> Even if he reivewd each document, it's crazy to believe Snowden, someone with zero intelligence, military, or diplomatic experience could accurate determine what was illegal, "need to know," or "safe."
Why is that crazy to believe? I think it's crazier to believe that the only people who should be given the official authority to decide which secrets to keep are those who are directly and strongly incentivized to keep secrets about atrocious programs like those which Snowden has leaked.
Because he doesn't know what he is looking at. He doesn't know what he doesn't know. He doesn't know what has been said to foreign diplomats.
>I think it's crazier to believe that the only people who should be given the official authority to decide which secrets to keep are those who are directly and strongly incentivized to keep secrets about atrocious programs like those which Snowden has leaked.
I would be behind an independent group to review this sort of stuff. But it can't be one political dood who thinks he is doing the right thing.
How do you construct an "independent group"? Who chooses the people in this group? If it's the government choosing, then it's not independent. If people can choose for themselves to review this sort of stuff, well, that's what Snowden did.
What is your scheme to ensure that all of the people who need to review (which should be millions, right?) are able to fairly review, without also exposing the stuff which should not be seen by ISIS to that review?
Snowden "chose for himself" just as much as John Walker "chose for himself" to figure out U.S. Navy anti-submarine doctrine during the 80s and pass it to the Russians.
Why is that crazy to believe? I think it's crazier to believe that the only people who should be given the official authority to decide which secrets to keep are those who are directly and strongly incentivized to keep secrets about atrocious programs like those which Snowden has leaked.