It didn’t take long for some to declare NSA leaker Edward Snowden not only an American hero, but a more patriotic citizen than the members of Congress. That patriot is now reportedly in Moscow and seeking asylum in Russia, and he released a statement today via Wikileaks accusing President Obama of deception and of using the “old, bad tools of political aggression” to deny him a state.

“Although I am convicted of nothing, it has unilaterally revoked my passport, leaving me a stateless person,” he wrote. “Without any judicial order, the administration now seeks to stop me exercising a basic right. A right that belongs to everybody. The right to seek asylum.”

Reuters has also obtained a letter Snowden wrote to Ecuador, thanking the country for considering his request for asylum there. “No matter how many more days my life contains, I remain dedicated to the fight for justice in this unequal world,” Snowden said.

For someone so quickly lauded as a hero when he was just an anonymous whistleblower, Snowden’s star has faded quickly, and playing the victim card today only seems to add to the creeping Snowden fatigue. Too late to go back to being a nameless, faceless hero now, huh?

https://twitter.com/chaircrow/status/351823660308365312

Some British syntax in the statement posted to Wikileaks (such as, “the United States of America have been”) has many believing Snowden didn’t write the statement at all.

Forget the statements: all the world wants now is a different photograph of Snowden to go along with all of the news reports.

  • RblDiver

    I’m still of the opinion that he did a good, or at least “not bad,” thing but in a dumb way. The Wikileak connection is rather unfortunate.

    • EastValleyConservative

      I’m not sure what to think of him and his motivations. However, the ridiculous cry from the government and leftists of all stripes equating the government’s unconstitutional overreach as “national security” measures worthy of a charge of espionage is laughable at best. The only “national security” issue here is the government was exposed and the nation is pretty sure none of these officials will remain secure in their power.

      • http://extremesplash.wordpress.com/ Ben Bollman

        Yeah, he revealed the process of which things were being done and so far that we know of he hasn’t released any sensitive information. Other than not going through the proper channels, he hasn’t really done anything wrong.

        • jghdj

          I agree with you, Mr. Bollman.

          The burden of proof is on the government under the Espionage Act to show beyond a reasonable doubt actual harm to the United States as a result of this leak. The US may not merely recite a presumptive allegation that release of true information is harmful per se. It has to prove actual instances of actual harm.

          Furthermore the interest of the United States that is allegedly harmed by the release of information cannot itself be an illegal objective. For instance, our spying on the EU during trade negotiations violated international treaties we voluntarily entered. Consequently, the US could not assert that it was ‘harmed’ by being deprived of its objective to secretly violate agreements it entered into. Similarly, any function of the NSA or any other intelligence agency that was outside of the scope of FISA court approval, or which action, even with FISA court approval could be challenged as unconstitutional could not provide a basis for “harm” either. Snowden could assert a constitutional challenge to FISA in his defense. The relevant FISA amendments and FISC rulings have never been challenged and hence found constitutional by the Supreme Court.

          In sum, the notion that Snowden is guilty of violating US law is unfounded in the extreme. But, we can see from the commentary and general ignorance of the law among members of the public that he could not receive a fair trial.

          • Slugglife

            JG

            The harm is as Snowden said, that we would realize we did not have the constitutional govt we are promised by the constitution. We were never supposed to know we were subjects and not citizens.

  • bossmanham

    I’m a Snowden fan. People now mocking him are just following in lockstep with the One.

    • objectivefactsmatter

      Oh yeah. I worship 0’Bama and follow him in lockstep. Otherwise I can’t actually find any problems with some guy invading our most sensitive security networks and then running off to our most dangerous enemies.

      O’Bama is probably not even unhappy about it. It fits in with his long-term plans, but he must object to anything that so clearly makes him look bad. Perhaps 0’Bama himself wanted to do the same thing at the UN in between his POTUS terms and running for UN presidential czar of the new “socialist” world government.

      • bossmanham

        Right man. Keep thinking that your messiah is unassailable as he steps civil rights.

        • Richard Wayne

          While I too am a fan of Snowden releasing info on the data mining, I am also a bit skeptical of other potentially unknown actions he may have done.

          With that being said, there are plenty of big statist republicans who don’t follow Obama who are mocking him. Just look below the headline. The twitchy team seems opposed to the guy now too.

