1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

NBC Brian Williams interview with Edward Snowden - 5/28/14

Discussion in 'Now Playing - TV Show Talk' started by cwerdna, May 28, 2014.

  1. NorthAlabama

    NorthAlabama tabasco rules

    5,387
    6
    Apr 19, 2012
    sweet home, al
    apart from any opinion of snowden and the document releases, there's one thing i believe to be true - the public discussion over the programs would have never taken place if he had addressed his concerns through acceptable or proper channels, even with help from sympathetic lawmakers.

    once that kind of power is granted, it will be protected at all costs, and never willingly given up, or dissenters listened to. like asking a wartime general if more troops are needed, or asking a surgeon if surgery is recommended - ask any government agency if it's legal, and the answer will most likely be "yes".
     
  2. smak

    smak TV MA SLV

    20,166
    202
    Feb 11, 2000
    NoHo, CA USA
    Yah, that's the one where the guy he sent a question told him to call back if he had any more concerns. Not really "told to ask no more questions" that Snowden said.

    I'll wait for all those supposed emails to be released to believe that he sent them.

    Right now they are in the same realm as him being a super spy.

    -smak-
     
  3. smak

    smak TV MA SLV

    20,166
    202
    Feb 11, 2000
    NoHo, CA USA
    But why is Snowden's granting himself the power to release whatever documents he feels like any better?

    -smak-
     
  4. MikeAndrews

    MikeAndrews Registered abuser

    14,222
    1
    Jan 17, 2002
    Northern...
    You don't get told to stop asking questions in writing.
     
  5. robojerk

    robojerk Active Member

    2,326
    7
    Jun 13, 2006
    Laguna Hills CA
    Snowden gave all the documents to Greenwald from The Guardian to do with as he pleases. Snowden doesn't have anything anymore (You would know that if you watched the interview).

    You should watch Frontline's "United States of Secrets". it was pretty good at telling the story of why Snowden did things the way he did.
     
  6. smak

    smak TV MA SLV

    20,166
    202
    Feb 11, 2000
    NoHo, CA USA
    So Snowden shows his disapproval of the NSA scooping up tons of data indiscriminately is to steal and give to reporters tons of data indiscriminately.

    Makes sense.

    -smak-
     
  7. MikeAndrews

    MikeAndrews Registered abuser

    14,222
    1
    Jan 17, 2002
    Northern...
    Snowden depended on Greenwald to check the documents including with the government and decide what, when and how to release them to avoid harm. They have staff and legal going over them
     
  8. smak

    smak TV MA SLV

    20,166
    202
    Feb 11, 2000
    NoHo, CA USA
    That's not any more comforting.

    I'm not sure why a reporters judgment and motives whether to release or not release an item is any more trustworthy then the government's?

    Especially a reporter like Greenwald who was angry at the government for not recognizing his marriage.

    -smak-
     
  9. cmontyburns

    cmontyburns Excellent.

    14,647
    34
    Nov 14, 2001
    Houston, TX
    Because that's what reporting is. Sure, Greenwald could have (and still could) just do an information dump, but he'd be immediately discredited and it would likely end his career.
     
  10. LordKronos

    LordKronos New Member

    1,432
    0
    Dec 28, 2003
    If you are waiting for the NSA to be honest, don't hold your breath. Time and again, NSA officials went before CONGRESS and testified that they were not doing certain things, only to later be proven that they were doing those exact things.
     
  11. LordKronos

    LordKronos New Member

    1,432
    0
    Dec 28, 2003
    I haven't watched the interview discussed in this thread (since I just found out about it 5 minutes ago when I opened this forum), but I did watch the Frontline story you mention (both episoides) and I thought it was incredibly well done (as usual for Frontline). I highly recommend everyone watch it.
     
  12. MikeAndrews

    MikeAndrews Registered abuser

    14,222
    1
    Jan 17, 2002
    Northern...
    Yeah. You expect that the NSA searched for Snowden's email (like they hadn't done that a year ago) and with the layers of classification and rules thereof, besides the story they want to tell, would turn over every email Snowden sent?

    That's not the only email Snowden sent. It's the only email the NSA will release.
     
