For those who think Snowden and/or Greenwald have engaged in terrorism,

[morningfog]

what the fuck is wrong with you?

This is through the looking glass, fascist shit. And, to what end? Are you going to drool at the prospect of treating them like a terrorist?

Are you going to own your words and advocate for a drone strike against them like others labeled terrorist?

This is really twisted shit. Step back and think for a minute. I mean use your brain instead of thoughtless reflexive hate. This is not a road we want to go down.

When you support this idea, you are aligning with the likes of Michael Hayden and John Bolton. Think about it.

[newfie11]

1. Thank you!!!!!!

[cali]

2. what the fuck indeed.

It's insane.

And here's the thing: you can find Greenwald as despicable as you wish. You can find him to be an awful reporter. You can hate his politics, But why on earth would you call him a terrorist or guilty of espionage? That's so ridiculous and so beyond the pale that I can't fathom it.

[Democracyinkind]

3. Really scary that people can say that and still conceive of themselves as being liberal. nt

[99Forever]

4. They are autoritarian fascist.

Claiming to be Democrats, is another of their lies.

[n2doc]

5. They are signing on with Dick Cheney's vision of the future

But it is all ok, because we have a 'D' in the white house.

[cantbeserious]

6. Darth Vader America With Authoritarian Groupies

eom

[Skidmore]

7. I don't think they are terrorists.

I do think they broke the law and should expect sanctions for doing so. Even when considered as civil disobedience, it is still breaking the law. I do think that the methods adopted by Greenwald and Snowden have detracted from whatever statement they are trying to make.

[Civilization2]

9. all civil disobedience IS breaking the law that is the point of it.

you can't make the "statement" without the leaks, it is a chicken and egg thing,.

There is nothing wrong with breaking a law when it is unjust, in fact that is how laws are changed. Only white men with property could vote, while they owned slaves,. this was the "law", untill it wasn't.

[Little Star]

11. Bingo

[sabrina 1]

22. Okay, now what about those who broke the law that these Whistle Blowers broke the law to

expose?

What's interesting is the way Bush's war crimes are ignored in any discussion about Manning et.

Ooooh, Manning broke the law, I am such a fair-minded democrat that I will make sure Republicans see how willing I am to point that out.

And then, it stops there. I have yet to see any of those harping on the Whistle Blowers's law relatively minor law breaking, then go on to point out that 'however, this is a minor issue considering what he was exposing'.

It's interesting to see democrats protecting Bush/Cheney now when for eight years they were railing against them, slamming the MSM for NOT reporting on the crimes, screaming for 'impeachment', then when someone comes along and actually does that, AFTER Bush is gone from office, they do an about turn and point their fingers AWAY from the War Criminals and directly at the person they claimed to be waiting for while Bush was in office.

Because most of what Manning revealed WAS about the Bush era.

The attacks on Whistle Blowers are a defense of Wall St and War Crimiinals and all of their horrific policies, plain and simple, and that is how I view them.

And that is why Cheney, Fleischer, Palin, Bush, King, Boehner et al slam the Whistle Blowers and call for their prosecution as well as the prosecution of any media that publishes their leads.

[Skidmore]

27. Who is not criticizing Bush and Cheney here?

You are way off base with that one. I have yet to see anyone defend them. It is a fact that these activities originated and were used by that administration and pointing that out does not mean that someone is defending these people. As for the MSM, the Bush/Cheney administration trained them to serve as stenographers and "embedded" them to keep track of them. How many times on any iteration of DU were there discussions in the past about journalists dying under circumstances that were suspicious?

In regard to whistle blowing, I have been a whistle blower and know full well how the process and consequences can play out. I've told my story a few times in the past on DU. Now there is a smart way to whistle blow. It doesn't necessarily mean that there will not be consequences in terms of career path and personal affairs.. I don't think Greenwald and Snowden have been smart about what they have done. Manning was certainly naive and I frankly see Assange as nearly predatory in the way he uses people, regardless of his stated purpose and where he is in the world.

