The debate in the United States continues over whether Edward Snowden is a whistleblower or a traitor. I previously wrote a column on that question. There appears to be less debate in Sweden where Snowden received standing ovations in the Swedish parliament after being given the Right Livelihood award for his disclosure of sweeping surveillance programs of the United States. The award honors Snowden “for his courage and skill in revealing the unprecedented extent of state surveillance violating basic democratic processes and constitutional rights”. This week, the new movie on Snowden also captured two more awards and critical acclaim.
Snowden appeared by video from Moscow and has left the prize in Sweden hoping that he will someday be allowed to travel personally to pick up the prize. His father however was in the chamber during the award ceremony. Many are hoping that Sweden or another West European country will grant Snowden asylum. Philanthropist Jakob von Uexküll, who established the award in 1980, raised this prospect in his speech when he added “So Mr Snowden, your Right Livelihood Award is waiting for you. We trust that Sweden will make it possible for you to collect your award here in Stockholm in person in the very near future.”
Polls have shown that a majority of Americans share the view of Snowden as a whistleblower despite a concerted effort by the White House, intelligence community, and congressional leaders to the contrary.
Source: The Guardian
@ Max-1 (as opposed to Max-2)
Everyone has something to hide. Every…one….. All of us. have things we don’t want known. Every day. All the time. Always.
Some small things. Some large things. Some important things and most inconsequential. There is not always a nefarious purpose to being circumspect or secretive. In many cases privacy is for personal protection. Other times it is just by preference. (Leave Me Alone!! ala Greta Garbo) Protection against intrusive internet stalkers (my reason). Protection against being misquoted and misconstrued and having your personal and professional life compromised.
I’m not about to be forthcoming on the Internet and expose myself to annoyance and even danger. So even if I take a “you first position” show your own pass codes, you won’t see me volunteering my “pass codes” (interesting terminology that is somewhat telling about you…. btw.)
The NSA can spy on us. It DOES spy on us. We don’t like it and nor should we accept this intrusion into our PRIVATE lives.
Snowden did all of those who were blissfully unaware a favor. A huge favor. Waking people up, we hope. That there is danger stalking us in the Internet and that we are never alone anymore in our lives on: the phone, in public or even in our communications with each other.
Never alone. Big Brother is really really watching.
Paul C
Post your full name and pass codes… Far different to claim that you have nothing to hide when you skirt being transparent by suggesting the NSA already has them. Lacking full disclosure I’ll accept that you DO have something to hide…
Max-1 – Lead and we shall but follow.
Snowden is a National Hero, and as such…. he is worthy of our admiration, not our scorn…. ‘Screw’ all of the ‘Politicians’… including Barack, yo Momma!!! Whose Nobel Prize, by the way, should be rescinded!!! It’s our Government that deserves the scorn… This country has regressed, since the election of George W. Shrub! We are, America of the 50’s again…. And I had a bad childhood back then….
Max-1 wrote:
“what isn’t criminal activity in High Offices when the Govt does it?”
~+~
This is one of the reasons I have long advocated for a justice department that is separate from the being under the executive branch. That in my view sets up the stage for both conflicts of interests and a means to engage in corruption.
I believe the attorney general should be a directly elected position and it must be a non-partisan position.
One of the reasons Washington has direct elections for Lt. Governor, Secretary of State, Commissioner of Public Lands, Attorney General, Superintendent of Public Instruction, and Insurance Commissioner is that during the drafting of our state constitution, the framers wished to avoid a concentration of power and created a better checks and balance system than the federal system.
While these entities still must hold to following the legislature, the courts, and to some extent the governor’s office it does permit some pushback and balance.
It would be agreeable to see this on the federal scale but I have great doubt that the current political system would ever acquiesce to such a change for it might reign in some control. It is for the same reason that both sides seem to be vehemently opposed to increasing the number of justices sitting on the Supreme Court. In my view nine is inadequate, especially given the enlargement of the population and issues increasingly manifest with a advancements in legal and other aspects of society. The legislature has the power to make a change but it is doubtful it will happen any time in the foreseeable future.
Darren – much as I agree with you about an independent AG, it is not covered by the Constitution. However, maybe they well add it during the upcoming Constitutional Convention.
One of the ways that the United States controls people is through financial repercussions.
Very basic examples of this are through the civil process rather than the criminal; tax policy; fines and forfeitures; the legal process; prosecutions to exact financial ruin even if cases never go to trial; and sanctions against occupations such as prohibiting employment by requiring licensing of everything and then civil actions against that license.
As society becomes more financially interdependent, this is often more effective and less visible to others, going under the radar from scrutiny.
Anecdotally, is the right to renounce one’s citizenship.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948, of which the US was a signatory nation, declares under Article 15 that a person has a right to change his/her nationality. The US government controls that by requiring individuals to suffer a 30%(?) tax penalty of their assets if these are above a certain threshold. This can be dissuasive and the government does not permit renouncement if this is not paid. I don’t know to what extend this can actually be accomplished but it is an example.
Paul C
Would it not be different had Snowden revealed how the US Govt spies only on our enemies? But alas, his revelation comes with warning on how you Government spies on YOU, most likely illegally. If reporting on how your Government violates your Rights is criminal, what isn’t criminal activity in High Offices when the Govt does it?
Slippery slope, much?
Max-1 – since the courts seem to be approving the wiretaps not sure what we can do. No president would want to give up that power so they would veto any bill getting rid of it.
Barkingdog,
Fascism requires ardent adherence to the ever persistent need to control people. Spying on your citizens is but a small act that portends great influence upon a whole society…
Anyone who claims they have nothing to hide…
… Please post your full name, and passcode to this web site.
Watch the non responses… Or… People quick to change their pass code becAuse they claim, they have nothing to hide.
