We recently addressed the irony associated with Mother Russia’s receptiveness toward Edward Snowden – the heroic former contractor for the National Security Agency (NSA) who earlier this year exposed the federal government’s massive domestic spying program.
Snowden has since been granted temporary asylum by Russia – much to the chagrin of the United States of America, which wants him extradited back home to face criminal charges. Offering some spot-on commentary on this bizarre twist of fate is Jeffrey Tucker of The Laissez Faire Club in a post entitled “Thank You, Russia.”
“Edward, as everyone knows, is on the run for having revealed to the American people that their government is logging every communication and storing it for later use,” Tucker wrote. “In other words, Edward is in big trouble for revealing that our government is doing to its own citizens what the U.S. once accused Russia of doing to its citizens.”
Tuckers goes on to say he is “as glad as the next guy that ‘we’ won the Cold War,” but adds “you just have to wonder: What was the point of those 45 years of nuclear stalemate? All that time, we were told that this was a mighty struggle between individualism and collectivism, between freedom and tyranny, between capitalism and communism.”
Indeed, that was the basic construct of the Cold War – and the reason thousands of Americans were sent to points all over the globe to fight and die (including 58,282 who lost their lives in Vietnam).
“The humiliation is increased for Americans to see our former enemies … now providing a safe haven to a young man who told the truth about the U.S. surveillance state,” Tucker concludes.
How true … for any American who truly loves freedom, the Snowden saga is more than terrifying: It is humiliating. In fact it is one of the strongest, most unambiguous messages our nation has ever sent the rest of the world.
That message? “Do as we say, not as we do.”
62 comments
I hope Snowden doesn’t stay in Russia for long. For all we know Russia could use him later to bargain a deal with the US. Better to find a way to sneak to a country where your asylum is a bit more guaranteed.
A South American country is where he will be heading.
You’re probably right. I don’t think he’ll chance going to a European country as we’ve already seen any plane suspected of harboring Snowden will be forced to land and searched by a few EU countries.
I hope Snowden doesn’t stay in Russia for long. For all we know Russia could use him later to bargain a deal with the US. Better to find a way to sneak to a country where your asylum is a bit more guaranteed.
A South American country is where he will be heading.
You’re probably right. I don’t think he’ll chance going to a European country as we’ve already seen any plane suspected of harboring Snowden will be forced to land and searched by a few EU countries.
I don’t get why you call Russia’s receptiveness to Snowden, Irony. It clearly is not. Russia considers the US its number one enemy in the world. That has not changed since the end of the cold war. Its simply using Snowden to gain information on the US’s intelligence network and as anti-US propaganda. That is not irony. That is business as usual.
The irony is not the twist, that is Snowden’s current location. The irony is that Russia, dead set against freedom and individualism of any kind, treats the hero’s of These United States of America better than the fracking libitard commie gubmint empleados of this country, comrade.
Have a Great Day!! :) There won’t be many left with the Leftists and Marxists that are in Congress and the WH (and the SCOTUS) today. :)
I doubt Snowden has information that is truly “useful” to Russia. They are using him to piss off a US administration that has demanded Snowden’s return in a very undiplomatic way. I hope they never send him back.
yep yep. Mmmm Hmm
I don’t get why you call Russia’s receptiveness to Snowden, Irony. It clearly is not. Russia considers the US its number one enemy in the world. That has not changed since the end of the cold war. Its simply using Snowden to gain information on the US’s intelligence network and as anti-US propaganda. That is not irony. That is business as usual.
The irony is not the twist, that is Snowden’s current location. The irony is that Russia, dead set against freedom and individualism of any kind, treats the hero’s of These United States of America better than the fracking libitard commie gubmint empleados of this country, comrade.
Have a Great Day!! :) There won’t be many left with the Leftists and Marxists that are in Congress and the WH (and the SCOTUS) today. :)
I doubt Snowden has information that is truly “useful” to Russia. They are using him to piss off a US administration that has demanded Snowden’s return in a very undiplomatic way. I hope they never send him back.
yep yep. Mmmm Hmm
The irony is that Snowden fled to a country that still doesn’t give a damn about the civil liberties that he claims to cherish.
