Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Snowden has been vindicated and he is a hero [View all]gcomeau
(5,764 posts)54. No he hasn't, and no he isn't.
What is it with people being incapable of comprehending that Snowden did not ONLY leak data on this specific program?
HE GAVE THE CHINESE INTEL ON NSA TARGETS IN CHINA. There was nothing in that that involved "whistleblowing".
If he ever sets foot on US soil again he will rightly spend a very long time in a prison cell.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
207 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
When you are right then it remains right. Glad to know you noticed my consistent stand.
Thinkingabout
May 2015
#12
In reading the constitution and knowing warrants have been requested and granted, yes.
Thinkingabout
May 2015
#7
The warrants went to the providers of the records of which was their property. The records does not
Thinkingabout
May 2015
#14
Call it whatever you please, the Constitution was around before any of the providers.
Thinkingabout
May 2015
#23
EXXON gas in your vehicle does not give you ownership of the pumps, station
Thinkingabout
May 2015
#194
So pollution is the answer, nope don't think it is, maybe this is a part of the problem.
Thinkingabout
May 2015
#205
Yes, it is true our homes are "safe" but when a warrant is issued then your home can be inspected.
Thinkingabout
May 2015
#66
We used to "expect" - reasonably! - that our phone conversations/mail were private
bread_and_roses
May 2015
#119
Are you old enough to remember looking at a phone bill and observing the long distance calls,
Thinkingabout
May 2015
#172
That is the same information delivered to the NSA. I do not know who started
Thinkingabout
May 2015
#187
The phone data records never went through you phone, they belong to the provider. Your
Thinkingabout
May 2015
#204
As I remember the Constitution says, "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses,
rhett o rick
May 2015
#169
Which Supreme Court case is the basis for your understanding about constitutionality?
merrily
May 2015
#114
Issuing the warrants is in the Constitution and until that is changed getting the
Thinkingabout
May 2015
#38
The warrants are not issued to persons, houses, they are issued to providers of services, the
Thinkingabout
May 2015
#94
Plus that lovely news that the Republican congress people are so freaking dysfunctional
dixiegrrrrl
May 2015
#62
No. There are two kinds of analysis. One is whether a law is, on its face, unconstitutional,
merrily
May 2015
#116
Those purporting to be attorneys on DU always avoid substantive legal questions
riderinthestorm
May 2015
#151
I read it was under the Patriot Act it was illegal, the ruling did not exclude other methods.
Thinkingabout
May 2015
#93
Other methods of what? And, with all due respect, what you give a damn about is totally irrelevant.
merrily
May 2015
#118
Telephone metadata collection was known in 2006, long before anybody knew who Snowden was
Cali_Democrat
May 2015
#6
The article is from May 2006 and it specifically mentions the phone data collection program
Cali_Democrat
May 2015
#26
Right. It's more about Obama who pushed to "legalize" it after BushCo did it illegally. n/t
cui bono
May 2015
#28
What Snowden revealed was way more that just telephone data. And the lie came from your
rhett o rick
May 2015
#92
The ruling mentioned in the OP was specific to telephone metadata collection only
Cali_Democrat
May 2015
#101
That's a phenomenal compilation! Posting it is a great public service - thanks! nt
GliderGuider
May 2015
#123
Wonder why Eric Holder thought he might have a criminal case against Snowden, then?
merrily
May 2015
#117
Wow. Predictable immediate, attacking defense not just of HC, but of her *ICON.*
woo me with science
May 2015
#99
As I told someone who thought I might be interested, "I'd rather be bitten by rabid dogs
merrily
May 2015
#120
If you're gonna let an anonymous poster on a message board influence your vote...
Cali_Democrat
May 2015
#181
Of course it's more fun to think of some DUers as 'losing' something in this debate.
randome
May 2015
#65
Really? Because bank robbers usually rob banks to take and keep money.
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
May 2015
#133
He'd be more of a hero in my books if he'd simply released all of the documents in full
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
May 2015
#128
I can appreciate that viewpoint but I don't see ANY government wanting its secrets exposed.
randome
May 2015
#134
Except as we just saw, unless you have people leaking classified info
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
May 2015
#135
Nah, they're still all living in denial and declaring him a traitor.
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
May 2015
#130
It's time for the president to give him a full pardon and allow him to come home.
totodeinhere
May 2015
#59
He is absolutely a hero. It's way past time to end the criminal secret government.
woo me with science
May 2015
#100
Not "does not cover it," but does not authorize it. The agency, part of the Executive Branch,
merrily
May 2015
#146
Not really a daily occurrence at the SCOTUS. Something being a common practice for a long time is
merrily
May 2015
#148
Yeah the authoritarians are so easy to spot, they instantly reply to your type of post
Rex
May 2015
#165
That spin is fascinating. If anything, this is a rejection of Snowden. What the ruling says is...
stevenleser
May 2015
#155
He hasn't been "vindicated". Funny how ONE illegal act is BAD, but another is perfectly fine?
George II
May 2015
#166