👤 EDWARD SNOWDEN: Hero or Traitor?

[SideTracker]

Obviously a dope smoking liberal.

 

 

 

 

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/09/edward-snowden-nsa-whistleblower-surveillance

 

*****************************************

 

1984 was not "intended" to be an instructional manual.

[SideTracker]

 

[SideTracker]

 

 

"If you are not doing anything wrong".

 

I called home before leaving work to ask if I needed to pick up anything from the grocery store. What have I done wrong? To be honest it's no one's business that I called home. This is what the Patriot Act loving fools are leaving us with just as predicted. What if someone is having a conversation about a family member being treated for cancer and the discussion leads to rather private conversation what steps are to be taken next. Neither the two having the conversation are "doing anything wrong" and neither is the person that is ill. However because of the Patriot Act loving fools the conversation is theoretically not of a private nature. While the Patriot Act loving fools are busy warding off terrorism how many turn to perversion while snooping others cell calls? It's ok, this is what the Patriot Act loving fools asked for and got.

 

http://news.yahoo.com/nsa-revelations-force-want-150053450.html

[SideTracker]

"Nothing to hide" is what the Patriot Act loving fools say.

 

 

Published on Jun 8, 2013

 

Judge Andrew Napolitano and Fox News' Shep Smith blasted the NSA snooping and the Obama Administration.

Reacting to the Verizon phone grab by the NSA and Harry Reid's assertion that congressmen have known about the snooping for seven years and is "routine," Smith and Napolitano tore into the "constitutionally impermissible" nature of the government's actions.

 

"This is a fishing expedition on the grandest scale we've ever seen in American history," Napolitano said. "They're looking for a select group of people and in order to find that select group of people the Constitution says to present some evidence against them to a judge and get a search warrant for their phones. Rather than doing that, they got a search warrant for 113 million phones."

 

"Who would trust them after this?" the judge continued, noting that the administration's defenders have claimed the NSA hasn't actually listened to anyone's calls. "The Constitution doesn't trust them."

 

Smith then played a clip from this morning of Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) saying he is "glad" the NSA is snooping in order to protect Americans from terrorists threats, prompting the judge's response: "The whole purpose of the Fourth Amendment is to prevent the government from doing this, to prevent it from interfering with the privacy rights of a lot of innocent people in order to find a few that may be planning something wrong. [...] Nobody wants the wrong thing to happen but the idea that we would sacrifice liberty in order to obtain safety is a canard. This is just a shortcut to make it easier for American spies to spy on Americans."

 

He concluded: "This is the most extraordinarily broad search warrant every issued in the history of the federal courts of the United States."

 

Shep was livd about the whole NSA snooping/spying on Americans and spoke directly to camera: "Under this logic, the government can send to people to all of our homes, put them in a bed next to us, have them watch everything."

 

"The slippery slope is covered in green," the host concluded. "We're not letting this go. Not for a moment. We're not letting this go."

[partsman66]

Anyone who trusts our Govt is a fool.They've been watching us since they began looking for communists in our own country.The problem for the little people today is the technology that they use.Even if all the listening they do was ruled illegal I assure you it wouldn't stop.Big brother has gotten to big and I'm pretty sure it's to late to do anything about it.

[Wild74]

This guy is probably toast...Question is why run off to Hong Kong if he did nothing wrong?

[SideTracker]

^

 

I believe he explained why? Regardless, what did Snowden do "wrong". There are many "libertarians" congratulating Snowden for what he "did" and many others that are of contention our spying a$$ government and public in general needs more exposure to their perverted ways not less.

[SideTracker]

 

Anyone who trusts our Govt is a fool.They've been watching us since they began looking for communists in our own country.The problem for the little people today is the technology that they use.Even if all the listening they do was ruled illegal I assure you it wouldn't stop.Big brother has gotten to big and I'm pretty sure it's to late to do anything about it.

 

 

 

You are absolutely correct. Anyone that trusts this government should have their heads examined by a non government approved psycho type person.

 

From the Faux interview with the Judge:

 

"The whole purpose of the Fourth Amendment is to prevent the government from doing this, to prevent it from interfering with the privacy rights of a lot of innocent people in order to find a few that may be planning something wrong. [...] Nobody wants the wrong thing to happen but the idea that we would sacrifice liberty in order to obtain safety is a canard. This is just a shortcut to make it easier for American spies to spy on Americans."

 

It does not get any better than that. Quite understandable the Big Pharma doping of the populous has many people not even thinking about the matter. After all, "if you have nothing to hide". Scroo that!

 

All laid out for the peeps but on deaf ears we know.

