Snowden Seeks International Help Against US Espionage Charges

An anonymous reader writes "Edward Snowden is calling for international help to persuade the U.S. to drop its espionage charges against him. Snowden said he would like to testify before the U.S. Congress about National Security Agency surveillance and may be willing to help German officials investigate alleged U.S. spying in Germany. Snowden is quoted as saying that the U.S. government 'continues to treat dissent as defection, and seeks to criminalize political speech with felony charges that provide no defense.' He continues, 'I am confident that with the support of the international community, the government of the United States will abandon this harmful behavior.'"

Comments

Abandon their harmful behavior?

[NoKaOi]

He continues, 'I am confident that with the support of the international community, the government of the United States will abandon this harmful behavior."

Has he even read the stuff he leaked?

Re:Abandon their harmful behavior?

[Midnight_Falcon]

Maybe he should go work for the UN. They've been trying to get the US government to abandon various forms of harmful behavior for a while.

This has worked out with the US ignoring the UN/working around them whenever enough member states disagree with them, and going through the UN when it is politically expedient and success is likely.

Re:Abandon their harmful behavior?

[deathcloset]

He continues, 'I am confident that with the support of the international community, the government of the United States will abandon this harmful behavior."

Has he even read the stuff he leaked?

Probably. And he lived in the country from which he leaked it. I think his attitude is actually quite heartening. I wonder if, like me, when he thinks of the United States he thinks not only of the abstract bureaucratic entity and its questionable activities, but that he thinks of the actual people that entity consists of and is made by. You know; his friends, family, neighbors, shopkeepers, etc. He probably thinks that most people would drop these charges and move on, and he may be right. But entities, yes, they don't drop charges. I'm not trying to oppose your point, but I think his optimism is reasonably warranted.

If your tire gets a leak, you shouldn't waste time or energy on punishing the nail - you should fix the tire and drive more carefully and maybe avoid that road you had just gone down.

The analogy can go further, but that's as far down that road as I'm prepared to go.

Re:Abandon their harmful behavior?

[xevioso]

The problem is that there are a significant amount of people in the U.S> who believe that some of the things Snowden leaked are harmful to the US.
For example, he leaked that the U.S> was spying on specific Chinese Universities, to determine how they were hacking into our military and industrial computers. Now those universities know how to be more careful. It is unlikely they will stop trying to hack into us.

The problem Snowden has is that even if he "started a conversation" about U.S. intelligence, he still leaked a number of things that could easily be found to be harmful to the U.S. Even if 98% of the things he leaked were good things for the world to know, he will ALWAYS be at risk of being charged for the 2% of the things he leaked that are genuinely bad for the world to know.

Re:Abandon their harmful behavior?

[alexgieg]

He's not a hero. He's a traitor.

Going against the petty interests of a minor group in favor of the broader interests of humanity is the kind of stuff for which one's remembered as an hero down the line, including despite one's personal faults.

He would have been a hero if he leaked the NSA spying on US citizens and stopped there.

As a non-US citizen I most certainly disagree.

Re:Abandon their harmful behavior?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm always told "If I have nothing to hide...."

So can I just tell the police that the things I do are considered "Personal Security" and if they discover any illegal thing I'm doing, I can just tell them that they are traitors and have leaked harmful material regarding my Personal Security.

It's me breaking the law that is wrong.... It's the police finding out!

Gotta put more laws in place to make it wrong for them to find out about all these illegal things I do.... Yeah, that's it!

Re:Abandon their harmful behavior?

[NicBenjamin]

Actually the entire problem the US has is it's designed to be too collaborative. "Checks and balances" is a fancy way of saying "if all y'all motherfuckers can't agree on shit, shit don't happen." The Senate makes consensus requirements even more onerous because one guy can bring the entire Legislature to a halt for six days per bill voted on. Any Senator can force three days of debate on the question of "Should we debate Bill X," when those three days are up he can force another three days of debate on the actual vote. If the House insists on changes to the bill the Senator can add another three days by filibustering the conference report.

