Snowden is nominated for Nobel Peace Prize

[HankB]

Snowden is as deserving of the Nobel Peace Prize as previous winners Yassir Arafat, Algore, and Barack Hussein Obama.

As for whether he's a hero or traitor . . . releasing information on how fed.gov is spying on Americans (like most of us on this forum) can be plausibly regarded as patriotic . . . but once he started releasing details of our foreign intelligence gathering, IMHO he crossed the line into treasonous territory.

[cordex]

once he started releasing details of our foreign intelligence gathering, IMHO he crossed the line into treasonous territory.

Part of the problem is that many programs that collected information on foreigners were indiscriminately applied to Americans as well.  Show how it is applied to Americans and you show how it is applied to everyone else.

[TommyGunn]

His point was, bringing LeMay into a discussion when you're trying to talk about good judgment and workable tactics is, well, kinda insane

Curtis Lemay's tactics & judgement helped us win WW2.  He was the right guy at the right time in the right place for America in WW2.  
He may have been a great commander for the Strategic Air Command in general as well.
He had too much of an axe to grind during the Cuban Missile Crisis (I said Bay of Pigs before, right place wrong incident).  
One thing a president has to do is weigh the suggestions and other info each service commander gives him during a crisis situation.  JFK, as badly as he had bungled the earlier Bay of Pigs fiasco, had learned enough to take a more tempered approach and thus he did not go with Lemay's decision during the missile crisis.
This to Kennedy's credit.
Not all military commanders have the same temperment.  Note how Civil War commanders of the Union Army, Generals McLellan and later General Ulysses Grant differed in their approach to how to prosecute the war.
In fact, often a relatively minor incident can often reveal a lot.
During a early part of the Civil War, General Mclellan was trying to find a good river crossing for cavalry.  He wondered aloud "how deep the river was here."  A sort of meh, indecisve action on the part of a army officer.
A young lieutenant under his command, however, heard him, and immediatly rode his horse out into the middle of the river and yelled back; "this here, sir, is how deep the river is."
A more aggressive, take charge, "get the job done" attitude ...right?
President Abraham Lincoln would later replace Gen. McLellan.
The young officer who rode his horse out into the river?
His name was George Armstrong Custer.  

[TommyGunn]

No, I don't think that. I was just illustrating that we've done many things, of which that is only one, that have emboldened al-qaeda


Let me ask you this... if a nation started sending drones into the US to kill people they considered "terrorists," how would you feel about it? 

The "moral equivelency" argument?  This is hypothetical and need not even be answered, IMHO. If we had an AQ-like group in America I'd call them terrorists without using quotation marks to muddy the issue.  Do you NOT think AQ is a vast network of terrorists? 
 

We can't keep fighting wars on nebulous things like "terrorism."

A war is fought against a nation. If we have not declared war against pakistan, syria, or whoever, we shouldn't be sending combat aircraft into them to bomb people. Period.

UNperiod.

Yes we damned well keep FIGHTING a war against the terrorists.  What would you do?  Sit back and let them blow up 3,000 Americans at a time?   Infiltrate America and conduct a far more active covert war against us?
Some Commander-in-Chief you'd be.
Wars are fought against enemies of this nation.  That may mean a foreign nation or some other type of enemy.  Our country's founders fought the Barbary Pirates in the early 1800s and that was the rough equivelancy of what we're doing now, so even they thought it was possible and beneficial to fight a war against a non-national entity.

Once in a while, eh? Any idea just how many noncombatants we've killed in our drone strikes? There's not near enough oversight.

The WW2 argument doesn't hold any water either. Not only have we gotten more technologically advanced, but we were fighting those NATIONS, in their entirety. Here, we continually say "we're not at war with XYZ, and then prove we're lying by sending armed aircraft into those countries to kill their people.