[Wild74]

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2013/06/edward_snowden_hero_or_traitor.html

 

Interesting read on him.

[SideTracker]

 

^

 

James Clapper is a bought and paid for stooge as a result of the The Patriot Act Loving Fools. Keep on defending these stooges. What would we expect a government Nazi to say? That is definitely a "no brainer".

 

I and many others contend Snowden has done nothing wrong.

[SideTracker]

Government Spying: Should We Be Shocked?

http://lewrockwell.com/paul/paul863.html

"The media seemed shocked.

Many of us are not so surprised."

"We were told we must accept this temporary measure to provide government the tools to catch those responsible for 9/11. That was nearly twelve years and at least four wars ago."

 

"House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers tells us of the tremendous benefits of this Big Brother-like program. He promises us that domestic terrorism plots were thwarted, but he cannot tell us about them because they are classified. I am a bit skeptical, however. In April, the New York Times reported that most of these domestic plots were actually elaborate sting operations developed and pushed by the FBI. According to the Times report, “of the 22 most frightening plans for attacks since 9/11 on American soil, 14 were developed in sting operations.”

 

***********************************

 

It goes without saying the American populous has got to be one of the most easily duped in the world.

[DLine06]

Snowden like Bradley Manning did nothing wrong but because they are whistleblowers, their behinds will fry like bacon at grandma's.

[SideTracker]

^

 

Yes, this is a heck of a lot more involved than being a "tattle tale". Those that love Liberty are speaking out in favor of Snowden. It's the freaks that speak out against him and these freaks are indeed the real terrorists to this country.

 

Government is to be watched at ALL times.

[TheLionWire]

Snowden should get a medal. Dude has a tone of cajones to take on the entire US Federal government and go all out to say whats going on. Im behind this guy.

[KirtFalcon]

Oh, he did something VERY wrong and illegal. Whether you agree with him or not, he is in deep dodo. Anyone who knows anything about jobs with security clearances knows you cannot divulge classified information. If you do, the government is going to come down on you like a ton of bricks. I worked in the "black world" of top secret programs for over 15 years in the military and I can tell you unequivocally ... there is zero tolerance for divulging classified information. He will not be handled as a whistle blower ... he will be most likely be charged with multiple counts of mishandling of classified documents, espionage, aiding and abetting the enemy and possible treason ... among other things. He could get multiple life sentences ... depending on how the government wants to handle him.

 

That said, I'm glad he did what he did and I'm sorry for what he's about to go through.

[SideTracker]

Looking to me like government is totally out of control.

 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=TFeNcOjENYE#!

 

Interesting point while some say congress had no idea initially the atrocities surrounding Patriot would occur a commentator mentioned congress has had opportunity to roll some of it back. Remember those goppers like Michele Bachmann that promoted extension of the provisions that are supposed to be renewed or discontinued by vote of the House every two years? I learned real quick what Bachmann is about. She is going out. Good riddance.

 

http://w2.eff.org/Privacy/Surveillance/Terrorism/20011031_eff_usa_patriot_analysis.php

[DaveTV1]

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2013/06/edward_snowden_hero_or_traitor.html Interesting read on him.

I see him as a Patriot with reporting this violation of the Constitution. Of course, we have too many idiots today that would lock him up or worse, because he supposedly threatened U.S. Security, he did nothing of the sort. I applaud this gentleman for doing the right thing by reporting this abuse by the Federal Government.

[SideTracker]

^

 

John McCain would insist on water boarding even though Snowden has already explained what he did and why.

[KirtFalcon]

He broke numerous laws, whistleblower or not.

[Wild74]

 

^

 

John McCain would insist on water boarding even though Snowden has already explained what he did and why.

John McCain is against torture but Dick Chenny might give him a good dose of water boarding.

[Wild74]

 

He broke numerous laws, whistleblower or not.

From what I have been reading he has something to do with the Chinese, I don't think he is a hero, probably just the opposite, he is 29 years old he is still in his stupid age and I think he will find that out pretty soon.

[Wild74]

Good Read

Morning Jolt

. . . with Jim Geraghty

June 11, 2013

Don't Come Crying to Us, NSA; You Guys Are the Ones Who Hired This Goofball.

Everybody's going to have an opinion on Edward Snowden, today the world's most famous leaker.

In the coming days, you're going to see a lot of people talking past each other, conflating two issues: One, did he do the right thing by disclosing all these details of the vast NSA system to gather data on Americans? And two, should he be prosecuted for it?

Of course, you can do the right thing and still break the law.

