ABC This Week anchor Martha Raddatz (5/11/14) introduced a lookback at the Edward Snowden/NSA stories by saying, “A year later, Snowden still sparks a raging debate.” But the show sure had a funny way of illustrating that fierce debate–with two guests who both attacked Snowden for revealing the extent of NSA spying.
Correspondent Pierre Thomas interviewed former NSA chief Keith Alexander, which Thomas introduced with this:
Edward Snowden is a traitor and could be a spy recruited by Russia to target the US. That’s the suspicion of the man who was running the NSA when the breach happened last year.
But that seemed to overstate even Alexander’s claims about Snowden, who admitted that he couldn’t say whether Snowden was a spy. (“Is he a spy?” “I don’t know the answer to that.” So much for Raddatz’s teaser: “Coming up, is Edward Snowden a spy?”)
But Alexander did say, as Thomas summarized, that thanks to Snowden, “nations have our surveillance playbook and terrorists have changed how they operate.” Why anyone would find Alexander a credible source is another matter (FAIR Blog, 10/14/13).
And for the other side in the Snowden debate, Raddatz brought in ABC contributor and former national security aide Richard Clarke. To him, Snowden “hurt our counterterrorism efforts” because he
revealed ways that NSA collects information. And the terrorists, and others, criminals and others around the world, have stopped using those methods of communication since he revealed them.
In other words, Clarke basically said the very same thing Alexander said. And it’s a claim that requires one to believe not only that terrorists did not know before Snowden that the US government would be tracking their communications, but also that the NSA was especially useful in uncovering terrorist plots to begin with.
As Clarke claimed: “We no longer have the heads-up that an attack is coming on our embassy in fill in the blank because of what he did.” The reality is that there is little to no evidence that NSA’s metadata dragnet has prevented terrorist attacks against the US (Gizmodo, 1/13/14).
The only dissenting view came in a two-sentence soundbite from Anthony Romero of the ACLU, who says that the debate over surveillance “would never have happened but for the actions of Edward Snowden.”
Now if only media outlets like ABC could give that debate a little more in the way of balance.
I’m shocked that they are going to try and discredit Snowden and put out things about him to try and sway public opinion. He gave up everything he had and everything he would have had. The big search engines are one of the worst invaders of privacy. They are in bed with our Government, I have been using a non tracking private search engine http://LookSeek.com for about a year to protect myself.
Give Raddatz a dictionary to look up the word “debate.”
Why would anyone be shocked to find out the worst human rights Violators in the world would try and discredit the person who outed them.
The only surprise here, should be that the American Public actually buys into the nonsense spewed by the NSA and the Fux Snooze Nitwork about the whole operation, and “how it keeps us safe”.
Snowden should be given everything we would give a hero
In the history books in fifty years Snowden will be considered as an American who changed the US, much more than any of the US Presidents of the XXI century.
One can’t claim that one has Democracy, if one assumes the right to read the correspondence of the WHOLE WORLD. Snowden told the world that our government has violated the rights of all the rest of the world countries, including the very citizens of the U.S. I for one never gave to my government my permission to read my emails, or listen to my conversations, or spy on me in any shape or form. There is no justification for the abuse of power by any government, might does not make right, having super technology does not mean that one can use illegally. What legacy did Hitler, and Stalin leave? President Bush, and Obama will be recorded in history as violators of Democracy, like Nixon and his ‘plumbers.’ Is there anything left that the spooks can not control, can they read our minds too?
So.. because of Snowden we were not able to predict Bengazi?????!!!!!
Im always amazed that Snowden is not seen for what he is.To his credit he never lied about it.He freely admitted that he lied and cheated his way into the job with one purpose.He would steal all he could(without ever knowing what he stole until later)..and hopefully prove that the Us was doing “bad things” once he could look at the material.Well he came up with a few gems.I liken it to a man running for the Senate for one purpose.To have access to the oval office.there he can steal everything he can shove into a briefcase and run like hell,handing it off to FOX news on his way to the airport and a one way ticket to Russia.Once there off course Snowden had all his files compromised by the KGB.They would not even have to threaten the little shit.Just dope him and copy it.So millions of bits are data were compromised.Ok so what to do- what to do.Well he is guilty.Not a whistle blower since he never had an inkling of what he was stealing.Not a spy I dont think.A guy who wanted fame with a side order of having an ax to grind is my guess.So we the people thank him for that info that did end up helping.We hope no one dies from the security breech ,but hell we will never know that.So yes he should be in jail under any number of charges for ages.Going to Russia knowing full well that they will fleece him of all his data may paint him as a traitor but Im not so sure.More likely he has a lot of scared coward in him and was in way over his head.Taking help from anyone who offered it.To me he is a putz who in the end may of hurt more than he helped.Or even helped more than he hurt.But I do take note that few in government on either side…..Our representatives big and small consider him as anything but a traitor.
