Most Americans Think Snowden Did the Right Thing, Poll Says

[Go Vols]

By Zach Schonfeld
Filed: 6/2/14 at 5:56 PM


Nearly a year after Edward Snowden first leaked classified documents revealing the extent of National Security Agency surveillance programs, more than half of employed Americans believe he was in the right, according to a survey commissioned by cloud storage service Tresorit.

The survey found that 55 percent of respondents think Snowden did the right thing in exposing PRISM, the mass data-mining program, while another 29 percent believe he was in the wrong, and 16 percent endorse neither statement. Of Snowden’s supporters, 80 percent said he exposed constitutional violations.

Eighty-two percent of respondents said they still believe corporate information is being monitored by the U.S. government, and 51 percent said their employer has taken steps to make sure corporate files are secure.

Research firm YouGov carried out the study by surveying more than a thousand “employed American adults.”

http://www.newsweek.com/most-americans-think-snowden-did-right-thing-poll-says-253163

[VanillaRhapsody]

1. MOST people don't know he is a Libertarian who supported George Bush either....

[WillyT]

2. And What Does That Have To Do With The Price Of Tea In China ???

[VanillaRhapsody]

3. it goes to motive Your Honor

[Armstead]

12. So if he had done the same thing but hsd been a Democrat....

It would have been okay?

[VanillaRhapsody]

15. stolen govt property? What do you have against laws...

unless he can produce emails HE claims exists....he didn't blow any whistle..

[Armstead]

81. I'm all for laws

But I'd like to make sure the government follows them too.

And I don't like the trend to pass laws that allow the government to break laws or previous standards of behavior in the post 9-11 world.

(Please note that I did not say the Obama administration. This is bigger issuecthan party pokitics of the moment.)

As i noted in the Op i have mixed feelings about what snowden did. But i also think it served an important purpose of trying to awaken us from our collective stupor about the extent to which we are giving up privacy and freedom.

[AgingAmerican]

78. OR

If Bush was president, it would be OK too. But since Obama is president, it's not OK.

[progressoid]

95. Unsurprisingly, your question goes unanswered.

[VanillaRhapsody]

114. but he isnt......perhaps a democrat would have saved the emails

If you want to go all theoretical

[Whisp]

4. so if Karl Rove stole those papers, you'd be coolio with that would you?

ok....

[WillyT]

7. Say Wha..

[VanillaRhapsody]

9. You understood it!

[WillyT]

79. Hey VR... If You Have That Kind Of Mind Reading Ability... You Should Take It On The Road...

Lotsa money to be made.

Either way... thanks for straitening me out about what I think.

Gettin older... could use the help.

[VanillaRhapsody]

115. i am not the one reading minds

[Whisp]

13. Read back what Vanilla posted up a few from here.

You darn well know,

Say Wha...

[Whisp]

77. We know that if Rove was the stealer, and he ran to Russia

he would be looking to make some kind of profit for the Republican Party by selling information and to embarrass the Democrats. He wouldn't be using his treasure trove for idealistic reasons about saving the world from surveillance trolls.

We know Karl Rove, so this would be a fair assumption. It would be a sure bet. We know Karl.

What do you really know about Snowden that you would so trust him to be doing the right thing for all the right reasons?

[treestar]

98. Classic dodge

I get that from right wingers.

We know why you don't want to answer the question.

[rhett o rick]

121. You are pointing out something very important with your question. I would respect

anyone that would open the door to expose potential corruption, especially as potentially dangerous as the NSA spying on all Americans. Apparently you would only appreciate it if it was someone with a (D) behind their name or some other qualification.

If the NSA/CIA are operating without any oversight, it could be the biggest thing in the century. They could manipulate elections and destroy peoples lives. Seems that's ok if the President is a Democrat. But remember the NSA/CIA expanded under Bush and Pres Obama didnt make any changes. If there is one thing I fear more than a Republican president, is a Republican controlled NSA/CIA.

I bet if Snowden pointed out to you that your house was on fire, you'd let it burn.

[billhicks76]

36. FOX News Hates Snowden and GG

And I don't support FOX News.

[VanillaRhapsody]

116. how big a star is Rand Paul on that network?

I only ask because you sound like a faux news expert

[stupidicus]

72. absolutely nothing

it doesn't matter what his motives were because the material speaks for itself and is the only thing relevant in this case.

Impotence in the face of the message has left them with little but attacking the messenger, which is why they have the losing case.

The concerns and criticisms of BHO and the SS are justified by the debate and action taken on it thusfar, and if defending Snowden's actions (what he'll be tried on in a court of law over versus this court of public opinion where any BS passes the smell test of some)is tantamount to being a stealth rightwinger/libertarian, then it logically and consistently follows that their defenses of BHO on this or any other matter makes them supporters of that criticized or condemned in their entirety, from his chained cpi proposal to this NSA issue.

That's just one of the flaws in the so-called arguments of the cheerleading squad around here. The reason they love to focus on this issue is because unlike the others, chained cpi, drones, etc, there's no scapegoat like Snowden or GG to be found where the burden can be lifted off of Atlas/BHO by that means, given his complete ownership of a great deal of the rest. It's all about controlling the narrative and trying to maintain the focus on one where they can at least present an illusion of defensibility or delude themselves into thinking it defensible.

and motive is not an element of a crime that has to be shown for a conviction. That's why they prefer putting the two amigos on trial with nonsense like that as opposed to putting BHO on a similar trial for that they revealed, as NSA overreach supporters it would appear.... They can't cut the tether between BHO and the NSA problem, but they seem to think lopping their heads off at every opportunity gets the job done.

I suppose if Snowden ever goes to trial, we can expect the prosecution to be asking who he voted for in 2004 and 2008....lol

[VanillaRhapsody]

124. Except for that fact that he gets caught lying over and over again!

[stupidicus]

158. like with the frequency and egregiousness of this guy?

http://www.opednews.com/articles/Obama--s-Lies-NSA-Spies-by-John-Whitehead-Activism_Freedom_Government_Lies-140122-76.html

and again, it's not the credibility of Snowden that is on trial here, but rather the validity/veracity of the material he's uncovered and shared. And as far as I know nobody has challenged that material, just an interpretation or two of it by him or GG.

that's why you're reduced to impotent and failed efforts at impeaching the witness in this case. All those lame efforts aren't gonna touch what the documentation has revealed from which the criticisms/condemnations have arisen. It's just the product of junior high school-like popularity contest that will have zero impact on the results.

