There are those who would be our masters.

[Nonsensei]

Snowden has officially been charged with espionage amongst two other charges, which add up to a total of 30 years in prison. Presumably many more charges will be forthcoming to ensure that he never sees the light of day again.

I was surprised to hear espionage among the charges, as I remember a time when that charge was reserved for spies who funnelled top secret information to a foreign government. At first I thought that the federal government must know something about Snowden and his actions that we do not. However that was not the case.

It turns out that the definition of espionage has been broadened to such a degree that the act of revealing any sensitive information to literally anyone makes you a spy. Even in doing a tremendous service to the world by revealing the Orwellian spying operations being deployed against law abiding citizens all over the world, you would be considered a spy. It is no longer about endangering the United States and its citizens by revealing secret information to an enemy. It is about revealing information that the federal government does not want revealed. This shift in the meaning of the term espionage has resulted in a criminal category that is antagonistic toward the interests of the american people while serving those of the federal government.

This mutation of meaning reminded me of a similar case, namely with the definition of terrorism. I remember reading about a case where a man joked about shooting up his office on facebook. He was arrested on charges of being a terrorist, and brought before a judge where he had to explain that he was not serious. He was eventually let go, but not before being labeled as a terrorist in the public eye and having his life and reputation ruined.

The alteration of the meaning of words is the leading edge of a psychological attack on the american people. In broadening the definitions of crimes and offenses to such a degree that almost any offense can fit under them, while simultaneously ensuring that you are able to pry much farther into the personal lives of citizens than they previously suspected was possible you create a situation in which people begin to watch what they say our of fear that an offhand remark might land them in Guantanamo Bay.

That is the beginning of the end for our civil liberties. The de facto suppression of freedom of speech and thought. The terrorization of the american psyche, an attempt to force citizens to abdicate their rights out of fear. Not fear of an external attack this time, but rather a fear of our own government. The people currently leading our country have apparently decided that individual rights and an empowered citizenry are an impediment to their goals and this is how they plan to subvert our way of life.

While you are typing out your response that involves the phrase tinfoil hat just keep in mind the number of components to my argument that are undisputable fact.

[Solitary]

It just keeps getting worse doesn't. We are moving very fast towards, or are, a fascist country now. I think we already are in Arizona with Arpaio's storm troopers and tent city. Next we will be a Christian theocracy. Solitary

[Elohim]

It was my understanding that he revealed the nature of the nsa's cyber attacks on the Chinese to the Chinese. Would that fall into the traditional definition of espionage?

[Jmpty]

Snowden has officially been charged with espionage amongst two other charges, which add up to a total of 30 years in prison. Presumably many more charges will be forthcoming to ensure that he never sees the light of day again.

I was surprised to hear espionage among the charges, as I remember a time when that charge was reserved for spies who funnelled top secret information to a foreign government. At first I thought that the federal government must know something about Snowden and his actions that we do not. However that was not the case.

It turns out that the definition of espionage has been broadened to such a degree that the act of revealing any sensitive information to literally anyone makes you a spy. Even in doing a tremendous service to the world by revealing the Orwellian spying operations being deployed against law abiding citizens all over the world, you would be considered a spy. It is no longer about endangering the United States and its citizens by revealing secret information to an enemy. It is about revealing information that the federal government does not want revealed. This shift in the meaning of the term espionage has resulted in a criminal category that is antagonistic toward the interests of the american people while serving those of the federal government.

This mutation of meaning reminded me of a similar case, namely with the definition of terrorism. I remember reading about a case where a man joked about shooting up his office on facebook. He was arrested on charges of being a terrorist, and brought before a judge where he had to explain that he was not serious. He was eventually let go, but not before being labeled as a terrorist in the public eye and having his life and reputation ruined.

The alteration of the meaning of words is the leading edge of a psychological attack on the american people. In broadening the definitions of crimes and offenses to such a degree that almost any offense can fit under them, while simultaneously ensuring that you are able to pry much farther into the personal lives of citizens than they previously suspected was possible you create a situation in which people begin to watch what they say our of fear that an offhand remark might land them in Guantanamo Bay.

That is the beginning of the end for our civil liberties. The de facto suppression of freedom of speech and thought. The terrorization of the american psyche, an attempt to force citizens to abdicate their rights out of fear. Not fear of an external attack this time, but rather a fear of our own government. The people currently leading our country have apparently decided that individual rights and an empowered citizenry are an impediment to their goals and this is how they plan to subvert our way of life.

While you are typing out your response that involves the phrase tinfoil hat just keep in mind the number of components to my argument that are undisputable fact.

Which is what he did.

[Plu]

Pretty sure nobody's at war with China. Unless you guys have a very different understanding of "enemy" as the common one, anyway.

[Elohim]

Revealing information to a foreign government is espionage regardless of whether or not they are an enemy in the traditional sense of the word. If someone leaked blueprints for a new generation fighter jet to Canada without permission it would still be an act of espionage.