[RitchieRich]

8. Agree except for the acting like a baby part

[stonecutter357]

10. I hate Libertarians more than Republicans.

He sold our data to China and then Russia.
I don't like the US having my data and i sure as hell don't want it in Russia

[Civilization2]

12. "Sold" requires payment,. please link to the prof of payment, thanks.

Last edited Wed Aug 21, 2013, 09:51 AM - Edit history (1)

USA, USA, USA,. We're number 1!!! Rah rah rah,. .

bla bla bal,.

Fear is the path to the dark side.
Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering.
I sense much fear in you.

[George II]

14. Okay, he "BARTERED" the information, he was questionably granted asylum, right?

[morningfog]

17. There is no evidence he gave anything to Russia,

other than what they can read in the news like everyone else.

[sabrina 1]

23. The US is responsible for him being in Russia. At least get the facts straight if you

want to be taken seriously.

[George II]

36. Yeah, they tied him up, put him on a plane and shipped him off to Russia, with a side trip to HK!

[sabrina 1]

38. Still wrong on the facts. He was in transit to another country when the US Government

took away his passport. They are to blame for Snowden being in Russia. They know they can count on the Right Wingers spewing their usual garbage about 'commie, liberal morons' and assign the usual false, nefarious motives to anyone who opposes Bush's old policies and they hope that no one will straighten the record.

No need to thank me for supplying you with the facts so you don't fall for the propaganda and help spread it around.

[George II]

41. I'm wrong? He went to Russia on his own accord. Let me rephrase.........

........he's outside the US voluntarily, correct?

Maybe while he's sitting around all day he should try reading the biography of Daniel Ellberg. It might be enlightening.

Nothing to thank you for. Your statement, "the US is responsible for him being in Russia" it totally false.

[sabrina 1]

42. Yes, you are wrong. The US Govt forced Snowden to remain in Russia. How hard is that to

to understand? Would you like me to keep repeating it until it sinks in? I know it's hard to believe that our Government would do something like that, but what can I say? Facts are facts.

And I don't think he's sitting around doing nothing. He has been offered a great job by a
multi Billionaire I believe so he'll be earning a good living, as he deserves to do.

Anyone who exposes Government corruption is doing their job as a good citizen. Thank the gods we still have people willing to do it.

[George II]

43. He can leave Russia tomorrow - it's in his hands.....

Again, he should look into the life of Daniel Ellsberg.

[Bluenorthwest]

69. Perhaps you should take a look at what Daniel Ellsberg says about Snowden being abroad...

I hope Snowden’s revelations will spark a movement to rescue our democracy, but he could not be part of that movement had he stayed here. There is zero chance that he would be allowed out on bail if he returned now and close to no chance that, had he not left the country, he would have been granted bail. Instead, he would be in a prison cell like Bradley Manning, incommunicado.

He would almost certainly be confined in total isolation, even longer than the more than eight months Manning suffered during his three years of imprisonment before his trial began recently. The United Nations Special Rapporteur for Torture described Manning’s conditions as “cruel, inhuman and degrading.” (That realistic prospect, by itself, is grounds for most countries granting Snowden asylum, if they could withstand bullying and bribery from the United States.)

Snowden believes that he has done nothing wrong. I agree wholeheartedly. More than 40 years after my unauthorized disclosure of the Pentagon Papers, such leaks remain the lifeblood of a free press and our republic. One lesson of the Pentagon Papers and Snowden’s leaks is simple: secrecy corrupts, just as power corrupts.
http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-07-07/opinions/40427629_1_daniel-ellsberg-pentagon-papers-snowden-s


Maybe you meant another Daniel Ellsberg?

[George II]

72. No, that's the one - the one who didn't flee the country and was willing to face prosecution.

[oldhippie]

73. No he can't ......

... because he doesn't have a valid passport. The US revoked it.

Maybe you don't know much about international travel, but you can't enter another country, or usually even leave one, without valid travel documents.

[George II]

75. I'm sure that if he asks the US government for documents to return to the US they would be issued...

....within hours of that request.

[morningfog]

16. Even if what you say is true, does that make him a terrorist?

[one_voice]

13. I don't think what they did was terrorism...

BUT I do think what Snowden did was wrong. And I'm not going to apologize for that.