The end result is a legislature that talks a whole bunch of shit about shit (which nobody will care about six months from now), and doesn't actually do anything, which allows the Executive branch to run wild. Since the elected people in the Executive are forced to spend inordinate amounts of time dealing with aforementioned BS (which nobody will care about in six months) Obama doesn't have time to over-see the Executive. Which means that the executive branch people running wild have very little to do with the people we actually elect. In a Westminster system nobody would believe a PM who claimed he didn't know he's tapped Merkel's phone. In the US everybody's like "Oh I can see why if they put in the fifth bullet point of a presentation that he had to squeeze in between dealing with Islamists/political opponents with a political death wish/North Korea/etc. Obama might not notice that."

More collaborative government would just make this worse. You could never change anything complicated because individual voters always vote no on complex changes. When things get rough (ie: the ObamaCare rollout) they tend to decide to abandon the changes on the basis that if everything stays the same there's no risk of things getting worse. You'd end up with a lot of small-c-conservative stuff. For example, it would be impossible to change the zoning in any neighborhood because the local busy-bodies would all vote hell no and nobody else would bother voting. On national issues it would be even worse. If you have a vote on gun control people aren't going to let you sit out of the gun control debate.

Re:Abandon their harmful behavior?

[NicBenjamin]

So most Americans like him. Most Americans liked Bradley Manning.

Snowden's got a huge problem in that he was trusted by the government with data, and he abused that trust. Some of that can be justified by saying he wanted to expose mass data collection. But that's not all he exposed. He also exposed spy operations on quite a few countries. If the US Government lets him get away with that then they risk all kinds of other operations coming to light.

For example it would be pretty much impossible for us to maintain a relationship to Israel if we weren't pretty sure one of them (aka: a Spy) would tip off one of us if they were about to take some aggressive action. They couldn't maintain a relationship with us if they weren't pretty sure somebody in the US Government would tip them off if the Saudis started offering toothsome bribes. Both sides know this, but neither side's public really understands it, so therefore it's a really bad idea to encourage young idealistic state department staff to tell the public "General X is on the CIA payroll."

Re:Abandon their harmful behavior?

[NicBenjamin]

Repeat after me: You're an idiot!

You do realize this is only funny if you get him to say "I'm an idiot."

As is you just insulted yourself, and gaver him permission to repeat the insult.

Re:Abandon their harmful behavior?

[smpoole7]

OK, I'll play.

> "Checks and balances" is a fancy way of saying "if all y'all motherfuckers can't agree on shit, shit don't happen."

Remove the profane language and actually, that's pretty much what James Madison said. Our system was designed that way on purpose. Of course, then you say ...

> bring the entire Legislature to a halt for six days per bill voted on ... force three days of debate ... another three days of debate on the actual vote

These are simply the (admittedly dumb) rules which the Senate has decided to impose upon itself. Those rules could be changed at any time. That's why I view Washington as a slapstick comedy: they keep shooting themselves in the foot, the whine and wail about how bad it hurts. :)

Actually, what scares me more than anything is the slow move in this country toward "rule by elites." Whether Republican or Democrat is irrelevant to me. One other thing that the Founder Fathers specifically tried to prevent was the appointment of "special masters" -- especially Caesars (or to use the more modern form of that word, "Czar") -- with broad power and the ability to act *WITHOUT* a consensus on the part of the governed.

That might seem like a good idea to you NOW, as long as a "special master" is in place making changes that you like. But change masters, and you might not think it's such a great idea.

This, in a nutshell, is why our Constitutional system of government was set up the way it was. No one person (or small group of people) was to have power to rule by "dictat" and decree.

Finally, what troubles me the most about this country is that we've forgotten how to compromise. Political compromise basically boils down to, "we hammer out an agreement that no one really likes, but that everyone can live with." Instead, we have people on both Left and Right screaming that it MUST be all done their way, no compromise ... and that's the REAL reason why nothing gets done.

