Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I agree, and I'm not saying the government shouldn't be held accountable for its wrongdoing. There needs to be a separate, independent court for government employees to blow their whistles in when the usual chain of command is corrupt, as NSA has shown itself to be.Because he still broke the law doing it.
He signed a Standard Form 312 at least twice, depending on his clearance level, and probably made one verbal attestation of his agreement not to disclose classified information.
We are a nation of laws. He broke one. Don't get me wrong -- I'm glad he did. What he revealed NEEDED to be revealed.
But that doesn't give him a free pass.
With that mentality though, whistleblowing becomes impossible. You understand that the government makes the laws and inherently built into a system like that is the fact that corrupt government will make laws that protect that corruption.
Snowden revealed that the government is setting up a system that is inherently unconstitutional and what you are demanding is that he face justice. The government protects whistleblowers in the private sector because it is known that to have oversight like that you MUST have legal protection. The same concept is withheld from government because THEY DONT WANT OVERSIGHT.
I ask how you think that the people can oversee the government when the people are not allowed to even know what the government is doing? The answer is that it is impossible.
I hope he dose and if the court cannot show that he let loose other secretes, the jury acquits him. Of course, I doubt that will even be an option to be honest.
Of course, given the corruption extant throughout this Administration, I don't have any idea how such a court would be formed.
The whole situation sucks. Snowden broke the law, but he did us all a huge service in bringing NSA's illegal acts to light.
But given how I've called for Bradley Manning to be prosecuted for violating the law, I have to call for Snowden to be prosecuted, too. I can't embrace a double standard here.
It's not a zero-sum game. If two parties have done something illegal, you don't prosecute one and let the other go.
Prosecute both of them.
It's a zero-sum game for the government. They are trying to intimidate and harass anyone who stands in their way. You are just being a useful cog in their game. Stand up against the oppression and knock off the bull shit.
Yes, they ARE trying to intimidate and harass anyone who stands in their way.
But insisting that both Snowden AND the government face punishment for their wrongdoing shows I'm just a useful cog...how, exactly? Wouldn't a useful cog insist that what NSA did was no big deal?
I'll give you a few moments for your ragegasm to subside and think this through.
President Barack Obama has publicly displayed a relaxed attitude toward Snowden's movements, saying last month that he wouldn't be "scrambling jets to get a 29-year-old hacker."
Condescension (and agism) - What does Snowden's age have to do with it? Isn't this allegely the president whose all about the youth? Oh, that's just when he's wading through teenybop shows for votes.
Ignorance - Hacker? Last, I check there was no case that Snowden was hacker. Maybe, that's part of the gestapo's secret charges.
Lies - Obama is doing anything he can to get Snowden. He even had the Bolivian president's flight rerouted mid air out of fear that Snowden was on the plane.
Nor am I. A finding of Not Guilty would be immediately appealed by the government in hopes of finding a more tractable jury.I agree, and I'm not saying the government shouldn't be held accountable for its wrongdoing. There needs to be a separate, independent court for government employees to blow their whistles in when the usual chain of command is corrupt, as NSA has shown itself to be.
Of course, given the corruption extant throughout this Administration, I don't have any idea how such a court would be formed.
The whole situation sucks. Snowden broke the law, but he did us all a huge service in bringing NSA's illegal acts to light.
But given how I've called for Bradley Manning to be prosecuted for violating the law, I have to call for Snowden to be prosecuted, too. I can't embrace a double standard here.
IMHO, I believe that is the purpose of juries, or at least one vital function they perform. Not only can they determine if the law was broken BUT also if the law should apply even if violated. Modern law rejects that concept BUT it can do nothing about it. Essentially, jury nullification.
I would LIKE to see that happen but I am not confident that the government is going to allow it.
I don't accept that it's okay for Snowden to be prosecuted for exposing government tyranny.I agree, and I'm not saying the government shouldn't be held accountable for its wrongdoing. There needs to be a separate, independent court for government employees to blow their whistles in when the usual chain of command is corrupt, as NSA has shown itself to be.With that mentality though, whistleblowing becomes impossible. You understand that the government makes the laws and inherently built into a system like that is the fact that corrupt government will make laws that protect that corruption.
Snowden revealed that the government is setting up a system that is inherently unconstitutional and what you are demanding is that he face justice. The government protects whistleblowers in the private sector because it is known that to have oversight like that you MUST have legal protection. The same concept is withheld from government because THEY DONT WANT OVERSIGHT.
I ask how you think that the people can oversee the government when the people are not allowed to even know what the government is doing? The answer is that it is impossible.
I hope he dose and if the court cannot show that he let loose other secretes, the jury acquits him. Of course, I doubt that will even be an option to be honest.
Of course, given the corruption extant throughout this Administration, I don't have any idea how such a court would be formed.
The whole situation sucks. Snowden broke the law, but he did us all a huge service in bringing NSA's illegal acts to light.
But given how I've called for Bradley Manning to be prosecuted for violating the law, I have to call for Snowden to be prosecuted, too. I can't embrace a double standard here.
