Edward Snowden: the whistleblower behind the NSA surveillance revelations

[obumazombie]

The closer these scandals come to owebuma, the more I will get excited !

[Dacabeti]

Congress (media too) can only blame themselves for not knowing.  Apparently other whistleblowers have come forward and not been quiet about it either.  So what Snowden recently did, really isn't news.

Whistleblowers William (Bill) Binney and J. Kirk Wiebe

Video

http://current.com/shows/viewpoint/videos/nsa-whistleblowers-warn-of-secret-spying-programs-that-can-target-anyone/

Thomas Drake describes his decision to reveal the secret surveillance to authorities and the public: “Not only did I discover the wheels had come off the existing vehicle, we were in an entirely new vehicle — in absolute violation of the Constitution. I knew if I remained silent that I would be complicit to the subversion of our own Constitution.”

The bold makes my point specifically.

[J P Sousa]

I believe that the information released by Snowden needed to be released. However, he is still a traitor along the lines of Bradley Manning. When he took his position(s) with the intelligency community he agreed to keeping the knowledge he aquired secret and he broke that agreement. I agree he did it for the right reasons and I am glad he stepped forward but he still has broken the law.  Just because the information hurts the Obama administration and lets the people see what is really going it doesn't change the fact that laws were violated and he should be prosecuted just as Manning is being prosecuted.

Now with that said, I pray that the U.S. cannot get him extradited because I am glad he did what he did and I think he did the right thing by anyone's standard... The American way, do what is right knowing the consequences. Self exile is punishment enough.

There is a world of difference between what Snowden did and what Manning did.


If people in position of authority or has information of abuse do not follow the constitution, then we are finished as a nation. 
.

[FlaGator]

There is a world of difference between what Snowden did and what Manning did.


If people in position of authority or has information of abuse do not follow the constitution, then we are finished as a nation. 
.

Basically what they did is exactly the same, they took information that was intrusted to them and then shared it with people who weren't authorized to see it. From a legal stand point they are in the same boat.

I am not a adherent to situational ethics nor am I an ends justifies the means person. I believe in the rule of law and the law should be applied equally to everyone. Just because someone breaks the law but does something that you agree with doesn't mean he or she is not subject to the consequences of their actions.

Once you start applying the law on the basis of what the person in power agrees with you have tossed aside the rule of law and replaced it with might makes right. In essence who ever is running the show decides what is right and wrong.

[obumazombie]

Basically what they did is exactly the same, they took information that was intrusted to them and then shared it with people who weren't authorized to see it. From a legal stand point they are in the same boat.

I am not a adherent to situational ethics nor am I an ends justifies the means person. I believe in the rule of law and the law should be applied equally to everyone. Just because someone breaks the law but does something that you agree with doesn't mean he or she is not subject to the consequences of their actions.

Once you start applying the law on the basis of what the person in power agrees with you have tossed aside the rule of law and replaced it with might makes right. In essence who ever is running the show decides what is right and wrong.

I'm not sure I can agree with that.
In Manning's case he was a uniformed member of the armed services and knew full well he could serve in harm's way right along with fellow servicemembers. He intentionally or unintentionally leaked information that could easily have put front his fellow line troops in more danger during wartime.

In Snowden's case I don't see any evidence that the information he leaked would have compromised any of our military or even intelligence or diplomats in any extra danger.

[thundley4]

I'm not sure I can agree with that.
In Manning's case he was a uniformed member of the armed services and knew full well he could serve in harm's way right along with fellow servicemembers. He intentionally or unintentionally leaked information that could easily have put front his fellow line troops in more danger during wartime.

In Snowden's case I don't see any evidence that the information he leaked would have compromised any of our military or even intelligence or diplomats in any extra danger.

Also, Snowden's actions confirm what many have suspected for some time and makes Obama look bad.

[FlaGator]

I'm not sure I can agree with that.
In Manning's case he was a uniformed member of the armed services and knew full well he could serve in harm's way right along with fellow servicemembers. He intentionally or unintentionally leaked information that could easily have put front his fellow line troops in more danger during wartime.

In Snowden's case I don't see any evidence that the information he leaked would have compromised any of our military or even intelligence or diplomats in any extra danger.

I am not sure the law makes that distinction.

Now don't get me wrong. If I had the authority I would pardon him for what he did, but he did violate the letter of the law if not the spirit of the law.

[thundley4]

I am not sure the law makes that distinction.

Now don't get me wrong. If I had the authority I would pardon him for what he did, but he did violate the letter of the law if not the spirit of the law.

I agree that he violated the law, but there is a distinction between what he and that little queer Manning did.

[J P Sousa]

I am not sure the law makes that distinction.