Just my opinion, and worth precisely what you paid for it. :)

Re:Abandon their harmful behavior?

[shutdown -p now]

You know, one of the best things about Snowden is that not only he exposed the abuse of powers by the government, but it also exposed the worthless ass-licking cunts like you who would rush to sign up to become Stasi informers if only given a chance. It's very refreshing to have you guys come out in the open like that, and proclaim loud and clear that you are who you are. Thank you, Mr Snowden!

Re:Abandon their harmful behavior?

[alexgieg]

Neither. But having concrete knowledge is better than having vague suspicions, for it at least allows for some change to happen, even if just a tiny bit of change.

Re:Abandon their harmful behavior?

[DNS-and-BIND]

> You'd end up with a lot of small-c-conservative stuff.

I love how your mind is so tiny that you can't even conceive that Americans might think this is a good thing. Obama and his cronies are supremely frustrated that they can't just slash and burn the U.S. government to their liking. Obama himself even said that the government was "broken" because he didn't get what he wanted. That's by design, it's not a goddamn mistake. It's a good system that's resistant to change. The 20th century was full of examples of radical changes in government and the vast majority of the time it resulted in tyranny instead of freedom.

Re:Abandon their harmful behavior?

[smpoole7]

> As for forgetting how to compromise, the problem is that there's no actual moderates left. Everybody's on a side.

So let's compromise. I'm a conservative: after realizing that we have (for example) HUNDREDS of freakin' destroyers in our Navy, not to mention that we're building planes that are being put in storage because we don't need them, and on and on ... I'd be willing to accept substantial and severe cuts in military spending. Stop being the world's policeman. Don't touch military pay and benefits, because those folks have earned it. But there's plenty that could be trimmed, billions and billions of dollars.

OK ... so what are my liberal friends willing to surrender in return? It's got to be something near and dear to their hearts. :)

That's how compromise works. It's not rocket science.

> My favored solution would be to adopt something like the Canadian or British system ...

You seem like a bright fellow, so you probably know this -- but the reason we set things up this way was to give equal representation to each state (the Senate), and then equal representation by population (the House). Further, Senators were originally chosen by the State legislatures. Some argue that we need to go back to that.

The Founders were unable to get the smaller states to sign on to the Constitution without the Senate. Likewise, the populous states wouldn't sign on without the House. Ergo: compromise. :)

Re:Abandon their harmful behavior?

[Jane Q. Public]

"Maybe he should go work for the UN. They've been trying to get the US government to abandon various forms of harmful behavior for a while. "

The UN only wants to trade what it sees as bad U.S. behavior by its own brand of bad behavior.

Remember that not all members of the U.N. are equal. It was created that way.

While I deplore the actions of my government, and wish it would stop the foolish and damaging things it has been doing, I have reservations because (A) I don't think it will happen unless someone convinces Obama that he's not a king, and (B) I would be happy -- ecstatic even -- if the UN disappeared tomorrow.

Re:Abandon their harmful behavior?

[Anonymous Coward]

"I would be happy -- ecstatic even -- if the UN disappeared tomorrow."

Yeah, because we don't need an international diplomatic platform or UNICEF, eh?

Re:Abandon their harmful behavior?

[Nehmo]

...He's not a hero. He's a traitor....There was a right way to do this, he didn't even try a little bit to go that route.

He took on a huge personal risk for the good of America the world, and he did so knowingly and thoughtfully. I'm not sure how you define "hero", but for me, this guy fits the bill.

I would have done it too, and I would have been proud of myself if I had.

And what is this "right way" you mention? What are you suggesting he should have done? He did expose the activity in the right way. He saw something harmful for America, and then he went directly to his authority and reveled it. His authority is the American people.

Re:Abandon their harmful behavior?

