Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Espionage/Archives/2013/August
 | This is an archive of past discussions about Wikipedia:WikiProject Espionage. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Can we bump Snowden up to High importance?
He's really shaken up the NSA. The social, political, legal, and diplomatic implications of his actions tell me that he is probably more important in the Intelligence community than anyone else in the last decade.
Legal:
- Microsoft, Yahoo!, AOL, and Facebook suing for a declassification of their role in PRISM.
- Lawsuits from EFF, ACLU, and many others.
Political:
- Multiple senate and congressional hearings
- Grave concerns from multiple politicians. Of both parties.
Social:
- Restore the Fourth
- Similar political movements
- The populace has become engaged.
- Revitalized attention to the issues raised by those who came before. Thomas Drake, William Binney, John Kiriakou, and Russ Tice.
Diplomatic:
- Direct involvement of no fewer than seven heads of state.
- Latin American countries, Germany, and France demanding answers.
- implications for China and Russia as well.
And the Incident keeps having ever growing ramifications and implications. If there's anyone who needs to be High Importance, it's Edward Snowden. Right now his ranking is only "mid" in Project Espionage. The media attention to him isn't just a sideshow. His revelations and actions have real, significant, and long term impacts.
--71.20.55.6 (talk) 18:35, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
- Disagree, for now. First, being listed as highly prominent for espionage is not an honor. It should be approached with care when referring to a living person (just as a listing in the "American traitors" category). Edward Snowden has been charged with espionage. He has NOT been tried or convicted. Also, his prominence is recent, approximately six weeks. I don't question the validity of the points you made! They are good justifications for listing Edward Snowden at medium level importance, despite recent-ness. --FeralOink (talk) 01:50, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
- I wouldn't care for wiki to render judgement upon his guilt or innocence. The reason I believe he is important to Espionage isn't even based on his spy-hood or lack thereof. It's that he has become one of the best public sources of information about espionage, or at least the mechanics of how the NSA conducts the electronic portion of it. His case, even at this early stage has been very instructive in revealing also, just how far the US is willing to go to punish a perceived threat, and test the limits of other countries' abilities and willingness to resist the US in that regards, and what costs they are willing to bear on his behalf. I hesitate to predict the future in this venue, but I believe that, whatever the eventual outcome, he will shape policies around the world for decades. --71.20.55.6 (talk) 10:11, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
- Let's wait till they find Snowden, workout the case and wait for the verdict of the trial. It's only a matter of time – if he goes to trial. If Julian Assange has been able to cover his tracks for this long, why couldn't Snowden get help from Assange to do so? As for the assessment, we'll keep it at what it is. Adamdaley (talk) 06:32, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
- I wouldn't care for wiki to render judgement upon his guilt or innocence. The reason I believe he is important to Espionage isn't even based on his spy-hood or lack thereof. It's that he has become one of the best public sources of information about espionage, or at least the mechanics of how the NSA conducts the electronic portion of it. His case, even at this early stage has been very instructive in revealing also, just how far the US is willing to go to punish a perceived threat, and test the limits of other countries' abilities and willingness to resist the US in that regards, and what costs they are willing to bear on his behalf. I hesitate to predict the future in this venue, but I believe that, whatever the eventual outcome, he will shape policies around the world for decades. --71.20.55.6 (talk) 10:11, 21 July 2013 (UTC)