The Guardian: Snowden Is A Whistleblower, Not A Spy

[ProSense]

The Guardian: Snowden Is A Whistleblower, Not A Spy

The Guardian, the British newspaper that's published the scoops on the National Security Agency's expansive surveillance programs, ran an editorial Tuesday that served as a spirited defense of leaker Edward Snowden.

Snowden, the 30-year-old former defense contractor who leaked details on the surveillance programs, is facing espionage charges from the United States. But those charges are "innappropriate," the Guardian's editorial asserted.

This is emphatically not a cold war style national security case; it is a 21st century case about the appropriate balance between the power of the secret state and the rights of free citizens in the internet era. To charge Mr Snowden under America's first world war Espionage Act is inappropriate. We live in a different world from that. America is not at war in the traditional sense. Mr Snowden is not a spy. Nor is he a foreign agent. He is a whistleblower. He has published government information. And it is as a whistleblower that he will eventually have to answer to the law.

Read the editorial here.

http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/guardian-snowden-is-whistleblower-not-spy

Seems like The Guardian editorial board is trying to convince itself that Snowden is a "whistleblower."

Snowden broke the law, and he will be prosecuted.

Bruce Schneier:

Edward Snowden broke the law by releasing classified information. This isn't under debate; it's something everyone with a security clearance knows. It's written in plain English on the documents you have to sign when you get a security clearance, and it's part of the culture. The law is there for a good reason, and secrecy has an important role in military defense.

But before the Justice Department prosecutes Snowden, there are some other investigations that ought to happen.

https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2013/06/prosecuting_sno.html

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023068663

Jimmy Carter on Snowden: "He's obviously violated the laws of America, for which he's responsible."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023119933

There Are 12 Million Stateless People Around The World, But Edward Snowden Isn’t One Of Them
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023149095

[tularetom]

1. Doesn't a spy have to be spying FOR somebody?

I'm not so sure he's a "spy", but if we think he's broken the law let's get him back here and put his ass on trial and we'll find out exactly what's been going on.

[truedelphi]

38. If Snowden is a spy, it is obvious he was a spy for us the people.

And since espionage is offering information to THE ENEMY, that tells us who the enemy is, at least from the viewpoint of our Beloved Leader and his law enforcing buddy Eric Holder.

[AlinPA]

61. Does "the people" include al-Qaeda? A trial might help determine who have been receiving

information from him on the NSA processes.

[truedelphi]

62. Oh puhhhhhhh LEASE!

We were told several years ago there were only something like 240 Al Queda folks left. Of course, with our drones knocking off people attending weddings left and right, maybe the recruitment numbers are up.

The point is, any real terrorist has been avoiding using phones and email for a decade. the only people this NSA shit is after is regualr people; you know like the protesters that Trans Canada has been telling Nebraska police need to be targeted like terrorists.

Monsanto owns friggin Blackwater right now - that tells you what our government is about. Late last September, Obama's DOJ slammed 32 low income homes in Santa Rosa with warrantless house to house searches - after all, if one person in a neighborhood is growing grass, so is everyone else.

Meanwhile the Big Banking Execs go scot free for laundering tens of billions of dollars of dirty cartel money.

The biggest enemies facing the Political Class/One Percent is regular folk. If you don't want our environment destroyed by fracking, and are willing to protest; if you don't want vomitoxin-contaminated GM foods for your kids and grand kids to eat courtesy of Monsanto, well, you too will be on a list.

[AlinPA]

64. I am definitely on those lists. I mention al-Qaeda because even if they are small in number

they could use his information and would pay him well for it.

[Pholus]

2. Selective quoting is your speciality...

Yes, like Jimmy Carter, Bruce Schneier joins your calls for prosecution. But just like Jimmy Carter...if you actually read the blue linkie....there is more!

"Keeping things secret from the people is a very dangerous practice in a democracy, and the government is permitted to do so only under very specific circumstances. Reading the documents leaked so far, I don't see anything that needs to be kept secret."