          • bossmanham

            I think it’s a little foolish at this point to do that.

          • KayGee

            The Twitchy Team is jumping back and forth on the “love him or hate him” issue because it’s too difficult to simply focus on his message of unrestricted Gov’t spying, and quite frankly, given how Twitchy pretty much IGNORED things like SOPA, PIPA, and CISPA (except for one short panderbear article in 2012 where Issa said he’d make a “Digital Bill of Rights” or whatever, but never followed up on…) they don’t really have a problem with it, it’s just that Obama feller and the Dems running it that they don’t like… You’d better believe that if Mitt Romney won last election, they’d be right here on this same website either defending these same Gov’t spying programs, or at the very least saying “Hey no big deal, tough on ‘terra”, since these kind of spying programs will exist REGARDLESS of who’s in the WH….. both mainstream political parties support this in one way or another, no denying it.

          • https://twitter.com/BoldFreshJew BoldFreshJew ⊕

            Individual Constitutionalism is so damn hard.

          • Hiraghm

            I wouldn’t be defending them. I’ve been pissed since 2001 that our gov’t has been unwilling to distinguish between citizen and enemy.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            Speaking for myself, I don’t underestimate the threat from jihadis, including the MB.

            We need to make sure we win. However, obviously there are ways we can lose even if we defeat the jihadis.

            Snowden may have had good intentions but he didn’t actually help the position of the USA, government or citizens. Yet. Maybe something will come of it.

            He is no hero. He’s clearly a leftist globalist. He’s therefore a traitor. That is not the same as supporting all of the things he objects to.

            I’m sorry when people can’t handle nuanced positions. This lack of comprehension is precisely why we as a nation can’t seem to eke out better results from our government.

      • Hiraghm

        Why do we have an NSA?

        Lessee… we have the National SECURITY Agency

        Then we have Department of Homeland SECURITY

        Then we have our real spy agency, the CIA (which is forbidden from operating within the U.S., iirc).

        We don’t need NSA, especially if it can’t distinguish between citizen and foreigner.

        We don’t need ANYTHING named “homeland”. Long ago it should have been named dept of DOMESTIC security. Or better, never have been created.

        • objectivefactsmatter

          There is a LOT of bloat. Something needed to be done about Islamic terrorists. It was however clearly allowed to grow out of control.

          Department of Homeland Security should have been a transitional project to bring together smoother cooperation between agencies.

          • Slugglife

            yeah. now its just a fat pig.

  • descolada9

    So he wants to seek asylum in Russia, the same country with a neo-dictator that put members of a female punk band (Pussy Riot) in jail for speaking out against him?? That’s really intelligent.

    • Pablo

      No, that’s not why Pussy Riot was jailed.

      • descolada9

        Please elaborate so I get things straight in the future, Pablo.

    • Tony0920

      Not sure he prefers to seek asylum there? In the airport transit zone. With no laundromat.

  • CatHerder

    I don’t know what to make of this guy, honestly. I’m pretty sure he can’t reveal any secrets not already known to Russia and/or China, but not 100%.

  • FedUpJoe

    I, for one, have zero trust in clapper & the nsa. Seems like the people side with Snowden. The establishment on right and left want to hang him.

    • objectivefactsmatter

      I’m against all of them. They’re all clowns.

    • DarkKnight2016

      Actually public polling suggests that the people think he is a traitor.

  • nc

    I lost any respect I might have had for him when he chose countries unfriendly to America to seek asylum in. Now none will take him.

    ES, phone home!

    Better yet, come home and face the music.

    • Richard Wayne

      Where else can he go? Not like close allies would harbor him…

    • jghdj

      Face what music??

      The burden of proof is on the government under the Espionage Act to show beyond a reasonable doubt actual harm to the United States as a result of this leak. The US may not merely recite a presumptive allegation that release of true information is harmful per se. It has to prove actual instances of actual harm. in fact, true violations of the Espionage Act are so rare that prior to Hussein’s presidency, the sum total of prosecutions under it in our entire history amounted to 3. Barry has attempted to deploy it 6 times during his presidency.

