John Walker, the Navy spy who defined crypto-betrayal, dead at 77

Opinion: If you want to call anyone a traitor, measure them against John Walker first.

Read the whole story

 

[Chamrin]

fadedtimes[/url]":3d1qh8qc]It's all a matter of perspective. Sure he betrayed the USA, but we had spies and informants Soviet areas, which lead to human death and damages. Both sides are evil when it came to these conflicts in the Cold War.

Because others do "evil" does not excuse ones own evilness.

 

[Mujokan]

fadedtimes[/url]":26i3eie4]It's all a matter of perspective. Sure he betrayed the USA, but we had spies and informants Soviet areas, which lead to human death and damages. Both sides are evil when it came to these conflicts in the Cold War.

This issue is way too complicated to reduce to "both sides are evil". Watch a documentary on the gulags for instance.

The US was evil in Vietnam, and Central and South America, etc. But I am glad it wasn't the US government that collapsed to end the Cold War. Despite what the US has created in the Middle East in the last decade or two.

The justification for Snowden is that he woke us up to the potential for totalitarianism from our own governments. Walker couldn't claim anything like that, he was just helping actual totalitarians.

 

[chrysostomos]

Chamrin[/url]":121t118p]

fadedtimes[/url]":121t118p]It's all a matter of perspective. Sure he betrayed the USA, but we had spies and informants Soviet areas, which lead to human death and damages. Both sides are evil when it came to these conflicts in the Cold War.

Because others do "evil" does not excuse ones own evilness.

Indeed. I often wonder why people resort to that pathetic Tu quoque fallacy to excuse the most atrocious behaviour.

 

[rhenley]

The Independent does a better background of this person, detailing his scheme after he 'retired' from the service and enlisted other family members in perpetuating the fraud. He was only caught when his ex-wife couldn't handle him attempting to enlist his daughter, and went to the FBI !

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... 01184.html

 

[Buffy]

Walker couldn't claim anything like that, he was just helping actual totalitarians.

No, he was just helping himself. The benefit to the Soviets was just a by-product.

 

[skicow]

Well, if you listen to some who believe Snowden is a traitor, they say he's getting paid by the Soviets as well.

I personally believe Snowden to be a whistle-blower at the least, and more towards a hero.

 

[Buffy]

So what he did, didn't aid anyone else other than himself? Wrong. He helped himself and the Russians.

Oh, the Soviets sure benefited, no doubt about that! I just don't think his motivation was anything other than selfish.

 

[abridge683]

The rat-bastard didn't die fast enough. He put my shipmates in perilous danger.

Yeah, I haven't forgiven him at all. The comparisons to Snowden aren't apt. This guy wasn't a whistle-blower. He was flat out selling Top Secret information to the Soviets that impacted people in the field in a real-time way.

Good riddance.

 

[seanmgallagher]

rhenley[/url]":2d0ppvbm]The Independent does a better background of this person, detailing his scheme after he 'retired' from the service and enlisted other family members in perpetuating the fraud. He was only caught when his ex-wife couldn't handle him attempting to enlist his daughter, and went to the FBI !

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... 01184.html

There are a number of "better" stories on Walker. I would recommend John Prados' profile at USNI: http://m.usni.org/magazines/navalhistor ... t-betrayal

 

[Quiet Desperation]

Mujokan[/url]":3dnf1bkh]The justification for Snowden is that he woke us up to the potential for totalitarianism from our own governments. Walker couldn't claim anything like that, he was just helping actual totalitarians.

Well, woke *you* up. Some of us were long preaching that angle and bring roundly ridiculed by the geekverse in general. Same thing with police militarization.

Edir: OK, OK, I was totally cranky here. I'm sorry. Hugs? I should be glad people are seeing this stuff now,.

 

[Mujokan]

Quiet Desperation[/url]":gig1816a]

Mujokan[/url]":gig1816a]The justification for Snowden is that he woke us up to the potential for totalitarianism from our own governments. Walker couldn't claim anything like that, he was just helping actual totalitarians.

Well, woke *you* up. Some of us were long preaching that angle and bring roundly ridiculed by the geekverse in general. Same thing with police militarization.

Congratulations.

 

[dlux]

For a moment I thought this guy died, and I panicked:

 

[chanman819]

 

[Poryhack]

Fatesrider[/url]":2wdtaark]

Mujokan[/url]":2wdtaark]

fadedtimes[/url]":2wdtaark]It's all a matter of perspective. Sure he betrayed the USA, but we had spies and informants Soviet areas, which lead to human death and damages. Both sides are evil when it came to these conflicts in the Cold War.

