Can we at least wait an hour or two before we divide into hero-worship and excoriation of Snowden?

[Recursion]

This is really getting kind of silly. How about everybody just wait a couple of days before we divide into camps about this? Is Snowden telling the truth? What are his motives? What's his background? Was he really in a position to know the things he's claiming?

We don't yet know the answer to any of these questions and we won't for a while. Let's actually let the media do their job (for once) and not jump into hero worship and excoriation prematurely.

[cali]

1. Why don't you read what he has to say?

[Recursion]

3. Why do you assume I haven't?

I don't particularly believe him, but that's because I don't particularly believe things people say at first. I want to give this some time before I decide.

[dixiegrrrrl]

28. Well, I want to rush to judgement and excoriate the obvious people

as soon as possible!
Before the news even got out would have been preferable.
Who knows what energy I might have in a few days hence?

[Fumesucker]

2. Welcome to DU!

I think you'll find us a fractious bunch now that a Democrat is POTUS.

[graham4anything]

4. according to the linked thread.its like the biggest dirty trick in the history of the USA

it is akin to the Brook Brothers phony riot at the Miami Dade County that stopped the 2000 recount that would have shown Al Gore winning Florida.

Once again, they were caught with their hands in the cookie jar.
Only difference between now and the 2000 recount is- there is an internet that instantly finds out dirty tricks for what they are.

and I believe the article in the link below is indeed true.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2978377

[MNBrewer]

45. What possible difference could it make that he gave Ron Paul money?

[Logical]

5. It is a discussion board. Why wait? You can ignore any post that annoys you. n-t

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

6. He answers some of your questions directly here (VIDEO)

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/09/edward-snowden-nsa-whistleblower-surveillance

I am glad we have these brave whistle blowers who are so bothered by these abuses of power by our leaders who appear eager to abandon our constitution that they are willing to sacrifice everything to do get the information out in front of the public.

[Recursion]

7. Why the hell should I believe him?

Did you read my post? That's what I'm saying: it's too soon to make a decision yet. He might be telling the truth, or not. Let's wait and see.

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

8. Because he is the source of the revelations.

What do you mean, let's wait and see what the NSA and it's apparatus has to say?

[Recursion]

9. Ah, right. DU: we're skeptical, except of people we take a liking to

And then we believe them immediately.

See my sig. I don't trust anybody in this story, including Snowden, and I'm going to see what happens before I make up my mind.

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

11. We are much more skeptical of those speaking from power

than those speaking truth to power.

This should not be a surprise to anyone who frequents this site.

He articulates his motivation very well...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/09/edward-snowden-nsa-whistleblower-surveillance

And happens to be shared by many DUers as well as many Americans.

Anyway, the most important part of this story is not him, it is what he has revealed.

[Recursion]

18. Why do you keep pointing me to his articulation of his motives?

Are you reading what I'm saying? Whether he's being honest is precisely the question, so showing me what he said doesn't help.

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

21. Because I believe in going to the source, when possible

You asked questions about his motivations, and he deals with those questions directly, so that is why I point you to the source...

He said it was during his CIA stint in Geneva that he thought for the first time about exposing government secrets. But, at the time, he chose not to for two reasons.

First, he said: "Most of the secrets the CIA has are about people, not machines and systems, so I didn't feel comfortable with disclosures that I thought could endanger anyone". Secondly, the election of Barack Obama in 2008 gave him hope that there would be real reforms, rendering disclosures unnecessary.

He left the CIA in 2009 in order to take his first job working for a private contractor that assigned him to a functioning NSA facility, stationed on a military base in Japan. It was then, he said, that he "watched as Obama advanced the very policies that I thought would be reined in", and as a result, "I got hardened."

The primary lesson from this experience was that "you can't wait around for someone else to act. I had been looking for leaders, but I realised that leadership is about being the first to act."

Over the next three years, he learned just how all-consuming the NSA's surveillance activities were, claiming "they are intent on making every conversation and every form of behaviour in the world known to them".

more
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/09/edward-snowden-nsa-whistleblower-surveillance

[Recursion]

25. Going to the source is great to find out *what the source said*, not whether that is the truth

He said it was during his CIA stint in Geneva that he thought for the first time about exposing government secrets. But, at the time, he chose not to for two reasons.

And that's the bit that really gets me. He thought the CIA was shady, so he went to BAH? That's a company that makes Halliburton look clean. I'm reserving judgment still.

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

31. He choose to sacrifice everything to expose wrong doing in our gov

He worked in the intel community, so that seems pretty straight forward to me.

He was hoping that things would change under new leadership, but when unconstitutional practices did not change, after 4 years, he decided to come forward.

I do not see anything suspicious in that.

[Recursion]

36. So he says

Yes, I'm aware he's said that. We don't know if that's true or not.

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

40. He isn't the only one who has said that though, and he has documents to back him up

and so do others.

Considering all that, and our nations security state history, he has a very compelling case.

[treestar]

33. Why do you assume he's telling the truth?

This is also very general. "real reforms" what are they and why are Obama's not "real." Advanced what policies? And were those policies reasonable or not? Why would the NSA want to know about every conversation?

[WinkyDink]

49. Perhaps you will never believe him, while others will. SO WHAT? It doesn't make you superior.

[treestar]

30. But it's wrong to believe Obama, right?

That's hero worshipping.

You're saying we should believe him just because he said so.

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

38. Nope. It's wrong to ignore the facts on the ground.

That's being an informed citizen.