What, really, has WW2 really to do with this?  THEN we were at war with the Axis Powers.  Now we're at war with radical Islamists.  THEY'VE been at war with us since 1993 when they first tried to blow up the trade towers.
You just can't let an entity wage war against you and do nothing in response.
Youi may like the idea of living under Sharia Law but I don't. 
And anyone who tries to get me to live under Sharia Law is going to get a bullet in his brain if I am humanly able to put it there.
The idea we're proving we're lying by sending drones somewhere to whack terrorists is wrong.  It doesn't by any means prove we're lying.  Are you aligning yourself with AQ now .... you seem to be making their argument for them.

But this is all thread drift... So, again, I'll ask you... what has Snowden revealed that has A.) helped al qaeda, and B.) cannot be found in another source, such as the aforementioned huge amounts of tell all books, leaks (inadvertant or deliberate) by congress, etc?

AGAIN I will try to tell you that AQ is now being schooled in American intelligence tradecraft that they have picked up from Snowden's leaks.  You can listen .... or not.   
Neither you or I know where else this stuff could have been found out.  That is a highly speculative statement.  I do not think it needs an answer before I say Snowden was a traitor. 
That others have "leaked" stuff does not show AQ could have gotten it from them, since the content of those leaks has not been compared to what Snowden has revealed.  If you think otherwise then I suggest you provide this forum with the proof.   
And such leaks, "tell-all books" or whatever do not excuse Snowden.  An old bromide says "Two wrongs do not make a right."   

[Fitz]

The "moral equivelency" argument?  This is hypothetical and need not even be answered, IMHO. If we had an AQ-like group in America I'd call them terrorists without using quotation marks to muddy the issue.  Do you NOT think AQ is a vast network of terrorists? 
 

UNperiod.

Yes we damned well keep FIGHTING a war against the terrorists.  What would you do?  Sit back and let them blow up 3,000 Americans at a time?   Infiltrate America and conduct a far more active covert war against us?
Some Commander-in-Chief you'd be.
Wars are fought against enemies of this nation.  That may mean a foreign nation or some other type of enemy.  Our country's founders fought the Barbary Pirates in the early 1800s and that was the rough equivelancy of what we're doing now, so even they thought it was possible and beneficial to fight a war against a non-national entity.


What, really, has WW2 really to do with this?  THEN we were at war with the Axis Powers.  Now we're at war with radical Islamists.  THEY'VE been at war with us since 1993 when they first tried to blow up the trade towers.
You just can't let an entity wage war against you and do nothing in response.
Youi may like the idea of living under Sharia Law but I don't. 
And anyone who tries to get me to live under Sharia Law is going to get a bullet in his brain if I am humanly able to put it there.
The idea we're proving we're lying by sending drones somewhere to whack terrorists is wrong.  It doesn't by any means prove we're lying.  Are you aligning yourself with AQ now .... you seem to be making their argument for them.


AGAIN I will try to tell you that AQ is now being schooled in American intelligence tradecraft that they have picked up from Snowden's leaks.  You can listen .... or not.   
Neither you or I know where else this stuff could have been found out.  That is a highly speculative statement.  I do not think it needs an answer before I say Snowden was a traitor. 
That others have "leaked" stuff does not show AQ could have gotten it from them, since the content of those leaks has not been compared to what Snowden has revealed.  If you think otherwise then I suggest you provide this forum with the proof.   
And such leaks, "tell-all books" or whatever do not excuse Snowden.  An old bromide says "Two wrongs do not make a right."   

That's not how it works.

YOU Made the statement that snowdens leaks helped AQ. YOU have provided no evidence to support that. YOU made the claim. I said I have seen nothing from his leaks that wasn't already available. Burden of proof is on you, bud.

As for the rest, you brought WW2 into this, not me. I was answering your stuff.



Pretty cowardly , that aligning myself with AQ comment. I spent 20 days cleaning up what they did, and 16 months in a shithole fighting islamic extremists. You can take that comment and shove it right up your ass. I've earned the right to have an opinion on the activities of my government, and I no longer believe that agencies who violate the constitution deserve any quarter when it comes to exposing their dubious activities.