      Furthermore the interest of the United States that is allegedly harmed by the release of information cannot itself be an illegal objective. For instance, our spying on the EU during trade negotiations violated international treaties we voluntarily entered. Consequently, the US could not assert that it was ‘harmed’ by being deprived of its objective to secretly violate agreements it entered into. Similarly, any function of the NSA or any other intelligence agency that was outside of the scope of FISA court approval, or which action, even with FISA court approval could be challenged as unconstitutional could not provide a basis for “harm” either. Snowden could assert a constitutional challenge to FISA in his defense. The relevant FISA amendments and FISC rulings have never been challenged and hence found constitutional by the Supreme Court.

      In sum, the notion that Snowden is guilty of violating US law is unfounded in the extreme. But, we can see from the commentary and general ignorance of the law among members of the public that he could not receive a fair trial.

  • TocksNedlog

    The wording of that statement is VERY similar to what Assange said in a telephone interview a couple of days ago.

  • Zach Smith

    I am grateful for what Mr Snowden did. Hopefully it will lead to the reform of these out of control intelligence agencies.

    • ObamaFail

      That won’t happen, because the liberals are happy that the NSA is spying on them all of the time.

      • Jeremy

        The Obama Zombies out in full force.

      • objectivefactsmatter

        Yep. It’s not about supporting the constitution, it’s about destroying it.

      • onegoodnathan

        and vice versa. dont y’all see how pathetic the right vs left paradigm is?

        • KayGee

          THANK YOU for pointing this one out. It can’t be said enough. I wonder which is worse, supporting it before you were against it, or being against it before you supported it? or are they BOTH WRONG….

          • http://extremesplash.wordpress.com/ Ben Bollman

            Bush had his faults but The Patriot Act targeted foreign suspects, not American citizens. There is a difference.

          • KayGee

            Maybe not so different afterall, This article is even from Fox news, so you know you can trust it! They both do it, and do it to citizens no less! http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/06/27/bush-spy-program-continued-under-obama-gathered-american-citizens-internet-data/

          • http://extremesplash.wordpress.com/ Ben Bollman

            Fair enough then, but Obama is worse since he campaigned on ending programs like that and expanded them instead.

  • DaveM

    Hero or traitor…I do not have all the facts. For sure the government had no permission from me to collect data on me! Once collected…what can (or can not) be done with the information? Sounds controlling to me!

    • objectivefactsmatter

      Wannabe hero ends up becoming a traitor.

      He’s obviously projecting when he objects to tyranny.

      • jghdj

        Why don’t you cite to law, troll?

        Here’s a little FYI: the burden of proof is on the government under the Espionage Act to show beyond a reasonable doubt actual harm to the United States as a result of this leak. Without such a showing, there is no illegal act. The US may not merely recite a presumptive allegation that release of true information is harmful per se. It has to prove actual instances of actual harm.

        Furthermore the interest of the United States that is allegedly harmed by the release of information cannot itself be an illegal objective. For instance, our spying on the EU during trade negotiations violated international treaties we voluntarily entered. Consequently, the US could not assert that it was ‘harmed’ by being deprived of its objective to secretly violate agreements it entered into. Similarly, any function of the NSA or any other intelligence agency that was outside of the scope of FISA court approval, or which action, even with FISA court approval could be challenged as unconstitutional could not provide a basis for “harm” either. Snowden could assert a constitutional challenge to FISA in his defense. The relevant FISA amendments and FISC rulings have never been challenged and hence found constitutional by the Supreme Court.

        In sum, the notion that Snowden is guilty of violating US law is unfounded in the extreme. But, we can see from the commentary and general ignorance of the law among members of the public that he could not receive a fair trial.

  • objectivefactsmatter

    “Although I am convicted of nothing, it has unilaterally revoked my passport, leaving me a stateless person,” he wrote. “Without any judicial order, the administration now seeks to stop me exercising a basic right. A right that belongs to everybody. The right to seek asylum.”

    Failed spin. Then again, leftists are probably impressed.

    • jghdj

      “Objectivefactsmatter” eh? Then why don’t you cite some, like these:

      Here’s a little FYI: the burden of proof is on the government under the Espionage Act to show beyond a reasonable doubt actual harm to the United States as a result of this leak. The US may not merely recite a presumptive allegation that release of true information is harmful per se. It has to prove actual instances of actual harm.

