WATCH: Edward Snowden’s Alternative Christmas Message | Mediaite

Posted by LetsShrug 10 years, 10 months ago to News
43 comments | Share | Flag

"A child born today will grow up with no conception of privacy at all. They’ll never know what it means to have a private moment to themselves an unrecorded, unanalyzed thought. And that’s a problem because privacy matters; privacy is what allows us to determine who we are and who we want to be."
SOURCE URL: http://www.mediaite.com/tv/watch-edward-snowdens-alternative-christmas-message/


Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by $ Stormi 10 years, 10 months ago
    Some of the comments show how naive some of the readers are. Our Constitution is not going to protect anyone when we have a Marxist and his judges in power. There might have been a time when the media would have run with Snowden's story, but now they all hide behind the Bildeberger screen, and tell nothing which might ruffle the feathers of the power elite. That includes FOX. Ask Hannity about the ceremony that he and later Obama attended, of the supposed sacrifice. He will not speak on the subject. Even Limbaugh has limits as to topics he will discuss, for fear of losing his show. The media has been neutered. Sad but true, only our enemies will disclose what is being done against the citizens of this country. Who said anything when Clinton used Echelon to spy on foreign politicians' and domestic citizens' phone calls? No, he had the media eating out of his hand. Did the media then give us the truth about Ron Brown or Vince Foster? The situation has not improved under Obama.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by dbhalling 10 years, 10 months ago
    My only complaint with Snowden's talk was he discussed getting the BALANCE correct. Rights are not about balancing. My right to own myself and not have the government spy on me is absolute as long as I am not a criminal or a spy. No balancing is necessary
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by Lucky 10 years, 10 months ago
      Yes to dbh. I recall that it used to be that government could spy on or monitor citizens only with a court order specifically mentioning at least the name of the person targeted. There is a balance but that is the extent of it.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
    • Posted by Hiraghm 10 years, 10 months ago
      But it's only protected by the Constitution if you're a citizen of the U.S.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by dbhalling 10 years, 10 months ago
        Natural Rights exists whether governments chose to protect them or not and they apply to all people.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
        • Posted by Hiraghm 10 years, 10 months ago
          "natural rights"... yet another euphemism for individual rights.

          Sure, rights apply to all people. All people have rights, given them by God (or rights don't exist... take your pick).

          But who cares? The U.S. government is under no obligation to protect the rights of speech, religion, armament, self-incrimination, etc of Afghans or Iraqis or Russians.

          So, again, it's only protected by our Constitution if you're a citizen.

          Now, I would understand if our judicial system pretended otherwise, since it's as corrupt as the other two branches... nevertheless...

          Suggesting that our Constitution protects the rights of foreigners is like suggesting that I can make a claim on your insurance policy. Your policy is a contract between you and your insurer. The Constitution is a contract between our government and citizenry.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by dbhalling 10 years, 10 months ago
            No Rights do not come from god they come from logic. Natural Rights starts with the simple proposition that you own your self. Rand explains why this is so for man. Anything that contradicts the proposition that you own your self means that you are a slave. Obvious examples are murder and slavery, but so are restrictions of free speech or religion.

            I do not believe that Natural Rights are a euphemism for individual rights. Natural Rights has a specific philosophical basis in Locke and the Declaration of Independence. Individual rights does not have this foundation.

            Rights do not only apply to a citizen that is neither logical nor historically correct under the Constitution. If they are Natural Rights then they exist regardless of whether a government enforces them. This is important, because we have to have a standard by which to judge the actions of our (any) government. It is also important, because as Locke and Jefferson made it clear when the government fails to protect these rights, the people have the right to overthrow the government - by force if necessary. The social contract theory does not limit the contract to citizens. There is not logical or historical basis for this. Based on your idea then Rights would not apply to a baby, since it could not have consented to the contract. Natural Rights transcend citizenship - they exist because you are a person.

            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Rozar 10 years, 10 months ago
    I don't know if he actually said this but the message is good. Depressing but good. I'd like to know who down voted you.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 10 years, 10 months ago
      Well..the gulch is infested lately so take your pick.
      I still stand by my initial proclamation that Snowden is a hero.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by jrsedivy 10 years, 10 months ago
        Great segment, short, to the point, with a solid message.