[Fitz]

You also have a distinct lack of reading comprehension. I used quotations around terrorists discussing a hypothetical american terror organization. The quotes were appropriate, and not meant to muddy anything. I never said AQ weren't terrorists. If anyone is muddying the issue, it's you. Your refusal to back up your assertions, and answering questions with questions (And thinly veiled insinuations that I support those murderous bastards) are offensive, and cowardly.

[Gewehr98]

Only criminals would worry that a country would have an extradition treaty with us.

Bovine excrement.

If I was a whistleblower trying to get my government to stop doing unconstitutional crap, and knew the second I blew that whistle that I was a walking dead man (or my family for that matter), then I'd look for someplace elsewhere to stay alive, too.

It's funny (in a funny/queer, not funny/haha way) - as an intel employee you're always encouraged to keep an eye open and report wrongdoing under the Intelligence Oversight Act, etc.

There'd be a lot more reporting of such transgressions if folks inside the IC weren't afraid of getting disappeared.  

[roo_ster]

Tommygun you still have not answered what particularly aq knows now that snowden alone revealed that harms the usa.  That is kinda important if you are going to accuse a man of being a traitor.

But let us assume you are correct and that snowden released information useful to thwarting nsa and cia surveillance.  Well that information is now useable not only by aq but by american citizens.  Given the unconstitutional nature of that surveillance i call that a win for americans.  Perhaps we can make such techniques ubiquitous in america for americans.

[TommyGunn]

YES IT IS HOW IT WORKS.
Fitz, did I not mention that commentors on cable news have claimed that AQ has been helped by Snowden's leaks?  You want annotated sources for what I have heard on TV news?
Sorry I ain't keepiong recordings around of what I here 24/7 on news so I can provide it to you on some internet forum.
You can take my word for it .... or not.  Take your pick.

YOU Made the statement that snowdens leaks helped AQ. YOU have provided no evidence to support that. YOU made the claim. I said I have seen nothing from his leaks that wasn't already available. Burden of proof is on you, bud.

To be precise, I DID NOT make the claim, I reported that I'd heard this reported on cable news.  
To me it makes a lot of sense that our enemies would use such revelations to learn more about how we operate.  Is it hard for you to believe this?  If you've served in the military (16 months fighting Islamists) I should think you might already understand this and comprehend the possible damage it does to us.
I made the comment about you aligning yourself with AQ because that is what it outwardly appeared to be doing, despite  your avowed service of " spen(ding) 20 days cleaning up what they did, and 16 months in a shithole fighting islamic extremists."  BTW, thanks.   I don't feel that entitles you to demean our war effort by claiming the things you have about our airstrikes.

My points about WW2 was that we fought that war (IMHO) with a greater sense of the danger our foes posed to us than we apparently do today, and we fought to win, without wringing our wrists every time we bombed a Nazi Japanese Islamic Wedding Party by mistake.  I think it will take the same attitude to win against the Islamists.
"War is Hell," as Sherman said.   It's a lot of things, few of them good.    And it's time we Americans ought to get our collective heads out of our butts and accept that war is as bloody nasty as it is, stop trying to play it nice and pretty like it's a video game, and annihilate the enemy.


Yes, you are entitled to your opinion -- never said yo weren't.  But I am entitled to mine as well.  
I just think mine was forged in a nastier part of hell than was yours .....

[roo_ster]

Tommygun the snowden revelations showed us that the absolute worst possible abuses intimated by the usapatriot acts were but a starting point.  The reality of those possible abuses and the orders of magnitude they went beyond shocked a lot of people normally willing to give govt the benefit of the doubt.   The intel community has tossed away its credibility and the goodwill of many supporters with both hands.  It will be a long time before they are trusted again if ever.  They brought this on their own heads.

[TommyGunn]

Tommygun you still have not answered what particularly aq knows now that snowden alone revealed that harms the usa.  That is kinda important if you are going to accuse a man of being a traitor.

But let us assume you are correct and that snowden released information useful to thwarting nsa and cia surveillance.  Well that information is now useable not only by aq but by american citizens.  Given the unconstitutional nature of that surveillance i call that a win for americans.  Perhaps we can make such techniques ubiquitous in america for americans.