      Furthermore the interest of the United States that is allegedly harmed by the release of information cannot itself be an illegal objective. For instance, our spying on the EU during trade negotiations violated international treaties we voluntarily entered. Consequently, the US could not assert that it was ‘harmed’ by being deprived of its objective to secretly violate agreements it entered into. Similarly, any function of the NSA or any other intelligence agency that was outside of the scope of FISA court approval, or which action, even with FISA court approval could be challenged as unconstitutional could not provide a basis for “harm” either. Snowden could assert a constitutional challenge to FISA in his defense. The relevant FISA amendments and FISC rulings have never been challenged and hence found constitutional by the Supreme Court.

      In sum, the notion that Snowden is guilty of violating US law is unfounded in the extreme. But, we can see from the commentary and general ignorance of the law among members of the public that he could not receive a fair trial.

  • borntodie

    I don’t care about his personality. The truth needed to be told, and I’m glad he exposed it. The people who think he’s a traitor don’t get it.

    • Texan357

      “The people who think he’s a traitor don’t get it.”

      What a perfectly reasonable argument. /

      • jghdj

        You can’t handle a reasonable argument!

        The burden of proof is on the government under the Espionage Act to show beyond a reasonable doubt actual harm to the United States as a result of this leak. The US may not merely recite a presumptive allegation that release of true information is harmful per se. It has to prove actual instances of actual harm.

        Furthermore the interest of the United States that is allegedly harmed by the release of information cannot itself be an illegal objective. For instance, our spying on the EU during trade negotiations violated international treaties we voluntarily entered. Consequently, the US could not assert that it was ‘harmed’ by being deprived of its objective to secretly violate agreements it entered into. Similarly, any function of the NSA or any other intelligence agency that was outside of the scope of FISA court approval, or which action, even with FISA court approval could be challenged as unconstitutional could not provide a basis for “harm” either. Snowden could assert a constitutional challenge to FISA in his defense. The relevant FISA amendments and FISC rulings have never been challenged and hence found constitutional by the Supreme Court.

        In sum, the notion that Snowden is guilty of violating US law is unfounded in the extreme. But, we can see from the commentary and general ignorance of the law among members of the public that he could not receive a fair trial.

  • ICOYAR

    No matter what, Snowden is a man fearing for his own life. He fully knew the consequences, but did what was only just and fair to the American citizenry.

    If I could do anything, I would seek to have have identity, appearance, and everything about him fully change, and work to make him assume an anonymous identity.

  • DrSamHerman

    Stateless? No.
    Spineless? Yes.

    • jghdj

      spineless? your government has been revealed as tyrannous, and this man gave up his life to make that expose. when is the last time you did anything so great for your country? let me answer that, since it was rhetorical: NEVER.

      he’s absolutely right to point out the hypocrisy and the strong-arming of our rogue government. if it were put to a straight democratic vote – rather than mediated through the lies and non-representation of our elected officials – this man would be coming home to a ticker tape parade.

      • DrSamHerman

        I vote, pay taxes and practice medicine in my country. What do you do for yours? Anything but whine about how “evil” America is? So “evil” that we brought down the Berlin Wall, defeated the Japanese and the Germans in WWII and rebuilt their economies afterwards?

        If he is so brave, why did he run? Why didn’t he face the consequences of his actions? Why is he running like a common criminal evading prosecution?

        You leftists are such wimps when it comes down to actually facing responsibility for your misdeeds. And you are a craven coward just like Snowden is.

        • jghdj

          what you most certainly are not, is a republican!

          you describe NO SACRIFICE. you and barry sorrento both pay taxes! how heroic! you live comfortably in tyranny and force tyranny on others. how deluded does someone have to be to think that voting and paying taxes are the hallmarks of outstanding character??? yes, many a GERMAN thought that about his alleged patriotism around about 1940. you’re problem is you’re another godless pervert. in my book, it goes like this: GOD and then country. did edward snowden break gods laws? he most certainly did not.

          what do i do? i’m a civil rights lawyer. i save people from liberals like you. and you’re way behind the times: franklin roosevelt isn’t president, and wasn’t a good one. ronald regan isn’t president either. in fact, ignoramous, one can be virulently opposed to the 2008 (yes, that recent, not exactly part of our rich tradition) FISA amendments and not be at all out of lock step with constitutional tradition.

          no, i will not sacrifice myself nor would i have mr. snowden sacrificed on the altar of evil DESPOT in the white house. now there is a man who LIED.

          do you even know what the elements of the espionage act charges snowden’s been indicted on are?? oh, i crack myself up! of course you do not! if you did, you would be aware that the government CANNOT prove its case. do you know what that means, EDWARD SNOWDEN ACTUALLY DID NOT BREAK ANY LAWS! and i will not see him burned at the stake by pigs of your character and mentality. crawl in a hole and expire. we don’t need you, we don’t want you, you’re the reason the country has declined.

