If Snowden Returns To The US?

[javadog]

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

[javadog]

Originally Posted by yazhound

lesser of two evils to you i presume

Or the greater good, or something along those lines.

[Taz's Master]

Originally Posted by Christien

This. I've often wondered about this. Many people who are happy to ignore the constitution when it comes to security and privacy are the same who argue that the 2nd amendment is unassailable. Either the constitution is a sacred document that must be adhered to exactly or it is open to interpretation, evolution and change. You can't have it both ways.

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

[gtc]

Originally Posted by javadog

I think sometimes we cling to ideals and shoot ourselves in the foot. The constitution was a fine document for its time but the reality is that our world is a vastly different place now and the ****heads don't play by the same rules we do. You can aspire to live free, in an idealistic sort of way, or live in the real world.

I don't notice any instrusion in my life, so I see no downside to the NSA doing what they are tasked to do.

JR

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?

[javadog]

Originally Posted by gtc

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?

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

[74-911]

Originally Posted by javadog

I don't notice any instrusion in my life, so I see no downside to the NSA doing what they are tasked to do.

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".

[javadog]

Originally Posted by 74-911

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

Argumentum ad verecundiam

JR

[gordner]

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.

[JJ 911SC]

He should get in touch with Petraeus lawyer

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

[yazhound]

Originally Posted by javadog

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

And you are presumably man enough to do it?

BTW, what has he cost you precisely?

[yazhound]

Originally Posted by JJ 911SC

He should get in touch with Petraeus lawyer

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

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

[javadog]

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

[Taz's Master]

Originally Posted by javadog

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

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

[masraum]

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

[creaturecat]

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

[nota]

Originally Posted by masraum

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

I would like to live in a country
that would find him not guilty of stupid rules violation
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 ?

[Geary]

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.

[shoemakj]

Originally Posted by yazhound

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

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.

[Norm K]

Originally Posted by fintstone

I figured that anyone who is literate enough to post here realized that was how it works in the US.

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".

[Rick Lee]

Originally Posted by shoemakj

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

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.