John Yoo argues that the government has to pursue prosecution of Snowden, considering what they've done in response to much lesser leaks:

The NSA leak case will reveal if the Obama administration really means what it said about its foolish and unconstitutional pursuit of the AP and Fox News in other leak cases. Recall that the Obama Justice Department claimed that Fox News reporter James Rosen was a co-conspirator in the alleged leak of classified intelligence. If the Justice Department truly believed what it told the courts when seeking a wiretap on Rosen, then it should indict the reporters and editors for the Washington Post and the Guardian newspapers who published information on PRISM. They clearly "conspired" with Snowden to publish classified information, information that was much more harmful to the national security than in the Rosen case (on North Korea's predictable response to sanctions). Personally, I think that the Post is protected by the First Amendment, but Holder's Justice Department clearly doesn't think so.

So either the Justice Department will indict not just Snowden, but also the Post and Guardian reporters, or it will have been shown to have been untruthful to the courts in the Rosen case (which I think has become clear) . . .

Yoo also points out that Snowden's claim to noble motives is muddied quite a bit by his decision to run to Hong Kong. (By the way, the last guy to run to Hong Kong, certain that he was beyond the reach of American law enforcement and extradition treaties, was Mr. Lau, the money-keeper for the Gotham City mob. And we all remember how that turned out.) When Snowden declares, "Hong Kong has a reputation for freedom in spite of the People's Republic of China. It has a strong tradition of free speech," we have to wonder if A) he's already working for the Chinese or B) he's an imbecile.

This may be a story with no heroes. A government system designed to protect the citizens starts collecting all kinds of information on people who have done nothing wrong; it gets exposed, in violation of oaths and laws, by a young man who doesn't recognize the full ramifications of his actions. The same government that will insist he's the villain will glide right past the question of how they came to trust a guy like him with our most sensitive secrets. Who within our national-security apparatus made the epic mistake of looking him over -- completing his background check and/or psychological evaluation -- and concluding, "Yup, looks like a nice kid?"

Watching the interview with Snowden, the first thing that is quite clear is that his mild-mannered demeanor inadequately masks a huge ego -- one of the big motivations of spies. (Counterintelligence instructors have long offered the mnemonic MICE, for money, ideology, compromise, ego; others throw in nationalism and sex)

Snowden feels he has an understanding of what's going on well beyond most of his colleagues:

When you're in positions of privileged access like a systems administrator for the sort of intelligence community agencies, you're exposed to a lot more information on a broader scale then the average employee and because of that you see things that may be disturbing but over the course of a normal person's career you'd only see one or two of these instances. When you see everything you see them on a more frequent basis and you recognize that some of these things are actually abuses.

What's more, he feels that no one listens to his concerns or takes them seriously:

And when you talk to people about them in a place like this where this is the normal state of business people tend not to take them very seriously and move on from them. But over time that awareness of wrongdoing sort of builds up and you feel compelled to talk about. And the more you talk about the more you're ignored. The more you're told its not a problem until eventually you realize that these things need to be determined by the public and not by somebody who was simply hired by the government."

My God, he must have been an insufferable co-worker.

"Look, you guys just don't understand, okay? You just can't grasp the moral complexities of what I'm being asked to do here! Nobody here really gets what's going on, or can see the big picture when you ask me to do something like that!"

"Ed, I just asked if you could put a new bottle on the water cooler when you get a chance."

Of course, all of this is presided over by a guy who thought that civil liberties were a useful cudgel against a Republican president back when he was outside the Oval Office. John Sexton turns the wayback machine to 2005, when then-senator Obama, from the floor of the Senate, sternly declared that the PATRIOT Act "didn't just provide law enforcement the powers it needed to keep us safe, but powers it didn't need to invade our privacy without cause or suspicion" and added:

If someone wants to know why their own government has decided to go on a fishing expedition through every personal record or private document -- through library books they've read and phone calls they've made -- this legislation gives people no rights to appeal the need for such a search in a court of law. No judge will hear their plea, no jury will hear their case. This is just plain wrong.

Ace of Spades: "James Rosen could not be reached for comment, but secret government surveillance into all of his phone calls and emails indicates he's pretty ####."

Found this graphic on the site of Jeff Boss, one of the token Democrats running for governor in New Jersey this year:

[Stoney]

Dumb question. Cant he use the whistleblower protection act to cover his behind?

[DLine06]

Dumb question. Cant he use the whistleblower protection act to cover his behind?

Ask Bradley Manning on that....real simply, NO.

[KirtFalcon]

Dumb question. Cant he use the whistleblower protection act to cover his behind?

 

The only whistles he will be blowing will be in the big house if he ever sets foot on American soil again. He's not a whistleblower, he's a criminal.