          • DrSamHerman

            Drama much?

            Do you honestly think ANYBODY believes you are “civil rights attorney”?

            When was the last time you had your Lithium level checked? This current depressive cycle needs your dose adjusted to get a 1.4 to 1.6 level along with some Seroquel or Abilify.

            And Hitler came to power in 1933/1934, dolt, not 1940.

            Thanks for the laugh! Civil rights attorney…is that a new word for “inmate”?

          • jghdj

            DUM, DUM, DUM. Ha! I’m afraid I am a civil rights attorney, but what I used to do was medical malpractice and hammer rejects like you out of the profession. I bet you’ve got a NPDB record a mile long!

            Troll, you assert guilt of a defendant without any knowledge of the law or the fact! That’s why I use preemptory strikes on the senile such as…you!

            The burden of proof is on the government under the Espionage Act to show beyond a reasonable doubt actual harm to the United States as a result of this leak. The US may not merely recite a presumptive allegation that release of true information is harmful per se. It has to prove actual instances of actual harm.

            Furthermore the interest of the United States that is allegedly harmed by the release of information cannot itself be an illegal objective. For instance, our spying on the EU during trade negotiations violated international treaties we voluntarily entered. Consequently, the US could not assert that it was ‘harmed’ by being deprived of its objective to secretly violate agreements it entered into. Similarly, any function of the NSA or any other intelligence agency that was outside of the scope of FISA court approval, or which action, even with FISA court approval could be challenged as unconstitutional could not provide a basis for “harm” either. Snowden could assert a constitutional challenge to FISA in his defense. The relevant FISA amendments and FISC rulings have never been challenged and hence found constitutional by the Supreme Court.

            In sum, the notion that Snowden is guilty of violating US law is unfounded in the extreme. But, we can see from the commentary and general ignorance of the law among members of the public that he could not receive a fair trial.

            Try and keep up now, if the US cannot prove an element of the offense, the defendant is NOT GUILTY. See how that works, twit?

            But while you’re off rambling about how BHO is the second coming of your lord and savior, FDR, you’ve revealed yourself as a LIBERAL TROLL.

            Furthermore, on the eve of WWII, Hitler was in power. In 1940 when he began exterminations, Hitler was in power, and the virtue-less germans stood by or participated. That’s you. Look in the mirror.

          • DrSamHerman

            So now you were a malpractice attorney? Any other identities you have held? Perhaps you were a Pharaoh in ancient Egypt? Damn, you bipolar I’s are a kick until you go into the depression/hallucinatory phase.

            Nobody asked you for a dissertation presentation. That’s nothing more than written version of “push of speech”. You must be a really rapid cycler. Not to mention, you keep posting the same crap over and over again just like a mixed feature OCD/bipolar I. Not like I haven’t seen enough of your type in the four decades I’ve been in practice.

            Senile? No. Laughing at your multiple blatherings? Yes.

            I’ve been around this board longer than you, “counselor”. I can imagine your own attorney is constantly trying to bail you out of those continual 72 hour involuntaries.

          • jghdj

            Are you f’ing brain-dead, or are you unaware that attorneys practice in multiple specialties?

            I looked you up in the National Practitioner Data Bank…you got your license revoked for molesting a patient. NOT VERY SURPRISING.

          • DrSamHerman

            You looked me up in NPDB? And how did you do that legally? If you are a malpractice attorney, you would have been barred from running a query on the database format, unless you broke the regulations and accessed it through a third party or under false pretenses. I have accessed NPDB legitimately, and I am not even listed. My screen name isn’t my full name. Is yours?

            Take your AM doses.