He stole. Plain and simple. If you want to overlook that because you think he did for a good reason that's on you. I don't have to do that or agree with that.

But don't call me twisted, fascist or any of the other fucking pet names that are being used because I think what he did was wrong.

When you take something that doesn't belong to you it's stealing. And since we don't know what's been taken we don't know if something that could put us at risk is out there. We also don't know if he's walking around with citizens private information, but apparently that's ok.

You (the collective you) don't want to hear you're being spied on for your own good as a reason for that wrong doing. So don't tell me he stole for my own good.

AND NO I do NOT approve of spying on American citizens.

Do not confuse not approving of what Snowden did or the way Greenwald is handling things with approving of the NSA/spying.

Now we'll see how fast someone does exactly that ^^^ or says 'so you think it's ok Mr. Miranda was detained" even though I didn't say one word about that.

I also don't approve of ANON hacking and putting all that personal info out like they did the other day after the incident. That's just wrong. Those people have families. A over zealot person could hurt someone. When you play with fire someone eventually gets burned.

[morningfog]

18. I understand disagreeing with what Snowden did.

I get that. I don't get those who want to take the next step down the very slippery slope claiming acts of terrorism.

[LondonReign2]

21. All whistleblowers "steal"

They take information that the "owner" does not want revealed and do just that.

[George II]

44. There are two different ways to "blow the whistle" - the brave way and the cowardly way...

....Snowden took the cowardly way.

[LondonReign2]

48. That's nice

Tell me again how that makes him a terrorist? Or absolves the NSA of unconstitutional acts?

[George II]

58. I never mentioned, nor am I in a position to define "terrorist" in this context.....

....you mentioned "whistleblower", and I addressed that.

[LondonReign2]

59. Thank you for your valuable insight

[George II]

60. Glad I could be of help.

[sabrina 1]

24. Every Whistle Blower 'steals'. But what do you think of the crimes Manning and Snowden

revealed, in Manning's case mostly the Bush War Criminals and their policies, in Snowden's case, what we Democrats always predicted would happen if these Bush policies were not rescinded?

Compared to 'stealing' material to prove that the Bush gang did commit war crimes, it seems to me that the focus on the minor 'crime' of 'theft', the War Crimes revealed and the abuses of power by our Government, SHOULD be the focus of any Democrat commenting on all of this.

So I wonder why all the glossing over of Bush War Crimes? I KNOW Cheney is happy when the focus is on Manning or Snowden.

Most of Manning's leaks had to do with the Bush era. When I see people focusing on Manning, to me they are defending Bush and his gang of War Criminals.

[one_voice]

26. I can't help but laugh..

why do you have steal in quotes? It's not like they kinda steal, sorta steal, it's stealing. Crime in quotes, as if it's not so bad cuz he's my guy. Why don't you have crime in quotes when talking about Bush or when you talk about Obama's crimes for that matter?

What's the definition of stealing? Taking something that doesn't belong to you. That's what they did. You can call them anything your little heart desires to romanticize them, try and make it better, or right, it's still stealing.

Now, we weren't discussing Manning we were talking about Greenwald and Snowden, but I'm not surprised YOU try and change the discussion just as I said someone would.

Also not surprised you used language like 'We Democrats' as if I'm not a Democrat...funny that. Please do not lecture me on what should and should not be the focus of a Democrat commenting on this. Not a very nice tactic. I'm entitled to think what they did was wrong.

And this:

So I wonder why all the glossing over of Bush War Crimes?

Please show me where I 'glossed over Bush War Crimes"

And this:

Most of Manning's leaks had to do with the Bush era. When I see people focusing on Manning, to me they are defending Bush and his gang of War Criminals.

I NEVER FUCKING mentioned Manning in my comment.

This is a disgusting tactic of you and your clique.

You're a dishonest person, I never said most of what you're claiming.

If you want to know what I think FUCKING ASK don't attribute thoughts/words to my comments/posts that weren't there.

That's a disgusting tactic and I'm sick of it.

[JoeyT]

28. Steal should be in quotes.

The data in question belongs to all of us. I'm ok with him "stealing" it, as are many others.