[Anonymous Coward]

Even if 98% of the things he leaked were good things for the world to know, he will ALWAYS be at risk of being charged for the 2% of the things he leaked that are genuinely bad for the world to know.

Taken together with the 99.9995% of eavesdropping that were illegal, unconstitutional, and genuinely bad for the NSA to know, I say that we give Snowden a day of jail time for every year Clapper and Alexander spend in high-security prison.

We know that Snowden's work has been good for the U.S.A. being a free and constitutional country, and we know Clapper and Alexander's work and their continuing weaseling, lies, breaches of all constitutional guarantees and delusions of grandeur to be terrible for the U.S.A.'s image and security both inside and outside of the U.S.A.

Yes, terrible for its security since the most important weapon the U.S.A. has against domestic and foreign terrorism is its image as a freedom-loving nation.

And they are trampling it, spitting on it, and ridiculing it. They are traitors to the U.S. people and the U.S. constitution. And theor crony Eric Holder, himself a self-aggrandizing perjurer taking justice into his own hands, will not even bother prosecuting them for their openly committed and continued perjury, sometimes committed with weasel words with the intent to mislead, sometimes plain-out lying.

We really have a lot more to worry about than whether Snowden is technically guilty of a crime or misdemeanor when we do not prosecute those who are not only guilty, guilty, guilty of crimes against U.S. constitution and people, but who also continue doing their damage and make the U.S.A. an international laughing stock wiping their asses with the constitution.

Re:Abandon their harmful behavior?

[DrJimbo]

So let's compromise. I'm a conservative: after realizing that we have (for example) HUNDREDS of freakin' destroyers in our Navy, not to mention that we're building planes that are being put in storage because we don't need them, and on and on ... I'd be willing to accept substantial and severe cuts in military spending. Stop being the world's policeman. Don't touch military pay and benefits, because those folks have earned it. But there's plenty that could be trimmed, billions and billions of dollars.

OK ... so what are my liberal friends willing to surrender in return? It's got to be something near and dear to their hearts. :)

So ... according to you a compromise means that you are willing to get rid of something we both agree is wasteful and unnecessary only if I am willing to give up something I believe is essential, non-wasteful, and perhaps even provides good ROI. This is exactly the kind of "compromise" the Tea Party recently proposed. They were only willing to do something they agreed needed to be done if others would make significant concessions in unrelated areas.

Doing something we both agree should be done is not a compromise; it is agreement. Demanding additional concessions in other areas before you are willing to do what you agree should be done is about as far away from compromise as possible; it is extortion and hostage-taking. It's basically saying "we're going to ruin it for everyone unless we get our way".

You have perfectly encapsulated the reason why there are no longer any compromises in DC.

Re:Abandon their harmful behavior?

[gmuslera]

The US hasn't used this data to physically harm anyone. There are plenty of allegations that the US used the data for economic advantage, but no examples of specific operations that did so. And if such operations existed Snowden would have exposed them.

Even if you don't consider planting backdoors and weakening crypto damage, Presidential Policy Directive 20 is about having ready for using those intrusions, backdoors and so on to harm. And Petrobras is an example of specific operation of using that data for economic advantage. But even snooping with other intentions than detect that is a terrorist there is damaging enough, even if it is just to find how to access and plant backdoors in a otherwise secure network (i.e. Tor users)

Re:Abandon their harmful behavior?

[sugar and acid]

The british system works nicely to stop a dictator. At any point, the parliament can elect a new prime-minister, or in effect force a new election. And there is the nuclear option, where the queen can in theory sack a government.

This is never used, as it would create a constitution crisis the monarchy probably wouldn't survive. But if the government was seriously dysfunctional, and was unpopular, the queen could just about politically get away with it. The closest case is sacking of the australian Witlam government in the 70's by the governor general (queen's representative in australia) for the government being in deadlock over a budget and having to shut down functions. So basically the equivalent of the government shutdown the US has just had.

Re:Abandon their harmful behavior?