      • MarcusFenix

        At the risk of presumption, Snowden didn’t really blow the whistle on anything that people who have at least some passing knowledge of government activity didn’t already know. While the acronym “PRISM” may be new to some, the fact that the government has been using groups such as the NSA to spy on it’s own citizens is anything but new. That sort of activity has been going on for the better part of 60 years +, in some form or another. People believing that giants like Google or Facebook aren’t being monitored would be naive, at best.

        That said, I think it’s good he got the word out, and that he did some fingerpointing. But realistically, I can’t imagine people (such as jihadists) thinking they’re not being watched or looked for actively in cyberspace. The fact this “shocks” people only goes to show how Americans have been very much asleep behind the proverbial wheel.

        Snowden should come back and testify before Congress. Drop a dime on everyone and everything, in public, and let the chips fall where they may.

        • DrSamHerman

          Don’t bother trying to rationalize with the “civil rights attorney”. He appears to be, to use more common parlance, a loon of cosmic proportions.

          The constant recitation of Wikipedia entries and regurgitations from other sites points to a mommy’s basement-dwelling dimwit with too much time on his/her hands and a permanent fixture on conspiracy sites.

          • MarcusFenix

            I know, but i did have to at least take a crack at it. :)

          • jghdj

            You should return to LICKING WINDOWS! No, these programs did not exist 60 years ago. Neither the laws enabling them nor the technology existed 60 years ago, and you, like fake ‘doctor’ pull things out of your anuses because you’re ignorant. What are you even referring to in claiming that domestic mass surveillance has gone on for 60 years…Alex Jones InfoWars?

            Do you know what the 4th amendment says? Jesus christ. You no-information voters should be BANNED from voting. You should have to pass a test about the BASIC STRUCTURES and history of your government. FISA didn’t even exist until the late 1970’s. But since you’re incapable of basic logical syllogism, let me lay it out for you: your baseless and factually absurd and impossible allegation that PRISM or wiretapping existed 60 years ago IS NOT EXCULPATORY!!

            You allege that if the government does something illegal for a really long time, it suddenly becomes legal. Moron. If you kill people for a really long time, does murder suddenly become legal? So, what was your point? You didn’t have one. You have in IQ of 2.

            Unreasonable warrantless searches and seizures are illegal under the federal constitution…that believe it or not IS A LAW, not a philosophical suggestion, specifically aimed at THE GOVERNMENT. All the rights in the bill of rights are enforceable by individuals through the Civil Rights Act of 1875. It’s called Title 42 of the United States Code, Section 1983.

            And the poseur, as the french say, doctor, is so utterly ignorant of basic facts as to assume lawyers do not practice in multiple areas.

          • DrSamHerman

            We didn’t allege anything. You created our “arguments” out of thin air. Where did I talk specifically about any of the legal matters involved? That was all your hallucinatory nonsense.

            Repetitive posting of the same nonsense doesn’t make you right–just makes you obsessed.

          • MarcusFenix

            By your first statement, it almost makes me hope you’re the person I said that to the first time I posted, because it would be all too sweet. Not only are you the same person who got deconstructed and demolished the first time, but you’re still butthurt over it! Amazing!

            I hope you’re ready for an encore…but in the chance you’re not, then you can join him in the dirt, where you and your ridiculous argument belong.

            First, lets dismiss your entire lack of public knowledge.

            On May 29th, the government released declassified documents, assembled into a 344 page report, with introduction by Colin Burke. I am sure your knowledge of this subject doesn’t require me to tell you who he is, correct?

            This report demonstrates that the NSA (but we can reliably presume it was done by others) initially conducted surveillance and message intercepting as early as the 1930’s. While you’re correct, somewhat, that it wasn’t the mass spying program it is now, you would be wrong to assume they were not using their code breaking systems to spy on people, mostly enemies. By the 1940’s, the navy was using their cryptanalysis techniques to collect metadata from thousands of messages per month.

            The possibility that some of these techniques were used to justify or promote the internment of over 100,000 Japanese-American citizens, who had done nothing wrong and were in good standing with the law, cannot be logically overlooked. Citizens were treated as an enemy, without cause and without justification other than the fact they were from the Pacific. I don’t think your Bill of Rights was on vacation, was it? Somehow, someone forgot to enforce their civil rights? George Carlin makes a wonderful analogy about rights. He posits that rights are basically privileges given to you, that can be taken away at any time, for any reason. We can certainly name plenty of times that seems to have happened, but keep believing that the government doesn’t involve itself in things that are morally, legally, or logically reprehensible. Your ability to quote a law, its inception date, or its use does not clearly demonstrate the understanding of its context, history, or implementation. Just more fail from some scrub who has no other real argument than that.

