Mr. Stinky Pants wrote: Quote: Hello. My name is Ed Snowden. A little over one month ago, I had family, a home in paradise, and I lived in great comfort. I also had the capability without any warrant to search for, seize, and read your communications. Anyone’s communications at any time. That is the power to change people’s fates.



It is also a serious violation of the law. The 4th and 5th Amendments to the Constitution of my country, Article 12 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and numerous statutes and treaties forbid such systems of massive, pervasive surveillance.



This is where I disagree with him. Yes, he had the capability to search, seize, and read (without any warrant) our communications. But as he stated himself, it was against formal policy to do so. He himself stated that there was a policy restriction and not a technical restriction against doing this.



If he had read our communications without a warrant he would have broken the law. Just like how I remember nurses reading the case file of some celebrity in a hospital. When the hospital found out, they were fired. The hospital had a policy of protecting patient's privacy. There was no technical barrier but a policy barrier.



In my opinion, the US Government is doing the same thing as the hospitals and this is okay (to me -- apparently many feel differently). They are only storing meta-data about our communications. In some cases they are storing the actual copies of communications but cannot actually look into it without a warrant.



I just find it sad that many people are hailing this guy as a hero. He was living in a country where everybody can criticize the government without fear of prosecution. We can worship or choose not to worship as we please. I live in a country with freedoms and opportunities where many in the world still die trying to get to. But Snowden apparently feels our government is the worst of the worst -- so much that he would betray it and run to a country where many people are in jail only because for the fact they criticized their government. This is where I disagree with him. Yes, he had the capability to search, seize, and read (without any warrant) our communications. But as he stated himself, it was against formal policy to do so. He himself stated that there was a policy restriction and not a technical restriction against doing this.If he had read our communications without a warrant he would have broken the law. Just like how I remember nurses reading the case file of some celebrity in a hospital. When the hospital found out, they were fired. The hospital had a policy of protecting patient's privacy. There was no technical barrier but a policy barrier.In my opinion, the US Government is doing the same thing as the hospitals and this is okay (to me -- apparently many feel differently). They are only storing meta-data about our communications. In some cases they are storing the actual copies of communications but cannot actually look into it without a warrant.I just find it sad that many people are hailing this guy as a hero. He was living in a country where everybody can criticize the government without fear of prosecution. We can worship or choose not to worship as we please. I live in a country with freedoms and opportunities where many in the world still die trying to get to. But Snowden apparently feels our government is the worst of the worst -- so much that he would betray it and run to a country where many people are in jail only because for the fact they criticized their government.



Based on what he is saying, it's not true that they are only storing the meta-data. Other information indicates that they may have been limited to meta-data in the case of phone calls, but not for electronic communication such as emails.



You say it's ok that the NSA is capable of reading these emails without a warrant, because the policy says they are not supposed to. But this is an agency with no oversight. They are operating under legal interpretations so secret that even their lawyers were not to read them! There's no real reassurance that they are not doing so. There is absolutely no way in the current system that we would know if there ever were abuses. Totally different than the hospital case, where there was visibility and legal recourse.



I wouldn't say our government is the worst of the worst, but it's certainly not perfect, and the things we do right do not justify the things we do wrong. When our government does something wrong, we should speak up and try to change it. It's because we are able to do that, and because people have been willing to do that even at personal risk or cost, that we still get some things right.



And if someone who is taking that risk feels that maybe their message will be more effective if they are not hidden away in solitary confinement and tried in a sealed court preceeding, and that maybe they would not like to be in prison, I can't really blame them for going wherever they need to go. Even if that happens to be somewhere that happens to get more things wrong than we do. It's not like he has ever claimed Russia is a bastion of democracy or better than the US, so let's not pretend his destinations are a statement to that effect. Based on what he is saying, it's not true that they are only storing the meta-data. Other information indicates that they may have been limited to meta-data in the case of phone calls, but not for electronic communication such as emails.You say it's ok that the NSA is capable of reading these emails without a warrant, because the policy says they are not supposed to. But this is an agency with no oversight. They are operating under legal interpretations so secret that even their lawyers were not to read them! There's no real reassurance that they are not doing so. There is absolutely no way in the current system that we would know if there ever were abuses. Totally different than the hospital case, where there was visibility and legal recourse.I wouldn't say our government is the worst of the worst, but it's certainly not perfect, and the things we do right do not justify the things we do wrong. When our government does something wrong, we should speak up and try to change it. It's because we are able to do that, and because people have been willing to do that even at personal risk or cost, that we still get some things right.And if someone who is taking that risk feels that maybe their message will be more effective if they are not hidden away in solitary confinement and tried in a sealed court preceeding, and that maybe they would not like to be in prison, I can't really blame them for going wherever they need to go. Even if that happens to be somewhere that happens to get more things wrong than we do. It's not like he has ever claimed Russia is a bastion of democracy or better than the US, so let's not pretend his destinations are a statement to that effect.