"The argument that exposing these documents helps the terrorists doesn't even pass the laugh test"

"I believe that history will hail Snowden as a hero -- his whistle-blowing exposed a surveillance state and a secrecy machine run amok. I'm less optimistic of how the present day will treat him, and hope that the debate right now is less about the man and more about the government he exposed."

Since Schneier is an expert in crypography, a commercial computer security expert and a new board member of the Electronic Frontier Foundation I highly recommend that people read the ENTIRE link, not just the selective

[ProSense]

10. Well,

"if you actually read the blue linkie....there is more"

...since I posted the original "blue linkie," aren't you happy?

I mean, they weren't the primary point of the OP. In fact, if you go to the "blue linkie" where "there is more," you'll also find people obfuscating by claiming that the information is "selective quoting" or missing.

It's a cheap tactic.

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

56. These totalitarians are famous for twisting sources to decive

Fortunately for DU most here read the article and come to their own conclusions.

[hlthe2b]

3. I have not drawn any kind of conclusion re: Snowden nor Greenwald...BUT

the very vehemence with which they are both demonized sends flaming red flags to me that there is a concerted effort underway to deflect from the issue at hand--i.e., that there is far more behind this surveillance program(s). We have only just begun to scrape the surface of the scope and breath and legality of these NSA surveillance programs. I am increasingly becoming convinced that there are far more lies being told--more concealment--than even I can imagine.

So for those determined to focus ONLY on Snowden and Greenwald--be my guest. But, I'd be willing to bet there are more like me that sees this as deceptive deflection--whether intentional or not.

[randome]

4. All these debates would be moot if Snowden showed evidence of his claims.

Instead, he stole some PowerPoint slides and neglected to get evidence that he could spy on the President as he claimed.

So the 'debate' then hinges on his credibility, which looks none too good right now.

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font]
[hr]

[flamingdem]

21. He's a whistleblower alright, blowing da whistle fer the Libertarians!

[Bluenorthwest]

5. From Bruce Schneiern at your own link: "I believe that history will hail Snowden as a hero

- his whistle-blowing exposed a surveillance state and a secrecy machine run amok. I'm less optimistic of how the present day will treat him, and hope that the debate right now is less about the man and more about the government he exposed."

Your own experts say focus on issues not on the personalities, but you do not follow that sage advice.

And your link to the Guardian does not go to the Guardian, but to some blogger quoting the Guardian. Why? You love circles made of links that lead to nowhere because your own links say history will call Snowden a hero. Very strong sentiment, not sure I agree with it, but you do, you quote it as absolute.

[ProSense]

6. That was

"From Bruce Schneiern at your own link: "I believe that history will hail Snowden as a hero"


...a snip from another post (http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023068663)

Schneier believes Snowden will be remembered as a hero.

I don't think the situation bodes well for Snowden. The "hero" thing might not pan out. There will certainly not be a pardon (http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023011189)

Schneier also said that Snowden "broke the law," a fact that "isn't under debate," and that "the law is there for a good reason." He also acknowledged that the Justice Department will prosecute Snowden.

It's going to happen. He broke the law, and he will be prosecuted.

My point is that regardless, Snowden broke the law.

[KittyWampus]

7. Whistleblowers don't release sensitive/classified documents to the Chinese/Russians and whoever else

he's decided to release info to.

[eissa]

8. Whistleblowers expose illegal activities

Leakers reveal confidential information. There's a difference. Manning, Ellsberg, Silkwood = whistleblowers who exposed illegal and abusive acts. Snowden stole four laptops of classified information about a LEGAL program and ran off to China where he leaked the information. I tire of people who think that the simple act of just revealing classified documents = whistleblower, and worthy of praise. It's not that cut and dry.

[jmowreader]

12. And leakers who leak to foreign intelligence services...

...are spies.

Next we'll hear Al Capone was a hero because he exposed the hypocrisy of the Volstead Act and Clyde Barrow was a hero because he proved the need to make bank robbery a federal crime.

[Johonny]

9. Hmm British telling you the spy that leaked them information isn't a spy

well DUH.