SO what you and your fellow Snowden/GG haters hate them, that just begs the question as whether if GG was replaced with say Rachel Maddow, and Snowden was some black, gay, BHO-voter, whether you'd be giving the other "Liar" in this case the grief he deserves after all the alleged case-changing, ulterior "motives" were eliminated.

Pretty doubtful I'd say, give the way y'all have abandoned reason for mindless cheerleading more harmful than any real or imaginary license Snowden or GG have taken with that material.

[VanillaRhapsody]

159. this reads both sexist and racist to me

You may want to self delete

[stupidicus]

164. thanks for conceding the validity of my observations and accomapnying remarks

and demonstrating your impotence in the face of them.

[VanillaRhapsody]

168. "impotence"?

conceded what exactly?

[stupidicus]

169. even though your continual tacit concessions where neither solicited nor warranted

they remain most welcomed.

Your no doubt what will be an endless foray into non-germane/irrelevant BS like allegations of racism and sexism, or feigning ignorance as to what you've tacitly

implied or indicated (as by an act or by silence) but not actually expressed <tacit consent> <tacit admission of guilt>

conceded as a result of your transparently obvious dodging, as well as the "debating" impotence it represents, can only leave that dodged almost entirely unaddressed and completely intact/unrebutted.

Thanks for also tacitly conceding in the identical way, that BHO has taken license with the truth regarding the NSA stuff as shown. That you've likely not taken him to task over that in anything close to approximating the scorn and ridicule you've heaped upon Snowden for the same alleged offense, speaks volumes about both your motive behind all these tacit concessions in the form of less than artful dodging, as well as the irrational hatred you appear to have for Snowden.

please continue

[VanillaRhapsody]

170. I have no earthly idea what you are talking about....

[stupidicus]

171. thanks for conceding/admitting

your reading comprehension difficulties.

I'd suggest that goes a long way towards explaining your other deficits as previously explained in plain and simple english.

It does however look like we're entering the "last word" game phase that most dodgers inevitably find unavoidable.

please continue

[HangOnKids]

172. Holy Hell!

That was delicious. Thank you.

[VanillaRhapsody]

175. Conceding what?

I am not reading another nonsensical screed!

[HangOnKids]

181. You aren't reading your own posts?

Good to know. It appears you are in way over your head.

[VanillaRhapsody]

176. besides...I do NOT think that the racism and sexism were false at all

I think it was quite accurate....so no I haven't even conceded that! And the rest was just word salad.

[stupidicus]

178. and yet it remains a baseless, fact-free, and unarticulated

as to how anything I wrote could be reasonably construed as racist or sexist, and it likely got a few laughs from the jury after you filed a report.

It no doubt required you manufacturing meaning where none existed or was intended, and was designed for and intended to provide a diversion so as to provide some cover for the fact that you had nor have any meaningful rebuttal to what I posted, much like with the "word salad" nonsense you dropped into your last response. As a male with eight sisters, and a long history of stomping racists and assorted other stupid people into the dirt, it really shoulda been me filing the report over such a baseless and insulting effort on your part.

As already noted, this is how those with little to no choice play the "last word" game, and particularly those "motivated" by an acute awareness that their effort has been shredded from the start as yours has been here.

please continue

[VanillaRhapsody]

179. Yes it most certainly could reasonably judged that way.....

as it most certainly was....


I quote:

"SO what you and your fellow Snowden/GG haters hate them, that just begs the question as whether if GG was replaced with say Rachel Maddow, and Snowden was some black, gay, BHO-voter, whether you'd be giving the other "Liar" in this case the grief he deserves after all the alleged case-changing, ulterior "motives" were eliminated."

YOU seem to think that any criticism of Snowden is BECAUSE he is a White male....I smell MRA...

Please continue your racist and sexist screeds....quite illuminating...

[stupidicus]

180. thanks for highlighting the problem

and verifying/validating my conclusion already made of your reading comprehension difficulties playing the central role.

nobody but an unreasonable adult would read it that way. I was obviously and only replacing the actors with other ones for which you'd likely a have political/ideological affinity with, as well as a gender one where the RM switch with GG was made -- which didn't occur with Snowden. SO there goes your hysterically silly and baseless "sexist" claim and the disturbingly ignorant and insulting conclusion that

YOU seem to think that any criticism of Snowden is BECAUSE he is a White male....I smell MRA...

Secondly, and how does suggesting for the same argumentative purpose that Snowden, while remaining male, also had BHO-voting bona fides by being black, as being gay would also provide I'd think, in isolation even pretend to suffice for a "reasonable" racism charge?

Why I'm surprised you didn't accuse me of being homophobic too, no?

Obviously either the obvious escaped you, or this is just another dodge/diversion.

The only "reasonable" deconstruction of my post would be that I merely made the case that it is the ideological/political differences between you, GG, and Snowden that accounts for your quite irrational, seemingly very hateful attitudes towards them. I'll thank you for showing that you not only harbor and direct such at them at every available opportunity, but also those who defend them, like with this silly racism and sexist/MRA stuff. And also, taken in the total context of my submissions here, that is exactly the same case I made in response to your lying charge with the BHO examples of lying too. The only diff between the two is the BHO example is unalterable. All this racist and sexist garbage is a transparently impotent and therefore unsuccessful effort at you being unable to deny that your ideological and political support for BHO differences with them alone that explains your animus, because if it was a Maddow/like character that replaced GG, and a black/gay/BHO-voter that replaced Snowden, you'd be noiseless and figuratively choking on your own bile. Your "they're just out to get BHO!" line would completely fail to carry much weight, and would take other arrows out of your already all but empty quiver as a result of that loss.

So do tell, why should I or any reader of this think I need worry about the racism and sexism charges from the likes of you? It seems to me like most would see it as a case of projection on your part, and that maybe their maleness does play a major role in this for you. And your taking such offense to my innocently using RM to replace such a villian for the purpose stated to the point of laughably deeming it sexist and me a sexist, well, that would tend to reinforce the notion of a trigger-happy man-hater.

please continue

[scarletwoman]

6. Link?

[VanillaRhapsody]

26. How long have you been on DU?

[scarletwoman]

31. Since 2001. Which you could have easily found out for yourself by looking at my profile.

But maybe you haven't been here long enough to figure out how to do that.

