Posted on 06/15/2013 2:08:07 PM PDT by Lazamataz
Earlier this year, Edward Snowden went to The Guardian, who then published an article on June the 6th that had numerous damning revelations about the National Security Agency.
Edward Snowden broke an oath he had sworn, and revealed that the NSA had committed acts of domestic espionage far beyond anything most people had ever suspected. He revealed that data about the phone calls of millions of Americans, the entire customer base of Verizon, had been collected and stored in perpetiuty. Experts concluded that the same records were likely collected and stored by the NSA, from most or all of the other telephone carriers.
There are no white-hat-wearing good guys in this story.
Edward Snowden violated an oath of secrecy. Some, including the Speaker of the House John Boehner, have called him a traitor. While I cannot go that far, I do consider his actions unacceptable and unethical.
Yet the NSA has systematically violated the privacy of almost every American who use the telephone. These actions are also unacceptable and highly unethical.
And therein lies the moral dilemma. It seems there is no one to root for in this story. On one hand, we have a man who violated his personal integrity and his oath; and on the other, we have an agency who has overstepped the boundaries most Americans find tolerable with regards to privacy.
Few phone calls were listened to, although a small number were. However, much information can be gleaned by a complete record of who a person calls, and how often, and when. This information should never be collected or kept, unless a warrant is issued for a particular person and for a specific law enforcement reason. While a warrant is rumored to have been issued, if it exists, it was done in secret and it is unacceptably broad. It covers all Americans, even the vast majority who are not under suspicion. It amounts to a fishing expedition. It is not how America is supposed to operate.
These actions by the NSA are violations of all of our privacy, on a grand scale, remind us of nothing so much as the East German Stasi -- that secret-police group in the formerly Communist state that kept tabs on the entire population to ferret out the few lovers of freedom and free markets.
Snowden has said a few things about his revelations:
While the actions of Edward Snowden were underhanded and immoral, the actions of our government were even more so -- simply because of the scale and the number of people affected.
There is an underreported aspect to the story of the NSA intercepts: Text messages and electronic text communications are kept in their entirity. This means that if you have sent a password or a credit card via electronic media of nearly any flavor, it now sits in the data centers of the National Security Agency. Furthermore, the ability and the opportunity to abuse this information against political opponents is huge, and this administration has already demonstrated a great propensity to target its political opposition with any tool at their disposal (c.f., the targetting of 'Tea Party' and "Patriotic" 501-c political action organizations).
Congress must rein the NSA in. The President has already said he won't, and the Democrat-controlled Senate cannot be counted on to do the right thing.
“There are no white-hat-wearing good guys in this story.”
Actually there is. His name is Edward Snowden. I am sorry they allow vanity posts like this. A moral dilemna! What’s a goil to do!?
An easy analogy could be this: You see a building burning (our Constitution). Unless you act, great damage may be done. But there is no water to put out the fire (all members of Congress have acquiesed in their duty for oversight, 11 hack judges have acted absolutely recklessly, and many other have lied to cover up) so you see a front loader with which you can push a water tank into the fire and stop it (reveal the truth) but the water tank will be demolished and you may be charged with stealing the front loader (accused of treason and so). You act, knowing the building contains precious articles like the bill of rights and you are a hero to all but the simplest of imbeciles.
why do you say he broke an oath. he was working for a private employer.
In common law, unlawful contracts are not binding. Likewise, oaths only exist for the honorable. If you make an oath to the dishonorable, it is not binding.
He had a Top Secret clearance. He signed more than one piece of paper not to disclose classified information. His clearance is between him and the Federal government and his signature/oath is between him and the government, not his employer.
I agree. No protection for whistleblowers in this regime or from its media.
Actually, this is not a vanity; this is a Freeper Editorial, and is placed in that section as it was intended. If you disagree with the concept of Freeper Editorials, you are free to protest to Jim Robinson.
Bwahahahaha ...
If "fighting terrorism" and preventing the attendant loss of life is what's most important, then, heck, these same Tyrannical techniques could be applied to fighting everyday criminality, since such criminality causes far more loss of life than all terrorism combined.
If I recall correctly, the terrorists will have already won if they cause America to morph into some kind of totalitarian police state which is at perpetual War. Part of the goal is to combat terror without destroying our Free society.
It seems that some have, hysterically or otherwise, totally lost sight of that consideration. Fear is a potent tool for convincing people to surrender essential liberty.
You will note that I don't call Snowden a traitor (other than the implication in the title) and I specifically mention in the article that I won't go as far as, say, Boehner, who did call him that.
I do believe that he broke his oath (or contract) to not reveal state secrets, but I feel I am clear, in my editorial, that his is the lesser of the crimes and/or immoral acts.
As if those are the only two choices. In any event, anyone who blindly believes everything Snowden has stated is a fool. Same goes for those who blindly believe what the government has stated. The reality is that 99% of the pundits including the OP don’t have a clue what is true and are trying to pass off speculation as truth. Nonsense.
Nobody will know for sure until we see actual top-secret information, which will not happen. However, the reactions of lawmakers who are "in the know" is telling. They immediately called him a traitor, and did not deny his claims. I believe that reaction tells us a lot.
Thank you, kind sir. Your observations are spot-on.
:)
I NEED COOKIES!
True. However, it is not unlawful to have someone sign a contract not to share national secrets. The secrets turned out to be horrific, in this case, but the contract was lawful.
Snowden committed a crime that pales in comparison to the (unfortunately legal) criminality of the NSA.
Ultimately, we the people have a right to know what is being done on our behalf. I’ll choose daylight and freedom over security.
Why sure I believe Snowjob is in China.
Canivore, Echelon, Hippa. You never heard of these?
Not taking a swipe at you. A question.
>> In 2013 the facts come out that the bad guys have been scarfing data for years.. and we should be newly pissed about it TODAY?
Obamacare will be far worse than anything the NSA could tap and reveal. Furthermore, at least the NSA is a body of intelligent individuals unlike the mindless bureaucrats we should expect to manage Obamacare.
Yeah, so do I. I’m tryin’ to cut back ... if I bake ‘em I eat ‘em. The expression ‘little round man’ is starting to sound like a BOLO in my ear.
LOL
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.