Sorry if I don't take their, Putin, and the Chinese word for it.

[ljm2002]

11. Yes, Snowden broke the law...

...and yes, Snowden is a whistle blower.

Was Daniel Ellsberg a whistle blower?

There are certainly arguments to be made in pointing out the differences between the two cases. However, one thing is exactly the same: Daniel Ellsberg also broke the law, yet Daniel Ellsberg was a whistle blower.

IOW your premise here (X broke the law; therefore, X is not a whistle blower) is simply false.

[ProSense]

13. Well,

"IOW your premise here (X broke the law; therefore, X is not a whistle blower) is simply false. "

...that's your "premise," not mine. I mean, I stated two things: 1) The Guardian was trying to convince itself that Snowden is a "whistleblower" and 2) Snowden broke the law.

The Guardian's characterization of Snowden also acknowledges that he will "have to answer to the law."

It's clear that I don't agree with the "whistleblower" claim, but I do agree with the assertion that he will "have to answer to the law."

I simply stated it more emphatically: Snowden broke the law, and he will be prosecuted.

[ljm2002]

14. So you post the Guardian piece...

...that makes the case for Snowden as a whistle blower.

Then right under the excerpt from the piece, you comment as follows ( (a), (b) labels added by me):

(a) Seems like The Guardian editorial board is trying to convince itself that Snowden is a "whistleblower."

(b) Snowden broke the law, and he will be prosecuted.

I interpreted the above 2-sentence response as (a) I disagree with them and (b) here's why. That is, in fact, the obvious interpretation.

But you go on ahead with your silly "Who, me? Why I said no such thing!" game-playing, it is mildly amusing.

[ProSense]

15. Hey, interpret it however you want to. Enjoy. n/t

[ljm2002]

16. And that, my friends...

...is transparency. As in, transparently deceptive and trying to be cutesy about it.

It's like GWB when he said "I never said Iraq had anything to do with 9/11". Now technically, he was right. They were very careful about what he said in that regard. It's just that he would say a couple of sentences about 9/11, and then right after he'd say a couple of sentences about Saddam Hussein and Iraq and what a threat they were.

BTW this is a tried-and-true tactic of corporate spokespeople. Not saying that's what you are -- just that you have provided us with a fine example of the genre, up to and including the smug response "Hey, interpret it however you want to".

[ProSense]

18. Actually,

And that, my friends...

...is transparency. As in, transparently deceptive and trying to be cutesy about it.

It's like GWB when he said "I never said Iraq had anything to do with 9/11". Now technically, he was right. They were very careful about what he said in that regard. It's just that he would say a couple of sentences about 9/11, and then right after he'd say a couple of sentences about Saddam Hussein and Iraq and what a threat they were.

BTW this is a tried-and-true tactic of corporate spokespeople. Not saying that's what you are -- just that you have provided us with a fine example of the genre, up to and including the smug response "Hey, interpret it however you want to".

...it's me disagreeing with you, and telling you your interpretation of my statement is bogus. You can refuse to accept that.

You can even introduce your own conspiracy theory (wink-wink).

LOL!

[ljm2002]

19. Hey, winky-winky to you too!

You did not, in fact, tell me that my interpretation of your statement was bogus.

In fact you benevolently told me to go ahead and interpret it as I wished.

However, it is not really a question of what one wishes. It is a question of what the words plainly mean.

I will leave it to others, should they be interested, to go back and read your OP and see if their interpretation of your response agrees with mine, or if they believe that you were just making a couple of neutral, unconnected statements.

TTFN

[ProSense]

20. My bad.

"You did not, in fact, tell me that my interpretation of your statement was bogus. In fact you benevolently told me to go ahead and interpret it as I wished."

I initially didn't use the word "bogus." I stated that it was "you 'premise,' not mine."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3159390

Now, I'm saying it's bogus, and you still are free to interpret it as you wish.

Again, enjoy!

[ljm2002]

22. As I mentioned...

...your contortions on this are mildly amusing.