[VanillaRhapsody]

33. it was a rhetorical question....

[scarletwoman]

40. Not really, it was an avoidance tactic.

I asked for a citation. You produced a non sequitur.

[VanillaRhapsody]

41. Not at all....just bored with producing the same information over and over for people who refuse

to believe their lying eyes...


but here you go...
http://www.salon.com/2013/06/10/edward_snowden_a_libertarian_hero/

[scarletwoman]

66. An opinion piece, written by somebody named Andrew Leonard. I have no idea who that is,

or why I should care about his opinion.

Is that all you've got? No hard proof, just some writer's opinion?

Why the hell would I take your assertions seriously? (Oh, btw, that IS a rhetorical question.)

[VanillaRhapsody]

147. How about words right out of his own mouth...

http://www.salon.com/2010/05/28/crazy_10/

a Glenn Greenwald opinion piece...

[scarletwoman]

165. Thank you for the link.

It's an excellent piece of political analysis, and I agree with it completely.

[VanillaRhapsody]

167. of course you do....

why am I not surprised by that?

[Fearless]

24. Everyone knows that's a non sequitur

[VanillaRhapsody]

27. Only if like you I were to ignore the facts...

[scarletwoman]

52. You have not presented any facts.

[Fearless]

93. Non sequitur...

"Non sequitur (Latin for "it does not follow&quot , in formal logic, is an argument in which its conclusion does not follow from its premises.[1] In a non sequitur, the conclusion could be either true or false, but the argument is fallacious because there is a disconnection between the premise and the conclusion. All invalid arguments are special cases of non sequitur. The term has special applicability in law, having a formal legal definition. Many types of known non sequitur argument forms have been classified into many different types of logical fallacies."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non_sequitur_%28logic%29

[VanillaRhapsody]

96. then please explain HOW this is non sequitur....

Is it a fallacy that he is a Libertarian?

http://www.salon.com/2013/06/10/edward_snowden_a_libertarian_hero/


Where is YOUR supporting evidence?

[Fearless]

100. His political affiliation has nothing to do with

Whether he did the right thing exposing NSA spying. That is the non sequitur.

[VanillaRhapsody]

101. you may not give a crap......but I do

I dont trust Rand Paul even though he supports mj legalization. Do you?

[Fearless]

117. Again a non sequitur

[VanillaRhapsody]

119. how so its an apt analogy

[Fearless]

143. It is a non sequitur

Because Rand Paul's points of view have nothing to do with Edward Snowden and equally Snowden's political affiliation has nothing to do with whether he did the right thing or not in exposing the NSA spying program.

They do not make logical arguments as they require the reader to make a leap of faith, requiring an assumption on the part of the reader.

The first requires you to assume that being libertarian precludes him from being correct in exposing the NSA spy program. Of course it does not.

The second requires you to assume that Rand Paul's support of marijuana legalization make him a decent politician despite his other points of view AND that Snowden's exposing of the NSA spy program makes him a good person in spite of his other points of view. Of course it does not.

Additionally, you contradict yourself between the two statements. The first suggests that a person is not a decent person because of a majority of their beliefs, but the second suggests that a person is a good person simply because of one belief that they hold.

[VanillaRhapsody]

145. its called analogy for a reason...

[Fearless]

160. It is a comparison of unrelated topics.

[VanillaRhapsody]

161. in your opinion but most certainly not mine

I am not easily blinded by the light

[Fearless]

166. What does that even mean?!

[billhicks76]

28. He was a standard republican

He foolishly believed in the Iraq War and War on Terror and the NSA/CIA but as with every lie they couldn't hold up. I'm glad he went from idealist fool to a hero. He changed during Bush's term as did many others who couldn't defend Bush's crimes any longer with a straight face. He thought Obama would change things and held off. He was wrong. Obama turned into a Bush clone with respect to foreign policy, surveillance, mass incarceration and law enforcement. Most democrats were against the surveillance under Bush and still are now although some are trying to muddy the waters and make it a battle of personalities with Obama and Snowden. Right out of the dirty tricks playbook which I choose not to read. You should be applauding him for turning against the Iraq War, Bush and his republican roots. That is our goal right? Convince republicans they are wrong and to embrace the truth? Or do you just want perpetual fighting and division so nothing changes just like the CIA facilitates in 3rd World countries it wishes to exploit?

[MannyGoldstein]

34. Stop lying, please.

Greenwald is a civil libertarian, not a Libertarian. I've seen zero evidence that he's a Libertarian - if you have any, please fork it over. He's against cutting Social Security, wants to stop the growth of income inequality, and to reign in the bankers.

[VanillaRhapsody]

35. Prove it!

did HE say it....or are YOU speaking for him?

Is Rand Paul a Civil Libertarian too? Cause he sure as shit supported him!

[MannyGoldstein]

44. Stop lying, please.

Greenwald never, ever supported Rand Paul for any office. It's a lie. Put up or shut up.

$10 if you can produce a quote where Greenwald claims he's a Libertarian. You're lying. Again, put up or shut up.

[VanillaRhapsody]

146. How about Rand and Ron

http://www.salon.com/2010/05/28/crazy_10/

[MannyGoldstein]

148. "Ron Paul holds some views that are wrong, irrational and even odious."

"There’s no question that Ron Paul holds some views that are wrong, irrational and even odious."

Did I miss the secret endorsement?

[VanillaRhapsody]

155. but....

And its a big one!

[MannyGoldstein]

157. But what? nt

[ProSense]

64. Repost:

Greenwald is not the left.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023321760


Greenwald: Progressives and the Ron Paul fallacies
http://www.democraticunderground.com/100294827

Then he got defensive.

@Wolfrum Thanks: of course Obama = better than Paul on those issues for progressives - though I do say Endless War jeopradizes entitlements

http://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/153169132471328768

Greenwald does exactly this: Hype Ron Paul based on soundbites. One can find any number of clips or writings contradicting these soundbites, as with the anti-war claim. You're opposed to the death penalty, but would let people die without health care?