This issue is way too complicated to reduce to "both sides are evil". Watch a documentary on the gulags for instance.

The US was evil in Vietnam, and Central and South America, etc. But I am glad it wasn't the US government that collapsed to end the Cold War. Despite what the US has created in the Middle East in the last decade or two.

The justification for Snowden is that he woke us up to the potential for totalitarianism from our own governments. Walker couldn't claim anything like that, he was just helping actual totalitarians.

<overly long keyboard warrior bullshit>

If you were an expert on this like you claim to be you'd realize that the security of the country has always been a secondary objective at best. You're really worried about security and lives? There are better ways to spend the billions of dollars we give the NSA to spy on us. Pour that money into self driving cars, medical research, etc etc etc. There are a million and one better ways to spend it. Terrorism is nothing but a bogeyman used by the government to scare the populace into submission; how about we solve the larger issues first?

 

[dlux]

I'm seeing a lot of 'ignore' lists getting updated in this thread.

 

[killing_time]

Chamrin[/url]":sc931iu5]

fadedtimes[/url]":sc931iu5]It's all a matter of perspective. Sure he betrayed the USA, but we had spies and informants Soviet areas, which lead to human death and damages. Both sides are evil when it came to these conflicts in the Cold War.

Because others do "evil" does not excuse ones own evilness.

he didn't ask for a pardon, its a statement that no one is beyond criticism.
a person should be careful or question who they root for.

 

[Mujokan]

@Fatesrider

I won't downvote you, your side of the argument has to be made.

But we have to think in the longer term. Democracy is more fragile than we might imagine, who've grown up with it. We always have to take the high ground even if it costs us.

 

[MrTeapot]

Fatesrider[/url]":27ptf1sk]
I'll agree that the programs could have been run "better" (Though, under the circumstances, I defy ANYONE to detail specifically how). But the hysterical reaction on the part of the socially unaware who seemed surprised by all of this (despite the fact it's ALL been in the news since 1981 and I knew all about it from that ALONE long before Snowden's treasonous acts) was both unwarranted and hyperbolic. From an objective point of view, no one who didn't DESERVE to be harmed was harmed - until Snowden's revelations upset the terminally paranoid among us. In all honesty, I still can't understand why people were surprised by it or, more importantly, why they're blaming "the government" over it (as if our elected government is separate from the people). WE VOTED FOR THE GOVERNMENTS THAT DID THIS!

Here is specifically how it could be better. The government could stop violating its own laws in secret. I don't think its idealistic to hold a government accountable to follow its own laws. Its often hard to get that to actually happen, but its an important goal for a country that isn't trying to be totalitarian.

Your assertion that we voted for the government that did this is a little naive as well. Who exactly should I have voted for instead? I didn't realize "believes the government should be able to secretly violate its own laws with impunity" was a part of a candidate's political platform. Looking at how support for these programs is bipartisan, I think its pretty apparent that it isn't.

 

[SAI Peregrinus]

Fatesrider[/url]":31dicv20]

Mujokan[/url]":31dicv20]

fadedtimes[/url]":31dicv20]It's all a matter of perspective. Sure he betrayed the USA, but we had spies and informants Soviet areas, which lead to human death and damages. Both sides are evil when it came to these conflicts in the Cold War.

This issue is way too complicated to reduce to "both sides are evil". Watch a documentary on the gulags for instance.

The US was evil in Vietnam, and Central and South America, etc. But I am glad it wasn't the US government that collapsed to end the Cold War. Despite what the US has created in the Middle East in the last decade or two.

The justification for Snowden is that he woke us up to the potential for totalitarianism from our own governments. Walker couldn't claim anything like that, he was just helping actual totalitarians.

I put Snowden in the same category as Walker. Motives mean nothing to me when it comes to revealing intel that gives aid and comfort to the enemies of our country - which both did. One can argue the "ethics" of their motives all day long, but in the end, both were/are traitors.

The nuance with regard to Snowden about the "potential for totalitarianism" is that EVERY COUNTRY ON EARTH HAS ALWAYS HAD THE POTENTIAL to be totalitarian. Being "watched" by the state in our day to day lives is a long, long way from being manipulated, coerced and/or punished due to that state watching (which is the act of totalitarianism). Potential is to actual as fantasy is to reality. We elect our representatives, who enacted these programs, so the fault, if one must place blame, is on US for failing to be clear when we shouted "KEEP US SAFE!" after 9/11 when these programs were expanded. But remember, these programs have been around in various forms since REAGAN.