The judges are in bed with the politicians. Snowden did the right thing by taking it to the people. And if we accept that its okay for Snowden to be prosecuted for exposing government tyranny, then we accept their power over us.
The illegality of disclosing classified information is not even a law?It's a zero-sum game for the government. They are trying to intimidate and harass anyone who stands in their way. You are just being a useful cog in their game. Stand up against the oppression and knock off the bull shit.
Yes, they ARE trying to intimidate and harass anyone who stands in their way.
But insisting that both Snowden AND the government face punishment for their wrongdoing shows I'm just a useful cog...how, exactly? Wouldn't a useful cog insist that what NSA did was no big deal?
I'll give you a few moments for your ragegasm to subside and think this through.
LOL ragegasm.
A cog is not a whole lot better than zombie (the people who insist that what the NSA did is no big deal). We can't worship the so-called law (which is not even a law) when we know its bunk and counter intuitive to freedom.
You're right. My bad.Nor am I. A finding of Not Guilty would be immediately appealed by the government in hopes of finding a more tractable jury.IMHO, I believe that is the purpose of juries, or at least one vital function they perform. Not only can they determine if the law was broken BUT also if the law should apply even if violated. Modern law rejects that concept BUT it can do nothing about it. Essentially, jury nullification.
I would LIKE to see that happen but I am not confident that the government is going to allow it.
?
They cant do that though the state has no appeals.
Indeed. Or he may just have an "accident".I am more inclined to believe that Obama is going to use the NDAA or military to take care of this. There, the judges can be controlled and the outcome determined before the trial.
I don't accept that it's okay for Snowden to be prosecuted for exposing government tyranny.I agree, and I'm not saying the government shouldn't be held accountable for its wrongdoing. There needs to be a separate, independent court for government employees to blow their whistles in when the usual chain of command is corrupt, as NSA has shown itself to be.
Of course, given the corruption extant throughout this Administration, I don't have any idea how such a court would be formed.
The whole situation sucks. Snowden broke the law, but he did us all a huge service in bringing NSA's illegal acts to light.
But given how I've called for Bradley Manning to be prosecuted for violating the law, I have to call for Snowden to be prosecuted, too. I can't embrace a double standard here.
The judges are in bed with the politicians. Snowden did the right thing by taking it to the people. And if we accept that its okay for Snowden to be prosecuted for exposing government tyranny, then we accept their power over us.
I accept that it's okay for Snowden to be prosecuted for breaking the law.
Why can't you understand that?
The illegality of disclosing classified information is not even a law?Yes, they ARE trying to intimidate and harass anyone who stands in their way.
But insisting that both Snowden AND the government face punishment for their wrongdoing shows I'm just a useful cog...how, exactly? Wouldn't a useful cog insist that what NSA did was no big deal?
I'll give you a few moments for your ragegasm to subside and think this through.
LOL ragegasm.
A cog is not a whole lot better than zombie (the people who insist that what the NSA did is no big deal). We can't worship the so-called law (which is not even a law) when we know its bunk and counter intuitive to freedom.
Perhaps you should just stop now. You're embarrassing yourself.
The mass collection of data was illegal.
He still broke the law, and regardless of what the outcome was- for better or worse- he goes to trail. You want the NSA on trail for something they did wrong, something that supposedly broke the law. Yet Snowden who did the same thing doesn't require the same treatment?
You say he did the right thing, but certainly a case could be made that the NSA was doing the right thing too. Anyhow, point is, you break the law you go to court- it's up to someone else to determine if you should do time or not.
Also, didn't the Patriot Act make this NSA thing legal?
I love how this is allegedly so cut and dry to you yahoos. It's called prosecutorial discretion. Do you really think that the law was designed to send honorable men to jail?
I love how this is allegedly so cut and dry to you yahoos. It's called prosecutorial discretion. Do you really think that the law was designed to send honorable men to jail?
The law is blind, and devoid of emotion. I believe it was designed to send people who broke it to jail regardless of what they're reasons are. Or at the very least it's designed to make sure those people go to trail- that is how the law works. I find it ironic that you want the NSA to be on trail for breaking the law, but you want to give Snowden a pass.
Just makes no sense.
I find it ironic that you want the NSA to be on trail for breaking the law, but you want to give Snowden a pass.
The govt. was running an unlawful, unconstitutional program that betrayed the American people and he exposed it. None of that says, 'prosecute him' to me. The system has to operate within the confines of sanity or else the system will go haywire.
You keep insisting I've said things I haven't said.The mass collection of data was illegal. There is no law that authorized it. This was a govt. gone rogue. You're embarrassing yourself.
If the honorable man broke the law and is found guilty by a jury of his peers...yes. Of course.He still broke the law, and regardless of what the outcome was- for better or worse- he goes to trail. You want the NSA on trail for something they did wrong, something that supposedly broke the law. Yet Snowden who did the same thing doesn't require the same treatment?
You say he did the right thing, but certainly a case could be made that the NSA was doing the right thing too. Anyhow, point is, you break the law you go to court- it's up to someone else to determine if you should do time or not.
I love how this is allegedly so cut and dry to you yahoos. It's called prosecutorial discretion. Do you really think that the law was designed to send honorable men to jail?