What would you accept as evidence beyond the assertions I've already made?  Apparently nothing.

Bovine excrement.

If I was a whistleblower trying to get my government to stop doing unconstitutional crap, and knew the second I blew that whistle that I was a walking dead man (or my family for that matter), then I'd look for someplace elsewhere to stay alive, too.

It's funny (in a funny/queer, not funny/haha way) - as an intel employee you're always encouraged to keep an eye open and report wrongdoing under the Intelligence Oversight Act, etc.

There'd be a lot more reporting of such transgressions if folks inside the IC weren't afraid of getting disappeared.  

Do you think real life is a LeCarre' novel?   That covert agencies always skulk around killing people who blab?
Hell, guy, if I thought that I'd move to a remote Pacific island and in a way no one could trace me; screw extradition and all that.
If Snowden was so worried about consequences such as that he ought to have given his information to an American Media Outlet who would paste it across the evening news.  

You also have a distinct lack of reading comprehension. I used quotations around terrorists discussing a hypothetical american terror organization. The quotes were appropriate, and not meant to muddy anything. I never said AQ weren't terrorists. If anyone is muddying the issue, it's you. Your refusal to back up your assertions, and answering questions with questions (And thinly veiled insinuations that I support those murderous bastards) are offensive, and cowardly.

I ain't muddying anything Fitz.   You used quotes in a manner that invites misconstruction in a tendentious discussion.

As to my assertions I have pointed out where they came from.  You want more documentation?  Sorry this is not a college thesis.   No one in this thread has provided any source material for what they've asserted so if we can't keep this on a discussion level, we might as well just close this entire thread .... which come to think of ... might not be such a bad idea anyway.

[Fitz]

YES IT IS HOW IT WORKS.
Fitz, did I not mention that commentors on cable news have claimed that AQ has been helped by Snowden's leaks?  You want annotated sources for what I have heard on TV news?
Sorry I ain't keepiong recordings around of what I here 24/7 on news so I can provide it to you on some internet forum.
You can take my word for it .... or not.  Take your pick.To be precise, I DID NOT make the claim, I reported that I'd heard this reported on cable news.  
To me it makes a lot of sense that our enemies would use such revelations to learn more about how we operate.  Is it hard for you to believe this?  If you've served in the military (16 months fighting Islamists) I should think you might already understand this and comprehend the possible damage it does to us.
I made the comment about you aligning yourself with AQ because that is what it outwardly appeared to be doing, despite  your avowed service of " spen(ding) 20 days cleaning up what they did, and 16 months in a shithole fighting islamic extremists."  BTW, thanks.   I don't feel that entitles you to demean our war effort by claiming the things you have about our airstrikes.

My points about WW2 was that we fought that war (IMHO) with a greater sense of the danger our foes posed to us than we apparently do today, and we fought to win, without wringing our wrists every time we bombed a Nazi Japanese Islamic Wedding Party by mistake.  I think it will take the same attitude to win against the Islamists.
"War is Hell," as Sherman said.   It's a lot of things, few of them good.    And it's time we Americans ought to get our collective heads out of our butts and accept that war is as bloody nasty as it is, stop trying to play it nice and pretty like it's a video game, and annihilate the enemy.


Yes, you are entitled to your opinion -- never said yo weren't.  But I am entitled to mine as well.  
I just think mine was forged in a nastier part of hell than was yours .....

Oh, ok.

So first, you're saying that because the news made a claim, it's true. Gotcha.

I cannot "understand" how this helped al qaeda because I have seen no evidence supporting that claim. You really have difficulty comprehending what you read.

LOL. Demean our war effort. Yes, because I have a problem with some aspects of our war, I'm demeaning our effort. You should call the Commissar and let him know I've badmouthed the Dear Leaders. We are under no obligation to praise every action that our leaders take, and ignore when they do wrong things.

Like, you know... spying on americans on a massive scale, breaking into american tech companies datacenters...

"According to news reports."

