I am actually getting a bit confused by this SnowdenGate thing and the relative importance that various nations' political players are giving it. They each seem to be taking it a bit differently:
____________________________
UK:
Cameron: GCHQ surveillance of UK citizens and the Internet in tandem with US NSA surveillance was and is necessary for national security purposes. Yes, we know it is and was illegal, because GCHQ kept telling us - actually they were a little bit nervous about that being made public. I mean, good grief, they're not idiots, you know.
By the way, the whistleblower Snowden is a criminal for releasing this information.
The Crown is going to to throw the book at the reporters involved in Rupert Murdoch's News International's scandalous, disgraceful, illegal phone hacking. We can't have that sort of thing going on in a free democracy like the UK, after all, can we? Ruddy heck, before you knew it, we'd all be hacking into each other's phones what with the GCHQ doing it in spades already. Oh, wait. ...Did I say that?
America:
Obama: I know I promised to encourage whistleblowers and reduce NSA and other surveillance of citizens and the Internet but in fact, as SnowdenGate has revealed, it has been increased to cover all citizens and all foreign nations and external networks. But it's OK because we need the surveillance for national security purposes - really, we do, you can trust me on this one.
By the way, the whistleblower Snowden is a criminal for releasing this information.
Rest assured we have not carried out any surveillance of our European allies ... Oh, wait. What? We have? Merkels' phone too? How the @#$%^ did I forget that? @#$%^!
US Security Chiefs: We actually need to increase the existing levels of surveillance for national security purposes.
By the way, the whistleblower Snowden is a criminal for releasing this information.
Yeah, actually we did tap into Merkels' phone and all the other EU political leaders, just to get to know them better, not so as to spy on them or anything like that. That would be ridiculous.
Germany, France, and other EU nations:
Merkel & Co.: @#$%^ing Americans, why can't you @#$%^ing keep your @#$%^ing noses out of our @#$%^ing affairs? If we @#$%^ing wanted you to know anything we'd @#$%^ing tell you, for @#$%^'s sake. You can just @#$%^ off and @#$%^ you, you @#$%^ing @#$%^hole @#$%s.
New Zealand:
Key: Ah @#$%^ing hell, the whole @#$%^ing world knows now that we knowingly @#$%^ing @#$%^ed NZ law over big time when we @#$%^ing illegally surveilled Dotcom's @#$%^ing busines networks and contacts in cahoots with those @#$%^ing FBI and NSA @#$%^tards. Now I look a real @#$%^ing idiot and it's coming up to @#$%^ing election time.
I tell you, @#$%^ing heads are going to roll for this one and it won't be @#$%^ing mine, you @#$%^ing DCSB @#$%^wits. And @#$%^, @#$%^, @#$%^ @#$%^ing Dotcom. I wish I'd never heard of that @#$%^ing @#$%^hole @#$%^ing comedian. Why the @#$%^ did we let him into New Zealand anyway, and why the @#$%^ did we let the @#$%^ing FBI @#$%^ing push us into @#$%^ing breaking the @#$%^ing law? I'm @#$%^ed if I know.
@#$%^ me I need a cup of tea and a @#$%^ing lie-down.
____________________________
What we can draw from this is the possibility that neither the EU countries nor NZ consider the whistleblower Snowden to be a criminal for releasing the information that he apparently did.