Snowden = Hero
Max-1 – all the government entities that want my passwords already have them. 🙂 And they have yours.
There were people in the German government who knew that Goerring was the one who went through the tunnel over to the Reichstag (Parliament) in 1933 and set it on fire. Von Hindenburg, the President, issued the Reichstag Fire Decree which suspended all civil liberties and curbs on government so that the government could go after the alleged Communists who set the fire.
That was the beginning of the end. Nazi Party takes over entirely, Holocaust, War. The parallel is the Twin Towers and the Patriot Act which followed.
Had there been a Snowden perhaps German and World history would have been different.
The 1933 Parallels. Never Forget!
BarkinDog – there is NO proof that the Nazis burned down the Reichstag. There were certainly rumors, just as there are rumors about Hillary’s sexuality. Does not make them true. We know that one Communist was convicted and confessed. The other Communists on trial with him were acquitted.
And what has the US awarded Snowden with for publicly revealing the US governments total surveillance state?
Public apathy followed by heaping doses of obfuscation and out right unconstitutional acts on part of congress, the executive and the courts.
“Once again, John Hancock was the first to sign. It is said as he signed his name in bold letters, he commented that he was doing so the King wouldn’t need his spectacles to recognize him as a “traitor.” When someone stated that at least all the delegates would “hang together,” Benjamin Franklin replied, “or most assuredly, we shall all hang separately.”
http://www.llanonews.com/news/111640/
—————————————————–
Traitors ALL:
http://www.barefootsworld.net/doi1776.html
[partial excerpt]:
” Fifty-six men, appointed by their fellow citizens of each Colony, meeting in Congress assembled, determined that the only logical course of action by which they could throw off the yoke of tyranny was to declare the independence and sovereignty of the individual colonies, and join together in a firm league of friendship with each other, for their common defence, the security of their Liberties, and their mutual and general welfare, binding themselves to assist each other, against all force offered to, or attacks made upon them, or any of them, on account of religion, sovereignty, trade, or any other pretence whatever.
In so doing, these fifty-six men, on the authority of the good people of the colonies, signed the Declaration of Independence, mutually pledging to each other their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor.
Have you ever wondered what happened to the fifty-six men who signed the Declaration of Independence?
Five signers were captured by the British as traitors and tortured before they died. Twelve had their homes ransacked and burned. Two lost their sons in the Revolutionary War, another had two sons captured. Nine of the fifty-six fought and died from wounds or the hardships of the Revolutionary War.”
more:
barefootsworld.net/doi1776.html
Bruce E. Woych,
You might not have been aware but this website only permits two hyperlinks within a comment. I edited yours to dereference one of them; the last.
If you would like for the readers to see more than two links this can be accomplished through additional comments.
Good call DBQ, I was thinking of polonium poisoning. Way to write it up!
Nick Spinelli – I bet Putin does see envy when he looks into Obama’s eyes. Putin has an 84 percent approval rating in Russia.
Maureen – anyone who hugs a tiger is going to have a much higher popularity rating than Obama.
There is a disconnect between the Swedish government’s handling of Edward Snowden and that of Julian Assange.
As a libertarian Republican who has never and likely will never vote for a Democrat, I can say that the PATRIOT Act is the single worst piece of legislation “my” party has enacted in my life. Snowden did the right thing even if it was technically “traitorous” to disclose classified information. The sad thing is Snowden’s acts will not matter. The PATRIOT Act has already been extended twice. First by Republicans before Bush left office and then in 2011 when Democrats controlled the presidency and the Senate.
The sunset provision expires again in 2015. Maybe we can get more amendments or changes, but outright expiration seems like a long shot given both parties have now embraced it and in so doing normalized and institutionalized the abuses and built another giant bureaucracy. I hope I’m wrong, but I doubt the civil liberties we lost with that hideous law will ever be fully restored using the normal political process. Neither party wants to let the law expire and then get demagogued as being “weak on terror” by the other party if another attack occurs. Snowden was more right than wrong, and some changes did occur as a result. But not enough.
The price of freedom is eternal vigilance but that vigilance goes in all directions and is the responsibility of the people, people like Snowden and people like the government.
One question is now that Snowden’s vigilance has brought the government’s vigilance to the public eye, will the government be less obtrusive by pulling back their coverage or simply get better at masking it?
A second question is that if personal rights and freedoms are defiled and as a result a thousand innocents are saved from a terrorist attack, well?
Both the government and Snowden are necessary. It is best that he remain in another country and perhaps even be treated like the British spies were in Moscow. Brought back to the US would tip the balance. If you want to punish him, don’t buy his book or see the movie. Regardless of what one thinks the questions need to be asked.
Would be interesting to see who would represent Snowden should he ever come back to face charges. If one takes the stance that he broke he law for something he considered good reason, that would negate the argument that Obama is wrong for breaking/ changing laws for what he considers good reason.
I predict that Obama will pardon Snowden on his last day in office (can he do that pre-conviction?).
Charlie – Obama can do whatever he wants, just ask him.
@ Jim
Well of course they wouldn’t do something like that. Even our government isn’t THAT stupid.
Snowden might come down with a serious illness while in custody. Unfortunate but so sad. (that was sarcasm). He could be “accidentally” killed by another inmate while in custody awaiting his long and protracted show trial. Oh what an unfortunate accident. /wink wink. Polonium poisoning. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poisoning_of_Alexander_Litvinenko
There are a lot of ways to eliminate someone, other than a hail of bullets in public. Especially, when you are the government and have unlimited resources. Add to that that the public has the attention span of a geriatric gerbil and they can get away with anything they want.
DBQ, It is pure fantasy to think that if Snowden showed up at JFK that the govt. would come in call him a terrorist and kill him. That is just not going to happen. The optics would just be horrendous.