As for the revelations about the NSA, I put it in the “dog bites man” category. The only thing that surprised me about this whole episode is that a high school dropout was able to get in the position to reveal that information.
The apathy of so many bothers me. So just because some feel this level of snooping is “inevitable” we should tolerate it? Or just because we aren’t surprised that they are abusing their powers (and the Constitution) we should just yawn and say, “ho hum, is anyone really surprised.”
Even if this doesn’t surprise you, it should at least disgust you.
Lots more folks these days quoting Reagan concerning liberty being fleeting.
“The only thing that surprised me about this whole episode is that a high school dropout was able to get in the position to reveal that information.”
If you take that on a case by case basis, why does it always come to the same conclusion? Every whistle blower is a failing because they have clearance they shouldn’t. Even if you hypothetically, single-handedly, built PRISM and had something bad to say about it, the conclusion will be that you same. We are men, not machines and we need a real framework for dealing with abuses, real or imagined, that can’t automatically fall back on “if the wheel squeaks, it is too damn close to the machinery”. If we keep falling back on this, as we almost always do, the problem will only continue. If we shouldn’t be so shocked that PRISM is going on, why should we act so shocked that the whistle blowing problem persists?
The irony is that Snowden fled to a country that still doesn’t give a damn about the civil liberties that he claims to cherish.
As for the revelations about the NSA, I put it in the “dog bites man” category. The only thing that surprised me about this whole episode is that a high school dropout was able to get in the position to reveal that information.
The apathy of so many bothers me. So just because some feel this level of snooping is “inevitable” we should tolerate it? Or just because we aren’t surprised that they are abusing their powers (and the Constitution) we should just yawn and say, “ho hum, is anyone really surprised.”
Even if this doesn’t surprise you, it should at least disgust you.
Lots more folks these days quoting Reagan concerning liberty being fleeting.
“The only thing that surprised me about this whole episode is that a high school dropout was able to get in the position to reveal that information.”
If you take that on a case by case basis, why does it always come to the same conclusion? Every whistle blower is a failing because they have clearance they shouldn’t. Even if you hypothetically, single-handedly, built PRISM and had something bad to say about it, the conclusion will be that you same. We are men, not machines and we need a real framework for dealing with abuses, real or imagined, that can’t automatically fall back on “if the wheel squeaks, it is too damn close to the machinery”. If we keep falling back on this, as we almost always do, the problem will only continue. If we shouldn’t be so shocked that PRISM is going on, why should we act so shocked that the whistle blowing problem persists?
Really? Now the former Soviet Union n/k/a Russia are the guys in white hats?
While defending the last 6 or 7 years (regarding domestic surveillance) since this started (I thought it was “The Patriot Act?) is impossible to do , to reject our efforts in fighting the Cold War and since are totally over the top. Certainly as they would occur
(Viet Nam, etc.) protesting is a great American tradition. To paint everything with a “we wore the black hats” is absurd.
We always have been and always will be the good guys. Even good guys make mistakes in defending themselves from the enemy.
I agree. I don’t think anyone is saying they are the white hats now, just that the hats worn by the commies in office in the USSA are a whole lot darker. :)
Unfortunately, the world is not so black-and-white that you can categorize some as the “good guys” and others as the “bad guys.”
Are the “good guys” the ones spying on their citizens without any suspicion of wrongdoing?
I don’t really care what the Russians are doing to their people. That’s irrelevant. What’s relevant is the massive snooping operation that’s being carried out by our government targeting people indiscriminately. I do not trust a government that does not trust me.
Uh yeah. Sarcasm is not always written in bold. But the article (Tucker) puts the U.S. on the same domestic spying plane as say,the K.G.B.??
“What was the point of those 45 years of nuclear stalemate? All that time, we were told that this was a mighty struggle between individualism and collectivism, between freedom and tyranny, between capitalism and communism.”
Many American citizens said after 9/11 that they wanted to be safe. They didn’t care what it took. “I haven’t done anything wrong”. “They” can search whatever “they” want. Remember? So now are those (I wasn’t one of them) the same people who are shocked about The Patriot Act 2013 ? Again, I absolutely will not defend domestic spying
but watch out what you ask for……you may get it.
