If you think the Valerie Plame saga is worth flogging compared to Snowden you have a very serious gap in your judgment and sense of proportionality.

But if you want to continue, maybe you should get it right.

Valerie Plame

And no, "Richard Armitage" isn't an anagram for Richard Cheney.

When massive amounts of detailed information on intelligence programs and alliances is stolen and released to all comers and people try to claim that it doesn't cause any harm, as many here do, they might have a case to describe some of those people as "idiots."

Al-Qaeda's Embrace Of Encryption Technology - Part II: 2011-2014, And The Impact Of Edward Snowden

The CIA was about having an American intelligence agency suitable to face the challenge of the Cold War: the enormously powerful and dangerous Communist bloc lead by the nuclear armed Soviet Union which was further fortified by the Warsaw Pact nations, Communist China, and the growing number of Communist insurgencies across the world. Trying to explain the CIA as "making the world safe for American business" is silly.

The Communists killed 100,000,000 people in the last century in all manner of cruel tortures, executions, forced starvations, and many other crimes against humanity. Why wouldn't countries want to prevent that from befalling their people? Of course! The real danger is "Wall Street bankers and lawyers!" Please.

The Soviet Story - trailer

Yes.

It's demonstrable.

How Al-Qaeda Uses Encryption Post-Snowden (Part 2) – New Analysis in Collaboration With ReversingLabs

Russian, yes. American? Not so much.

I'm pretty sure that nobody from the US National Security Agency is going to come and detonate a suicide vest while you are in a shopping mall or buying groceries whereas Isis will do that if they can.

Well, it certainly doesn't discuss all the facts, it's basically a white wash on Snowden's behalf.

Washington Post: The Volokh Conspiracy - As evidence mounts, it’s getting harder to defend Edward Snowden

Looks like a moderator is out to try to hide the truth, or at least dissenting views backed by facts.

No matter how conclusively it is proven that Snowden caused harm there will be people that continue to proclaim Snowden their hero.

Washington Post: The Volokh Conspiracy - As evidence mounts, it’s getting harder to defend Edward Snowden

The problem is that there is no shortage of extremists around the world that actually want to do this sort of thing, and they actually have caused enormous problems for many governments.

One of the problems with "cynicism" is not knowing where to stop, or when you've gone too far. Then you end up being a kook.

Well, other than the state ownership of the means of production, being ruled by a Communist party, the mandatory classes on Marxism, trying to stamp out bourgeois values and religion, you almost have a point.

How Al-Qaeda Uses Encryption Post-Snowden (Part 1)

Washington Post: The Volokh Conspiracy - As evidence mounts, it’s getting harder to defend Edward Snowden

Washington Post: The Volokh Conspiracy - As evidence mounts, it’s getting harder to defend Edward Snowden

How Al-Qaeda Uses Encryption Post-Snowden (Part 1)

Yes, and most cases such services are paid through property taxes. If the company owns the plant and its grounds, they pay substantial property taxes. If they lease the property, the property's owner does (and passes those costs along in the lease).

We're not talking about property taxes, we're talking about income taxes.

Right. Just the other day the Motley Fool published effective tax rates. That takes into account not just federal taxes but aveerage state/provincial tales and other tax-related burdens that actually get paid in real life by actual companies doing actual business in all the countries they list. The effective rate for businesses in the US is 40%. The second highest, behind only the UAE.

Right. Usually, that's because:

1) We want people to risk their money making investments to start and grow businesses. That creates economic activity, which is taxed.

2) If the person risking their money on such an investment loses it (as most do - most new businesses fail), they do NOT get to write that loss off on their own income taxes. It's just gone, goodbye. 3) The lower rates only apply if you let the investment site for a good long time. Those who throw money in and yank it back up pay a much higher rate.

Employees ARE people who profit from a business. In fact employees account for the vast majority of the outbound cash that most businesses spend. And its taxed at normal payroll rates. And the taxes levied on the money those people are getting out of the company are a big part of what pays for the public infrastructure that they (as the people who are making money daily in the business) use. Why do you think that city, county, state, and federal programs to encourage business presence and growth aren't hesitant to wave, for some period of time, taxes charged directly to the business? It's because the net result of establishing that business in place and keeping it there is MUCH MORE TAX REVENUE - from all of the other activity and employment that results.