            Time to use some caps, because apparently CAPS LOCK IS CRUISE CONTROL FOR AWESOME.

            Back to point, you’re correct about a few things. FISA didn’t exist until the late 70’s, but I NEVER said PRISM was from anything before now. I never said anything about THOSE programs. I stated that the NSA and others were conducting this type of work for OVER 60 YEARS. Trying to say I don’t know what I’m talking about, when YOU clearly didn’t even grasp the fundamentals of what was said is laughable, at best. Any idiot would know that things like the internet DIDNT exist in the 30’s and 40’s, unless you’re some retard who believes Al Gore went back in time and invented it as a means of stopping the Chinese from invading Spain with their invincible robot-tiger hybrid army.

            But I have demonstrated, as you can check on your own, that this sort of thing has, in fact, been going on for over 60 years. Your entire ranting, piece of crap “argument” based on the fact you think *I* am the idiot, when you’re not even aware of such simple (and now very much) public knowledge, is a fallacy. Your entire logical process is a fallacy, laced with ad hominems (but i’m guilty there too, but..only as a response), logical inconsistencies, and just a general lack of knowing what the hell is going on.

            Congratulations. If you’re the same poster I lambasted before…you’re even more ridiculous than you were the first time around. Months later, you’re still butthurt over being slammed, when you had no recourse or argument that could win. THIS is the best you can do? Don’t make me laugh, fool. Did you think someone like myself wouldn’t actually read the news, or the document itself for that matter, at some point before commenting on something that would be publicly read and scrutinized? Did you genuinely believe you could “one up” me on something you have zero knowledge of yourself to begin with, and still think you’re “argument” has merit when you’ve done no research? You don’t even understand the words you’ve typed, with regard to context.

            Further, I certainly didn’t “allege” that continuous illegal activity made it somehow morally or legally alright. In fact, I quite pointed out that I was glad Snowden blew the whistle. Why would I be glad of that fact, if i categorically believed it was FINE for the government to do so? Are you brain damaged? Doing something over and over that is wrong doesn’t ever make it right. That’s an increasingly foolish argument from someone who clearly demonstrates that they are unhinged.

            I would also point out, my dull and uninformed friend (and using your ridiculous caps gesturings) that WIRETAPPING HAS BEEN IN EFFECT in the United States since AFTER 1890. It was ruled Constitutional by the SUPREME COURT in 1928. Just saying.

            All of this also makes you, my caps-using verbal punching bag, the no-information voter you apparently dislike so much. You don’t know what’s going on in current events. You didn’t even catch anything I posted in context, using fairly simple English. You came at me with nothing more than some ranting and a penchant for using your caps lock key. Excluding my post here as being snarky and pointing out your idiotic typing, you have no coherent argument of your own, don’t know what you’re talking about, and at best can just talk crap as if you were up to date on information.

            Lumping me together with whoever (and no offense to the poster who stated they were a doctor…i dont know you, but, it’s not important) disagrees with you to try and make more than one person look bad at the same time, and equate what you believe is stupid or foolish by linking the 2 persons…

            It’s lazy, weak, and ineffective. Just. Like. You.

            I’m done with you. You clearly are out of your depth. You’re not even close. When you can get on the collective level of those who post here, maybe we can have a conversation where you don’t out yourself as a complete ninny who talks out of their buttcrack.

            Until then, stay away from the windows…because you’re not even intellectually worthy to lick my boots, much less touch my very nice and expensive windows.

          • DrSamHerman

            LOL.

            It’s fun to toy with trolls like this one. All bark, no bite and definitely no brain.

            Given the language the troll uses, I would bet he/she is not even in the US.

  • Dragomance

    I still think what Snowden did was right,but I kinda agree the pic of him is getting worn out.Right now I’d think I’d settle for the photo of the empty seat.