[Aupmanyav]

Espionage should be punishable with death.

[Plu]

Actually kinda reminds me of this again.

[Plu]

Actually kinda reminds me of this again.

[Hydra009]

Which is what he did.

How did he endanger the United States and its citizens by blowing the whistle on a domestic spying program?   :-?

[Jmpty]

Which is what he did.

How did he endanger the United States and its citizens by blowing the whistle on a domestic spying program?   :-?

Explain "Domestic spying program." By calling it that, you reveal that you don't really know what the NSA actually did, what they monitored, what their limitations were, and why they did it. This guy, by revealing the program, rendered a very effective tool being used to combat international terrorism, useless. This is tantamount to telling an enemy what your battle strategy is going to be. Treason.
Bradley Manning is a different case. He, in my opinion, revealed war crimes, and should be given consideration as such.

[AllPurposeAtheist]

First you go by the assumption this guy is completely innocent and only doing his patriotic duty. Revealing government secrets whether you like those secrets or not is still illegal. The mere fact that he revealed secrets you don't like doesn't make him a hero or anything. It does however bring him under the scrutiny of the government. Governments have always and will always have secrets and revealing them when they're classified doesn't make you a hero and in fact makes you a criminal. Crimes aren't null and void merely for being unpopular.

[Nonsensei]

Which is what he did.

How did he endanger the United States and its citizens by blowing the whistle on a domestic spying program?   :-?

Explain "Domestic spying program." By calling it that, you reveal that you don't really know what the NSA actually did, what they monitored, what their limitations were, and why they did it. This guy, by revealing the program, rendered a very effective tool being used to combat international terrorism, useless. This is tantamount to telling an enemy what your battle strategy is going to be. Treason.
Bradley Manning is a different case. He, in my opinion, revealed war crimes, and should be given consideration as such.

Actually the one revealing his ignorance on what the NSA is currently doing (not did, as in past tense but is still doing right now) is yourself. First of all is the subject of their limitations. The scope of their ability to intrude upon our privacy is unlimited. They can and do have access to all the internet and phone activity of every US citizen without limitation. While they are regularly given metadata such as call length, time, and other similar types of information it has also been revealed that if the NSA wishes it may have access to the full content of any phone or internet activity of any american citizen without the need for even a warrant with the secret FISA court. Such an invasion of privacy is completely up to the individual NSA analyst who is restricted by absolutely no legal oversight or barriers.

Second is the assertion that this was a "very effective tool being used to combat international terrorism". To start with I feel that this statement carries with it a certain amount of inherent naivete. To be blunt, this assertion is the result of the federal government claiming that it has used this to thwart terrorist plots. No evidence of such thwartings has ever been provided and when asked for the request is denied citing national security. In essence, by believing a totally unconfirmed counterterrorist track record you are taking the federal government at its word. The unprecedented amount of power this privacy destroying practice affords the federal government makes its motives untrustworthy.

In addition there is a presumption here that it is absolutely necessary for the NSA to have complete, unlimited access to all public and private digital activity of every american citizen everywhere in order to safeguard our country against terrorism. I do not see how this aggregate approach to intelligence gathering even serves that goal unless the federal government considers any and every citizen to be a potential threat. And then theres the elephant in the room. Terrorists aren't stupid. Theres no way they would ever plot an attack using their registered verizon serviced smartphone or any other overwhelmingly popular medium. To suggest that this information gathering extravaganza will somehow reveal terrorist plots is one of the most intellectually insulting assertions ive ever seen. There really is no philosophical difference between what the NSA is doing, and requiring live video cameras in the homes of every citizen to ensure that no terrorists are operating within the country. Under this approach to counter terrorism every US citizen is a suspect by default and the rule of law and due process is overthrown for the sake of preventing terrorist plots that they refuse to inform us anything about.

How long until this power is abused, by the way? How long until an incumbent president in danger of losing reelection has a miraculous recovery in the polls due to the anonymous release of some well selected private communications of his opponent? How long until lawsuits against the federal government start getting dropped or dismissed because some now private information came to light about the people suing that, while immaterial to the case, call their motives or integrity into question?

The scope and power of this new tool is so vast it cannot be accurately measured. You really expect them to just use it to combat terrorism? Are you really comfortable trusting them to not become corrupt?

If so, i am stunned at your naivete. Make no mistake. Snowden did an immeasurable service to US citizens, and most recently UK citizens as well by making this information public. The rule of law may label him as a traitor, but I know better than that and frankly so do you even if you wont admit it.

[AllPurposeAtheist]

So you assume the worse of our government and want to grant full license to anyone to disclose any and all secrets you may or may not like. You can't have it both ways. Either our government has the capability to secretly investigate criminal or terroristic organizations or they do not. If not then you're giving terrorists and criminals free license to operate with impunity.

[Plu]

much?