Friend or foe?
Friend. Exposing unconstitutional, illegal surveillance programs run by the government should be rewarded.
Who is he?
What did he do?
I don't know the full story and would like to know the story
Friend to the people, he exposed more of the corruption in government today. The majority of the people who view him as a foe, ARE government. Government is here for us, not the other way around. Snowden by the way is the person who "blew the whistle" on the government spying and collecting information from our phone calls, email and Internet usage (among other thing I'm sure).
Quote from: Wingnut on July 26, 2013, 05:54:24 PM
The majority of the people who view him as a foe, ARE government.
And ding dongs like Rush Limbaugh.
Quote from: Mikefrompluto on July 26, 2013, 06:26:39 PM
Quote from: Wingnut on July 26, 2013, 05:54:24 PM
The majority of the people who view him as a foe, ARE government.
And ding dongs like Rush Limbaugh.
What an incredibly accurate word for those people.. Thanks mike haha
While it is amazingly awesome what he did. Because he did it, the government is just going to cover it up more. This is also why I'll never believe a republican pundit: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t27ie4qFlXM
It's just so blatantly party line bull. It's basically "Obama is a democrat, we don't like him" nonsense. Both parties can go to hell. Democracy is a sham. An illegitimate form of government.
Ugh. I saw Ann Hitler as soon as I opened that link and immediately threw up a little in my mouth.
Quote from: Dudecore on July 26, 2013, 07:59:36 PM
While it is amazingly awesome what he did. Because he did it, the government is just going to cover it up more. This is also why I'll never believe a republican pundit: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t27ie4qFlXM
It's just so blatantly party line bull. It's basically "Obama is a democrat, we don't like him" nonsense. Both parties can go to hell. Democracy is a sham. An illegitimate form of government.
As opposed to believing a Democratic pundit? Why listen to pundits in general, they're paid to attack members of the opposite party.
He is a coward who so clearly has no ideological motives, only a desire for attention. If he had any conviction he would not continue to run away from trial. Regardless of what you think of the information he leaked, he broke the law, and should have a trial. Previous leakers (Leaker of the Pentagon Papers) turned themselves in, faced trial, and were ultimately let go. There is no reason to think the same could not happen here.
As for the information he leaked, it should not come as a surprise to see the patriot act extended in this way, and it should be recognized as a relic of the anti-terrorist fervor of post 9/11 and repealed.