[Immerman]

Ironically the title "President" was chosen rather than something lofty like "Prime Minister" specifically to try to keep the office humble. A president is (was) that guy who runs the local XYZ club, not someone with real power.

Re:Abandon their harmful behavior?

[SuricouRaven]

But rather than the title humbling the office, the office instead made the title grand.

Re:Abandon their harmful behavior?

[nbauman]

OK ... so what are my liberal friends willing to surrender in return? It's got to be something near and dear to their hearts. :)

Right now the conservatives have cut food stamps, and they want to eliminate it entirely.

Food stamps are one of the most effective welfare programs we have, supported until recently by Democrats and Republicans alike.

Without food stamps, we'd be back to third world hunger like we were in the 1930s, with people stealing bread and children with rickets.

Is that a realistic compromise? Can I in good conscience bargain away food stamps and let people go hungry again?

I don't believe in false balance. Both sides aren't equally wrong. When you ask the Republicans what they want on health policy, they say, "Abandon Obamacare and leave the free market in its place." I can't go back to that. This is the free market. http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp1312793 Obamacare was already a compromise with the Republicans, modeled on Romneycare and the Heritage Foundation plan. Obama gave them everything they wanted, and they were still against it. How can you negotiate with people like that?

Re:Abandon their harmful behavior?

[NicBenjamin]

The problem with your argument is that you're not actually making an argument. You have told us what you want in principle (less federal government), but have yet to tell us which major functions of government you want Obama to give up.

The ones that make the Feds dominate the economy (Social Security, Medicare, and the VA) don't actually take up much of his time. They are also clearly within his Constitutional powers because he has a 16tth Amendment right to the income tax, and he can spend it promoting the "general welfare." Defense and Foreign Affairs are the only ones you've unambiguously said he should keep, and they're the really complicated ones that are causing him all these NSA problems.

I find this is actually a fairly common problem when dealing with Conservatives. They really want to gut the size of government, but they're totally unwilling to tell you that they think Florida should do it;'s own damn hurricane forecasts. It's kinda like my food budget. I'd really like to spend less then $10 a day on food, but I don't have a pantry so I can't make my lunch, so I have to eat out, and I always end up spending $6.69 at Wendy's.

Re:Abandon their harmful behavior?

[nbauman]

I suspect your wording was specifically designed to impart images of slavery and prejudice

That's right.

I grew up during the 1960s when the southern states were arguing that the federal government had no constitutional role in passing and enforcing federal voting laws that would force the states to allow black people to vote, much less a constitutional role in interfering with their free choice to discriminate against black people in hiring, education, and seating on buses. Those were decisions to be made democratically by the states and the (white) people.

That's what "states' rights" meant for 50 years.

You can look up the Wall Street Journal editorials from those days in the library.

Too bad Snowden will only be 33 in 2016

[wjcofkc]

Because you have to be 35 to be elected president in the United States.

Re:Too bad Snowden will only be 33 in 2016

[wjcofkc]

Your level of hopeless pessimism is in itself a sign, and possibly a symptom, of effective brainwashing.

Re:Too bad Snowden will only be 33 in 2016

[sqrt(2)]

Yeah, because THAT'S what's keeping him from being elected. It's not that a good percentage of the country has bought into the line that he's a communist traitor who has put American lives at risk, handed over secret documents to the "enemy", and was acting out of a desire to harm the United States. None of those things are true, mind, but that's not stopping people from demanding we send SEAL Team 6 into Russia.

The anger directed toward this man was so quick to start, so widespread, and so homogenous in tone and intent that it makes me suspect an NSA influence operation using internet sockpuppet accounts, and the already completely dominated mainstream cable channels (I won't use the word "news" to describe what they are). We actually know the government does this, we even knew before the Snowden documents, so it's not that much of a stretch in my mind. But on the other hand, I know quite a few living, breathing, people who really are that intellectually retarded. They're vociferously and sincerely calling for blood. He wouldn't live to see his name on the ballot if he comes back here. Our government has spoken: he's a traitor aiding foreign powers. We kill people for that.