I'll agree that the programs could have been run "better" (Though, under the circumstances, I defy ANYONE to detail specifically how). But the hysterical reaction on the part of the socially unaware who seemed surprised by all of this (despite the fact it's ALL been in the news since 1981 and I knew all about it from that ALONE long before Snowden's treasonous acts) was both unwarranted and hyperbolic. From an objective point of view, no one who didn't DESERVE to be harmed was harmed - until Snowden's revelations upset the terminally paranoid among us. In all honesty, I still can't understand why people were surprised by it or, more importantly, why they're blaming "the government" over it (as if our elected government is separate from the people). WE VOTED FOR THE GOVERNMENTS THAT DID THIS!

Walker deserves to be shot for what he did. Snowden hasn't been tried and found guilty of anything in a court of law, and so his punishment is moot until then. But given his confessions and constant releases of information (which very likely led to emboldening Russia, in the face of an internationally embarrassed, and intelligence-gathering compromised U.S., to annex the Crimea and invade the Ukraine), I'll volunteer for the firing squad once the guilty verdict is handed down.

Vote me down if you will, I don't give a shit about ball-less wonders who are more worried about their sheep fetish being revealed to the government (who will do nothing about it) than about the security of their country. Just don't come crying to me when the next terrorist attack in the U.S. kills thousands because Snowden revealed how the U.S. gets intel on the bad guys and the came up with a way around it. I'd say the Ukrainians are already regretting it.

Edit: Fixed URL

Walker released data to the Soviet intelligence services. Snowden released data to the US public via journalists who have redacted information that could endanger field operatives. If these are both traitorous acts then you have a sick conception of who "the enemy" is.

 

[chrysostomos]

Mujokan[/url]":izsjcbj5]@Fatesrider

I won't downvote you, your side of the argument has to be made.

But we have to think in the longer term. Democracy is more fragile than we might imagine, who've grown up with it. We always have to take the high ground even if it costs us.

Democracy is a very tricky beast; for example, democracy can be used to tyrannise (see eg tyranny of the majority) or it can even be used to abolish itself as in the case of Nazi Germany and what potentially might happen should a majority of folks vote for a measure that causes power to be embodied in one individual.

This sort of happened in Egypt when the people naïvely voted in Morsi, not realising that he would take away a lot of their liberties or not give them more civil rights than they had under Mubarak.

Then there's the fact that in some parliamentary systems where there is a "first past the post" rule of vote counting a large chunk of the constituents are "represented" by someone who had been voted in by a slim majority of people, sometimes as low as 23%.

It'd be nice if we could implement a version of Athenian democracy where every individual had a vote towards lawmaking, or perhaps something like the Swiss Canton system. I don't think we need politicians who are so easily bought and then who go on to become lobbyists, influencing policy long after they'd left.

 

[Begelegeb]

John Walker, the Navy spy who defined crypto-betrayal, dead at 77

He wasn't a Navy spy, he was a soviet spy who was in the U.S. Navy (he spied for the soviets, not the U.S. Navy.)

 

[CppThis]

chrysostomos[/url]":1j9mnx6g]
Democracy is a very tricky beast; for example, democracy can be used to tyrannise (see eg tyranny of the majority) or it can even be used to abolish itself as in the case of Nazi Germany and what potentially might happen should a majority of folks vote for a measure that causes power to be embodied in one individual.

Not just Das Reich; historically speaking, virtually every violent repressive authoritarian regime had broad public support and secured power through legitimate will-of-the-people means. I learned a long time ago that 'the people' will usually line up behind the loudest asshole in the room regardless of whether his agenda is actually in their interest.

It'd be nice if we could implement a version of Athenian democracy where every individual had a vote towards lawmaking, or perhaps something like the Swiss Canton system. I don't think we need politicians who are so easily bought and then who go on to become lobbyists, influencing policy long after they'd left.

This was the idea behind the US system of government, that power would be delegated to the smallest possible unit of organization where individual citizens can remain involved. Unfortunately people decided it's easier and more lucrative to let a cental authority dole out free shit to its loyal supplicants, thus the slide toward crony-capitalist pay for play.