What a joke

According to news reports, I have a deadly evil assaulty weapon that is only designed to massacre children.

I don't believe the news. Neither should you. Have you taken a look at any of the stuff that has been leaked?

[TommyGunn]

Tommygun the snowden revelations showed us that the absolute worst possible abuses intimated by the usapatriot acts were but a starting point.  The reality of those possible abuses and the orders of magnitude they went beyond shocked a lot of people normally willing to give govt the benefit of the doubt.   The intel community has tossed away its credibility and the goodwill of many supporters with both hands.  It will be a long time before they are trusted again if ever.  They brought this on their own heads.

Maybe...but if we can't trust anyone to defend this country, then it is time to throw in the towel.


And it's 2 "n's" in TommyGunn, BTW.  

[Fitz]

Do you think real life is a LeCarre' novel?   That covert agencies always skulk around killing people who blab?
Hell, guy, if I thought that I'd move to a remote Pacific island and in a way no one could trace me; screw extradition and all that.
If Snowden was so worried about consequences such as that he ought to have given his information to an American Media Outlet who would paste it across the evening news.  

I'd say since he did a career in Intel work, he probably has a better idea of the dangers of blabbing than many.

As for the rest, are you joking now?

He DID give the information to the media.... that's why you're calling him a traitor, remember?

[TommyGunn]

I'd say since he did a career in Intel work, he probably has a better idea of the dangers of blabbing than many.

As for the rest, are you joking now?

He DID give the information to the media.... that's why you're calling him a traitor, remember?

Apparently only a small amount of it.

Oh, ok.

So first, you're saying that because the news made a claim, it's true. Gotcha.

I cannot "understand" how this helped al qaeda because I have seen no evidence supporting that claim. You really have difficulty comprehending what you read.

LOL. Demean our war effort. Yes, because I have a problem with some aspects of our war, I'm demeaning our effort. You should call the Commissar and let him know I've badmouthed the Dear Leaders. We are under no obligation to praise every action that our leaders take, and ignore when they do wrong things.

Like, you know... spying on americans on a massive scale, breaking into american tech companies datacenters...

"According to news reports."

What a joke

According to news reports, I have a deadly evil assaulty weapon that is only designed to massacre children.

I don't believe the news. Neither should you. Have you taken a look at any of the stuff that has been leaked?

I said I HEARD IT IN THE NEWS!  If it isn't true then show me how it isn't true.  
Gawd, people talk about "lack of comprehension" here but then jump right into it themselves.

As to "believeing" the news?   OK I don't believe the news.  
So there's no such person as Snowden (I heard him mentioned IN THE NEWS).
He never leaked any classified material (I HEARD THAT IN THE NEWS TOO).
He never damaged our intelligence community or aided AQ or defected to Russia (I HEARD THAT IN THE NEWS TOO).


Ok?
Reductio Ad Absurdem.


And now that I've done THAT, GOODNIGHT ALL!

[Fitz]

I said I HEARD IT IN THE NEWS!  If it isn't true then show me how it isn't true.  
Gawd, people talk about "lack of comprehension" here but then jump right into it themselves.

As to "believeing" the news?   OK I don't believe the news.  
So there's no such person as Snowden (I heard him mentioned IN THE NEWS).
He never leaked any classified material (I HEARD THAT IN THE NEWS TOO).
He never damaged our intelligence community or aided AQ or defected to Russia (I HEARD THAT IN THE NEWS TOO).


Ok"
Reductio Ad Absurdem.


And now that I've done THAT, GOODNIGHT ALL!

Now that you've done what? Revealed precisely how tenuous your call of "traitor" is?

You heard on the news that snowden was a traitor. You blindly accept it.


You truly are an American

[TommyGunn]

Now that you've done what? Revealed precisely how tenuous your call of "traitor" is?

You heard on the news that snowden was a traitor. You blindly accept it.


You truly are an American

Thank you very much.

[Viking]

There'd be a lot more reporting of such transgressions if folks inside the IC weren't afraid of getting disappeared.  

Disappeared as in "Banana republic disappeared"?

