq, but they don't really make the same distinction. they seem to quite happily spy on britons and foreigners equally. they are not hypocrites, just assholes...]
1 reply →
Can you lay out the charges, special prosecutor?
Whats the charge for a state being the enemy of its own citizens?
I think in those sorts of situations, when the people are actually in a position of power over their government and thus able to effectively prosecute it, official charges are typically not bothered with. (or if they are, nobody bothers actually proving them during the 'trial'.)
http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/declaration_transc...
(Lest anyone get the wrong idea, I'm not suggesting armed rebellion against the government. Rather, I'm pointing out that this situation has happened in history before, and, well, that's what we called it.)
Crimes against Humanity?