If this is true, would it change your opinion on Snowden?

[hedgehog]

If this is true, so please don't get side-tracked on whether it is true.

I heard a passing reference to the story on Diane Rehm, that Snowden gave info to the Guardian and the Washington Post that the papers declined to publish because the editors agreed with the government that this information would harm national security.

So, if this is true, it implies that Snowden did take and offer to reveal information that would cause harm. What are your thoughts?

[NoOneMan]

1. I still don't care about Snowden

But I do care about the ubiquitous, pervasive spying apparatus that is growing around us

[marble falls]

9. I so agree with you. Everyone needs to drop th Snowden circus and fix on Prism, FISA, Patriot Act...

and the Homeland Defense Act.

[pnwmom]

10. Do you care if he released information that harms agents like Valerie Plame?

I wonder why the people who were so outraged by her outing aren't more concerned about the lists Snowden has claimed to have had access to of other American spies around the world.

[NoOneMan]

12. No

I have no love for spooks or their nefarious overseas dealings. They wouldn't be in harm's way if they weren't spooking it up in other countries they have no business being in.

Am I a fan of outing spooks for political retribution and personal vendettas? Not really. Am I a fan of outing our entire international spy apparatus that we shouldn't really be engaging in? Yes.

[pnwmom]

13. So we're supposed to do nothing while countries around the world are spying on us? n/t

[NoOneMan]

14. Yes

I really don't give a damn, and maybe that's just their philosophy as well.

Perhaps a memorable day will come when a nation renowned in wars and victories, distinguished by the highest development of military order and intelligence, and accustomed to make the heaviest sacrifices for these objects, will voluntarily exclaim, 'We will break our swords,' and will destroy its whole military system, lock, stock, and barrel. To make ourselves defenceless (after having been most strongly defended), from loftiness of sentiment, is the means towards genuine peace... The so-called armed peace that prevails at present in all countries is a sign of a bellicose disposition, that trusts neither itself nor its neighbour, and, partly from hate partly from fear, refuses to lay down its weapons. Better to perish than to hate and fear; and twice better to perish than to make oneself hated and feared. - Nietzsche

Maybe we all just need to have a more open "nothing-to-hide" approach to the world. Maybe we instead need to stop thinking of ourselves as one large homogenous nation-state that needs to constantly consolidate vast power to "defend" ourselves against those we bare our teeth too. Im tired of these fantasy teams and this fantasy game. Im just a human. Fuck these lines on the map already.

[Amonester]

21. Sorry, but that will never happen.

Although I agree it's wonderful to dream about it, when one wakes up to reality, nobody will let kim jong-un bomb the sh*t out of Japan, Guam or Hawaii just to please the dreamers.

Get real.

[xtraxritical]

15. The Plame's have already publicly stated that they think ES did a good thing.

[pnwmom]

17. Yes, they "already" stated that BEFORE he announced in the interview

with the Chinese newspaper that he had information about the US spy network that he wanted to give to journalists around the world so they could decide to do with it.

I read their whole statement and it was all about his earlier release of information related to INTERNAL US surveillance. That is a separate issue.

I'd like to know what they think about his more recent threat to release information about our spying around the world -- information that could threaten thousands of people just like Plame, and her associates.

[Whisp]

18. •••+++++ !!!+++++•••

I'd like to know what they think about his more recent threat to release information about our spying around the world -- information that could threaten thousands of people just like Plame, and her associates.

I hope they make a retraction of some sort.

[Deep13]

2. It implies no such thing.

One could read it as an indictment against the timidity the WP and the Guardian.

[tk2kewl]

3. +1

[RC]

4. +10

Cause harm to whom? The citizens of the United States, or the agencies spying on us?

[idwiyo]

5. It doesn't imply any such thing. How you managed to arrive to your conclusion is beyond me.

[Igel]

19. It's an easy conclusion to come to.

If somebody says "X will cause harm," you can take it as some sort of objective fact based upon their superior knowledge.

Or you can read it as, "I think X will cause harm." Then it's clear that it's their own opinion--and while their knowledge of what X is might be superior to yours, there's no need for their ability to predict harmfulness to be all that great. It's not just that they're timid wrt the government--they may honestly mis-evaluate how much damage the info could cause or want to keep the damage to a minimum.

Kid's make this mistake all the time. "That's a really cool song" versus "I think that's a really cool song." The first applies pressure; it asserts some sort of objective reality. The second is more narrowly a personal opinion, and that's easier to ignore. I tried being the nice intellectual, prefacing statements by "I think" or "It appears to me" and found that it incites to rebellion. Better to simply assert my opinion as unchallengeable fact. Yeah, some will see through it and challenge, but you'd be surprised. Psycholing. It's great stuff.

There are a lot of 30- and 40-year old kids.

[bemildred]

6. My thoughts are that this is not really about Snowden and that the government does itself

no good by insisting otherwise. The longer they stall, the worse the accounting wiil be when it comes.

[GeorgeGist]

7. Snowden said it first.

“If I have time to go through this information, I would like to make it available to journalists in each country to make their own assessment, independent of my bias, as to whether or not the knowledge of US network operations against their people should be published.”

http://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/article/1268209/snowden-sought-booz-allen-job-gather-evidence-nsa-surveillance

[pnwmom]

11. Yes. He wants to divulge information about US spying to journalists around the world.

They're not all going to be as responsible as the WA Post and the Guardian.

[Sunlei]

8. my thoughts are he is a patsy for whoever saw the information stolen from the work comp

I want to know who placed him in those jobs and who set him up for the run to the 2 medias & the run to Hong Kong. Snowden should spill now before he is disappeared or worse, in Federal prison forever silenced.

How many more of those thousands of security cleared employees share info with outside interests?

[Sancho]

16. Even if it harmed national security, if the "nation" obtained it unconstitutionally, Snowden's ok...

by me.

Governments who do things unethically, illegally, unconstitutionally, and immorally should be exposed. Their perceived "national security" should be secondary to transparency and following the rules.

[Chan790]

20. It doesn't change my opinion of Snowden one bit.

I think he deserves to spend the rest of his life in Florence ADX between Ames and Hanssen.