  13. Anubys

    Anubys KMT Soccer Playa

    26,029
    15
    Jul 16, 2004
    Fairfax...
    The counter to this argument is to question why Snowden does not have copies of these e-mails.

    I'm firmly on Snowden's side here, but fair is fair. If the NSA is hiding them, was he stupid enough to steal all this info but not keep documentation that he tried to do it the right way?
     
  14. MikeAndrews

    MikeAndrews Registered abuser

    14,222
    1
    Jan 17, 2002
    Northern...
    He most likely has that in the stuff that he gave to the journalists. He says he has nothing with him and no way to get access to it.
     
  15. Anubys

    Anubys KMT Soccer Playa

    26,029
    15
    Jul 16, 2004
    Fairfax...
    I hope so. In that case, those e-mails will come out eventually.

    Here's the thing: I'm thinking that there are no e-mails. Because had he raised the issue through the proper channels, he would not have been protected. He would have been persecuted. His security clearance would have been revoked, he would not have been able to expose them, and he would have been rendered "unemployable".

    But it would be great if the e-mails exist...
     
  16. smak

    smak TV MA SLV

    20,166
    202
    Feb 11, 2000
    NoHo, CA USA
    There's no possible way you know that's not the only email he sent.

    That email released yesterday is very curious, since the answer to his question is something publicly available on the NSA website for at least the last 5 years.

    If he can't produce his emails, or whomever he gave his files to can't,. then there's no way you should believe him.

    You're telling me that 99.9% of the people in a situation where a chain of emails could possibly be the difference between being granted whistleblower status, or being deemed a traitor wouldn't have saved them in a bunch of different places?

    A lawyer? His family? Safe deposit box? Nowhere?

    The fact that yesterday's answer was that the NSA had more emails, not a copy of every email that he tucked away in the 5 places every other human being on the planet would have is telling to me.

    Maybe I'm wrong, and they're waiting for whatever reason, but it's extremely weird.

    -smak-
     
  17. MikeAndrews

    MikeAndrews Registered abuser

    14,222
    1
    Jan 17, 2002
    Northern...
    I believe that Snowden had no reason to even mention the emails, if they didn't exist.

    What has hit me lately, when dealing with a government anything, "How do we know that?" "You know that because I just informed you."
     
  18. eddyj

    eddyj SeƱor Member TCF Club

    57,033
    223
    Jun 20, 2002
    South Florida
    Exactly, he could easily claim that he spoke to his superiors and they shut him down, without ever doing it via email.

    The more I find out about Snowden and the NSA, the more I believe Snowden and the less the NSA. That Frontline show (or shows) were truly scary.
     
  19. PuddingRiot

    PuddingRiot New Member

    155
    0
    May 30, 2014
    I found Snowden very believable. He came across as someone motivated to do good. Not as a traitor.
     
  20. LordKronos

    LordKronos New Member

    1,432
    0
    Dec 28, 2003
    Also, in regard to this sort of mindset:

    As I recall from the frontline documentary, one of the guys involved in one of the illegal programs did go to someone in congress (someone on the intelligence oversight committee). When that representative tried to pursue the matter, she was met with mostly silence, mixed with a few "requests" to stop looking into the matter. The investigations she did manage to get started went nowhere. For the report that was generated, the NSA managed to get it classified, and nearly the entire thing was withheld. When someone eventually did leak details to the press, the representative (now retired) had her house raided by the FBI (multiple times), dragged before congress, and was under investigation for years.

    Also, if I'm not getting my people mixed up, I believe the person that did go to her was also a suspect in the above mentioned leak. His home was also raided (along with 4 other guys who retired because they didn't want to be associated with the illegal program). The FBI took his computer and then said that he was screwed (something like a 30+ year sentence) because they found classified documents on his computer. He spent his entire retirement fund on his legal defense, then when he ran out of money had to take a public defender. When the specific "classified" documents that he supposedly had on his computer were revealed, his lawyer was eventually able to find those documents online. They were previously unclassified, and were changed to classified after the fact in order to manufacture the evidence against him. After this came to light, the Feds just quietly dropped their case against him.

    That's what happens when you try to do things the "right" way.
     

Share This Page