*promote

Self promoting this video and sending it back into the queue for one more try; last queued Sunday, July 14th, 2013 12:48pm PDT - promote requested by original submitter not_blankfist.

When our enemies do it it's propaganda, when we do it we're just reporting the news, good for us for our reasoned and intelligent analysis.

Bloody hell. Do we know if Ms. Psaki is in recovery?

Even though Dante stated that the hottest place in hell shall be reserved for those who maintain neutrality in times of moral crisis, I submit that spokespeople for the ministry of propaganda are just as deserving to be poked by the robot devil's trident for all eternity.

The WH is calling Russia out for giving Snowden a forum for propaganda, but what exactly is the WH Press Conference if not a forum for propaganda?

THIS<---------- round two???

*promote

Promoting this video back to the front page; last published Sunday, July 14th, 2013 3:48pm PDT - promote requested by JiggaJonson.

hate to deconstruct the binary thinking of "is he a hero or is he a terrorist" (he's neither)

but regardless of what you think of Snowden, does he not need to stand trial?

long live edward snowden. he is single-handedly bringing everything that this government is doing wrong into the legitimate, IRL public eye.

ZING!

Also, *quality.

Boosting this quality contribution up in the Hot Listing - declared quality by Krupo.

Always nice to see someone stand up, with rational debate, to a government talking head.

"The NSA is listening to you!" Kay.... We all should have already known this. Snowden didn't say anything surprising.

Yes, but he proved it. That's the key difference. People have been saying this has been going on but not provided any hard proof of it. Snowden not only provided proof, he showed the world that the NSA is collecting vastly more information than anyone imagined through a variety of means that many hadn't imagined possible. Surely that is groundbreaking, no?

No he does not. Or he should not.

That's like saying: "hey that guy was working for a company who was just a front for the mafia, and one of the employees denounced it. Does he not need to stand trial?"

He came forward to present a terrible crime being commited (and IT IS a crime, and huge violation of the american constitution, not to name a the constitutions of a few other countries as well), and now he's being intimidated and bullied by the criminals, who are saying HE's the criminal for having the audacity to come forward and present to public what they have been doing.

I'm with you, but I must admit that the ONLY argument that gave me any pause was the one that goes "if he is practicing civil disobedience, he should WANT to get arrested and stand trial".

Real civil disobedience types like Martin Luther King Jr. and others intentionally broke laws (bullshit laws, but still laws) knowing full well that they would be arrested and go to jail. The point was to bring those terrible laws under public scrutiny and ideally ridicule. Point out how unfair they are. I think that people that take such actions are incredibly noble and selfless. To a certain degree, I think that the arguments that Snowden could or should follow that approach at least partially resonated with me.

But then, I considered some mitigating circumstances. IF Snowden had done that right out of the gate, he'd probably have been tossed in Gitmo for life without ever standing trial -- the administration has made it clear that they consider him an enemy of the state and that they are fine with the precedents of how such individuals are treated (ie., rights don't apply to you).

Basically, it boils down to respect. Dr. King Jr. hated some of the BS laws and social injustices in the South, but he respected the justice and good intentions of the US Government in general at the time. Snowden, on the other hand, had firsthand knowledge and proof that our government doesn't deserve such respect from us. They lie, they shit on the constitution, and they have the audacity to call him a criminal.

So, fuck them. They've pushed the line too goddamn far to expect civil disobedience; I think they clearly deserve every bit of blowback they get in the form of uncivil disobedience. Hell, I hope that Snowden has enough more dirt that he can turn the dial up to 11 and get into downright nasty disobedience if the government steps a single corrupt toe out of line in their attempts to extradite him back to their bullshit kangaroo courts.

I don't think Snowden should turn himself in for the simple fact that he has a ton more things that would really piss off the US, according to Glenn Greenwald. I almost want him to get taken out somehow so that ALL that stuff gets dumped. The US is an Empire and it needs to be taken the hell down before our entire planet gets crushed by it. Reboot the experiment, shows over, destroy those in charge.

If I thought he would actually get a fair trial, I would agree with you.

But let's be honest, if the US gets hold of him, he'll disappear into Guantanamo, probably be "enhancedly interrogated" and the best he could hope for would be a military tribunal in a decade or two.

Nice idea but those in charge are simply too rich to give a crap about the downfall of the US Empire. They bleed this country dry but in the end, like a Tick, they can move on to another host. You're dealing with super wealthy single individuals and corporations. They have control over they country but no liability towards it. The US government is just an investment.

And regarding Snowden? He should learn to sleep with one eye open. His civil rights are nonexistant at this point.

If the USA threatened Russia in any way Russia could join the EU or gang up with China. No cold war this time. Plus too much communication these days.

Snowden would not be doing his cause any favours if he turned him in. They're calling him a terrorist, ffs. He'd end up in a 6x10 cell in Guantanamo and we'd never hear his evidence.

Well, the main distinction really is that MLK and others in the Civil Rights movement broke laws in order to show the injustice of those very laws. Going to trial and living through the punishment was part of the demonstration of the absurdity of the laws themselves.

The only law that Snowden broke (IMO) was the unauthorized release of classified/secret information. He didn't break that law to show the absurdity of the US government's secrecy regime (though it is out of control), he did it to notify the US and the world citizenry of the extent of US surveillance of electronic communications. Getting punish for breaking the law does not serve his objective of informing and sparking debate, it only restricts his ability to continue to engage on these issues.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag.(show it anyway)

Sift of the week! Great video.

No, no, no... that was the last administration; this is the drone strike administration.

Exactomundo! Bush locked people up without trial, Obama just murders them.

I read recently that the only person who has seen jail time for all that torture stuff that happened in Iraq was the whistle blower who reported it.

Yeah, keep exporting Freedom, America!

What he's doing now is probably the most effective way of getting the word out. Going to trial, even if that happened and he didn't simply disappear or die or get locked up in some concentration camp, would be unlikely to do much. The trial would simply be held behind closed doors and all documents sealed on national security grounds.