Let's look at the numbers: There were less than 80 executions in the U.S. last year, the lowest in 40 years. Tens of thousand of people die each year without health care

Greenwald doesn't for a second consider that Paul's positions are propaganda.

"Endless War jeopradizes entitlements"?

What the hell does that mean? You know what jeopardizes "entitlements": getting rid of them and believing they're unconstitutional.

Is slavery an entitlement program?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/100294914

Debunking the "Ron Paul Cares About Civil Liberties" Myth

Last week Glenn Greenwald won the Dumbest Tweet of the Week award with this beauty, about Ron Paul:



<...>

http://angryblacklady.com/2011/12/28/debunking-the-ron-paul-cares-about-civil-liberties-myth/

Glenn Greenwald defend Rand Paul against "Democratic myths"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022485711

Disappointing those who 'stand with Rand'
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022742805

It's Greenwald Day!!!!






http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024931733

[ProSense]

69. By

"He's against cutting Social Security, wants to stop the growth of income inequality, and to reign in the bankers."

...claiming that Ron Paul was the most "anti-war, anti-Surveillance-State, anti-crony-capitalism, and anti-drug-war" candidate and hyping Rand Pau:

Ron Paul wants to eliminate corporate taxes and preserve oil subsidies. Did you know he's really a RW Republican? Greenwald's favorite politicians are frauds, and the fact that he doesn't know that means he's clueless. Anyone backing these frauds or making excuses for Greenwald support of them is trying perpetrate the fraud.

Ron Paul Calls For 'Nullification' Of Obamacare: 'Pretty Soon ... We're Just Going To Ignore The Feds'
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/ron-paul-calls-for-nullification-of-obamacare

"Ron Paul hates govt intervention, likes mandatory vaginal ultrasound probes"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002161152

Rand Paul backs bill that could lead to crackdown on states where voters legalized weed
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024663470

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024945439#post33

[Rockyj]

113. Its not about Snowden its about our...

government collecting data on its citizens with out an warrant. If we allow our government to get away with this what's next?

[rhett o rick]

122. Congrats at getting the number one response. Best for hijacking. Just sayin. nm

[sabrina 1]

130. Most people don't CARE. What has that got to do with these serious issues?

What people care about more than anything else is their Constitutional Rights.

Did you know that Drake was a Republican? The left not only didn't CARE, they admired him even MORE because he stood up for what was right, regardless of his political affiliations.

Did you know that SOME THINGS take precedence over Politics? And THIS is one of them!

[KurtNYC]

149. Message versus messenger -- most Americans CAN tell the difference

no matter how hard some try to confuse them.

[Reter]

156. A lot of libertarians initially supported him in 2000

He ran against nation building. After the election however, they all regretted it because he proved to be a globalist fraud.

[WillyT]

5. So... If A "Libertarian" Is Right Once In A While... We're Required To Ingnore It ???

[VanillaRhapsody]

11. So when is stealing from the govt "Right"?

Until he produces the emails HE CLAIMS he sent.....he is no whistleblower.....just a garden variety thief.

[AgingAmerican]

16. When the government is illegally spying on you

...and your family. In that case it is always right to 'steal' that info back and expose it far and wide.

[VanillaRhapsody]

17. are they?

Have you seen your name on a list?

[billhicks76]

32. Here Go Again

Most Democrats support Snowden...less Republicans do but even they have come around because of how filthy and corrupted NSA and CIA have become. These are the same guys who facilitated importing tons of cocaine and heroin from the 70s-90s while supporting draconian drug sentences for poor minorities.

[VanillaRhapsody]

38. can you prove that?

See you are conflating....support or not for Snowden with that of the NSA.

One is not synonymous of the other.....Some of us can have 2 thoughts at once.

[billhicks76]

42. But

People here conflate not supporting the NSA with being against Obama. Snowden has exposed the NSA and people owe him. We do not owe anyone else. We owe him.

[VanillaRhapsody]

45. Prove it!

[billhicks76]

47. Prove What?

????

[VanillaRhapsody]

49. what you just said about DU....prove it!

[billhicks76]

53. I Said Most Democrats

You really think they all comment here?

[billhicks76]

56. But Of Course I Think Here Too

It just seems obvious. I didn't take a poll but do I really have to?

[VanillaRhapsody]

57. No you said "people here"

quite plainly

[billhicks76]

65. It's Just Obvious To Me

The NSA or blaming GG or Snowden isn't a big hit with most here. Just an anecdotal observation. Maybe NSA can contract someone to create some fake profiles to " manage" public opinion but until then I see most people supporting Snowden. You and I may comment more here right now but overall I see massive support fir Snowden from comments I read...especially when people are mature enough to disassociate NSA from Obama

[StoneCarver]

37. Chill

It's clear some bad stuff is and was going on with the NSA, CIA, etc. violating the constitution. I'm glad Ed made it public. We can at least have the discussion and try and fix it. You seem a little defensive. It's probably a lot more gray than we think it is. Take care... Stonecarver.

[VanillaRhapsody]

39. Not defensive at all....I tell the truth and they call it "defensive"

[billhicks76]

46. When You Vocally Support

Asking for the heads of the NSA to roll then I will believe you

[VanillaRhapsody]

48. When you stop vocally repeating that lack of support for Snowden means support of the NSA!

[BillZBubb]

55. Don't hold your breath!

Methinks he doth protest too much.

[billhicks76]

61. I Know Right?

I haven't heard one drop of criticism if NSA. Everyone knows NSA's PR problem inadvertantly revolves around Snowden's larger than life media image. This is why the character assassination occurs. I'm unconcerned with the personality other than for this fact. We always have to out a face on things unfortunately but institutions are what's out if control and the evil deeds perpetrated by those running those institutions. Can you imagine if Putin or some dictator we support in Saudi Arabia or Latin America tried to make it all about the whistleblower and not the real crimes affecting millions?

[WillyT]

51. The Government... Has Been Stealing From Us For The Last 35 -40 Years...

Legally of course... because they make the "laws"...

Yet look at any graph that shows when we started going downhill...

Glad you're doin Ok...

[Skittles]

68. if you lack critical thinking skills, yes

absolutely

[morningfog]

84. Or if you are willfully ignorant, yes.

[Uncle Joe]

10. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, Go Vols.