My bad. Based on some other posts you have written I didn’t realize that you were being sarcastic. When we talk to each other, tone, inflection, and body language cue us to statements that are sarcastic — all of which is missing in written words alone.
Really? Now the former Soviet Union n/k/a Russia are the guys in white hats?
While defending the last 6 or 7 years (regarding domestic surveillance) since this started (I thought it was “The Patriot Act?) is impossible to do , to reject our efforts in fighting the Cold War and since are totally over the top. Certainly as they would occur
(Viet Nam, etc.) protesting is a great American tradition. To paint everything with a “we wore the black hats” is absurd.
We always have been and always will be the good guys. Even good guys make mistakes in defending themselves from the enemy.
I agree. I don’t think anyone is saying they are the white hats now, just that the hats worn by the commies in office in the USSA are a whole lot darker. :)
Unfortunately, the world is not so black-and-white that you can categorize some as the “good guys” and others as the “bad guys.”
Are the “good guys” the ones spying on their citizens without any suspicion of wrongdoing?
I don’t really care what the Russians are doing to their people. That’s irrelevant. What’s relevant is the massive snooping operation that’s being carried out by our government targeting people indiscriminately. I do not trust a government that does not trust me.
Uh yeah. Sarcasm is not always written in bold. But the article (Tucker) puts the U.S. on the same domestic spying plane as say,the K.G.B.??
“What was the point of those 45 years of nuclear stalemate? All that time, we were told that this was a mighty struggle between individualism and collectivism, between freedom and tyranny, between capitalism and communism.”
Many American citizens said after 9/11 that they wanted to be safe. They didn’t care what it took. “I haven’t done anything wrong”. “They” can search whatever “they” want. Remember? So now are those (I wasn’t one of them) the same people who are shocked about The Patriot Act 2013 ? Again, I absolutely will not defend domestic spying
but watch out what you ask for……you may get it.
My bad. Based on some other posts you have written I didn’t realize that you were being sarcastic. When we talk to each other, tone, inflection, and body language cue us to statements that are sarcastic — all of which is missing in written words alone.
I guess I am tired of the Faux outrage and the Faux scandal. We have known about this program since 2006. We know how to end it. We need to make changes to the FISA. Everyone is outraged, but no one is saying, why did Congress make this possible? Why hasn’t Congress done anything to change it? No one is saying call your Congressman and demand changes to the FISA, restoring court independence and reestablishing liability for companies who provide private information to the government without a warrant.
The reason that is the case, is because this outrage makes for good partisan politics. Its not real. If Mitt Romney were President, Snowden would be called a spy and a traitor by most of the people who are now calling him a hero. Congress is afraid to shut down the program and then have to answer why our intelligence agencies did not catch a terrorist plot that killed hundreds or thousands of Americans. Besides why complain when you can bash the current administration without risk?
So here is the deal. If the letter of the law permits our intelligence agencies and law enforcement agencies to do what they have been doing since 2004, you can expect this and every future administration to use it, whether far left, far right or middle of the road. If you are from SC and you believe Snowden is a hero, then get on the phone with your Republican legislator, all of whom voted for the laws making this possible, and demand they change the law. Call them out a town hall meeting for their support of domestic spying. Call them out for not making an effort to dismantle this program. I won’t hold my breath for that to occur. Its too easy to say, look what Obama is doing we have to get him out.
Nice cover libitard. How many Demlicans voted for this crap as well?
I don’t have a Democrat in Washington to complain to. I wrote my Congressman, Mick Mulvaney, and former Senator, Jim Demint, and my current Senator Lindsay Graham, in 2006 complaining about changes they were making to the FISA. I received no response from any of them, except we need a strong defense against terrorists. We appreciate your concern.
Then why should everyone call their Republitard Legislator. How about those Demlicans. They need some love too?
And respectfully, you probably should have started back long before 2006. Like sometime in the ’20’s. I appreciate you haven’t been around that long. The point is this didn’t start yesterday and maybe all those tin foil hats you (the ‘lucid, responsible folk’) have been talking about looking so silly, well….
