“What makes us different from other countries is not simply our ability to secure our nation,” Obama said. “It’s the way we do it, with open debate and democratic process.”

If that’s so, then Edward Snowden should be hailed as a hero. There’s simply no doubt that his leaks led to more open debate and more democratic process than would’ve existed otherwise.

Obama reluctantly admitted as much. “There’s no doubt that Mr. Snowden’s leaks triggered a much more rapid and passionate response than would have been the case if I had simply appointed this review board,” he said, though he also argued that absent Snowden, “we would have gotten to the same place, and we would have done so without putting at risk our national security and some very vital ways that we are able to get intelligence that we need to secure the country.”

As Tim Lee writes, "this is dubious at best. Prior to Snowden’s remarks, there was little public debate — in part because the federal government was preventing it".

<continue>

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/08/09/edward-snowden-patriot/

All this makes one wonder just what are the reasons for any swearing an oath to the country whose govt. sees its people as enemies or potential enemies of the State. What justification is there in an oath when no oath of allegiance states that one must become a liar for your govt. and withhold the truths from your own people as so many thousands do in a secret collusion to keep the truths hidden from people that they ostensibly work for. Clearly, there is a terminal conflict of interest here, never mind turning on your own people and spying on them in secret or developing weapons of mass submission just in case of an uprising... Perhaps if it was all done openly, people would prefer that over keeping it all secret...betcha they,(the sheeple), probably would!