Re:Too bad Snowden will only be 33 in 2016

[wjcofkc]

The anger toward this man was quick to start from the government, but I have yet to meet a citizen that considers him a traitor. I know a diverse group - many and varied from so many sides of the fence it requires theoretical ultra-dimensional geometry to describe. From right to left, from city dweller to country bumpkin, all I see is a government forcing thoughts and false beliefs on the people through the news, claiming to speak for these people while the majority of them themselves will tell me otherwise. The news is not here to inform you of reality, it exists to teach you that another, fabricated and agenda ridden one exists. Don't believe it. Talk to the people yourself.

Re:Too bad Snowden will only be 33 in 2016

[gmanterry]

Snowden has a better chance of being elected President of the European Parliament than he does President of the United States.

When did the U.S. swap governments with East Germany? A Republic an not survive when the government keeps data bases on all it's citizens. If the Supreme Court wasn't in the pockets of the fascists now running this country, we could have our Constitution back and become a Republic again. Presently the Executive Branch run the entire country and the other two branches are lapdogs.

Re:Too bad Snowden will only be 33 in 2016

[phayes]

He has a better chance of getting elected the President of Russia than either the US or the EU parliament. He's not enough of a politician for the latter two but the Russians seem to appreciate ex spooks.

Re:Too bad Snowden will only be 33 in 2016

[sqrt(2)]

If as you say it's common knowledge that all governments spy on all other governments, then it shouldn't have done much harm to have what we already knew confirmed.

But that's not true, not all governments engage in this behavior, and not all that do take it as far as the US. Tapping the private phone of an allied head of state is out of bounds. It's not the kind of thing we should be doing. It's the kind of thing that causes an embarrassing international incident when it is revealed. Imagine our own government's reaction if the tables were turned.

Also, Snowden released the information to reputable journalists who have been selecting what to release. He didn't just dump it on a website for all to see. Those journalists have been reviewing the material and redacting anything that would actually put lives at risk. Snowden carried this off in the most responsible, most honorable, fashion possible.

Re:Too bad Snowden will only be 33 in 2016

[cffrost]

Why do you assume that the Democratic and Republican parties would allow him to participate in their presidential election process?

We need to vote those crooks out, and keep 'em out. We already have better left and right parties to replace them: Green and Libertarian.

I'm well aware that achieving that may be an insurmountable task, but it's what I'm after, regardless of how the deck is stacked, and I'm never going back.

Re:Too bad Snowden will only be 33 in 2016

[gmuslera]

That Snowden didn't won the Nobel Peace Prize (but did the organization that aligned closely with current US message) gives you a hint that at least some parts of europe are just following US orders, so no chance for president of european parliament neither.

And they are now realizing that that submission don't saves them from being victims of the US spying/sabotaging machine too.

Don't do it Edward

[ISoldat53]

Nobody in Congress is interested in protecting you. No intelligence service in the world is interested in helping you. As soon as you set foot in any country that has an extradition agreement with the US you are gone.

Re:Don't do it Edward

[Anonymous Coward]

As it should be. Regardless of how one feels about what he has done, be it for or against, he broke the law and should have his day in court.

Barrack Obama broke the law, and didnt got his day in court. George W. Bush broke the law and didn't got his day in court. Bill Clinton broke the law and got his day in court even though it he didn't deserve that. Personal sex life is private, nobody should be allowed to asking these questions and therefore lying about it is fine.

America is more interested in blow jobs then corruption, waste of taxes payer money, unlawful wars, secret court and execution without due process.I don't want to live on this planet any more.

Re:Don't do it Edward

[rtb61]

Sorry, reporting a crime is not breaking the law, it is adhering the law and in point of fact it is a criminal act not to report witnessing a crime, accessory after the fact. Will he be able to return to the US, not for decades, all the psychopaths in power will have to be removed first. They will permanently target him as an example, they will take hostile moves against any country that harbours him and most western countries will not bother protecting him as he is not one of their own.