Have a Great Day!! :) There won’t be many left with the Demlicans and the Republicrats in charge!! :)
Well if you are from South Carolina there is only one Democrat, Clyburn. He voted no on the extension of the Patriot Act, and No on the 2006 Amendments to the FISA. I agreed on both of those things.
Good for you.
The problem with FISA is that John Roberts has appointed 11 authoritarian Republican judges since he’s been on the court.
Bullshit. We didn’t know about the mass collection of phone records until Snowden revealed it. We didn’t know the extent of internet collection (with the forced help from ISPs) until Snowden revealed it. We also didn’t know just how far the FISA courts were interpreting the government’s powers under the FISA and Patriot Acts.
Partisan politics should be irrelevant. It was wrong under Bush and it’s wrong under Obama.
Tell it brother
If you did not know you were not listening. Please tell me you remember the law Congress passed to provide retroactive protection to the wireless phone companies for giving the government all that “metadata” without a warrant. Surely you recall the testimony by the employees for the Wireless companies who claimed the NSA had set up offices within those companies for the collection of “metadata” and they had the capabilities of intercepting all telephone calls. Do you not recall the 2006 USA Today report that the NSA had “been secretly collecting the phone call records of tens of millions of Americans, using data provided by AT&T, Verizon and BellSouth” and was “using the data to analyze calling patterns in an effort to detect terrorist activity.”
What was it you thought the Government was getting? Did you think the Wireless companies were not being forced to cooperate?
I agree partisan politics should be irrelevant but that is not what is happening.
You are right. I was not paying attention to some vague 2006 USA Today article that I had never heard about until people tried to rationalize the current snooping by saying “geez, why didn’t complain about it earlier” — as if that really matters.
I have now read this 2006 article, that quotes “sources” and quotes Bush as confirming that the program does NOT capture purely intra-country calls made by Americans. Apparently, the USA Today also backed away from part of its story, which may also be another reason it did not gain much traction.
What happened in Snowden’s case, however, was not the mere publication of unverified sources, but rather the publication of an actual court order from a secret court, interpreting the FISA to allow dragnet searches of everybody because, as NSA alleges, such a wide search could be relevant to a terrorist investigation. The FISA court was supposed to be a means of limiting searches; and instead we learned that they were just a rubber stamp for aggressive requests.
We also learned, for the first time, about the Prism program. Before we knew that they could collect routing information such as IP addresses under a dubious interpretation of pen trap laws, but now they are collecting actual content of emails, videos, photos, etc. (even where innocent americans are a party) and have direct access into servers. Before this we knew they could filter data but content searches required a warrant and they could only collect IP addressed based on a court order (but one that did not require a warrant).
I guess I am tired of the Faux outrage and the Faux scandal. We have known about this program since 2006. We know how to end it. We need to make changes to the FISA. Everyone is outraged, but no one is saying, why did Congress make this possible? Why hasn’t Congress done anything to change it? No one is saying call your Congressman and demand changes to the FISA, restoring court independence and reestablishing liability for companies who provide private information to the government without a warrant.
The reason that is the case, is because this outrage makes for good partisan politics. Its not real. If Mitt Romney were President, Snowden would be called a spy and a traitor by most of the people who are now calling him a hero. Congress is afraid to shut down the program and then have to answer why our intelligence agencies did not catch a terrorist plot that killed hundreds or thousands of Americans. Besides why complain when you can bash the current administration without risk?
So here is the deal. If the letter of the law permits our intelligence agencies and law enforcement agencies to do what they have been doing since 2004, you can expect this and every future administration to use it, whether far left, far right or middle of the road. If you are from SC and you believe Snowden is a hero, then get on the phone with your Republican legislator, all of whom voted for the laws making this possible, and demand they change the law. Call them out a town hall meeting for their support of domestic spying. Call them out for not making an effort to dismantle this program. I won’t hold my breath for that to occur. Its too easy to say, look what Obama is doing we have to get him out.
Nice cover libitard. How many Demlicans voted for this crap as well?
