What in the actual fuck? Excuse me? This is why no conversation with you can happen. You're in La La land or something?
Well yes, you do get that impression. Because I disagree with you and throw your demeaning comments back in your face. BTW, your Wikipedia link cites anonymous sources. Hardly compelling, but fun to read! I've also included this post in the new Snowden thread, as this does indeed seem to be hijacking the thread. Here is some more fun reading from somebody who actually knows something about it... https://www.wired.com/2015/06/course-china-russia-snowden-documents/
Context matters. I've said possibly spend life in prison multiple times. So if he thought he could spend life in prison (there is nothing saying he wouldn't, in fact there are very few whistle blower protections available to him, and a whole lot of government action showing it's not out of the question) that would be the choice. It's hard for you to have a conversation with me because you have your mind made up about things without evidence. And evidence is what I require to make my mind up about something. And I'll change my opinion if sufficient evidence is provided which proves me wrong. You don't appear to have a high regard for evidence. This does make logical conversations difficult.
You talking to yourself? Good God, look in the mirror with this shit. I keep wanting to leave this conversation but this just gets better and better. So you post an article from a tech publication as if it's gospel and dismiss reports from The Times, the BBC and their political and security correspondents as bogus since they have the audacity to not give the name of a government source...? Here's an article citing the CIA's Ex-No. 2 who also says ISIS learned from Snowden. He's not anonymous, but you'll probably just call that propaganda instead, as you've already done with other things I've posted. I couldn't read the entire Wired article because I'm not a subscriber but I was able to read the top which included the following: "Do countries like China and Russia have copies of the Snowden documents? I believe the answer is certainly yes, but that it's almost certainly not Snowden's fault. Snowden has claimed that he gave nothing to China while he was in Hong Kong, and brought nothing to Russia. He has said that he encrypted the documents in such a way that even he no longer has access to them, and that he did this before the US government stranded him in Russia. I have no doubt he did as he said, because A) it's the smart thing to do, and B) it's easy." ------------ That's a complete opinion. The argument that it's not Snowden's fault because they already had everything has zero evidence to back that up. And the rest of that is just the author saying he believes Snowden. So you just dismiss The New Yorker article I gave you, you dismiss the most reputable British outlets and then you post this crap. And do you know why I'm so sure it's all just an opinion? Because at the top of the article it fucking says "OPINION"........!!!
Great contribution to the conversation. I commend you. It's all opinion. Because as I said before, there is no evidence. And you've continued to back that up by providing no evidence. But yes, obviously Snowden revealed that ALL electronic communications were being illegally monitored, so ISIS stopped using all forms of electronic communication. Snowden selling or giving that information to Russia and China just doesn't make sense. There would be no reason to go public if he had done so. There would be no reason for him to remain public now. As yet, nobody has shown what other options Snowden had to stop (or at least expose) the illegal monitoring of American communications that wouldn't have destroyed his life. He chose a path that could have allowed him to live life to it's fullest in Ecuador. It didn't work out for him. There is no evidence that he sold any of that data to any other country or did anything other than put himself at great personal risk to expose that our government was secretly spying on us, which was later determined to be illegal. He made our nation profoundly safer. Our leaders were elected on promises of transparency and to defend our constitutional rights. Every one of them who supported these programs is a far bigger criminal than Snowden, IMO. And until I see proof that he knowingly sold data to another country I will hold that opinion. He did mishandle data. But as far as I can tell, he had no other choice. And the public good he did by exposing those illegal programs should absolve him of any other crimes. So, if you want to set about providing some evidence that allowing the government to illegally monitor American citizens makes us any safer, I'm still waiting.
I'm not surprised you think that's all I wrote. My suspicions are confirmed. If you wish to dismiss all the people in the know and everything they say, from numerous countries around the world, and the many ways it damaged their ability to do their job, then so be it. If you wish to dismiss common sense in favor of the words of a traitor, then fine. It's a hell of a lot better than your contribution, an opinion piece from Wired, which you tried to sell as "somebody who actually knows something about it...". You've exhausted me, and we're just going in circles. I'll let you finish the conversation by saying I'm leaving because I can't provide any evidence. Enjoy! Incredible.
Yes, police like stop and frisk because it makes their job easier. They like all kinds of harmful things that make their job easier. That doesn't mean we should allow them to violate our rights to do it. It is exhausting trying to support a position with no evidence. I get that. Any time you feel like bringing some actual evidence to the table rather than unnamed sources and obvious claims like "respecting citizens rights makes cops jobs harder", we might be able to have a conversation.
I have absolutely never come across someone who decides what he feels is evidence and what are facts based off of opinion and editorial pieces that stand in direct conflict with other obvious experts on a subject that are giving their expert opinion and basing those opinions on facts at hand. Then continues to double down on it while trying to justify it with saying there is a lack of evidence? This is truly new territory for me…
I have literally said that none of this is evidence. I will say again. There is no evidence. None of this is evidence. It is all opinion and propaganda. Is that clear enough? Should I put it in bold italics? I certainly will not assume a whistle-blower is a traitor with no evidence better than unnamed people (and their associates) who were already found to be committing illegal acts in the data the whistle-blower revealed. There is no motive for Snowden to sell the data to Russia or China and behave the way he has with the press. None of that makes sense. What makes the most sense is exactly what Snowden and the reporters say happened. He turned the information over to well respected members of the media to curate and report on as responsibly as possible. If he were just trying hurt the US he could have just sent it all to wiki leaks without all of the extra risk and effort. If it were just to make money he wouldn't have any reason to expose himself the way he has. In fact, that would be counterintuitive. Of course the intelligence agencies are going to try and discredit him as much as possible. That's what they do. It's in the culture. That's why there are so few good cops holding bad cops accountable.
Snowden turned over classified documents to respected journalists who used the documents to prove in court that the US government was illegally spying on innocent American citizens, which violates our Fourth and Fifth Amendment rights. If Trump did something similar could you please explain what government abuses have been brought to light thanks to Trump's actions? https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/sep/03/edward-snowden-nsa-surveillance-guardian-court-rules https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-54013527
Well, according to Trump and OAN/Newsmax/Fox, a great number of government abuses have been brought to light, starting with the 30,000 acid-washed emails, the Russia Russia Russia hoax, the Impeachment hoax, the 2nd impeachment hoax, the raid on Mar-a-Lago, etc etc etc. barfo
Har Har Har! And those certainly are well respected... While I know you're joking, it must be said... Let me know when Trump and the stories those media outlets tell win even a single court case regarding their stolen election claims.
One things for certain. Putin cares a whole lot more about what Snowden knows than he cares about Snowden as a person.
Did it? Snowden gave up American Security secrets. I’m sure Putin sees him as his show winning American bulldog. “Good boy”, “stay”, “what do you think they are doing now”.