Re:Don't do it Edward

[Anonymous Coward]

You are absolutely a hero if you expose the systemic criminal behavior of the government even if you have to break the law to do it. We need more heroes like Snowden.

Re:Don't do it Edward

[rtb61]

It is illegal to obey illegal instructions. Those documents detailed crimes and hence where classified illegally in order to hide those crimes. He disclosed those crimes publicly due to the conspiracy to hide them by a government department with the approval of elected officials. Seriously, what the fuck do you not understand about the idea that it is illegal for any government department to break any laws and the requirement for any member of that department to report those criminal acts, be they criminal or constitutional infringements. Do you get it yet? The government can not legally order anyone to break the law, end of story and in the attempt that person so ordered is required by law to report the attempted crime, let alone obey the criminal order. Crimes can not be legally hidden under the auspices of national security, that would be a licence to run the government as a criminal organisation rather than being the democratically representatives of the electorate. I don't have to try, the law is the law.

Re:Don't do it Edward

[Sabriel]

From 2001 to 2010, the US executed 551 death-row prisoners and exonerated 48 on appeal (based on checking sources cited by wikipedia).

I don't know Snowden's opinion on it, but personally I wouldn't want to be anywhere near a court system that has an 8% rate of "oops, we found we wrongly sentenced you to death" (plus an unknown rate of never finding out), especially if I'd happened to seriously embarrass the government by revealing they'd been systemically ignoring the bill of rights.

Is Snowden facing the death penalty? Does it matter? When a powerful government, that claims to be a champion of liberty and justice, tolerates a known 8% risk of murdering its own citizens, it doesn't speak well for that government's likely diligence towards those facing other sentences.

You go, girl!

[TiggertheMad]

Snowden should be commended for standing up to a government who has been 'caught with it's hand in the cookie jar', engaging in illegal and immoral espionage of its own people. This behavior is far more damaging to the United State's values and long term interests than anything Snowden could ever do.

I've said it before, I'll say it again: Fuck you, NSA, you filthy traitors. The constitution isn't just rules for others to follow...

Re:You go, girl!

[b4upoo]

Snowden is a hero but he is making a mistake to expect sane behavior by the US government. Frankly we owe him a debt of gratitude but I suggest that he stay beyond the reach of US law regardless of any offers or so called agreements.

How bad was...

[mschaffer]

How bad was his first day of work at the tech-support line?

Presidential pardon

[neghvar1]

If I were US president, I'd declare a presidential pardon on all charges. I believe what he did is in the best interest of our country. Not our government, but our country.

Re:Presidential pardon

[sqrt(2)]

Put up or shut up. Show me something he blew the whistle on that wasn't wrong. He took documents over the course of months, selecting only the damning and illegal activity, and then in an abundance of caution gave them to journalists, and only journalists, who have so far done an honorable and commendable job disclosing only material which details the crimes of the NSA without putting any individual person in danger.

Re:Really?

[Ralph Wiggam]

They'll lock him up for the rest of his life- just like Bradley Manning. Why didn't Manning "confess he made the whole thing up"?

If you don't want to go to jail for releasing government secrets, then don't go to the DOD, apply for Top Secret clearance, and then voluntarily swear to follow their rules. The punishments for breaking those rules are clearly spelled out and you are reminded of them dozens of times before your clearance is approved.

Re:Poor, poor Ed...

[icebike]

They all do this shit, and you merely put them in the spotlight. The ones not yet caught have, of course, feigned indignation at the US, for doing what they all do. (Hmm, which ones have protested the loudest here?)

Make no mistake, though, if the US has done worse than any of its peers, it has done so only through having more opportunity, not more will or effort.

