I think you'd be better served by learning a litle more about what the NSA acutally did and how Snowden changed the game. The fact that you seem to know few specific details and tend to generalize a lot makes me think you are promoting a liberal viewpoint and not really addressing the issues at hand.

Look at how Snowden will be prosecuted. By that, I mean what laws did he break? He's guilty, he and everybody else knows it, so there are now teams of lawyers hashing out his future.

I say give the little ****er a bullet and bill his family for it, and the gun rental.

His sorry little butt has already cost us enough.

JR

Or the greater good, or something along those lines.

I see our government's primary responsibility as that of protecting our individual rights and freedoms.

So is it fine for people to break into your house if you never notice? Is it ok for some stranger to bang your wife if you never find out? :confused:

I'm sorry you are confused. Let me help you. The NSA was not trying to break into my house. Best I can tell, they weren't interested in screwing my wife either.

Try to stay on topic. The issue at hand is the gathering of data, en mass, and looking for specific things in it.

JR

The above statements reminds me of the speech by the Rev. Niemoller re: the nazi's actions:

"First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.
Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me".

Argumentum ad verecundiam

JR

What Snowden did, right or wrong, is show the world that the terrorist are winning. America is no longer the bastion of personal freedoms it was, the populace is more and more willing to give up their freedoms because their government tells them they have to in order to stay safe.
Every time we change the way we live our lives to "protect" ourselves, they win. Your government spying on you in the manner that was revealed is a huge loss of freedom for the American people, and a massive win for the terrorists. Even more revealing as to how much things have changed since 9/11 is the lack of reaction by the American populace to the unlawful actions of their government.

He should get in touch with Petraeus lawyer :rolleyes::confused::rolleyes:

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/04/us/petraeus-plea-deal-over-giving-classified-data-to-lover.html?_r=0

And you are presumably man enough to do it?

BTW, what has he cost you precisely?

Ironic no?
 

Perhaps many of you here sit fit to give the General a bullet too? Or his harms by degrees less worrisome to you?

I'd rather have an NSA computer read my emails or listen to my phone calls than have a terrorist kill me. Your choices in life might be different from mine, I don't know.

Petraeus did a lot of good. I'd give him a medal.

I'd give Snowden his bullet, if I got immunity. Care to arrange that for me?

I'm done with this thread. I hope Snowden gets what's coming to him.

JR

Snowden himself is proof that the government cannot be trusted with this information, it will be misused.

I'd like to see him go to trial and be found guilty.

Blind patriotism at work here. A dangerous construct.
kill kill kill. hate hate hate.
Makes you feel good, yes?

I would like to live in a country
that would find him not guilty of stupid rules violation SmileWavy
put in place by those who do not want their actions known

in fact I do wonder what % of the stuff stamped top secret
is to cover up or switch the blame
or is just things the government does not want the citizens to know about
and is not a threat to national security but is a cover up of official screw-ups
or worse like war crimes vs real national security issues

who watches the watchers ?

Petraeus sealed his fate when, as CIA director he boasted, "We will listen to you via your refrigerator." So, in a sense, he went way beyond what Snowden revealed regarding present day snooping on each and every American citizen.

Yes, they are less worrisome to me.

Classified information is disclosed every day, usually by accident. Most are actually self-reported. Every known disclosure is investigated to determine the extent of damage to national security. Inadvertent disclosures are still punishable offenses, ranging from a verbal admonishment to fines & prison time.

The investigating team concluded that the General's disclosure caused no damage to national security. They also determined that his disclosure was intentional, hence the "more than a slap on the wrist" punishment.

Snowden's disclosure is at the treasonous level, IMO.

Right. And I, like any reasonable reader, figured that only someone who's willing to ignore the Sixth Amendment to the Constitution would state flatly "Execute him".

I kind of wonder about this. Snowden surely could have sold info to the highest bidder, or even given it to enemies out of personal conviction. But his motivation was to expose illegal activity by the US gov't. And he did so at huge personal cost to himself, not at all for a promise of wealth or comfort. He's only ever going to face a life of misery now, he knew that beforehand and, yet, he still did it. How is that treasonous? It may be illegal, because it's never legal to divulge classified info. But I don't see how he was trying to give aid and comfort to the enemy.

If the NSA didn't do anything wrong they should have nothing to hide, right? Then again, that only applies to the American people ...

He is clearly guilty of theft, espionage, and flight to avoid prosecution. He might well not be convicted of treason, but there is every chance he would. Per the law:
"Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States"

"aid and comfort" is generally accepted to refer to any act that manifests a betrayal of allegiance to the United States, such as furnishing enemies with arms, troops, transportation, shelter, or classified information. If a subversive act has any tendency to weaken the power of the United States to attack or resist its enemies, aid and comfort has been given.

I believe that is the case.

I read back at the time of his initial disclosures that he was charged, in absentia, with espionage counts, with the maximum sentence being life imprisonment. There was no mention of the death penalty. Which surprised me, but upon reflection the US govt was probably trying to avoid giving other countries, which do not have the death penalty, an excuse to shelter Snowden. Of course he went to Russia, which administers the death penalty without even bothering with a conviction.