 

[Mujokan]

chrysostomos[/url]":1wapvt32]

Mujokan[/url]":1wapvt32]@Fatesrider

I won't downvote you, your side of the argument has to be made.

But we have to think in the longer term. Democracy is more fragile than we might imagine, who've grown up with it. We always have to take the high ground even if it costs us.

Democracy is a very tricky beast; for example, democracy can be used to tyrannise (see eg tyranny of the majority) or it can even be used to abolish itself as in the case of Nazi Germany and what potentially might happen should a majority of folks vote for a measure that causes power to be embodied in one individual.

This sort of happened in Egypt when the people naïvely voted in Morsi, not realising that he would take away a lot of their liberties or not give them more civil rights than they had under Mubarak.

Then there's the fact that in some parliamentary systems where there is a "first past the post" rule of vote counting a large chunk of the constituents are "represented" by someone who had been voted in by a slim majority of people, sometimes as low as 23%.

It'd be nice if we could implement a version of Athenian democracy where every individual had a vote towards lawmaking, or perhaps something like the Swiss Canton system. I don't think we need politicians who are so easily bought and then who go on to become lobbyists, influencing policy long after they'd left.

It's been a longstanding problem with Republican foreign policy that they think democracy only means having a reasonably accurate election. There's a lot more to it than that.

I think the Swiss system is the purest remnant of the founding philosophy of America. Of course it would never work in America. Too much civic responsibility is required.

 

[chanman819]

At first when you come across stories like this, you wonder why the spies sell out for so little - but the key thing is that there are only a handful of possible customers for that information - it's a buyer's market. And once they take that first step, their client has the ability to blackmail them.

At that point, the only way out is to come clean to your own counter-intel service and their preference will be to use you as a double agent to feed disinformation to your handlers - and then you're down the rabbit hole of being blackmailed by both sides and possibly either being imprisoned or assassinated as a liability if you're unlucky and choose poorly.

 

[steell]

dbmarketing[/url]":7rkyrg4h]

Fatesrider[/url]":7rkyrg4h]

Mujokan[/url]":7rkyrg4h]

fadedtimes[/url]":7rkyrg4h]It's all a matter of perspective. Sure he betrayed the USA, but we had spies and informants Soviet areas, which lead to human death and damages. Both sides are evil when it came to these conflicts in the Cold War.

This issue is way too complicated to reduce to "both sides are evil". Watch a documentary on the gulags for instance.

The US was evil in Vietnam, and Central and South America, etc. But I am glad it wasn't the US government that collapsed to end the Cold War. Despite what the US has created in the Middle East in the last decade or two.

The justification for Snowden is that he woke us up to the potential for totalitarianism from our own governments. Walker couldn't claim anything like that, he was just helping actual totalitarians.

I put Snowden in the same category as Walker. Motives mean nothing to me when it comes to revealing intel that gives aid and comfort to the enemies of our country - which both did. One can argue the "ethics" of their motives all day long, but in the end, both were/are traitors.

The nuance with regard to Snowden about the "potential for totalitarianism" is that EVERY COUNTRY ON EARTH HAS ALWAYS HAD THE POTENTIAL to be totalitarian. Being "watched" by the state in our day to day lives is a long, long way from being manipulated, coerced and/or punished due to that state watching (which is the act of totalitarianism). Potential is to actual as fantasy is to reality. We elect our representatives, who enacted these programs, so the fault, if one must place blame, is on US for failing to be clear when we shouted "KEEP US SAFE!" after 9/11 when these programs were expanded. But remember, these programs have been around in various forms since REAGAN.

I'll agree that the programs could have been run "better" (Though, under the circumstances, I defy ANYONE to detail specifically how). But the hysterical reaction on the part of the socially unaware who seemed surprised by all of this (despite the fact it's ALL been in the news since 1981 and I knew all about it from that ALONE long before Snowden's treasonous acts) was both unwarranted and hyperbolic. From an objective point of view, no one who didn't DESERVE to be harmed was harmed - until Snowden's revelations upset the terminally paranoid among us. In all honesty, I still can't understand why people were surprised by it or, more importantly, why they're blaming "the government" over it (as if our elected government is separate from the people). WE VOTED FOR THE GOVERNMENTS THAT DID THIS!

Walker deserves to be shot for what he did. Snowden hasn't been tried and found guilty of anything in a court of law, and so his punishment is moot until then. But given his confessions and constant releases of information (which very likely led to emboldening Russia, in the face of an internationally embarrassed, and intelligence-gathering compromised U.S., to annex the Crimea and invade the Ukraine), I'll volunteer for the firing squad once the guilty verdict is handed down.

