Ed Edward Snowden - Whistleblower or Criminal?

applecorped

Banned
Joined
Mar 8, 2008
Messages
20,145
http://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...f80160-d122-11e2-a73e-826d299ff459_story.html


"Edward Snowden, a 29-year-old former undercover CIA employee, unmasked himself Sunday as the principal source of recent Washington Post and Guardian disclosures about top-secret National Security Agency programs. Snowden, who has contracted for the NSA and works for the consulting firm Booz Allen Hamilton, denounced what he described as systematic surveillance of innocent citizens and said in an interview that “it’s important to send a message to government that people will not be intimidated.”




I'm leaning towards whistle blower but will wait to see what other information comes out.
 
Last edited:
Definite whistleblower.

It is clear that Americans have no adequate understanding of their 4th amendment rights when it comes to digital communications and that the government has been acting in secret to collect information which many Americans believe violates their 4th amendment rights. It is high time that a debate was triggered which leads to a clear definition of these rights in terms of digital communication, so Americans can be happy that their rights are not being violated in secret by the NSA. As this release of documents triggers such a debate, Snowden's activities are certainly in the public interest.

Also, the release of documents sheds some light on comments made by James Clapper that the NSA had 'not wittingly' collected the data of millions of Americans. I believe that there is strong evidence that this was a lie and that it is also in the public interest to discover whether the Director of National Intelligence is a liar.
 
Last edited:
Funny how he is hiding in China. If you want to talk about draconian monitoring and censorship, alk he hss to do is look out the window.

I imagine that the Chinese inteligence agencies will have him over for a "friendly" talk soon.
 
Oh , hes a criminal, as he clearly broke the law.

He certainly is by definition. The OP framed it as an "or" question, but he may be both a criminal and a whistleblower.

The government has no choice but to come down hard on him if they can. Otherwise you cannot have secrets at all if the people sworn to not reveal them feel that they can reveal them with impunity.
 
"I, sitting at my desk, certainly have the authorities to wiretap anyone — from you or your accountant, to a federal judge, to even the President..." Edward Snowden in today's interview.

I don't think I would mind this one going to court.
 
Last edited:
Funny how he is hiding in China. If you want to talk about draconian monitoring and censorship, alk he hss to do is look out the window.

I imagine that the Chinese inteligence agencies will have him over for a "friendly" talk soon.

Being in Hong Kong doesn't mean that you have given tacit approval for the surveillance abuses of the Chinese government, just in case you were implying that.
 
He certainly is by definition. The OP framed it as an "or" question, but he may be both a criminal and a whistleblower.

The government has no choice but to come down hard on him if they can. Otherwise you cannot have secrets at all if the people sworn to not reveal them feel that they can reveal them with impunity.

He has made it clear that he expects to face consequences. The question is whether there is some public interest defence of his actions. The US laws that govern whistleblowing are pretty complex.

However, I would guess that were he to be prosecuted, under the Espionage Act, for example, he would likely raise in his defence that he was asked to do things that he considered to be unconstitutional and against the public interest - if his assertion that he could 'wiretap anyone' can be backed up with evidence, then things could get interesting, to say the least. Anyway, it would be useful to hear some legal opinions on this, as I am very much a layman, if that isn't already clear. :)
 
Last edited:

Back
Top Bottom