Kinda like some of the folks here seem willing to do.

He was only charged with 18 U.S.C. 641 Theft of Government Property, 18 U.S.C. 793(d) Unauthorized Communication of National Defense Information, and 18 U.S.C. 798(a)(3) Willful Communication of Classified Intelligence Information to an Unauthorized Person; the two latter charges fall under the Espionage Act for “giving national defense information to someone without a security clearance and revealing classified information about communications intelligence,” That doesn't meant that it could not be more now.

The Simple Fact Is That By Legal Definition Edward Snowden Is a Criminal

Let's not discount there are more than a 1,000 Edward Snowdens all "stealing" proprietary information and/or communications from all Americans as we speak.

These are private contractors, not bound by these same laws Snowden is accused of breaking.
They are not even the U.S. Government, technically, yet are being allowed the same access level.
-Your company data? Compromised.
-Your medical records? Compromised.
-Your attorney conversations? Compromised.

And all of of it is copied and sent unfiltered to at least one foreign government with zero congressional oversight.
"Espionage" is a good word to describe the NSA-Israel connection. Thx fint.

It is a private government within the government.
Same as the Federal Reserve.
Not bound to accountability to the electorate.

Q). What if the Snowden Incident never happened?
A). Your information would continue being passed around from private contractor to private contractor.
A). Discussion would never reach the open air for public disclosure and oversight.
A). It is a private marketer's wet dream. Nobody would know where the information was sourced from, only that it make their company billions in profit for...cough...certain...stock market shareholders and CEOs.
Whitewater would be a drop in the bucket with this codified into legitimate law.

btw ---> parf

This thread really shocks me. I'd never have thought so many were completely fine with being under NSA monitoring. Information is power, and I can think of a lot of ways the NSA's database of information could be used that would not benefit a free society.

Ben Franklin said it best:
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

If he were brought home I'd like to see him heralded as a hero for exposing the US government illegally obtaining, storing, and analyzing private conversation's of American Citizens.

I think he also deserves to be penalized for exposing international spying techniques. I'd probably be a long way from the bullet camp though.

Treason would probably be hard to prove in court, but I guy can dream, can't he? :)

I agree.

Illegally exposed an illegal program, what sort of trial would that be?

Will the US government put themselves on trial along with Snowden?

Maybe an independent government could hold the trial, Canada?

No opinion of guilt or innocence implied but...this raises a question not yet discussed here. What if he's NOT found guilty?

The preponderance of criteria from the "shoot-now, ask questions later" crowd are based on assumptions of illegal activity. Not many get the chair (these days) because they're "assumed" guilty. Do you think he wants to come home with an expectation of the death penalty or life in prison? Armies of lawyers around the globe are lined up to take the case. Could there be a reason for that?

So, Snowden returns, get's his day in court and is found not guilty of anything significant and walks free. What then?

Oh, and let's not forget that whole "uphold-the-constitution" thing. ;)

I also wonder how much our gov't. really wants him to come home to face trial. That trial would be a fiasco, depending on which super lawyers he decided to go with, who would beg to take the case pro bono, just for the chance to embarrass the US gov't. All kinds of evidence would have to be suppressed due to revealing sources and methods. While I certainly don't think life if gonna get much better for him, having been acquitted, it would be an interesting case. He'd have all kinds of invitations to go abroad and consult for other countries' intel services or IT security firms. I think the US gov't. is best off by making idle threats to try Snowden so that he stays away, and our gov't. won't exert much pressure on whichever gov't. hosts him next.

I'd like to shoot him in the head, but that probably won't be an option.http://ehealthwoman.com/apple/images/34.gif http://ehealthwoman.com/apple/images/51.gif

yep
 

Rich, I posted Ben's quote and was suprised at the response. Go back and check...
but you bet your butt they would scream loudly at any attempt to override the 2nd amendment.... seemingly do not understand the notion of a bit at a time until you notice what's gone

this is well stated.

Well, that makes two of us.

What I find amazing is that of the tens of thousands in similar jobs, only one man's conscience led him to shine a light on what he felt was a crime against you & I.

Because there really was no wrongdoing despite the claims here. There was no institutional disregard of the Constitution, etc. In fact, much more obvious disregard us shown daily by rewriting laws with Presidential memos and full disregard for enforcement of existing laws.

Imagine if anyone who disagreed with US policy (who also swore not to divulge classified) were to do the same as Snowden.

BTW, the Second Amendment is actually in the Constitution...

So is the 4th ammendment, and the NSA roaming around your computer files is most certainly unlawful search.....

Stuns me so many are ok with this....I disagree with Snowden's methods absolutely, but in the end his intentions were not to harm the US but to wake up the populace to their Orwillian reality...

If that was truly his intention, there are legal channels to do just that. He chose to pursue illegal means, for whatever reason, which makes me think his motive was slightly less altruistic than some would like us to believe.