[Autumn]

14. Recommended. Thanks for the post

[pnwmom]

18. That title misstates the poll results. The fact that most people believe Snowden

did the right thing in exposing PRISM, does NOT lead to the conclusion that everything he did was okay.

He also leaked information about US spying on other countries, which interfered with our diplomacy and put some agents at risk. I haven't seen any polls showing the majority of Americans approved of that.

[Uncle Joe]

20. The question becomes did/does PRISM pose a greater threat to the American People

than the disclosure of spying against other nations.

I'm of the mind that it does, all nations that can, do spy and they know it.

PRISM is nothing but a leading edge to a full blown surveillance state and no democracy can survive for long under those conditions.

[pnwmom]

21. That's not the issue. Snowden could have and should have released the information

about PRISM without also releasing the information about international spying.

[Uncle Joe]

22. They're inextricably tied together, this is all PRISM.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM

PRISM was publicly revealed when classified documents about the program were leaked to journalists of The Washington Post and The Guardian by Edward Snowden – at the time an NSA contractor – during a visit to Hong Kong.[1][2] The leaked documents included 41 PowerPoint slides, four of which were published in news articles.[1][2] The documents identified several technology companies as participants in the PRISM program, including Microsoft in 2007, Yahoo! in 2008, Google in 2009, Facebook in 2009, Paltalk in 2009, YouTube in 2010, AOL in 2011, Skype in 2011 and Apple in 2012.[34] The speaker's notes in the briefing document reviewed by The Washington Post indicated that "98 percent of PRISM production is based on Yahoo, Google and Microsoft".[1] The slide presentation stated that much of the world's electronic communications pass through the U.S., because electronic communications data tend to follow the least expensive route rather than the most physically direct route, and the bulk of the world's Internet infrastructure is based in the United States.[15] The presentation noted that these facts provide United States intelligence analysts with opportunities for intercepting the communications of foreign targets as their electronic data pass into or through the United States.[2][15]

Snowden's subsequent disclosures included statements that governments such as the United Kingdom's GCHQ also undertook mass interception and tracking of Internet and communications data[35] – described by Germany as "nightmarish" if true[36] – allegations that the NSA engaged in "dangerous" and "criminal" activity by "hacking" civilian infrastructure networks in other countries such as "universities, hospitals, and private businesses",[13] and alleged that compliance offered only very limited restrictive effect on mass data collection practices (including of Americans) since restrictions "are policy-based, not technically based, and can change at any time", adding that "Additionally, audits are cursory, incomplete, and easily fooled by fake justifications",[13] with numerous self-granted exceptions, and that NSA policies encourage staff to assume the benefit of the doubt in cases of uncertainty.[37][38][39]

[pnwmom]

82. He never had to release specific details about the information we obtained

while spying -- and who we were spying on. But he chose to leak info about our spying on Russia while we were in the midst of negotiations with them; and the same thing, with China.

[Uncle Joe]

85. It doesn't take a great leap of imagination from knowing about PRISM, that we would

be spying on specific nations.

Once PRISM's Pandora Box was opened everybody knew, Russia and China most of all, we've been spying on each other in one form or another at least since the Cold War if not before.

The very nature of how PRISM works left nothing to doubt.

[pnwmom]

86. It was the specifics that they released that wouldn't have been known, not the fact

that we spy on Russia and China.

And Assange, who obtained documents from Greenwald, continues to threaten to release more -- without withholding information that could put innocent lives at stake.

He and Greenwald had a very public spat about that recently; you must have heard about it. None of this would be happening if Snowden had limited himself to downloading and/or passing on only information about PRISM in the U.S.

[Uncle Joe]

90. By its' very nature PRISM was international, it wasn't just in the U.S.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM_(surveillance_program)

Documents indicate that PRISM is "the number one source of raw intelligence used for NSA analytic reports", and it accounts for 91% of the NSA's Internet traffic acquired under FISA section 702 authority."[15][16] The leaked information came to light one day after the revelation that the FISA Court had been ordering a subsidiary of telecommunications company Verizon Communications to turn over to the NSA logs tracking all of its customers' telephone calls on an ongoing daily basis.[17][18]

(snip)

PRISM is a "Special Source Operation" in the tradition of NSA's intelligence alliances with as many as 100 trusted U.S. companies since the 1970s.[1] A prior program, the Terrorist Surveillance Program,[26][27] was implemented in the wake of the September 11 attacks under the George W. Bush Administration but was widely criticized and challenged as illegal, because it did not include warrants obtained from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.[27][28][29][30][31] PRISM was authorized by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court.[15] PRISM was enabled under President Bush by the Protect America Act of 2007 and by the FISA Amendments Act of 2008, which immunizes private companies from legal action when they cooperate with U.S. government agencies in intelligence collection. In 2012 the act was renewed by Congress under President Obama for an additional five years, through December 2017.[2][32][33] According to The Register, the FISA Amendments Act of 2008 "specifically authorizes intelligence agencies to monitor the phone, email, and other communications of U.S. citizens for up to a week without obtaining a warrant" when one of the parties is outside the U.S.[32]

PRISM was publicly revealed when classified documents about the program were leaked to journalists of The Washington Post and The Guardian by Edward Snowden – at the time an NSA contractor – during a visit to Hong Kong.[1][2] The leaked documents included 41 PowerPoint slides, four of which were published in news articles.[1][2] The documents identified several technology companies as participants in the PRISM program, including Microsoft in 2007, Yahoo! in 2008, Google in 2009, Facebook in 2009, Paltalk in 2009, YouTube in 2010, AOL in 2011, Skype in 2011 and Apple in 2012.[34] The speaker's notes in the briefing document reviewed by The Washington Post indicated that "98 percent of PRISM production is based on Yahoo, Google and Microsoft".[1] The slide presentation stated that much of the world's electronic communications pass through the U.S., because electronic communications data tend to follow the least expensive route rather than the most physically direct route, and the bulk of the world's Internet infrastructure is based in the United States.[15] The presentation noted that these facts provide United States intelligence analysts with opportunities for intercepting the communications of foreign targets as their electronic data pass into or through the United States.[2][15]

Snowden's subsequent disclosures included statements that governments such as the United Kingdom's GCHQ also undertook mass interception and tracking of Internet and communications data[35] – described by Germany as "nightmarish" if true[36] – allegations that the NSA engaged in "dangerous" and "criminal" activity by "hacking" civilian infrastructure networks in other countries such as "universities, hospitals, and private businesses",[13] and alleged that compliance offered only very limited restrictive effect on mass data collection practices (including of Americans) since restrictions "are policy-based, not technically based, and can change at any time", adding that "Additionally, audits are cursory, incomplete, and easily fooled by fake justifications",[13] with numerous self-granted exceptions, and that NSA policies encourage staff to assume the benefit of the doubt in cases of uncertainty.[37][38][39]

[pnwmom]

92. Why do you keep obscuring the point? The fact that we spy on other countries isn't news.

The specifics that were released about specific situations -- and the new information Assange is threatening to release now -- is where Snowden, Greenwald, and Assange have crossed the line.