        I agree with you that Snowden is a hero but it's not a popular opinion to have as both sides denounce him. I think the right do so from a national security standpoint, however I believe many miss that the point of a strong defense is to protect, defend and uphold the Constitution. There is an excellent Rolling Stone piece on Snowden that may be of interest to you if you haven't seen it already:

        http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/new...

        It's a really long article but well worth the time.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by Rozar 10 years, 10 months ago
        I've always liked him. I was super surprised to here even the right wing MSM denounce him.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by jrsedivy 10 years, 10 months ago
          This surprised me as well, but in hindsight it probably shouldn't have. Many complain about things that are happening, but few have the courage and tenacity to stand against popular opinion and take action.

          Here you have someone who actually saw something that he believed was of detriment to our country and he risked his life to inform us. In my opinion this falls squarely into the category of a hero. What if he would have never taken these steps? How long and how far would this have gone before anyone knew of these actions?
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by 10 years, 10 months ago
            PRE-cisely my point. And they love to say he's sold secret to enemies (or given them away)... I don't think he'd risk life and limb and lose his life to then aid the enemy....doesn't add up AT ALL. And this idea that he's a traitor for not going to internal complaint board (or congress, or whatever) is lunacy. He'd be 6 feet under or shark bait by now and we'd never know the difference!
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by jrsedivy 10 years, 10 months ago
              Agreed on all counts. If you haven't read it already I highly recommend the Rolling Stone article abut Snowden and the journalist he was working with that I had posted in response to Rozar's comment. The article really plays out the complexity of the situation very well and I think you might enjoy it given your comments on this issue.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by 10 years, 10 months ago
                I new a lot of these details already from reading other articles from The Guardian, but I was surprised to learn the ebay's founder was funding the media venture with Greenwald regarding the Snowden documents. That's an interesting tid bit I'd like to know more about how that came to be. Of course I'd like to know more about the whole thing. :) Interesting read, thanks for suggesting it. (Must demonize him...can't have him being a hero other people might start to get interested...ugh...people in this country have flippin' blinders on!)
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • Posted by jrsedivy 10 years, 10 months ago
                  No problem, glad you found it interesting. The new media venture is definitely interesting. I suspect that there are others who share our views on this matter and in this instance are willing to back it with significant funding. One of the things that stood out to me in the article was how organized Snowden was and the patience he had in getting this information to a safe source. The article did not paint the picture of a "traitor" seeking personal fame or fortune. Many are definitely wearing blinders in this case, with some calling for his death or life imprisonment which I simply cannot understand.
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
            • Posted by Hiraghm 10 years, 10 months ago
              He could have done what Robert Redford did in 3 Days of the Condor:

              http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7NHytm-gU...

              He could have gone to Fox News, the Washington Times, the New York Post, The Oklahoman, Michelle Malkin, James O'Keefe.