Vote me down if you will, I don't give a shit about ball-less wonders who are more worried about their sheep fetish being revealed to the government (who will do nothing about it) than about the security of their country. Just don't come crying to me when the next terrorist attack in the U.S. kills thousands because Snowden revealed how the U.S. gets intel on the bad guys and the came up with a way around it. I'd say the Ukrainians are already regretting it.

Edit: Fixed URL

You're going to get downvoted because Snowden is the pinnacle of naive innocence failing to understand how the real world works - and thus is pretty much the avatar of most of the techno-liberterians who worship him.

No, he's getting downvoted just like you are because you're both cowards willing to give up your freedoms in exchange for imaginary security. You're both the definition of "Ball-less wonders".

Retired Military thank you very much, and you can both kiss my hairy ass.

.

 

[chrysostomos]

therealeffingaeiouy[/url]":344tmgsh]

Poryhack[/url]":344tmgsh]

Fatesrider[/url]":344tmgsh]

Mujokan[/url]":344tmgsh]

fadedtimes[/url]":344tmgsh]It's all a matter of perspective. Sure he betrayed the USA, but we had spies and informants Soviet areas, which lead to human death and damages. Both sides are evil when it came to these conflicts in the Cold War.

This issue is way too complicated to reduce to "both sides are evil". Watch a documentary on the gulags for instance.

The US was evil in Vietnam, and Central and South America, etc. But I am glad it wasn't the US government that collapsed to end the Cold War. Despite what the US has created in the Middle East in the last decade or two.

The justification for Snowden is that he woke us up to the potential for totalitarianism from our own governments. Walker couldn't claim anything like that, he was just helping actual totalitarians.

<overly long keyboard warrior bullshit>

If you were an expert on this like you claim to be you'd realize that the security of the country has always been a secondary objective at best. You're really worried about security and lives? There are better ways to spend the billions of dollars we give the NSA to spy on us. Pour that money into self driving cars, medical research, etc etc etc. There are a million and one better ways to spend it. Terrorism is nothing but a bogeyman used by the government to scare the populace into submission; how about we solve the larger issues first?

I want to ask you how old you are because I find it hard to believe you lived through any part of the Cold War but I am sure you will tell me you are 60 years old and flew bombers in Vietnam.

Are you accusing him of being John Kerry?

Edit: Holy smokes, John Kerry is 70!

 

[yesteray]

therealeffingaeiouy[/url]":2fy2st6r]
Manning and Snowden are absolute traitors who committed treason.

The US Constitution defines treason: "Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court."

Manning was not tried for treason, and obviously not convicted of treason, so I dispute your opinion that Manning is a traitor.

I would further dispute your opinion that Snowden is guilty of any act that the Constitution would define as treason. Perhaps he is guilty of what me might call ill-informed-by-talk-radio-treason. So instead of an "absolute traitor" he is ill-informed-by-talk-radio-traitor.

 

[G1itch]

therealeffingaeiouy[/url]":2vqzqw7h]It seems the article is deciding you are a traitor if you do it for money but if you do it because you think it is right then it is not the same thing.

What if John Walker did it because he believed communism was the right way to live and imperial commercialism was going to destroy the world? If he did it because he believed it was right. Would he be less of a traitor?

To me being a traitor is in the actions not the motivations. We can always review the repercussions and punishments through whatever lens we want. However I don't think something becomes not treason and one becomes not a traitor just because you support or emphasize with their motives.

Manning and Snowden are absolute traitors who committed treason. What, if any, punishment they deserve is entirely up for discussion. But because we believe they uncovered serious wrongs does not change what they actually did.

Traitors can and have done things for justifiable reasons and causes. The United States would not exist if not for the work of a lot of traitors. However to narrow the definition of traitor and treason to seeking monetary gain is way off the mark.

A nation is more than just a Government. Sometimes it is a portion of the Government that is the traitor and the country needs to protect itself from rogue elements in the Government.

So while Snowden may be a traitor in a professional sense because he betrayed his employer, he is a patriot in a citizenship sense because he essentially sacrificed his (normal) life in service to his country, to protect the country from rogue elements in the Government who view the Constitution as an obstacle to their goals.