The government itself owns nothing: Everything the government owns, does, or says is in the name of the governed. I'm pretty good with the governed knowing there are massive spying operations being carried out on them, in their name, by the government they allegedly control. No matter who happens to be president at the time.

There are limits, of course. Stuff that would actually prevent us from keeping tabs on actual terrorists, for example. This falls well outside those limits.

[one_voice]

30. It didn't belong to him.

it's stealing.

When you take something that doesn't belong to you it's stealing. The question is not who it belonged to but whether it belonged to him--it did not.

I already knew that there was spying going on--if you didn't you weren't paying attention. I don't know how many times or ways I have to say this, I do not agree or approve of the spying. For some reason people that excuse the theft want to confuse the two issues.

I'm perfectly capable of not approving of the spying as well as not approving of what Snowden did.

You being ok with stealing, doesn't make it ok or make it any less of a crime. YOU don't get to change the definition of stealing just because YOU agree with the reason/cause.

steal
/stēl/
Verb
Take (another person's property) without permission or legal right and without intending to return it

thief
/THēf/
Noun
A person who steals another person's property, esp. by stealth and without using force or violence.

[JoeyT]

31. I don't need to change the definition of stealing.

When many people that are owners of something are cool with you taking it, you didn't steal it. I'm a bit iffy on the concept of stealing an intangible: If he'd hijacked a submarine or a tank, I'd call it stealing. As the stuff he took had no single owner, it's a bit more difficult to call it stealing.

I didn't mean to imply you were ok with the spying, and I apologize if I did. We all "knew" it was going on, but anyone that claimed even half the extent that we now know it happens would've ended up with a thread full of tin foil hat replies. Now we have proof of the extent it's happening.

[one_voice]

34. What about the people that...

aren't 'cool' with it being taken? They don't matter?

Not too mention there was stuff taken that had nothing to do with spying that was only a small part of it. There was a lot of other stuff taken. It's not just evidence of spying.

Really? I can break into a house (not your house) (NSA) steal a tv that was/is yours (info)and not be charged with a crime cuz you say, hey it's cool? The person's house I broke into has no recourse? What about multiple tvs that belong to multiple people? and coffee pots, and radios? Because you said it was cool it's not a crime? Could you please show me where the law says that? I'd really be interested in seeing that.

Mind you all this was planned in advance. Snowden too this job in advance to steal information. He had no idea what he was going to take.

[sabrina 1]

40. So I misunderstood you and you consider Bush War Crimes to be way more important

than the misdemeanor of a Whistle Blower doing what was necessary to expose wrong doing in a Government Agency which is operating under Bush policies?



I didn't see you mention the crimes he was revealing so I assumed you were focusing on what was important to you.

I eg, find the crimes revealed by all the recent Whistle Blowers to be way, way more egregious than the act of exposing them, by any means.

Eg, when our elected officials and our military take the oath they are required to take before being accepted into their positions, they are required to do just one thing. To defend and protect the US Constituion'.

Now, supposing a soldier witnesses a crime by one of his/her superiors. But it would require stealing some photos (Abu Ghraib eg) or documents to comply with that oath, what should that soldier do??

1) Remain silent because to take those photos or docs would be a crime.

2) Take the evidence and do whatever is necessary to inform the American of violations to the Constitution s/he was sworn to protect.

I don't remember anyone back when the Abu Ghraib photos were released calling it a crime for the soldier who was brave enough to do it.

The focus then for Democrats was on the major crime.

For me that remains the same so people talk about Snowden or Manning or Drake or Binney or Ellsberg, my first reaction is not to say 'they stole documents', it is the same as it was when Whistle Blowers outed Bush back when we were united about these things. My focus is still on the crimes revealed.

[one_voice]

47. Please go back and re-read my response.

and stop with this bullshit. You didn't misunderstand shit. You intentionally tried to shove words down my throat, but I'm not having that. I didn't mention the crimes because I wasn't talking about Manning--BUT YOU KNEW THAT.

I NEVER MENTIONED MANNING OR BUSH IN MY ORIGINAL COMMENT. What part of that are you unable to comprehend? You're intent on reading that into my comment. Unless Snowden uncovered Bush crimes, you're reading things into my original comment that wasn't there.

