Can we compare the Snowden saga to the old kids' fairy tale, "The Three Little Pigs"?

I think it’s a bit of a stretch, the US isn’t threatening another country, they are asking for cooperation. And Snowden is no innocent off to visit a Grandma and hijacked by a wolf.

If anything he’s a ginger bread man who is running away. He needs to be mindful of who helps him across the river lest he gets tossed in the air and snapped up.

I don’t really understand why he’s trying to go to South America. The U.S. has a rich, full history of covert operations and interference with governments down there… Whereas we could not afford to engage in such activities in China or Russia.

@bookish1 – I’m not sure that South America is really a true destination. I think it could be a red herring to throw the US off of the trail. Snowden could end up being some place like Iceland, Thailand, or another place that doesn’t love Americans.

Snowden did not board his scheduled flight to Cuba this morning. We’re talking more about Snowden than we are the NSA. His pole dancer girl friend, his flawed resume, the fact that he was a high school dropout.

I’d say maybe we’re being played here. Reminds me of the epic Wizard of Oz: pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.

Snowden is not some innocent hero. He is someone who broke the rules and violated his contract. He is a lawbreaker.

@marinelife – your opinion.

I would classify him as a person who was willing to release the truth to the American people, because the government was unwilling to. The government considers us Americans as “the enemy”, to be spied on and lied to.

Who has more regard for American values?

I would compare it more to this story

I heard an NPR radio sound bite from some senator last night claiming “This information doesn’t belong to Snowden. It belongs to the American people. He has stolen from the American people”.

What a crock. Snowden exposed this “secret unconstitutional” info to the American people. What a blatant setup. Would be like Nixon claiming the crime was against him.

A challenge:(Thanks @elbanditoroso) Name one country that does “love” America. And I do not mean tolerate, cower in fear of, or is bought off by.

@RealEyesRealizeRealLies I heard that and though the same thing. Information owned by the American people who don’t have a right to know what it is, where we got it, how we got it, or what we do with it. An odd definition of owned.

Kind of reminds you of Col. Jessups’ “You can’t handle the truth” rant from A Few Good Men.

@zenvelo @marinelife It’s true: Edward Snowden broke the law. And since you have no respect for anyone who breaks the law, I’m sure you’ll have no problem giving a blanket denunciation of other famous American lawbreakers. Let’s start with Martin Luther King, Jr. He broke the law, too, so please tell us all what a terrible person he was. Perhaps you even agree with the FBI that he deserved to be shot?

Or if not, then perhaps you’ll have to admit that “he broke the law” does not entail “he’s a bad person who morally deserves to punished.”

Snowden didn’t break any laws. Feinstein did, by not doing her job and upholding her oath. Snowden did Feinstein’s job for her, and thereby upheld his oath. Feinstein is the real traitor here.

Treasonous Feinstein accuses Snowden of treason

“a “secret” federal court granted the NSA the authority – no federal court has the power to grant any agency any authority to violate the Constitution”

“As head of the Senate Intelligence Committee, it is her job and the job of her panel to serve as an oversight mechanism on behalf of the American people; if she and her panel had been doing that job, Snowden’s whistle-blowing would never have been necessary.”

“The agency’s mandate requires it to gather intel on those overseas who seek to harm Americans, and that only Americans known to be or suspected of communicating with known or suspected foreign threats to U.S. national security are to be targeted.”

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court. The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.

@RealEyesRealizeRealLies Snowden violated his contract, which means he violated civil law. There’s no denying that. What I find surprising, however, is that anyone thinks that alone is a good reason to condemn him. That he is technically in breach of contract strikes me as immaterial in comparison to what he broke contract to reveal.

Understood. But I don’t believe contracts which violate the constitution are enforceable.

Otherwise, terrorist cells could operate within the US, and sign contracts with recruited Americans which prevent them from exposing the plot.

And, would a signed contract keep a law enforcement official who has infiltrated a group from turning them in or testifying against them.

@RealEyesRealizeRealLies Fair point, which means that “he violated the law” is an even weaker criticism than it might initially seem.

@rojo Exactly.

@SavoirFaire That’s a bit of a stretch for you to accuse me of that. I am responding to what is somewhat of a flimsy premise for this thread, that Snowden is some poor innocent that is running from refuge to refuge ahead of a violent and threatening US that would wage war.

@RealEyesRealizeRealLies While politicians and pundits have said the word “Treason” he has not been accused of Treason, only of disclosing secrets. And how can you say he didn’t break a law? (I am not saying it’s a good law.) He was well aware of breaking a law, even if it is unjust.

There seems to be a movement to elevate him to a martyrdom.

@RealEyesRealizeRealLies you keep saying the NSA actions are unconstitutional, but most US citizens, and the courts and the institutions don’t agree with you, and the laws governing the NSA surveillance of foreign internet traffic were passed by Congress in the light of day. I didn’t understand that you seem to get to declare what’s unconstitutional while no one else does.

@zenvelo “And how can you say he didn’t break a law? ”

I have conceded above that he may have, although I haven’t read his contract. I think Rosa Parks also broke the law.

@zenvelo ”...most US citizens, and the courts and the institutions don’t agree with you…”

Heh… no doubt. Fortunately the constitution doesn’t care how many people agree or disagree. As I understand it, NSA is authorized to monitor, as you say “foreign” internet traffic of suspected terrorists. The constitution doesn’t provide that it spy on American citizens unless suspected of cooperation with foreign suspects.

The Fourth Amendment (Amendment IV) to the United States Constitution is the part of the Bill of Rights which guards against unreasonable searches and seizures, along with requiring any warrant to be judicially sanctioned and supported by probable cause.

Unless all Americans are suspected terrorist sympathizers, then I don’t believe they have the authority to gather data of everyone, unknowingly. What am I missing here? Seriously, I’d really like to believe that our government officials are looking out for the best interest of society, without overreaching their authority by negating our civil liberties.

@zenvelo I’m not accusing you of anything. I am using sarcasm to point out the complete absurdity of your argument. Breaking the law does not, on its own, make someone a bad person. If you have an argument that does not rest on that premise, then, try giving it rather than the one you actually offered.