In a sense George Bush and the NSA are traitors for violating the Constitution, the spirit of democracy, bringing the US Armed Forces into disrepute, normalizing torture, and potentially bringing about the end of the age of democracy.

 

[Old_Fogie_Late_Bloomer]

dbmarketing[/url]":f9rhx5a5]

Fatesrider[/url]":f9rhx5a5]

Mujokan[/url]":f9rhx5a5]

fadedtimes[/url]":f9rhx5a5]It's all a matter of perspective. Sure he betrayed the USA, but we had spies and informants Soviet areas, which lead to human death and damages. Both sides are evil when it came to these conflicts in the Cold War.

This issue is way too complicated to reduce to "both sides are evil". Watch a documentary on the gulags for instance.

The US was evil in Vietnam, and Central and South America, etc. But I am glad it wasn't the US government that collapsed to end the Cold War. Despite what the US has created in the Middle East in the last decade or two.

The justification for Snowden is that he woke us up to the potential for totalitarianism from our own governments. Walker couldn't claim anything like that, he was just helping actual totalitarians.

I put Snowden in the same category as Walker. Motives mean nothing to me when it comes to revealing intel that gives aid and comfort to the enemies of our country - which both did. One can argue the "ethics" of their motives all day long, but in the end, both were/are traitors.

The nuance with regard to Snowden about the "potential for totalitarianism" is that EVERY COUNTRY ON EARTH HAS ALWAYS HAD THE POTENTIAL to be totalitarian. Being "watched" by the state in our day to day lives is a long, long way from being manipulated, coerced and/or punished due to that state watching (which is the act of totalitarianism). Potential is to actual as fantasy is to reality. We elect our representatives, who enacted these programs, so the fault, if one must place blame, is on US for failing to be clear when we shouted "KEEP US SAFE!" after 9/11 when these programs were expanded. But remember, these programs have been around in various forms since REAGAN.

I'll agree that the programs could have been run "better" (Though, under the circumstances, I defy ANYONE to detail specifically how). But the hysterical reaction on the part of the socially unaware who seemed surprised by all of this (despite the fact it's ALL been in the news since 1981 and I knew all about it from that ALONE long before Snowden's treasonous acts) was both unwarranted and hyperbolic. From an objective point of view, no one who didn't DESERVE to be harmed was harmed - until Snowden's revelations upset the terminally paranoid among us. In all honesty, I still can't understand why people were surprised by it or, more importantly, why they're blaming "the government" over it (as if our elected government is separate from the people). WE VOTED FOR THE GOVERNMENTS THAT DID THIS!

Walker deserves to be shot for what he did. Snowden hasn't been tried and found guilty of anything in a court of law, and so his punishment is moot until then. But given his confessions and constant releases of information (which very likely led to emboldening Russia, in the face of an internationally embarrassed, and intelligence-gathering compromised U.S., to annex the Crimea and invade the Ukraine), I'll volunteer for the firing squad once the guilty verdict is handed down.

Vote me down if you will, I don't give a shit about ball-less wonders who are more worried about their sheep fetish being revealed to the government (who will do nothing about it) than about the security of their country. Just don't come crying to me when the next terrorist attack in the U.S. kills thousands because Snowden revealed how the U.S. gets intel on the bad guys and the came up with a way around it. I'd say the Ukrainians are already regretting it.

Edit: Fixed URL

You're going to get downvoted because Snowden is the pinnacle of naive innocence failing to understand how the real world works - and thus is pretty much the avatar of most of the techno-liberterians who worship him.

There's a difference between "naive[ly]...failing to understand how the real world works" and understanding how the world works while not being in any great hurry to roll over and expose one's belly to the jackels. I realize the distinction may be lost on those whose natural instinct is to submit to authority without question.

As for Snowden, his only naïveté was thinking that the average American cared enough about "the big red, white, and blue d--k that's being jammed up their @$$holes every day"--to quote the late, great George Carlin--to do anything about it.

Edit: speling... :/

 

[yesteray]

therealeffingaeiouy[/url]":xfp9mdih]

90% of the "revelations" by snowden aren't revealing to educated people and encompass things these government agencies should be doing. Yes, the issues of spying and collecting data on US citizens was uncovered and that is great. That is absolutely wrong and should not be happening. However people get up in arms when a profiteering newspaper leaks another snowden document that we spy on other countries (by the way that is the real treasonous part).

I cannot recall any Snowden document that relates to the US spying on a US enemy which is required for his actions to be remotely treasonous.