

Obama to reporters: 'I don't see Snowden as a patriot' [video] - rdudekul
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/08/09/obama-news-conference/2636191/

======
if_by_whisky
"I called for a thorough review of our surveillance operations before Mr.
Snowden made these leaks. My preference, and I think, the American people's
preference would have been for a lawful, orderly, examination of these laws.
A... lawful, fact-based debate."

How could we possibly have a fact-based debate without knowing any of the
facts?

~~~
malandrew
Nope. My preference is for whatever discussion and debate proves most truthful
and transparent. Having all these documents in the hands of Greenwald and
Snowden means that the have no choice but to participate honestly or risk
being outed as liars.

If they really wanted an orderly, lawful examination they should already be in
the process of indicting James Clapper for perjury.

------
Zariel
Of course he has to say this, how else is he to response? But In reality what
defines being "patriot" doing what you believe is right for your country? Then
Snowdown is a patriot.

~~~
eshvk
> But In reality what defines being "patriot" doing what you believe is right
> for your country? That is a very loose definition. By that definition, every
> soldier including William Calley [1] is a patriot.

[1][http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Calley](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Calley)

~~~
jlgreco
Labeling somebody as a patriot should not be seen necessarily as signalling
approval.

I would not hesitate to label anyone in the military who _enlisted_ [1] for
_non-selfish reasons_ [2] a patriot. I think it would be inaccurate to claim
otherwise.

[1] Somebody who was drafted _may or may not_ be a patriot.

[2] Reasons that I would consider 'selfish' for these purposes include _" I
wanted to see the world"_ or _" GI Bill"_.

------
mark_l_watson
I donated money to Obama's 2008 campaign and voted for him twice. Now, my
honest opinion is that some of his statements are outright lies. Saying he
called for an orderly examination of privacy issues seems flat out wrong given
that his administration has been trying to keep things hushed up. He comes off
as trying to deliberately confuse and mislead the public. Open government -
ha!

I am so disappointed with Obama. I think that history will be very harsh in
judging him.

------
Sven7
That line wasn't an accident and that's the most disgusting bit about it.

Come on Mr. Obama. I expect better from you. Gandhi and Mandela were charged
for all kinds of things. Lets not start making that the bar. I wouldn't want
to start calling all those classy dudes on Wall Street patroits now.

------
duaneb
I don't see the government as very patriotic either.

------
nfoz
My transcription of an interesting part of his talk:

""I don't have an interest, and the people of the NSA don't have an interest,
in doing anything other than making sure that where we can prevent a terrorist
attack; where we can get information ahead of time, that we're able to carry
out that critical task. We do not have an interest in doing anything other
than that. And we've tried to set up a system that is as failsafe as far as
we've been able to think of, to make sure that these programs are not abused.

But people may have better ideas. And people may wanna jigger slightly sort of
the balance between uh, the information that we can get, vs. the incremental
encroachments on privacy that if haven't already taken place might take place
in a future administration (or as technologies develop further).

And the other thing that's happening is that as technology develops further,
technology itself may provide us some additional safeguards. So for example if
people don't have confidence that the law, the checks and balances of the
court, and congress, are sufficient to give us confidence that government's
not snooping. Well, maybe we can embed technologies in there that prevent the
snooping regardless of what government wants to do. I mean there may be some
technological fixes that provide another layer of assurance. And so those are
the kinds of things that I'm looking forward to having a conversation about."

\-- Obama

------
olaf
I see Obama as a false hope.

------
jlgreco
Presidents seem to generally be rather piss-poor judges of character.

~~~
jmduke
I'd say presidents are generally better judges of character than the vast
majority of the populace, given their position. It's fun and often therapeutic
to assume that government officials and politicians aren't as smart as _us
programmers_ , but an overwhelming amount of evidence generally points to the
fact that U.S. Presidents are, if nothing else, incredibly intelligent.

I'd also generally say that my (and likely your) first-hand knowledge is
incredibly lacking, as I have never actually met any Presidents.

~~~
jlgreco
I'd say the general population is not the bar we should be holding people to,
particularly not high-ranking politicians. Not by a hell of a long shot. I
mean congratulation, they are better than a group of people in which racism,
sexism, and various other forms of bigotry are still massively prevalent....

You don't need to meet a president to hear what he has to say about people.
Presidents are often quoted you see...

------
anon292929
So we were supposed to have conversations about things we didn't know anything
about?

------
bungle
I don't see Obama worth a Nobel price. Maybe they will give one to Snowden
next time.

------
Scryptonite
Shocking. </sarcasm>

I saw this a mile away. Anyone who didn't call this should work on improving
their judge of character.

Snowden is a patriot.

------
vehementi
Wow.

------
samstave
One of the things you'll notice in everything that Obama says, is how he ties
everything to an emotional response. His rhetoric is that of one who is using
suggestive language to sway the public - and he is a master of it - but once
you recognize it, it just makes you ill with simply how often he invokes the
tactic.

Emotions can affect behaviour, especially in those who don't have a good
filter, which is a majority of any human who is poorly educated, especially
about themselves.

Obama is a true political propagandist and absolutely nothing he says should
be believed - and it should be listened to with caution. It is better to read
his words than to hear them as you can more easily filter out his suggestive
emotional tone, and spot his key phrasings.

This is several years old... but there are many people who have stated what I
stated above. This is a 67 page writeup on his method of suggestive language.

[http://exopolitics.blogs.com/files/obamas_use_of_hidden_hypn...](http://exopolitics.blogs.com/files/obamas_use_of_hidden_hypnosis_techniques_in_his_speeches.pdf)