I don’t have a Democrat in Washington to complain to. I wrote my Congressman, Mick Mulvaney, and former Senator, Jim Demint, and my current Senator Lindsay Graham, in 2006 complaining about changes they were making to the FISA. I received no response from any of them, except we need a strong defense against terrorists. We appreciate your concern.
Then why should everyone call their Republitard Legislator. How about those Demlicans. They need some love too?
And respectfully, you probably should have started back long before 2006. Like sometime in the ’20’s. I appreciate you haven’t been around that long. The point is this didn’t start yesterday and maybe all those tin foil hats you (the ‘lucid, responsible folk’) have been talking about looking so silly, well….
Have a Great Day!! :) There won’t be many left with the Demlicans and the Republicrats in charge!! :)
Edit: Shite. Forgot about the Alien and Sedition act (1798). Maybe further than the ’20’s, Hmmm??
Well if you are from South Carolina there is only one Democrat, Clyburn. He voted no on the extension of the Patriot Act, and No on the 2006 Amendments to the FISA. I agreed on both of those things.
Good for you.
The problem with FISA is that John Roberts has appointed 11 authoritarian Republican judges since he’s been on the court.
Bullshit. We didn’t know about the mass collection of phone records until Snowden revealed it. We didn’t know the extent of internet collection (with the forced help from ISPs) until Snowden revealed it. We also didn’t know just how far the FISA courts were interpreting the government’s powers under the FISA and Patriot Acts.
Partisan politics should be irrelevant. It was wrong under Bush and it’s wrong under Obama.
Tell it brother
If you did not know you were not listening. Please tell me you remember the law Congress passed to provide retroactive protection to the wireless phone companies for giving the government all that “metadata” without a warrant. Surely you recall the testimony by the employees for the Wireless companies who claimed the NSA had set up offices within those companies for the collection of “metadata” and they had the capabilities of intercepting all telephone calls. Do you not recall the 2006 USA Today report that the NSA had “been secretly collecting the phone call records of tens of millions of Americans, using data provided by AT&T, Verizon and BellSouth” and was “using the data to analyze calling patterns in an effort to detect terrorist activity.”
What was it you thought the Government was getting? Did you think the Wireless companies were not being forced to cooperate?
I agree partisan politics should be irrelevant but that is not what is happening.
You are right. I was not paying attention to some vague 2006 USA Today article that I had never heard about until people tried to rationalize the current snooping by saying “geez, why didn’t complain about it earlier” — as if that really matters.
I have now read this 2006 article, that quotes “sources” and quotes Bush as confirming that the program does NOT capture purely intra-country calls made by Americans. Apparently, the USA Today also backed away from part of its story, which may also be another reason it did not gain much traction.
What happened in Snowden’s case, however, was not the mere publication of unverified sources, but rather the publication of an actual court order from a secret court, interpreting the FISA to allow dragnet searches of everybody because, as NSA alleges, such a wide search could be relevant to a terrorist investigation. The FISA court was supposed to be a means of limiting searches; and instead we learned that they were just a rubber stamp for aggressive requests.
We also learned, for the first time, about the Prism program. Before we knew that they could collect routing information such as IP addresses under a dubious interpretation of pen trap laws, but now they are collecting actual content of emails, videos, photos, etc. (even where innocent americans are a party) and have direct access into servers. Before this we knew they could filter data but content searches required a warrant and they could only collect IP addressed based on a court order (but one that did not require a warrant).
Why someone went to protect their rights in a place that doesn’t doesn’t have many righrs is beyond me.
It’s better than rotting in a jail naked half the time, a la Manning.
At the moment more there than here apparently.
Nolff: Wasn’t there a report somewhere that once he was allowed on Russian soil, even on a temporary basis, that he could later get the proper papers allowing him to board an international airline?
Why someone went to protect their rights in a place that doesn’t doesn’t have many righrs is beyond me.
It’s better than rotting in a jail naked half the time, a la Manning.
At the moment more there than here apparently.
Nolff: Wasn’t there a report somewhere that once he was allowed on Russian soil, even on a temporary basis, that he could later get the proper papers allowing him to board an international airline?