[Uncle Joe]

99. What specifics? n/t

[pnwmom]

102. Don't play dumb.

I'm sure you know that one of the first things Snowden did was give the South China Post a list of specific IP addresses that we'd been hacking.

And I'm sure you heard about Assange and Greenwald's well-publicized spat last week.

[Uncle Joe]

106. MYSTIC

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MYSTIC

MYSTIC is a voice interception program used by the National Security Agency. The program recorded every phone call made within a non-specified country for thirty days. According to former NSA Deputy Director John C. Inglis, the country is Iraq.[1] According to information later published by The Intercept, the country is the Bahamas.[2] After thirty days, the recorded phone calls are overridden by newer phone calls, although concern was raised that the NSA may start storing collected phone calls indefinitely.[3][4]

The MYSTIC program was first created in 2009, but was not implemented until 2011. In 2014, the existence of the program was revealed by documents leaked by Edward Snowden. After the Mystic program was revealed, The Washington Post argued that the surveillance program could be extended to other countries.[5] A representative of the American Civil Liberties Union criticized the program, stating that the NSA now has the ability to record anything it wants to.[6] It was also noted that MYSTIC is the first revealed NSA surveillance operation capable of monitoring and recording an entire nation's telecommunication system.[7]

Assange let it me known that it was Afghanistan and Greenwald only referred to it as Country X.

It's ongoing and can be any nation in the world including our own.

[Chathamization]

70. A few months ago the spin was that PRISM was merely a benign way the NSA transfers files

and that Greenwald just didn't understand how computers work. Seriously.

[randome]

177. Yes. Seriously. Just because a cloud storage company says differently...

...doesn't make what they say true.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Where do uncaptured mouse clicks go?[/center][/font][hr]

[LanternWaste]

103. Where in the article is the conclusion "everything he did was okay" listed that you reference?

Where in the article is the conclusion "everything he did was okay" listed that you reference?

[pnwmom]

105. I was talking about the subject line of the OP's Post, "Most Americans think .. . "

And my point is what you are saying: nowhere in the article does it back up the assertion in the subject line: most Americans think that "what" -- meaning "everything" -- Snowden did is okay.

[pa28]

19. Only 29% now believe he was wrong.

I believe that's getting into the territory Stephen Colbert once referred to as "backwash".

The DOJ should realize they are on the wrong side of history and bring him home with an immunity deal. At least charge him outside the espionage act and acknowledge he is a whistleblower, not a spy.

[Tarheel_Dem]

107. I think you've confused this survey with an actual scientific poll. What reputable pollster only...

polls "employed" Americans? Do you know how many people that leaves out? For starters, Medicare recipients, people receiving UE benefits, retired vets, full-time students, etc. Really? This is supposed to represent a cross section of the American people?

You probably need to see this:

Cloud Security Startup Tresorit Raises $3M - More Cash For The Hackers?
http://www.forbes.com/sites/benkepes/2014/05/01/cloud-security-startup-tresorit-raises-3m-more-cash-for-the-hackers/

http://techcrunch.com/2014/05/01/tresorit/

So basically, you've got a startup tech co, who wants you to click through a whole bunch of ads. So, the DOJ, like the rest of the country should disregard this outlier (EMPLOYED ONLY) "poll".

[karynnj]

110. Not to mention, in the PEW poll, there is a very strong correlation with age

Leaving out the entire retired population clearly causes a bias. Not to mention, it does not say HOW they "surveyed" people or what the response rate was. Nor do they give the actual question.

The PEW poll that Prosense posted showed more people against than for, but a very large percent of people in neither group. Among young people, that flipped.

[Tarheel_Dem]

111. Precisely. The headline of the o.p. is quite misleading. Thanks to Pro for sourcing the pollster.

Real polls have consistently said the same thing. Even early on, the American people approved of Snowden's disclosure about "domestic" surveillance. However, he ran into trouble when he fled the country. And to wind up in Russia, by way of China, hasn't helped at all.

Even though Americans thought it was great to know about surveillance, a clear majority thinks he should stand trial for what he did.

[Thinkingabout]

23. He has through his avenues released information which harms not only the USA but UK and probably

other nations. He is all worried about his safety but does not give a damn about others. If it was only revealing the NSA was collecting phone data then it is not as bad as all the other data which he stole and released to others who does not mind releasing the information. It continues, releasing more information in which he was never authorized to release. A person who does this is a ZERO.

[frylock]

74. can you add any specifics?

such as what information has caused harm to the US and/or the UK?

[valerief]

25. Duh. Most people aren't the ruling class or members of its court. nt

[ProSense]

29. "according to a survey commissioned by cloud storage service Tresorit"?

Nearly a year after Edward Snowden first leaked classified documents revealing the extent of National Security Agency surveillance programs, more than half of employed Americans believe he was in the right, according to a survey commissioned by cloud storage service Tresorit.

<...>

Research firm YouGov carried out the study by surveying more than a thousand “employed American adults.”

Seriously?

[LanternWaste]

104. (insert deflective irrelevancy here...)

Profit-driven media polls are much more reliable, having no internal bias and worthy of our respect, hence their repetitive postings on DU validating a particular POV, yes?

(insert deflective irrelevancy here... or more gossip column inches-- whichever bumper-sticker you so choose)

[Capt. Obvious]

30. Wait a minute

I thought there's another thread saying the opposite of this one?

[ProSense]

43. It was

"I thought there's another thread saying the opposite of this one?"