Here's my original comment:

I don't think what they did was terrorism...

BUT I do think what Snowden did was wrong. And I'm not going to apologize for that.

He stole. Plain and simple. If you want to overlook that because you think he did for a good reason that's on you. I don't have to do that or agree with that.

But don't call me twisted, fascist or any of the other fucking pet names that are being used because I think what he did was wrong.

When you take something that doesn't belong to you it's stealing. And since we don't know what's been taken we don't know if something that could put us at risk is out there. We also don't know if he's walking around with citizens private information, but apparently that's ok.

You (the collective you) don't want to hear you're being spied on for your own good as a reason for that wrong doing. So don't tell me he stole for my own good.

AND NO I do NOT approve of spying on American citizens.

Do not confuse not approving of what Snowden did or the way Greenwald is handling things with approving of the NSA/spying.

Now we'll see how fast someone does exactly that ^^^ or says 'so you think it's ok Mr. Miranda was detained" even though I didn't say one word about that.

I also don't approve of ANON hacking and putting all that personal info out like they did the other day after the incident. That's just wrong. Those people have families. A over zealot person could hurt someone. When you play with fire someone eventually gets burned

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3503807

Your response:

Every Whistle Blower 'steals'. But what do you think of the crimes Manning and Snowden

revealed, in Manning's case mostly the Bush War Criminals and their policies, in Snowden's case, what we Democrats always predicted would happen if these Bush policies were not rescinded?

Compared to 'stealing' material to prove that the Bush gang did commit war crimes, it seems to me that the focus on the minor 'crime' of 'theft', the War Crimes revealed and the abuses of power by our Government, SHOULD be the focus of any Democrat commenting on all of this.

So I wonder why all the glossing over of Bush War Crimes? I KNOW Cheney is happy when the focus is on Manning or Snowden.

Most of Manning's leaks had to do with the Bush era. When I see people focusing on Manning, to me they are defending Bush and his gang of War Criminals.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3504116

What the hell did Manning and Bush have to do with what I said? And how did you get that I was defending Bush and his gang of war criminals. I never even mentioned Manning.

Dishonest bullshit.

And you don't get to make me a bad person because I said what Snowden did was stealing--it was.

I also said that the spying was wrong. Somehow you missed that part in your effort to put words in my mouth and in my comment. As I predicted someone would. But you went way beyond what I thought would happen you accused me of defending the Bush war criminals.

Ugh...fucking gross and dishonest.

Just go away.

[bvar22]

61. And if YOU witnessed War Crimes,

what would YOU do?
The RIGHT thing....like keep you mouth shut?

.....or report them to the guys that committed them?

[one_voice]

64. What war crimes did Snowden or Greenwald...

witness? My comment had to do with Snowden and Greenwald.

So I will ask you, what the hell does war crimes have to do with what I said?

I don't think what they did was terrorism...

BUT I do think what Snowden did was wrong. And I'm not going to apologize for that.

He stole. Plain and simple. If you want to overlook that because you think he did for a good reason that's on you. I don't have to do that or agree with that.

But don't call me twisted, fascist or any of the other fucking pet names that are being used because I think what he did was wrong.

When you take something that doesn't belong to you it's stealing. And since we don't know what's been taken we don't know if something that could put us at risk is out there. We also don't know if he's walking around with citizens private information, but apparently that's ok.

You (the collective you) don't want to hear you're being spied on for your own good as a reason for that wrong doing. So don't tell me he stole for my own good.

AND NO I do NOT approve of spying on American citizens.

Do not confuse not approving of what Snowden did or the way Greenwald is handling things with approving of the NSA/spying.

Now we'll see how fast someone does exactly that ^^^ or says 'so you think it's ok Mr. Miranda was detained" even though I didn't say one word about that.

I also don't approve of ANON hacking and putting all that personal info out like they did the other day after the incident. That's just wrong. Those people have families. A over zealot person could hurt someone. When you play with fire someone eventually gets burned.

I'll tell what war crimes has to do with what I said...NOT A DAMN THING.