So tired of people excusing our government's behavior just because others do it.
Others include Pol Pot, Idi Amin, 'Papa Doc' Duvalier, and Joseph Stalin. (No point in invoking Godwin here).

We keep telling ourselves we are better than that. We keep passing whistle blower protection laws.
We pretend we have a constitution and that government is Of the People, By the People, For the People.

Then invariably when government gets caught doing something its not supposed to, some useful idiot comes along and says don't worry about it, every other country does that.

Re:Really?

[sjames]

He reported a crime.

The powers that be wrongly classified the information about the crime in order to cover it up.

There is a long history in law of recognizing that even the best intentioned laws may sometimes be wrong and that breaking them may sometimes be justified. In that long history, such justified infractions are not to be considered crimes. This is where we get such things as justifiable homicide.

I don't blame him one bit for running. He is not likely to receive justice here at this time.

Re:chaotic

[jbengt]

An individual should not have the right to decide which of his government's secrets should be revealed.

A government should not have the right to decide which of its policies & laws should be kept secret from its' citizens.

Re:Really?

[Jah-Wren Ryel]

There are procedures to report those crimes. I don't know of Snowden following them.

He did. The result was partly what convinced him to go another way.

The other part that convinced him? What happened to the others that tried before him.

So many people just don't get it.

[Dega704]

People who complain about him taking refuge in a country with a more oppressive government are missing the point entirely; maybe even intentionally. For years the U.S. government has put itself on a pedestal and acted as if it holds the moral high ground when it comes to the rights of it's citizens. Edward Snowden shattered that by revealing how full of crap they were. Does Russia have a worse human rights record than the U.S.? Absolutely. Does that give the U.S. the right to crap all over the 4th amendment and become a surveillance state? Hell no. Edward Snowden didn't defect to Russia and announce to the world that they are better than the U.S., he simply ended up there because he had no other choice; and he obviously would like to be able to come home. Personally, I am ticked at our government not just for violating our constitutional rights and branding whistleblowers as traitors, but for embarassing all Americans on the world stage by making us look like a bunch of hypocrits.

Re:Really?

[sjames]

Actually, the Patriot act did NOT authorize spying ion citizens except in the narrow case where that citizen was speaking with a foreign national suspected of terrorism. The NSA collected ALL call metadata and has been looking at it with their '3 hops' policy. That was not authorized. Notably, the NSA has repeatedly perjured itself before Congress on that very issue.

If he's smart, he'll stay in Russia.

[couchslug]

May as well. The US has ceased to stand for anything good and it nothing more than a globalist enforcer. No meaningful number of Americans oppose that role.
That's not to say anywhere else will fare much better under scrutiny, but now that the ideological battle of the Cold War is finished and Russia, China, and the US share the same freedom from idealism there is no reason for a bright fellow like Snowden to want out of Russia.

Re:No need to testify

[nnull]

Yes, and the American revolutionaries should have brought their concerns to the King instead of breaking the law and killing all those poor red coats. I'm sure the King would have been understanding by chopping off their heads for bringing it up.

elect Obama, he'll stop these abuses!

[stenvar]

"I will provide our intelligence and law enforcement agencies with the tools they need to track and take out the terrorists without undermining our Constitution and our freedom. That means no more illegal wiretapping of American citizens. No more national security letters to spy on citizens who are not suspected of a crime. No more tracking citizens who do nothing more than protest a misguided war. No more ignoring the law when it is inconvenient," Obama said in 2007, adding that "the FISA court works."

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2013/jun/13/barack-obama-surveillance-then-and-now/

Re:Really?

[Jah-Wren Ryel]

Wyden already had classified information about this stuff. He wouldn't do anything about it except give vague warnings.

What is so amazing to me are people like you who are always happy to criticize someone who took action for doing it "the wrong way." The problem with that attitude is that everyone has their own version of "the right way." Snowden got results, it ain't perfect but its 1000x more effective than what anyone else has done. He deserves enormous slack for that.