David Hollister, my understanding is that Bengazi was known to be the HQ of various fundamentalist Islamic groups, so an attack on the consulate should have come as no surprise to anyone in the U.S. government. Either they wanted the attack or they’re as stupid as they look and sound.
“And it’s a claim that requires one to believe not only that terrorists did not know before Snowden that the US government would be tracking their communications, but also that the NSA was especially useful in uncovering terrorist plots to begin with.” This statement sounds reasonable on the surface, but is in fact not helpful in understanding the issues. Terrorists and others would or should know in general what NSA does, but it is clear that they continued to use vulnerable communications channels, money laundering channels, and other tactics until their nose was rubbed in the fact that they were vulnerable. The same principle applies to many other breaches of security on sources and methods — the bad guys took steps to change practices which we might have assumed they would have known to be vulnerable. Think closer to home — do you have a password written on the bottom of your mousepad? A PIN number in your wallet? A housekey under a flowerpot? And then….
Snowden is a national hero of the same ilk as Daniel Ellsberg, a man with inordinate responsibility for exposing the fraud of our involvement in the debacle called the Vietnam War. Isn’t it ironical that we fought against fascism during World War II but now embrace its tenets: state-sponsored propaganda?
Has FAIR ever addressed the issue of Mossad’s (Israeli FBI) filming 9/11 and the operatives dancing, laughing, high fifing, and celebrating? The internet is full of the account, but many people holding dual citizenship with Israel deny it. I have inquired of our FBI under the Freedom of Information Act the details of its investigation only to be stonewalled. It is very important for governments to control its citizens’ access to information.
Michael E,
I believe that you are familiar with the Supreme Court Justice Brandeis’ famous decisions regarding wire tapping, and other illegal government measure. Here is one that I believe fits this particular case (Snowden):
• Decency, security, and liberty alike demand that government officials shall be subjected to the same rules of conduct that are commands to the citizen. In a government of laws, existence of the government will be imperiled if it fails to observe the law scrupulously. Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. To declare that in the administration of the criminal law the end justifies the means — to declare that the government may commit crimes in order to secure the conviction of a private criminal — would bring terrible retribution. Against that pernicious doctrine this court should resolutely set its face.
o Dissenting, Olmstead v. United States, 277 U.S. 438 (1928).
yeah… don’t bother to read mike’s posts. If you do, don’t bother arguing with him. Just smile and nod like with an Alzheimer’s patient who think’s Regan is still in office.
Carter,
I tend to be more liberal, than conservative, yet, I pride myself that for every liberal article I read, I try to read at least 3-5 very conservative pieces. We shall descend into Dark Ages when we listen, and read, only those articles, opinions that are in agreement with ours, what ever our leanings are. Our Constitution, and The Bill of Rights have made The Right to Free Speech a SINE QUA NON, (an indispensable condition). There is NO difference between the spoken, or the written word, both are protected by our Laws. So, our emails are just as off limits for the ‘guardians’ of liberty, as is our right to say what we think.
One of the first whistle blowers (post WW2) was an agent from the CIA Philip Agee who wrote INSIDE THE COMPANY (Diary of the CIA.) I have that book, and have read it, was very impressed by it, and agree with his findings, and conclusions. I personally recommend for all patriotic Americans who care about our freedom, to read that book.
Snowden raises the same question as one finds in JUVENAL: ( vI, 347), “Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?” Who will guard the guards? That question was raised by the Roman Senate, and before them the ancient Greeks (Socrates), however some defended the State’s right to eliminate the free speech Machiavelli, Metternich, Hegel, and of course Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin, Hoover, Nixon, and few other psychopathic tyrants. Snowden opened our eyes to see that we DO live in the near Orwellian State (1984). My hat off to him, Agee, and the rest of those who were willing to risk it ALL to fight the oppression, and injustice.
“Truth is treason in the Emopire of Lies”
-Oops!
“Truth is treason the Empire of Lies.”
I am so sick and tired of people defending this coward and traitor. Anyone who believes his ridiculous claims of being a whistleblower is as delusional as he is. Other than contempt, the only thing he deserves is a fair trial for treason. If he is convicted like he should be, he needs to be hung. END OF STORY!