I have to say, though, you've outdone yourself. Oh, it's only one l'il ol' blue link, to be sure. But it links back to... one of your own replies... back up in this very subthread.

Wow.

Like, I couldn't find it without you so kindly providing an actual link.

Now that's service.

[ProSense]

23. Why

As I mentioned....your contortions on this are mildly amusing.

I have to say, though, you've outdone yourself. Oh, it's only one l'il ol' blue link, to be sure. But it links back to... one of your own replies... back up in this very subthread.

Wow.

Like, I couldn't find it without you so kindly providing an actual link.

Now that's service.

...do I detect some desperation here?

[ljm2002]

24. You may, of course, interpret it as you wish...

...but "desperation" is not the same thing as "amused contempt". Just for future reference.

[ProSense]

25. Oh,

"You may, of course, interpret it as you wish......but "desperation" is not the same thing as "amused contempt". Just for future reference."

...it's desperation.

[ljm2002]

29. Again, I will leave it to others...

...to make their own judgments over whose interpretations are more reliable in our exchange.

[ProSense]

42. That's mighty big of you.

LOL!

[ljm2002]

48. Why thank you...

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

60. She is a well known spinner of tall tales and snark

As clearly demonstrated in this thread.

Only she, and her groupies in the cheap seats pretend not to notice her shtik.

[grahamhgreen]

57. Exposing war crimes is not a crime.

[Galraedia]

17. Snowden is not a Whistleblower!

A whistle blower is someone who reports a crime or violation of the law. Snowden did not do so. He reported the actions taken under the Patriot Act and those actions were legal. You might not like the actions taken by the NSA under the Patriot Act, but not liking them does not make them illegal. Also, who makes copies of state secrets and then hurries off to China if they're looking to be a whistleblower? Maybe we can forgive him for being a dumbass, but running off to China with stolen intelligence and revealing information on America's foreign surveillance makes him guilty of espionage.

[wtmusic]

27. You have no idea if "those actions are legal"

because you still don't know what actions they are. Nor do I.

I believe he's smart enough to know what's blatantly illegal and what's not, and if he's willing to make those sacrifices to get the word out, I want to know what he has to say.

[merrily]

30. The Constitution supersedes the Patriot Act.

Until the Supreme Court upholds this, you have no idea if it's legal.

And even a pro-government oppression Justice like Scalia said the Founding Fathers would have been aghast at this.

[truedelphi]

33. Scalia often comes out against our basic rights being trampled.

Of course, with so much of the military budget being thrown into the surveillance arena, he might be beholden to some other entity rather than his conscience on this.

I like this quote from George Washington: "A government is like fire, a handy servant, but a dangerous master.”

[merrily]

43. Well, Scalia often tramples on our rights as well, so I am not nominating him for any

liberty awards. However, as to mass surveillance, Scalia did make clear that the Framers had in mind surveilling one target at a time and for a specific reason. .

So, if Scalia owed someone something else, he still owes them.

As to Washington's quote, he had already had experience with King George. However, someone posted elsewhere that Lincoln said the U.S. could be destroyed only from within. So, that was prescient.

Maybe not as prescient as George Orwell, but not bad, either.

[wtmusic]

26. Um, Snowden has NEVER denied he broke the law.

"There are some other investigations that ought to happen..."

- which would never happen if Snowden was in prison right now.

That's the point.

[ProSense]

31. Right, but

"Um, Snowden has NEVER denied he broke the law."

...he sure seemed unaware that there would be consequences.

Josh Marshall: "Snowden’s pretty screwed."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023144319

There Are 12 Million Stateless People Around The World, But Edward Snowden Isn’t One Of Them
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023149095

[merrily]

32. No, he doesn't seem to have been unaware at all.

And, even if he was unaware, so what?

I agree with Ellsberg: Snowden did the right thing.

But Snowden seems to have been well aware, including of the treatment to which Manning has been subjected.

[ProSense]

35. I happen

"I agree with Ellsberg: Snowden did the right thing. "

...not to agree with Ellsberg on Snowden.