I'm saying that we should listen to what he has to say, since he is the source of the documents that were revealed, and make our own judgments based on what he has to say, and not just on the inevitable BS spin that is sure to follow.

[treestar]

39. But it would be wrong to listen to what Obama had to say

That's hero worshipping, right?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251310274

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

42. I will repeat myself for you, nope.

[randome]

13. And he has not specified one abuse. He says he witnessed abuse but he won't tell us what it is.

I'm willing to keep an open mind on his hero status but I'm not going to base my opinion on nebulous 'evils', either.

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

14. Spying on ALL Americans is no small abuse

Wouldn't you agree?

[randome]

17. If that's what's being done, yes.

But with 3 levels of approval and Pres. Obama's assurances that only non-Americans are targeted, I've reached a point where I'm not going to try to micro-manage the world.

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

19. Well, that is what is motivating the whistle blowers

Do you think they would risk everything if it wasn't a serious crime?

[randome]

20. What serious crime, then?

So far Snowden has said he witnessed the system being abused but he won't specify what that abuse was.

That doesn't exactly get me to be on his side. If he wants that, he needs to tell me something specific. Otherwise he comes off as disgruntled.

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

22. Spying on ALL Americans

Sucking up ALL our digital communications, and then there are the other revelations of collecting all of our phone records.

And there are others too who have pointed to this practice over the years, you may have missed them, but that is what the big deal/crime is... a blatant violation of our 4th amendment right of privacy.

[randome]

23. Non-Americans.

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

24. Not according to the whistle blowers.

Or they wouldn't have felt compeled to sacrifice everything.

[Vinnie From Indy]

27. Well, One of Snowden's rvelations should cause you some concern

He offered that as a "private" contractor he and other analysts could pinpoint ANYONE in AMERICA and harvest all of their communication. That is a big deal and is exactly the opposite of what Klapper told Congress.

[randome]

34. Well, he proved he had access to something he shouldn't have, that's for sure!

But 'could' doesn't bother me so long as there are sufficient controls and procedures. It's possible he knows all those details but, again, he hasn't offered any specifics to make me jump up and down.

Yet. I'm willing to hear him out. But he better make a good case for his actions.

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]

[treestar]

43. The FBI "could" put a human agent on surveillance of your home

They "could" trail you. They "could " subpoena your employer. They "could" talk to your associates.

[treestar]

35. Even Julian has one video

showing an abuse in Iraq.

This is even more general.

[randome]

37. So far, yes, it is.

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]

[Jamastiene]

10. No, this is DU.

We HAVE to argue the SECOND we get new news. It is in our blood. Otherwise, we wouldn't be DU.

[alcibiades_mystery]

12. I have no opinion of the man, and I'm unlikely to form one of any seriousness

The whole issue is of mild concern. I'd place infrastructure policy above any of this eight days a week.

It does make for juicy copy and hits all the right partisan buttons on message boards, though, so y'all can have at it. I predict fw threads on any of this by mid-July.

[randome]

15. Yeah, whatever happened to jobs, the economy and infrastructure?

We seem to have lost another month to one of Congress' circle-jerks.

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]

[UTUSN]

16. neh, i.m done and ready to go. nt

[leveymg]

26. If he were a phony, we'd have learnt that by now. Why do you assume the Guardian didn't vet its

primary source?

Does it really matter whether he's a Democrat, a Republican, or an Independent? A liberal, conservative, or libertarian? Whether he made a $250 contribution to Ron Paul?

It's the quality of the documents that he provided that determines what happens from here on, not his personal motivations. Let's just concentrate on what's important. The other stuff is just context, important, but not paramount to understanding this.

[Recursion]

32. Why did I assume the media would fall down on the job, *like it has already in this story*?

I don't know, I can't imagine why I would think that...

[leveymg]

50. Do you seriously think this is some sort of supersized Rovian Dirty Trick?

I don't think so, for the simple reason that Obama isn't really to blame for the erecting these NSA programs. Even as President, he's somewhat constrained in the amount of fundamental change he can alone make in the way the NSA operates.

This gives Obama the ammunition and public support he needs to make changes - let's see if he picks up the reigns and which way he drives the wagon.

[Recursion]

54. Well, Obama did give a speech two weeks ago about ratcheting down the war on terror (nt)

[treestar]

29. Nobody is jumping into excoriation

But the hero worshippers sure are.

[RainDog]

47. nah, I can tell you it's going both ways here

it's not one side or the other.

it's like being at the carnival and staring at the rides.

[jazzimov]

41. Although I have little faith in the M$M,

I agree that we should wait for a little more information.

I don't know the man. Of course, my first reaction was "Really? A fuckin' contractor? Like they really KNOW anything!"

But he may know more than I give him credit for. He may know less. I simply don't have enough information, yet.

[Downtown Hound]

44. Well, I don't need an hour to decide he's a hero

If you do, go ahead. So the answer to your question is no. And I think I'll just LOL at your idea that we let the media do it's job. Is your name Rip Van Winkle by any chance? Have you been asleep for the past ten years?

[RainDog]

46. agreed n/t

[WinkyDink]

48. I'm getting a "Trayvon Martin" sense of deja-vu. "Wait! Wait! Hold that thought and WAIT!"

[still_one]

51. That means you want to know the full story.... naw, that's no fun

[IADEMO2004]

52. Hahaha what a newbie.......25K posts? my bad nt

[jeff47]

53. Of course not. Waiting for reality to come out gets in the way of installing the halo. (nt)