Now don't get me wrong. If I had the authority I would pardon him for what he did, but he did violate the letter of the law if not the spirit of the law.

The problem I have is, Obama and his administration have been consistently breaking the law without consequence.

How can we in good conscience put this man in jail for exposing unconstitutional behavior on the part of this administration ?  

The former director of the US National Security Agency has indicated that surveillance programs have "expanded" under Barack Obama's time in office and said the spy agency has more powers now than when he was in command.  

http://www.businessinsider.com/bush-era-nsa-director-says-obama-expanded-surveillance-programs-2013-6

.

[Chris_]

The former director of the US National Security Agency has indicated that surveillance programs have "expanded" under Barack Obama's time in office and said the spy agency has more powers now than when he was in command.   

http://www.businessinsider.com/bush-era-nsa-director-says-obama-expanded-surveillance-programs-2013-6

The head of the U.S. government’s vast spying apparatus has conceded that recent surveillance efforts on at least one occasion violated the Constitutional prohibitions on unlawful search and seizure.

The admission comes in a letter from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence declassifying statements that a top U.S. Senator wished to make public in order to call attention to the government’s 2008 expansion of its key surveillance law.

“On at least one occasion,” the intelligence shop has approved Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) to say, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court found that “minimization procedures” used by the government while it was collecting intelligence were “unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment.” Minimization refers to how long the government may retain the surveillance data it collects.  The Fourth Amendment to the Constitution is supposed to guarantee our rights against unreasonable searches.

Wired

If they did it once, they'll do it again.  'Fast and Furious' didn't stop after only one gun.

[thundley4]

The problem I have is, Obama and his administration have been consistently breaking the law without consequence.

How can we in good conscience put this man in jail for exposing unconstitutional behavior on the part of this administration ?  

.

The same way they put the maker of the Mohammed movie in jail. 

[Dori]

I'm not convinced that collecting billions of data on everyone, every single day of the week, is either necessary or efficient to catch the bad guys. With the new NSA storage facility in Utah, they probably will be able to store all your information from birth to death. 

From what we know they have so far, like the NSA whistleblower said, is just the tip of the iceberg.  What do they have in our data profiles that we don't know about?  And the way technology develops so rapidly, what else will they be able to collect in the near future?

Also according to the whistleblowers, depending upon who our leaders are,  what they are putting together now is the turn-key to a totalitarian fascist government.

[J P Sousa]

This is an interesting read;

http://www.whistleblower.org/program-areas/homeland-security-a-human-rights/surveillance/nsa-whistleblowers-bill-binney-a-j-kirk-wiebe

.

[Mr Mannn]

I agree with the traitor talk. What we are seeing here is a typical flaming lib in action.
There were other legitimate avenues he could have taken. But he chose to flee to China?
what a drama queen. Now we have a guy with sensitive knowledge in the hands of a ruthless enemy.

this is why you can never trust a liberal with the security of the United States.

[FlaGator]

The problem I have is, Obama and his administration have been consistently breaking the law without consequence.

How can we in good conscience put this man in jail for exposing unconstitutional behavior on the part of this administration ?  

.

I understand the whole concept of fighting fire with fire but I also agree with the adage that two wrongs don't make a right.

At any rate. I do understand your point of view and at a different stage in my life I would be right there with you. My faith causes me to look at things differently than I use to.

I hope and pray that something can be worked out that will allow him to come home and not face prosecution. He did what he had to and I think that what he did was the right thing to do, but it was still illegal.

[txradioguy]

When you stop and think about it...what Snowden did was release info about the process involved in the way NSA gathers info on all of us.

He didn't release any actual info.  No names transcripts of conversations or emails.

In short he did what Seymour Hersch did with his front page story about how we were tracking al-Qaeda by their bank accounts.

I haven't seen or heard of Hersch having to hide from authorities or fear for his life.


Manning on the other hand did EVERYTHING Snowden didn't.  He released email...diplomatic cables...video etc.  Manning put lives at risk...Snowden hasn't.

That's the difference between the two based on the info available right now.  

And at this point Snowden needs to be protected under U.S. Whistleblower laws.

If it turns out he released documents then put him in a cell next to Manning.

But right now all he's guilty of is showing how the NSA collects the info.

[Zathras]

Oran's Dictionary of the Law (1983) defines treason as "...[a]...citizen's actions to help a foreign government overthrow, make war against, or seriously injure the [parent nation]." In many nations, it is also often considered treason to attempt or conspire to overthrow the government, even if no foreign country is aiding or involved by such an endeavor.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treason

So, using the above definition, Manning should be on trial for treason for his crimes while Snowden should not be charged for treason as he has not done the above. However, if it comes to light that he has passed on the info he has to other nations/groups, hostile or otherwise, then treason has to be on the table.