I think Snowden is a coward and a hack.

[merrily]

44. No, a coward would not have made the revelations at all.

[ProSense]

45. A coward flees the country.

A hack distorts the information he leaks.

Snowden is a coward and a hack.

[merrily]

49. Your saying that does not make it so.

Anyone who is not a sick masochist, seeing what happened to Bradley Manning, would have left the country.l

Although you keep trying to say that he did not foresee the consequences, he did. He knew going in, he was going to have to leave everything he had known for his entire life and take his chances on getting asylum somewhere where he knows no one, has no job and probably cannot read, write or speak the language. That is not cowardice under any fair definition. Not by a long shot.

[ProSense]

51. You're right, it's my opinion. n/t

[Galraedia]

55. If he was that scared he never would have leaked it to begin with.

And even if he wanted to do the right thing and avoid the consequences, he still shouldn't have ran his mouth off about America's foreign surveillance.

[merrily]

69. But he was that scared and he did disclose it to begin with.

So, you are clearly wrong.

As for the so called foreign surveillance, please. The only ones who might not have known about it are the American people. We are extraordinarily ill informed, naive and trusting.

[Galraedia]

70. If I told you America has stealth fighters....

that is not the same as me telling you the schematics for a stealth fighter.

[wtmusic]

34. Nonsense.

"Yeah, I could be rendered by the CIA. I could have people come after me. Or any of the third-party partners. They work closely with a number of other nations. Or they could pay off the Traids. Any of their agents or assets. We've got a CIA station just up the road and the consulate here in Hong Kong and I'm sure they're going to be very busy for the next week. And that's a fear I'll live under for the rest of my life, however long that happens to be."

To me, that sounds very much like a man who is standing by something in which he believes.

[ProSense]

36. He was complaining about his passport being revoked.

The rest of his statement was fairly ridiculous, including the "stateless" claim.

[wtmusic]

39. He is for all practical purposes correct.

That will change, and soon.

[ProSense]

40. I don't agree. n/t

[merrily]

50. You're calling his statement ridiculous?

[merrily]

46. There is another quote in which he spoke in terms of not knowing how many days the rest of his life

may be.

But, I guess posting anonymously in unconditional support of the current administration/PTB is real courage compared to being willing to give up life as you knew it and maybe life, period, in order to let people know they are being spied upon.

[wtmusic]

47. Word.

There is no justification, under any context, for calling Snowden a coward.

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

41. He seems to be very aware in his very first video

[merrily]

28. Snowden made the right choice. So says Daniel Ellsberg, once a hero of the left.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/13/daniel-ellsberg-edward-snowden_n_3438431.html

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

37. That sounds right. whistleblowers often breaks the law

Last edited Wed Jul 3, 2013, 04:06 PM - Edit history (1)

To get the news of wrong doing out to the American people.

Thanks for sharing

[Tarheel_Dem]

52. Well that's settled. The Guardian has spoken.

[mstinamotorcity2]

53. Snowden is a Man On the Run!!!!

He is not a whistleblower. He is a man who was trusted with classified secrets and left the Country. If he was blowing the Lid off of one of Dubya 's secret Patriot Act Actions why did he not go to a Member of the Congressional oversight Committees. I'm just saying.

[MjolnirTime]

54. They're trying to avoid any culpability in Snowden's crimes.

[grahamhgreen]

58. You guys are on the wrong side on this.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

59. Jimmy had a few other things to say about leak, privacy, and the secret government.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3119565

[warrprayer]

63. "He damaged the country heh heh"

from the horses ass's mouth

[Thinkingabout]

65. Whistleblower in an agency such as NSA results in a crime of espionage, Snowden says his intention

was to work in the NSA in order to gather information, that is a spy.

[warrprayer]

66. Spys do not give

high level intel to reporters for free

[Thinkingabout]

67. Then Snowden is more stupid than I thought at first but in the case of Snowden he is

performing for his puppet masters.

[AlinPA]

68. How do we know that he has not sold his information about how NSA processes work to (you name it).