[Scout26]

http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/war-whistleblowers-how-obama-administration-destroyed-thomas-drake-exposing


http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/after-the-whistle-revealers-of-government-secrets-share-how-their-lives-have-changed/2013/07/28/23d82596-f613-11e2-9434-60440856fadf_story.html

http://nypost.com/2013/12/30/state-dept-whistleblower-has-email-hacked-deleted/

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2013/09/09/video-benghazi-whistleblower-says-hes-been-punished-for-speaking-out-n1694699



I'm sure there are more out there.

[mtnbkr]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Binney_%28U.S._intelligence_official%29

He got held at gunpoint for whistleblowing.

Chris

[Sergeant Bob]

Methinks, someone hath....

[roo_ster]

TG:

I was looking for some hard data.  Secondhand unknown third party accusations are pretty weak tea.

Uncle Buck: "Do you know where I can cash a third party out of state check?"

[Tallpine]

If we had an AQ-like group in America I'd call them terrorists without using quotation marks to muddy the issue.

CIA

[RoadKingLarry]

Don't forget
DHS
TSA
DOJ
FBI
BATFEIEIO

[TommyGunn]

TG:

I was looking for some hard data.  Secondhand unknown third party accusations are pretty weak tea.

OK I completly understand that.
So I am listening to Fox News and a host has a guest on who has a background in intelligence.  During the interview he states that Snowden's revelations are aiding AQ because the terrorists are now using them to reverse engineer how U.S. Intel gathers data so they, then, can avoid it.  
I file it away, being concerned, but never really think I will have occasion to use the info again.
Then this thread happens.
What do I do?

Another point; we're on an internet forum, which I regard (possible wrongly?) as an informal place to chat and exchange ideas and even enter into light hearted debates.  This is not a college thesis where I would be prepared, and be expected, to provide a source for every claim I make.  You are not required, nor is anyone else, to believe what I say if you have strong beliefs to the contrary.
I personally don't understand why the claim that Snowden's leaks have helped AQ should be received as some sort of wild-assed guess-work, or even totally discredited.
Is it so hard to believe AQ would make use of the data?  Do you think they're too stupid or ignorant to do that?  That's a pretty dangerous assumption to make; to underestimate your enemies.
Making use of intercepted data, or another country's security leaks is such S.O.P. (Standard Operating Procedure) that it is actually more interesting to find incidents where it DIDN'T happen, or didn't happen quite as it perhaps should have.
During WW2 we were intercepting Japanese diplomatic communiques and decoding them in what was called "Operation Magic."   The info we gleaned was called "Purple Intelligence" as was distributed to only 12 people high up in the government (one of whom was FDR) called "the twelve apostles."  
At one point some of this data was transmited to England.  The doofus who encoded it made an error and used an outdated code to transmit it.  The code he used was believed to have been broken by the Germans.
This was discovered by the British officer who received it, and he sent out the appropriate alarms.
What SHOULD have been the result of this?
Several things.  First the Germans, who we learned after the war DID glom onto this and inform the Japanese (they were allied at the time).  The Japanese at this point should have realized they'd been compromised and stop sending real info out over the compromised pathways.  If they'd been slightly more sophisticated (they likely WERE -- normally) they would use the compromised codes and pathways to spread disinformation; stuff they WANTED us to believe true.  
American intel, OTOH, should have began to doubt the veracity of any intel that was intercepted through the pathway/code that had been compromised.
BUT, apparantly, the Japanese somehow goofed and kept on sending out good vital intel over that network .... and we goofed too; there's no information claiming we started treating the "compromised" purple info as disinformation; we kept believing it real.  Bizarrely, of course these two errors cancelled themselves out.
If you put this in a movie, no one would believe it.

If we had an AQ-like group in America I'd call them terrorists without using quotation marks to muddy the issue.

CIA

Really?  The CIA is plotting terrorist acts against America and blowing up our buildings and killing innocents?

I really wish people would stop treating the errors and mistakes we make in the field as though it was actually our government's policy.  
It isn't.
Grow up.