              He could have gone to our own people, not the enemy.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by 10 years, 10 months ago
                And how quickly would 'they' have caught up to him? A freak accident of some kind...and.. end of story. He was smart to bolt with the goods and find journalists he knew he could trust. He outted the enemy and he got off it's turf before doing so. It was well thought out and planned and organized. He knew what he was doing, he knew what he was risking and he took the necessary precautions to keep it all safe, including himself and his whistle.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by strugatsky 10 years, 10 months ago
                He only had one shot at it and one chance; and many chances to become shark bait. With information of this type, all US media outlets would have first cleared it with the "authorities" and by that time he would have been no more.
                Perhaps a tough choice, but logical.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
                • Posted by Hiraghm 10 years, 10 months ago
                  Okay, fine. He got the word out. Now come home and face execution for treason. Be the martyr.
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                  • Posted by strugatsky 10 years, 10 months ago
                    "Execution for treason" from an administration and a government that is far more guilting of treason? Fast and Furious was a direct attack on the Constitution, besides the murder of thousands of people in Mexico. Rule by fiat is a direct attack on the Constitution and the separation of powers. Out right lying to the nation is an affront to all. Need I go on? So, you want him to face execution for treason? And who are the judges?
                    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by 10 years, 10 months ago
          There's a bunch of them I think have their heads up their butts just as far as the left, they just don't know it. Pandering for ratings or votes is not principled. Nor is compromise. And they are too afraid to call a spade a spade or offending. All sickening to watch. Why don't they just say the truth..it has no agenda and it's pleasantly uncomplicated.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by brs02 10 years, 10 months ago
        A hero would not have fled to China, then Russia, or kept some of the information secret threatening to use it later.....
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by strugatsky 10 years, 10 months ago
          Would you suggest that he should have committed suicide by making himself available to the unconstitutional administration? Perhaps, then, George Washington should not have quietly slipped from the British encirclement but stood up with his sword, like a man?
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
          • Posted by Hiraghm 10 years, 10 months ago
            Yes, he should have stayed and fought rather than run and hid behind the skirts of our enemies.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by strugatsky 10 years, 10 months ago
              Perhaps he knew that "staying and fighting" would have gotten him and the message six feet under. During the days of the Soviet Union, there were many patriots who wanted better lives for Russia and Russians. Some chose to "stay and fight," and they are still making good fertilizer. Others ran and hid behind the skirts of their enemies, and were much more effective, besides being alive. The US has become very much like the Soviet Union (I know first-hand); why would you expect Snowden to have acted differently? How would you have acted?
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by 10 years, 10 months ago
              Stayed and fought....you can't 'fight' when you're in the middle of a fiery car crash, or a steep fall, or a sudden heart attack. He knows his enemy... apparently you don't.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ blarman 10 years, 10 months ago
        Snowden to me is a paradox. On the one hand he expressly broke the law and defied the oath he took. On the other hand, one can also argue that his employment contract was voided because of lack of good faith on the part of the employer! I like to think it is the latter, but this isn't contract law - the US would lock him up and throw away the key if they could.

        I think what he did was necessary to expose to the world how corrupted and power-hungry the US government has become.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by strugatsky 10 years, 10 months ago
          If Snowden's defiance of the oath is a "paradox," what does that make Obama and every member of his administration? Snowden broke the oath in order to uphold the Constitution; Obama broke the oath in order to destroy it.
          And the issue is not "to expose to the world" - the issue is to expose it to American citizens.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by $ blarman 10 years, 10 months ago
            Obama is an elitist and dictator wannabe. He believes that due to his own ego he should be making life decisions for other people and that those people should just accept his benevolence.

            Do I consider Obama's offenses to be greater than Snowden's? Orders of magnitude greater and wide-ranging. There is also the small issue of intent, in which I agree with you whole-heartedly. Obama should be impeached, but that won't happen because there is no way a Democratic Senate will vote to convict. :(

            As to whom the lies get exposed to, in the end everyone is going to know anyway. Americans are simply the ones who need to know MOST.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by 10 years, 10 months ago
              Who was trying to hide the truth and who was trying to expose it? Which one is evil?
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by $ blarman 10 years, 10 months ago
                Snowden wasn't evil per se, but he did break the law. A potentially bad law, but there are lots of those people still get convicted for. Snowden's intent was to shine light on the illicit activities of the government, which in my book is a mitigating factor.

                The activities themselves are designed with the intent to control and subvert power, which is evil. Clear enough?
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
        • Posted by Hiraghm 10 years, 10 months ago
          "I think what he did was necessary to expose to the world how corrupted and power-hungry the US government has become. "

          I apologize in advance to the women and children on this blogsite, but...

          F* THE WORLD.
          They don't need to know how corrupt our government is or isn't. It's none of their affair. They're not fit to deal with it. We will. Eventually.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by 10 years, 10 months ago
            There was no way to make the American people aware of NSA spying without also letting the rest of the world know too. And let's face it... probably most Americans have never heard (or remembering hearing) the name Eric Snowden or what he risked to expose the truth to them. Too many Americans are flat out ignorant.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by jrsedivy 10 years, 10 months ago
      I'm not sure if the message appeared elsewhere but I did see it in today's headlines of the Austin Business Journal:

      http://upstart.bizjournals.com/entrepren...

      Thought this might add credibility to the story. The accompanying article seems interesting, especially as it appears that our domestic media seems more critical of him when compared to the international press.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo