(Advanced) The Snowden Debate

Former National Security Agency lawyer Stewart Baker and Pentagon Papers whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg join us for a debate on Edward Snowden's disclosure of the NSA's massive spying apparatus in the United States and across the globe. 

Pre-learn vocab:

12 collocations

Watch:

The Snowden Debate

Put the points in the order the speakers make them

Stewart Baker

Snowden has done great diplomatic damage.

Foreign intelligence agencies have probably been able to get access to the unpublished classified information he shared with journalists.

Snowden didn't have to release so much information.

Snowden deliberately changed jobs to get  as many documents as he could.

He has released some information that has sparked a debate in the United States, but he has continued to disclose documents, which have no obvious policy value in terms of a debate.

He has violated U.S. law.

There must be a limit on what the public debates because surveillance by definition needs to be secret.

Snowden didn't go through the correct procedures to release the information.

Snowden has hurt The US's ability to catch terrorists and to keep an eye on Iranian and North Korean and Chinese and Russian operations.

Daniel Ellsberg

Snowden was in fact defending the constitution of the USA.

Snowden needed to put out enough documentation to make the case irrefutable. If he'd leaked one or just a few documents, the authorities would have said it was only an isolated example.

There’s no evidence that Snowden joined the NSA in order to harm the interests of the USA.

He saw the director of the NSA violate his oath to uphold the constitution.

Snowden has revealed a broken Constitution and  created  the opportunity to retrieve the public's civil liberties.

Discuss:

Who makes a stronger case in your opinion?

	Questions or challenges should be professional. Insulting, condescending, or comments involving personal language or attacks are unacceptable.
	Critical analysis, synthesis, rhetorical skill, and wit are keys to debate success.
	Focus on the opposing side’s position or argument. Knowing the “other side” is critical for preparing strategies to refute your opponent’s arguments.
	Limit your arguments to three or less.
	Use logic to make your arguments. Present these arguments clearly and concisely.
	Know the common errors in thinking like logical fallacies and use them effectively in your refutation.
	Present the content accurately. Only use content that is pertinent to your point of view and draw on support from authoritative sources.
	Be certain of the validity of all external evidence presented for your arguments. Also, challenges to the validity of evidence should be made only on substantive grounds.
	Your rebuttal (or conclusion) in a debate is your final summary position. Use it as an opportunity to highlight important issues that indicate proof of your points or refute your opponent’s argument.