  • josh

    ANYONE who paints Snowden as a traitor is in fact a traitor themselves. The man is exposing the biggest 1984 Orwellian spy system EVER CREATED and all without the consent of the American people, I say Snowden is an American hero. This spy grid is all about control and tracking we the people, facts. Benjamin Franklin said” Those who give up their liberty for a sense of security, deserve neither and will get neither” Especially considering our government and the communist puppet Obama runs and controls all the Muslim terrorists and arms Al Qaeda, I am pretty sure the NSA was NOT created to keep us safe, it was to monitor and control the population. It was created to help usher in the New World Order, a one world satanic government. Agenda 21, carbon taxes, open borders, disarmament and doubling all energy costs is all coming, the communist agenda is at hand.

  • Kleverabevera

    I will be able to trust their veracity on this a little better, when the media and big government stooges start using the same vigor with the Seal Team 6 leakers.

  • onegoodnathan

    establishment neo-cons like Michelle Malkin hate Snowden…shocker

    • http://extremesplash.wordpress.com/ Ben Bollman

      I don’t agree with her on this but she isn’t a neo-con, in fact she chided Bush several times for being a neo-con. They are going after Snowden for being an idiot about the way he is doing things, which he is, but they shouldn’t be focusing on him at all and should focus on Obama instead.

  • NeoNationalist

    Well this is surprising, Malkin. Maybe the liberals are right about you.

  • capisce

    It’s a shame that one person can do so much potential damage to our national security.
    It’s a tragedy that he was elected twice.

  • jhsif

    No no no! you got it wrong this story was supposed to be for Trayvon Martin’s girlfirend, how did you get thsi so wrong?! Snowden for president! (hey you can elect an illegal immagrint twice, why not snowden!)

  • http://extremesplash.wordpress.com/ Ben Bollman

    Congratulations media and even conservative media, you have now aided and abetted Obama in making people forget about the NSA spying on us and shifted the focus completely on Snowden. I hope you are happy.

  • Mister A

    What makes me most uncomfortable about the Snowed-In case is that the reporter at the Guardian only released the first page of his document. One out of forty-something pages explaining the ongoing national surveillance. Personally, I like him. I would have liked more information on the active targeting and data collection. I’m a fan of information, because information is unbiased. It’s only good or bad to the people who receive it.

  • Flattered to be Me

    Snowden is a hero! Whatever does not comes from his lips in a verifiable video, should only be taken as a grain of salt. The truth is, our government will try, with the use of the media, to discredit him and plant false stories about what he said. It is basic guerrilla 101

  • Hiraghm

    What’s great about all this focus on Snowden is that it takes attention away from the fact that the federal gov’t violated the 4th Amendment rights of millions of Americans… and nobody’s going to jail. There’s no call to halt the Utah data center, no call to destroy the data already collected.

    And no, I don’t take all those bleeding out the arse over “national security” seriously, because Snowden leaked that the gov’t is spying on foreigners as well as its own citizens. I fully expect our gov’t to spy on foreigners. But, if they’re so terribly concerned with securing the U.S., why aren’t they calling for an amendment declaring Islam not a religion, shutting down every mosque in the U.S., begin placing Moslems in internment camps for the duration, instituting a draft so we have enough troops to actually conquer the Islamic middle east?

    Sorry, until I’m convinced people really are in a panic mode over Islamic terrorism, I’m not going to worry about what Snowden might or might not reveal about our gov’t betraying its citizenry.

  • socilasatelite

    He did do good everyone else is too weak to back him everything else is just the news corps justifying their cowardliness. There is no debate he did right we are are going to let the government murder him while we joke about his neck mole.

  • Kathy Fugitt Price Skaggs

    I don’t want him giving away or selling secrets of the US but I am glad he had enough guts to tell us what the goverment is doing. Only the liberals were upset he told on Obama. And the main stream media is too stupid to realize that Obama is going to use this spying against them also. I have not done anything wrong but I still don’t want the goverment snooping on me. Also Obama isn’t doing it for our benifit since he isn’t watching muslims, who are the ones trying to kill us, but watching the tea party, christians, and other peaceful law abiding citizens.

  • Slugglife

    Exposing that the US govt is violating our constitutional rights to a further degree than we have already consented to? If only the communists in our country can convince us to hate this guy and demand his execution…

    Snowden will be the tool for the “bubba effect.”