He also helped the CIA & the corrupt regime under obummer avoid detection whilst they were crafting their Iran deal by exposing the NSA sigint tools unknown to those being surveiled. He also revealed tools that were used internationally & let loose to our 'allies' that they were being spied on which gave us a black eye & removed our collection capability.
A couple of users in the thread are shilling pretty hard for snowden - I wonder why?
A collection capability which should have been made public from day 1 and has otherwise been used in surveillance of the entire US citizenry. That collection capability has been rightfully exposed, should be made legally impossible, and should be completely dismantled and destroyed.
Finally what is all this CIA talk? Do you have proof of this "at the behest of the CIA" stuff? Proof that he was acting on orders? lots of disinformation in this thread... "I wonder why?"
Another user posted a link to snowden's CIA service record - if you had intellectual curiosity vs trying to keep people on the plantation, you would have looked it up yourself & not bothered to ask for it to be posted again. Where is your 'proof' that he was not acting at the behest of the CIA? Once a CIA agent, always a CIA agent, & snowden was/is a CIA agent... You & 'blacksunfun1' have an inexplicable fancy for defending snowden's honor...
"prove that snowden didn't act on behalf of the CIA"
Edward Snowden, like all of us, is innocent until proven guilty- of all assertions, including your own.
my time is special (as should everyone's be) - you want me to look at a service record? link it yourself- you are, after all, the one making the argument here. otherwise, you haven't countered my argument, you're making someone else do your legwork.
further, simply stating that someone "worked for the CIA" is not in and of itself an assertion that someone acted on behalf of the CIA when they went rogue against the government itself.
'you are, after all, the one making the argument here.'
I'd argue that we are both making an assertion - mine is that snowden is not trustworthy & yours is that he is trustworthy. Use some of your 'precious time' to perform your due diligence - I've done mine & arrived at my conclusion. Nothing I say will change your mind, the only one capable of doing that is you.
He also helped the CIA & the corrupt regime under obummer avoid detection whilst they were crafting their Iran deal by exposing the NSA sigint tools unknown to those being surveiled. He also revealed tools that were used internationally & let loose to our 'allies' that they were being spied on which gave us a black eye & removed our collection capability.
A couple of users in the thread are shilling pretty hard for snowden - I wonder why?
A collection capability which should have been made public from day 1 and has otherwise been used in surveillance of the entire US citizenry. That collection capability has been rightfully exposed, should be made legally impossible, and should be completely dismantled and destroyed.
Finally what is all this CIA talk? Do you have proof of this "at the behest of the CIA" stuff? Proof that he was acting on orders? lots of disinformation in this thread... "I wonder why?"
Another user posted a link to snowden's CIA service record - if you had intellectual curiosity vs trying to keep people on the plantation, you would have looked it up yourself & not bothered to ask for it to be posted again. Where is your 'proof' that he was not acting at the behest of the CIA? Once a CIA agent, always a CIA agent, & snowden was/is a CIA agent... You & 'blacksunfun1' have an inexplicable fancy for defending snowden's honor...
"prove that trump didn't collude w/ russia"
is the same type of argument as
"prove that snowden didn't act on behalf of the CIA"
Edward Snowden, like all of us, is innocent until proven guilty- of all assertions, including your own.
my time is special (as should everyone's be) - you want me to look at a service record? link it yourself- you are, after all, the one making the argument here. otherwise, you haven't countered my argument, you're making someone else do your legwork.
further, simply stating that someone "worked for the CIA" is not in and of itself an assertion that someone acted on behalf of the CIA when they went rogue against the government itself.
'you are, after all, the one making the argument here.'
I'd argue that we are both making an assertion - mine is that snowden is not trustworthy & yours is that he is trustworthy. Use some of your 'precious time' to perform your due diligence - I've done mine & arrived at my conclusion. Nothing I say will change your mind, the only one capable of doing that is you.