...this poll:

More Americans Oppose Edward Snowden's Actions Than Support Them
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025038710

Polls consistently show that most people approve of the release of data related to domestic activities, and view it as a good thing, but they don't approve of Snowden's actions.

Pew poll: Public Split over Impact of NSA Leak, But Most Want Snowden Prosecuted
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023036390

CNN Poll: Majority give Snowden thumbs down

A CNN/ORC International survey released Monday morning indicates that 52% of the public disapproves of Edward Snowden's actions, with 44% saying they approve of the leaks by the former government contractor who worked for the National Security Agency.

<...>

"Younger Americans are less likely than older Americans to call for the U.S. government to prosecute Snowden," says CNN Polling Director Keating Holland. "More than half of Americans over the age of 34 think Snowden should be extradited and prosecuted, but younger Americans are evenly divided. There are no major age differences on the question of whether Americans approve of Snowden's actions, so it seems that there is a generation gap on punishment, but not on the leaks themselves."

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/06/17/cnn-poll-majority-give-snowden-thumbs-down/

As you may know, details of the government collection of phone records and internet data were revealed when a former government contractor named Edward Snowden leaked classified information about those government programs to two newspapers. Do you approve or disapprove of Snowden's actions?

18 to 34

Approve: 45 percent
Disapprove: 52 percent


Do you think the U.S. government should or should not attempt to bring Snowden back to this country and prosecute him for leaking that information?

All

Should 54 percent
Should not 42 percent

18 to 34

Should 49 percent
Should not 48 percent

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2013/images/06/17/rel7a.pdf


January 2014:

There is little disagreement on the matter across party lines. Majorities of Democrats (59 percent), Republicans (56 percent) and a plurality of independents (48 percent) said Snowden should be charged.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2014/01/02/clemency-for-edward-snowden-the-public-is-skeptical

[billhicks76]

50. Perhaps Start A Pro-NSA Site

I'm sure it will be a big hit

[ProSense]

54. Why? You want this one to be a Pro-Greenwald/Snowden site?

No thanks.

[BillZBubb]

59. It should be.

People who care about civil liberties should be backing anyone brave enough to come forward with information like Snowden and Greenwald have done. We need more people like them and a lot less of those trying to smear them.

[ProSense]

62. No, it shouldn't n/t

[Tarheel_Dem]

112. Then feel free to start Libertarian Underground. This one is STILL partisan. n/t

[Capt. Obvious]

58. I'm going to rec this now

mainly because it keeps popping back to the top of GD yet every time I click on it I see no new replies.

This rec's for you!

[Eko]

60. I have no problem with Snowden exposing the extent of the NSA's spying.

I have a serious problem with him ending up in Russia with who knows what secrets he stole and with those who would call him a patriot. In what crazy world would someone take state secrets to Russia and be a patriot?

[Maedhros]

94. He didn't take any secrets with him to Russia.

He dispersed all of his files to journalists, and brought none of them with him to Russia.

Your "serious problem" is in your imagination.

[Eko]

118. Really?

And you know this how?

[Maedhros]

120. And you know that he did?

We have Snowden's word, corroborated by Greenwald, Poitras et al. But that doesn't mean all that much, unless one trusts journalists to tell the truth. I, personally, believe that Snowden and his colleagues are more trustworthy in this regard because their interests are to make the information public.

Your unfounded assumption is that Snowden fled to Russia in order to sell the documents he took from the NSA. Were that his motivation, he would not have come forward publicly and given the documents to journalists. Why would Russian intelligence pay Snowden for information he gave away to be released publicly?

I appreciate the effort, but your argument doesn't add up. You're just throwing mud, hoping it sticks.

[Eko]

125. Unfounded assumption huh,

Pretty sure what I said word for word is "I have a serious problem with him ending up in Russia with who knows what secrets he stole and with those who would call him a patriot.". So was my unfounded assumption "with who knows what secrets he stole" or "him ending up in Russia"? I never said anything about his "selling" anything at all, you are putting words in my mouth. You on the other hand have a unfounded assumption that he 1. Released all of the info he collected, 2. That he is telling the truth about all that he stole, 3 Told Greenwald and Poitras et al about all that he stole and 4. That he took no info to Russia. The facts are he stole information and ended up in Russia. I am not throwing mud at all, I am stating the facts. You are saying he released all of the information because he said so and that he took none with him because he said so. My argument does add up, yours doesn't.

[Maedhros]

127. Like I said - throwing mud.

/ignore.

[Eko]

128. Yeah yeah yeah,

stating facts and having an opinion based off of those facts only is throwing mud.

[stevenleser]

63. A huge percentage were in favor of the Iraq war at first. Polls do not validate an action.

Nice try though.

[frylock]

75. what did polls say about the Iraq war a year in?

[Tarheel_Dem]

88. I'm sure whatever the polls said, they weren't startup tech co's, polling only "employed"...

Americans. How ridiculous to present this as a cross section of American opinion, as if it means ANYTHING. The o.p. should pull the other one.

I'll give him this, he got some bites. Where's Zogby Interactive when you need 'em?

[KoKo]

152. Indeed...and we are almost a "Year" In from Snowden's first revelations...

The tide changes as more information comes out...

[gussmith]

67. If Heroes Come In The Form Of Snowden

so be it. I don't have the details to make a judgement but I know that we need voices to speak of the misdeeds of our government. Whistleblowers need protection before they need intimidation and fear.

[Tarheel_Dem]

71. "Employed Americans"? What? They can't be bothered to poll the jobless?

[Number23]

73. Interesting. Thanks for posting.

I think the split between this and the other thread reveals that Americans may approve of the information released about PRISM but not anything that he did before or after that.

[ProSense]

76. It was a

"I think the split between this and the other thread reveals that Americans may approve of the information released about PRISM but not anything that he did before or after that. "

...narrowly defined question posed a tech company. Consider this April poll by the same polling firm

Snowden in Russia: A 'public service' becomes a 'mistake'
https://today.yougov.com/news/2014/04/23/snowden-russia/

[Tarheel_Dem]

80. So you're saying it's a crap poll? And why are they polling just "employed" Americans?

That implies that they leave out the disabled, retired, unemployed, students, retired vets, etc.

[ProSense]

83. It's a

"And why are they polling just "employed" Americans?"

...survey by a tech startup, which is why the narrow focus.

It's basically adverstising for the company.

