Posted on 06/14/2013 8:45:37 PM PDT by chessplayer
In my book, getting out to the public that the NSA is essentially scooping vasts amounts of domestic data puts Snowden's action on that one point as very Patriotic.
Our citizens have a right to know if our corrupt government is blatantly violating our Constitution.
I don't really care if he went to Hong Kong because he likely knows just how evil this government is -- that he likely couldn't trust anyone here to keep him alive to spread the reality of domestic spying by the NSA.
I guess you are quite happy to have the left have ALL electronic data on ALL Americans???
There was another Latin term used I didn't know. sui generis. Of its own kind or class.
Guess we need to work on that... staying low profile...
Where is it written we have to know or be informed if our government is” blantantly violating our consititution? The Constitution hasn’t been a part of the equation for years now...and all but fools understand that Snowden revealed nothing which wasn’t already fully well known...and that others had not already informed us of.
So no...he is not a Patriot...he’s ‘left’ the USA... ‘stolen’ highly intelligent material to take with him...broke the oath he took to the Constitution by revealing intelligence he has no authority to do...and then he hands these documents over to a Chinese Press.
At least that makes him a defector, a thief, and a liar...at most a traitor.
LOL
No, I'm educating you. You apparently are in dire need.
“Not nearly as much a traitor as those he exposes. The only real “secrets” he divulged was the scope of the data mining/collection that involved all of us citizens - it was no secret that we were using the methods on the enemy. His Nation is in the habit of betraying the People and he did us a service.”
The programs were instituted by Bush, and portrayed on a PBS episode titles: “The Spy Factory” during Bush
True conservatives must have missed it. Or agreed with it at the time.
I am a national security conservative, and treason is treason, no matter when or why.
That's true. But programs like this are akin to guns. It makes all the difference in the world who's got his finger on the trigger.
The Bush administration restricted their interest to calls between the U.S. and overseas (or between abroad and the U.S.). Understand that a phone call leaving or entering the country is not subject to the 4th Amendment -- any more than your luggage is subject to the 4th Amendment when you are entering or leaving the country.
There is no evidence that the Bush administration sought the metadata on all domestic calls. Yet, the April court order that has been published specifically identifies all domestic phone calls as item (ii) -- phone calls between the U.S. and abroad being item (i).
This particular program and the Patriot Act demonstrate that there is no program and no act of the legislature that Democrats cannot pervert and abuse.
Governments are powerful creatures. Like guns. It's therefore vitally important that we elect people that we can trust with that kind of power.
Smaller governments with less power are to be desired, of course. But, even then, the point holds. Only trustworthy people should be allowed this kind of power.
Dear Alaska_Wolf,
Having revealed the knowingly destructive behavior of AgencyPerson(State, Federal, NGO) and having personally suffered the abuses mentioned in previous posts - might I point out to you that Agencies and AgencyPersons often ruin, jail, and occasionally kill those who threaten them.
Snowdon was wise to leave America so that he might have a greater chance to live long enough to hopefully convince the public that government is the greatest threat to their liberties, even their not being jailed/killed.
Thanks for posting ... I'm sure Jay of New York Times and O'Keefe fame is working to trash him as we type...
Post 51 is all too on point.
We removed King George and his “swarm of officers” for far less than the abuses of Obama and his Muslim fellow travelers.
If you think a “Star Court” was abusive under an English King, think of the abuses under a secret trail directed by King (Caliph) Obama and/or his Muslim buds?
bookmark
I’d state the Snowdon defense thus: “ If loyalty to the State is an insufficient defense, then disloyalty to the State is an insufficient indictment. “
The surveillant state defends its legality by noting that judges authorize the snooping, apparently under the auspices of the Patriot Act, and Congress is briefed. This is supposed to satisfy the 4th Amendment. But the simple existence of multiple branches of government in a process does not by itself rise to constitutionality, if the entire process is shut away behind iron doors the imperiled citizen cannot penetrate.
What makes the protection of the 4th Amendment real, as opposed to just words, is that the citizen can challenge the probable cause of the search and the scope and process of the evidence collection that is the weapon against him in court. If you, as an individual before the justice system, cannot reach all the way back to the moment when there was no evidence against you and litigate the police and prosecutor’s steps along the way to where you stand today in the dock, your trial is a sham, due process is denied.
But these judges are anonymous and unelected, and the briefings are classified, and limited to small circles of Congressional leadership. So if you are ever prosecuted using evidence collected by the kind of generalized data collection Snowdon describes, how will you challenge the origin of the prosecution? How will you claim the evidence is “fruit of a poisonous tree” if the tree is locked away in a cloistered, invisible garden? The secrecy of the process makes the powers of the State unaccountable to the people, and therefore illegitimate.
He's a criminal. Many cowardly criminals slither off rather than face justice.
And the original (and still valid) wording allows specific data gathering with specific prohibitions against a wholesale amassing of data on all the People - as far as we know, Bush didn't abuse it as Obama is.
I'd say it's a much better case for treason against those who instituted the ever expanding intrusions on our privacy. Just because a law says a citizen is wrong doesn't make it a law that should be adhered to regardless of the guise of "National Security". Else, one would have to think all the intrusions on the 2nd Amendment are perfectly fine and that Obama Care is the toots. The government sets up punishments for "crimes", then insulates itself from the punishments. I say that by law, he may be considered a traitor, but by common sense and when looking at the whole picture, he is doing Freedom a service. "National Security" is being relegated to another catch-phrase to allow the government to trample on the Constitution because "it's just so damn important that our Freedoms just don't matter".
The Founders were called such by the Crown. I believe his actions support and defend the Constitution of the United States far more than the actions of those he “outed.”
“He’s a criminal” you posted - may I inquire as to the jury decision to which you refer?
Has the concept of “innocent until found guilty” somehow not been taught in Alaskan schools? I suspect it was taught to you and somehow didn’t accept it? As a friend’s daughter is in charge of a significant component of the Alaskan education system, I tend to think you know about “innocent until found guilty”.
What about “Jury Nullification”?
Are you aware that a jury has the power not to return a verdict of guilty, despite any/all evidence - if they agree that justice will be served by such a verdict?
Which is more important, protecting a government which is in the last stages of creating an invasive and controlling tyranny - or keeping ones Constitution?
Choice time IS upon us.
As a voice in a cloud upon a mountain once was alleged to have said to Moses, “I put before you this day life and death. Therefore choose life”.
Snowdon had a choice of silent acquiesence to tyranny or denunciation of tyranny.
Daniel Ellsberg, a man with a certain experience in the issues of revealing government bad behavior, said Snowdon’s speaking out will prove to be far more important than the Pentagon Papers were.
Listen to the expert.
Aren't admitted thieves, criminals?
What about “Jury Nullification”?
Where, in China?
Choice time IS upon us.
To anyone aware of what has transpired, it's been upon us for many years. Americans are as a whole, not interested. Remember, not only was Obama elected, he was re elected and all the so called "patriots" have done little to challenge the criminal administration.
Daniel Ellsberg,
At least he didn't slither off to China, though he was a thief.
In late 1969—with the assistance of his former RAND Corporation colleague Anthony Russo and the staff of Senator Edward Kennedy—Ellsberg secretly made several sets of photocopies of the classified documents to which he had access; these later became known as the Pentagon Papers
I don't consider Ellsberg to be an expert, patriot or have the security of the USA as his primary interest.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.