The Snowden Prism

[arely staircase]

Now, in practice, there are a million shades of grey. You can support your government but see its various shortcomings and even evil things it does. And as I said at the outset, this is where leaks play a critical, though ambiguous role, as a safety valve. But it comes down to this essential thing: is the aim and/or effect of the leak to correct an abuse or simply to blow the whole thing up?
.....

Snowden is doing more than triggering a debate. I think it’s clear he’s trying to upend, damage - choose your verb - the US intelligence apparatus and policieis he opposes. The fact that what he’s doing is against the law speaks for itself. I don’t think anyone doubts that narrow point. But he’s not just opening the thing up for debate. He’s taking it upon himself to make certain things no longer possible, or much harder to do. To me that’s a betrayal. I think it’s easy to exaggerate how much damage these disclosures cause. But I don’t buy that there are no consequences. And it goes to the point I was making in an earlier post. Who gets to decide? The totality of the officeholders who’ve been elected democratically - for better or worse - to make these decisions? Or Edward Snowden, some young guy I’ve never heard of before who espouses a political philosophy I don’t agree with and is now seeking refuge abroad for breaking the law?

.....

Speaking for myself, the kind of balancing I’m describing is critical. But for a lot of people, again, there’s really nothing to balance since transparency is always better or because change is so necessary that spilling the beans has to be a good thing. That just doesn’t fit with my way of looking at these things. That’s why I’m taking this story as it unfolds. And I’m very skeptical of the notion that what Snowden did is awesome just because leaking state secrets is always a heroic act.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2013/06/like_the_oj_simpson_trial.php?ref=fpblg

[flamingdem]

1. He could have approached his supposed goal in many ways

and he certainly didn't need to compromise US security interests to such and extent around the world along the way.

[GeorgeGist]

2. I wonder how many other unqualified analysts ...

are analyzing National Security data?

[Whisp]

3. I wonder if Booz hires itself out for corporate espionage.

probably yes.

freelance stuff for themselves or are they commited to only doing gov work?

[arely staircase]

4. snowden is the halliburton electric shower of IT guys

nt

[OilemFirchen]

5. Whether intentionally or not, he did the right wing a tremendous service.

By reinforcing their belief that government is the enemy, he's also converted some on the left. A prevailing refrain is that, though acting within the law and specifically under the purview of the three branches of government, the intelligence community, by their nature, are liars. Thus, everything you know about them is the exact opposite of the truth. They aren't collecting and encrypting simple numbers, they're listening in on every phone call, reading every email, poring over every social media entry. And their goal isn't to keep the public safe, it's to entrap innocent citizens. Moreso, the President, the Attorney General, and many members of Congress and the Judiciary are big government-enablers - ergo, enemies of the people.

He also created a scenario whereby everyone must be a binarian. You cannot simultaneously believe that the government has overreached and that the government works for the public's best interest. You must pick sides. You cannot agree that the law is imperfect while arguing that the law is our foundation, and that adherence to it is our obligation. You must believe that those with whom you disagree are your enemies.

It may not be ratfucking, this particular "scandal", but it might as well be.