Cloud Security Startup Tresorit Raises $3M - More Cash For The Hackers?
http://www.forbes.com/sites/benkepes/2014/05/01/cloud-security-startup-tresorit-raises-3m-more-cash-for-the-hackers/

http://techcrunch.com/2014/05/01/tresorit/

[Tarheel_Dem]

87. Pro, what the hell would we do without you? No wonder I never heard of it.

[DeSwiss]

89. While I appreciate all the support......

...the only poll that counts is mine.

- I don't require reinforcement to what I know is the truth and what I know is a goddamned lie.

K&R

[Savannahmann]

91. Allow me to say...

[Enthusiast]

97. K&R!

[antiGOPin294]

108. As do I. Snowden is a true patriot

He has done so much to expose the crimes of the NSA. I hope that the government will change its position regarding Snowden's so-called "crimes", and grants him a full pardon. But that's just wishful thinking on my part.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

109. Probably because he did do the right thing.

[rhett o rick]

123. It's very interesting who here doesnt think he did the correct thing.

Those that support the status quo and loath those that dare challenge the authorities.

It is very likely that the NSA/CIA have put together an organization that has more power than the "most powerful man on the planet." It's easy to see how they could with an unlimited budget and absolutely no oversight. The Presidents come and go, but the same NSA/CIA remains in power.

And those that obsess on Greenwald and Snowden, just dont want to know the truth and will vilify anyone seeking such.

[Eko]

126. Thats totally ridiculous.

I can be against the spying, in fact have been against it since I learned about it in 2006 and think someone stealing secrets and ending up in Russia with who knows what secret info being a bad thing.

[rhett o rick]

129. All I ask is that you keep some prospective.You dont know that Snowden gave the Russians our secrets

[Eko]

131. Very true,

we don't know either way and will probably never know.

[rhett o rick]

132. But we must investigate the NSA to be sure they are acting in our best interest. nm

[Eko]

133. No arguments there

at all.

[U4ikLefty]

134. Ha-ha!!! Look at the authority-sniffers break their arm reaching to spin this.

See how much they spam these threads with nonsense?

desperate

[Eko]

135. I dont think the people who are criticizing snowden are "authority-sniffers" here.

We have legitimate concerns and no one I have seen on this thread who is criticizing him is saying the NSA is correct to do what they did (are doing). The fact that you engaged in an ad-hominen attack and did not enter a conversation with anyone with opposite views shows more of what you are about than the people you are criticizing. Desperate indeed.

[U4ikLefty]

136. A little defensive, eh? Too close to home?

I'm glad a legendary DUer like yourself put me in my place....whew!!!

[Eko]

137. More

Ad-hominen attacks, why don't you ask me questions about what I believe and why instead of attacking my character, or is that too hard for you?

[U4ikLefty]

139. Not really interested in you or what you think.

BTW, you attacked me before I said anything to you. That tells me all I need to know.

[Eko]

140. No,

I did not attack you at all. You misunderstand me calling out your ad-hominem attack for a attack on you. Sounds very republican and of course you are not interested in what I think, you made that clear with your first post. Everybody who does not agree with you is a "authority sniffer".

[U4ikLefty]

141. Yawn to nobody

see post 127...buh-bye

[Eko]

142. Run away!!!!!

cant discuss, cant argue,, only can engage in ad-hominem attacks and that has failed so you must run away!!!!!!!!!!

[HangOnKids]

173. Please More Exclamation Marks!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Such an indicator of brilliance!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Eko]

138. By the way,

I wouldn't call myself legendary, but thanks anyways.

[Eko]

144. Since when was it progressive

to engage in ad-hominen attacks,
to not engage in dialogue,
to deny logic,
to not be open to ideas other than your own,
to saying that people who call you out for your ad-hominen attacks are attacking you,
It became progressive when people who think the government is the bad guy automatically.
When every war is the fault of the government, with very little proof.
When everything is a conspiracy,
When even shots for the measles is a government plot,
When facts don't matter.
Progressives think, we debate, we can be wrong. We don't label others, we don't classify, we take the argument on it's merits. Or maybe I just am not a progressive anymore. Maybe the word progressive has changed and I haven't. Sometimes it seems that way, either that or their is a sizable libertarian population that has decided they are progressive now. Yeah.

[HangOnKids]

174. Sound and fury signifying nothing

I will join the other poster who put you on ignore.

[Eko]

182. And you prove my point.

Plenty of what I said would be up for discussion for those willing to do so, but you act like a right wing republican and say "naw naw no I cant hear you". Sad but whatever.

[Rex]

184. Wow, took you no time at all to call someone a right winger

Enjoy your stay!

[B Calm]

150. Just last week on national news it was reported the majority of people think he's a traitor!

[KoKo]

153. which "national news" poll was it... Link would be helpful.. n/t

[B Calm]

154. This was reported on all 3 ABC, NBC and CBS.

Last edited Wed Jun 4, 2014, 10:00 AM - Edit history (1)

The new Reason-Rupe poll finds Americans are sharply divided on how they view the NSA surveillance whistleblower Edward Snowden. Thirty-nine percent say Snowden is a "traitor for leaking government secrets." Nearly the same number, 35 percent, say he is a "patriot" for letting the public know about the government's surveillance programs. And 16 percent of Americans say they have mixed opinions about Snowden.

http://reason.com/poll/2013/09/19/poll-finds-public-split-on-whether-edwa2

http://www.nbcnews.com/#/news/us-news/more-americans-oppose-edward-snowdens-actions-support-them-n119476

[baldguy]

151. I have it on good authority from the RW Fifth Column on DU

that the opinion of the American people is irrelevant,

That polling them in such leading questions is fascism,

and that the masses of ignorant Americans don't really matter anyway,

Besides, who cares? The majority is often wrong--very wrong. So we can't have THEM deciding things, can we?

[hughee99]

162. Hey, if I want to find out what most Americans really think, I'll ask the NSA. n/t

[B Calm]

183. Why not, according to tea baggers it's the only government agency that listens to us.

[NCTraveler]

163. As they should.

Gives me a little hope.

Edit: The article gets something wrong that many seem to get wrong. One sentence leads to simple black and white thinking. While I support what he does, I am no "Snowden supporter". Why do people want to keep making that assumption. It is strange and lacking.