And to answer you BULLSHIT question that had nothing to do with what I said. I'd tell the fucking world.

This is a common tactic of your clique. You're a dishonest bunch.

Now go away. I think there's a cup of tea waiting for you.

[Bluenorthwest]

70. Wow, your posts are very venomous, read like defenses of Bushco's worst actions followed by

insults toward other DUers in mass McCarthyite phraseology. What a display of acting out in lieu of ethics and reason.

[one_voice]

71. No it wasn't.

Again accusations based in nothing.

[Fuddnik]

15. Franco-Americans.

As in Gen. Fransisco Franco.

[RC]

19. Well, they are succeeding.

They are making the NSA scandal more and more about Snowden and Greenwald and less and less about our own corrupt government and the illegal spying on US citizens by the NSA.

The ball is the NSA people. That is where you need to keep your eyes. Snowden and Greenwald are the messengers, nothing more.

[Fire Walk With Me]

20. The Two Minutes Hate is far more attractive than critical thought. n/t

[leftstreet]

29. Ralph Nader welcomes the break!

[KG]

32. !

[winter is coming]

57. If only it lasted for just two minutes!

I see the same handful of people posting OP after OP, with all the vengeful persistence of a jilted lover.

[Fire Walk With Me]

62. The OP is correct. n/t

[winter is coming]

63. I agree with the OP. n/t

[truth2power]

25. If you look around at other Liberal/Progressive sites on the internet..

you're not going to encounter anywhere near the authoritarian mind-set you see among some posters, here.

Liberals/Progressives are generally united in their support of Greenwald, Snowden, Manning etc. You have to look at the larger picture.

I hope that's some comfort to you.

[sabrina 1]

49. That's true, but the same comments can be found on Daily Kos eg, but they have

become a small minority there since back when I first discovered and it was filled with the Third Way and the owner supported them.

[truth2power]

56. Third Way. Yeppers! n/t

[treestar]

33. No one has said that

[Hydra]

50. Funny you say that

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023505302

[treestar]

76. that's a stretch

It's about the UK law, and even that is only saying the documents "might help terrorism."

[Hydra]

77. I agree it's a stretch(on the part of the people doing it)

But the groundwork is being laid for unapproved journalism = terrorism.

This OP was a response to the the hints and suggestions(subtle and not) of this, and it's becoming more blatant.

I called this over a month ago though during the Manning Trial- they were trying to frame Wikileaks as a terrorist organization, so we'll be hearing more on this. It's coming from the top.

[Waiting For Everyman]

35. The most troubling thing is this almost deification of the law.

It is very Nixonian. And especially since the law today is 100% corrupted by corporatism. What a bunch of little stooges this country has raised. (And apparently the UK is no better.)

[pnwmom]

37. There is a word for what they are doing, and it isn't "terrorism."

dictionary.reference.com


gray·mail [grey-meyl]
noun
a means of preventing prosecution, as for espionage, by threatening to disclose government secrets during trial.

[morningfog]

46. I have no problem with that.

[Cali_Democrat]

39. They are not terrorists

That is a silly notion.

[morningfog]

45. I agree. Glad we found some common ground

here at a bare minimum.

[villager]

51. The people who think such things are neither Democrats (in any meaningful sense)

.. or liberals (in any actual sense).

[BeyondGeography]

52. Nice strawman outrage

U bored?

[morningfog]

55. There have been at least 3 threads

conflating Greenwald and Snowden with terrorism.

[rhett o rick]

65. So do you believe that Snowden is a terrorist? nm

[BeyondGeography]

66. No more than Obama is head of the Stasi in his spare time

[rhett o rick]

67. Cant give a straight answer? nm

[BeyondGeography]

68. Obviously, you wouldn't recognize one if it sat on your head

[rhett o rick]

74. If I didnt know better I would think you are trying to start a fight. Well, go fight with

someone else.

[Bake]

53. They're too busy polishing the Obama Admin apple.

If this were done under BushCo, they'd be heroes. But not to the apple polishers of DU.

Bake

[MotherPetrie]

54. K&R. It's only "terrorism" when it's agains the Obama police state.