Snowden is not a traitor or a whistle-blower. He is a hacktivist-type.

[cthulu2016]

In this case the computer hack was getting a job where they let you sit at the computer and download all the secrets, but it works out the same as if Snowden had hacked into the computer from his mom's basement... Snowden ends up with a thumb-drive full of secrets.

From that point he could:

a) secretly inform our enemies of the intel. (Traitor)

b) bring forward the information in the most responsible way that would expose the wrongdoing. (Whistleblower) Or...

c) dumb the intel all over the place. (hacktavist... anarchist... "anonymous"-type... etc.)

Political hacker types tend to have a credo of No Secrets. A theory that total disclosure yields a better world.

I am not a fan of that in all instances, or even most instances. I am not a fan of Snowden's actions. I have very mixed feelings, but certainly think it was correct to charge him with something because otherwise classification is just a 'serving suggestion.'

On the other hand, I do have a very general sympathy for the mass-information-dump philosophy because whatever the problem with the world is, it isn't that there just aren't enough secrets kept from the 7 billion folks without security clearances.

And Snowden's biggest detractors are so profoundly horrible and ill-motivated it does generate some sympathy or affinity for his side of things. It isn't right o judge things by who is against them, but the anti-Snowden flacks rolled out on TV are so awful that it's like a 2003 flash-back.

Snowden certainly has been diseminating stuff rather itrresponsibly, but he did as the Washington Post and the Guardian to limit disclosures to avoid things like the identities of intelligence assets in the field, etc.. I don't think his objective was to get everyone killed. That is a small distinction, but it is what it is. He's not Lex Luthor.

He may be like the enviro-activists who "liberate" animals that don't know how to survive in the woods. Irresponsible and self-absorbed and thoughtlessly self-righteous.

Snowden is, no doubt, a major commiter of espionage. Criminal? Oath-breaker? Yeah, pretty much on the face of the thing.

Traitor? No, I don't feel like he was trying to make America lose a war.

[ProSense]

1. He's a criminal. n/t

[Harmony Blue]

3. He's a hero

[ProSense]

4. This

is a hero: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023084246

[Tx4obama]

2. BUT Snowden's criminal actions will contribute to America having loses in the current cyberwar

... which is being conducted against The USA by other countries.

Arrest him, trial him in court, toss him in prison, and throw away the key.

[Whisp]

5. +++ If Snowden's deceit ends up with a power grid shut down

or diddling with a nuclear facility, I wonder how loud the cheers for that and what Snowden might have contributed to will be.

Unbelievable sickness.

Fuck Ron Paul and his idiot followers.

[disidoro01]

9. What

This is over the top lunacy. Nuclear meltdown's, Grid failures? Fearmonger much?

[Whisp]

12. look up cyberwarfare.

[Gravitycollapse]

10. Your attempts to warp reality are futile.

[frazzled]

6. No secrets ... except for himself

Odd, isn't it, how those who yell loudest for "no secrets" are the first to put pillows over their doors or make people put their phones in the refrigerator so that no one can hear THEIR secrets.

[backscatter712]

7. Funny, that's what our "free and democratic" government keeps telling us.

"No secrets for you, just for us!"

[frazzled]

8. So he's no better than them

Although I don't believe it is possible or desirable for there to be NO secrets, either with governments or individuals.

If you think we have no need for spies or intelligence (though we've had them since the time of George Washington, and every other country has them), then we shouldn't have any intelligence agencies at all. No NSA, no CIA, no FBI, no military intelligence ... no police intelligence, for that matter. Forget figuring out who the gang members are; if you happen to run across one on your beat, good luck.

Welcome to the kooky world of Ron/Rand Paul world, where we have no foreign engagements, no intelligence agencies, and no Fed! Conspiracy theories about everything are as good as intelligence, and they're not secret! (They're just wrong.)

The only question should be how many and what kinds of secrets the government should keep; and what kinds of oversight the Congress and courts should have over them. But to envision a government that can conduct its foreign and military obligations with no secrets is naive and dangerous.

[disidoro01]

11. Nonsense

your all or nothing approach is wrong. I don't believe that our government needs to surveil 300 million americans and store the information. That doesn't mean I believe there shouldn't be police.