Please vote in the poll, then reply with a one-word answer: "Hero", "Criminal", or "Undecided".

After that, feel free to elaborate, share your thoughts, discuss.

Hero

Hero -- because he exposed that our 4th Amendments rights are being violated. A country that spies on its own people is a regime -- not a free democracy.

I voted "criminal", altho I'm thinking "traitor" is a better descriptor ~ the more I learn about Edward Snowden, the more I see him as a criminal/traitor ~ he admittedly took the job specifically to "go public" ~ and he put MANY people at great risk just to stroke his own ego ~ while I've never read the entirety of "whistleblower" legislation, I know there are ways to do so legally ~ Snowden went for the "fame", in hopes of the "fortune" following ~

Sooz

I'm 99% certain there is no way to "whistle blow" something that involves classified information and security clearance.

and he put MANY people at great risk just to stroke his own ego

Which people would those be other than the unproven claims by those who were embarrassed by the revelations?

I don't think Snowden did this because he wanted to stoke his ego. He did this for every American to let them know what their country is (illegally) doing.

Ignorance is not bliss. We are a democracy and we have the right to expect certain guarantees. Our Constitution guarantees us the right to no unreasonable searches. Collecting data on every American is an unreasonable search. If they suspect a particular person of doing something wrong, they can obtain a court order to get that person's phone records.

he is technically both. but if i can only choose one: hero.

He is definitely a criminal. Not sure if I consider him to be a hero or not. I'm surprised if anyone thought things like this were not happening. I'd be even more surprised if anyone thinks they will stop. This is part of "progress". We can see all and hear all.

Sorry, folks ~ I don't see him as a "hero", altho I think I understand mac's "both" comment ~ it is extraordinarily dangerous to hear/read something that gets your blood pumping withOUT all the accompanying background info ~ that alone is a very valid reason why some things are "classified" and require varying levels of security clearances ~ none of us are privy to "everything" any government is doing or is planning ... ever ~ that's exactly why elections matter ~

Sooz

How is he a criminal?
Reporting a crime isn't a crime although NOT reporting a crime could be.
It is your government that is breaking its own laws. If the laws are inadequate then your government should at least have the courage to be up front with its own citizens and publicly amend those allegedly inadequate laws. Of course, that may require a Constitutional Amendment.

He stole classified information from the govt.

Nope. He provided evidence of criminal acts.
By your reasoning then, Daniel Elsberg is a criminal and Ollie North isn't.

He took documents that were not his to take, in fact, it was classified govt information, he carried it around in briefcases and leaked it to the press. He stole classified information from the govt. Play with it all you want, he is a criminal. He did provide evidence of a crime, evidence he got illegally. He also has a lot of other information which may or may not involve crimes. He is carrying around classified information he stole. He is a criminal. I do not trust him with the info any more than I trust the govt not to commit crimes themselves. Maybe he truly thought he was doing the right thing. IMO, the right thing would have been to report the crimes to the proper people. Difficult finding the right people? Yep but imo much better than carrying classified info to places like China and Russia and running around where all sorts of people could have gotten hold of it. We disagree, oskar.

As I said, I can't decide whether he's a hero or not. There have been quite a few times when I have considered a criminal to be a hero. I'm just not sure about him.

Elsberg stole documents.
North followed orders.
Your government is committing crimes and Snowden exposed those crimes.

Ha, oskar. Yes, he did expose crimes. He committed a crime to do it. It was worth it to him and would be worth it to many people. I might do the same thing myself, but I would find the right people to report it to and not carry it around where others could get it.

Following orders is no excuse for committing a crime. North partcipated in actions banned by Congress. He lied to Congress. He obstructed justice and he shredded documents to cover up a crime. He is a criminal.

Elsberg stole classified govt documents. He is a criminal.

Does anyone think it will stop because he did this? In this day and age does anyone really think they have privacy on the phones or internet? If Mr see through govt and constitutonal scholar thought this was ok, is there any hope of a president who doesn't?

Pretty crappy countries we have, eh?

yep

i really don't have much confidence in classified information. i would guess the vast majority of it is classified to avoid either arrest of officials or embarrassment of same. only a small minority of classified information is classified for legitimate security reasons, again in my estimation. now, if you ask me: do i have anything other than my gut to go by, here? the answer to that is yes. i do. it is based on a preponderance of anecdotal evidence, much of which has been leaked by people like Snowden.

I voted "other" because I think he falls into both categories. He's a whistleblower for revealing the potentially illegal actions of the NSA but a criminal for additionally revealing much of the other classified information such as American attempts to spy on foreign leaders. I'm not excusing the American actions. If their guys had been caught in the other countries they should have been imprisoned by Germany or Canada or whatever country for a good many years as spies. However, it did endanger people and reveal secrets of his own country which, in anybody's book, is treason.

However, it did endanger people

Which people?

is it treasonous to endanger lives if you DON'T reveal secrets? if not, why not? and if so, how are Obama's actions in, say, Afghanistan, not treasonous?

also, you would have to show that Snowden endangered lives. can you show that?

i don't think this whole thing is nearly as black and white as most others seem to think it is.

Both. I have opposed the Patriot Act and always believed that the people who supported it were uninformed or unaware of the true consequences. I also believe that people who say we shouldn't care if we aren't doing anything wrong are shortsighted. I believe that the spying has been an attack on free speech and akin to warrantless searches and unlawful seizure of private words and thoughts. I am thankful that Snowden has ignited the conversation and provided some enlightenment.

But he is a criminal and has caused harm to the country and that cannot be ignored.

What harm, other than embarrassment?

Disclosures about the technology, hows and whens, and disclosures about the US actions involving other countries have placed some of our citizens at risk. If his actions are ignored, there are many other people with access to US secrets that can further harm the US and its agents if they go ahead and disclose what they know.

I can't expect you to agree. I do have a modicum of American patriotism even though I don't belong to the Grand Old Party.

However, it did endanger people

Which people?

Without actual names I can't point to specific people. However, Snowden didn't release just general information, he released specific information some of which has surfaced in news media. A determined group would have little problem identifying individuals or, at least, job titles to tie to the revelations. Mossad, AlQuaeda and other terror groups easily have the resources to do it.