Ron Paul's view upon Eric Snowden issue

[eagle1462010]

There are 2 sides to every story.

While I No longer trust our Government, I have issues in this case.

The NSA has got to sift through the sand to find the few grains of sand that could stop a Terrorist Attack. Considering they have to find this out while filtering out MILLIONS OF GRAINS OF SAND, their task is ENORMOUS.

They have stopped many Terrorist attacks, while they don't stop them all. So I do have issues with someone coming out and giving out CLASSIFIED OR TOP SECRET information on how they do this.

Being X military, giving out Classified or Top Secret Information on how they get their information is TREASONOUS. While I don't like the current administration, or trust them, I still believe that Snowden has a DUTY to HONOR HIS OATH ON DISCLOSURE OF CLASSIFIED OR TOP SECRET DATA.

This is a devil's advocate post people. I agree with a lot of posters here most of the time. However, I don't like a US citizen giving out information to other countries IRREGARDLESS of my FAITH IN MY OWN COUNTRY.

I believe that MOST OF THE NSA are GOOD AMERICANS trying to do a difficult job attempting to thwart Terrorism. While there may be ROUGE agents, and ADMINISTRATIONS (which we have now), there is still good hard working Americans who are sifting through the sand to stop Americans from being killed by Terrorists.

Therefore, I take the opposing side on this equation and let the chips fall as they may. I don't see Snowden as a HERO, and even my own wife disagrees with me, but I DO BELIEVE IN HONORING OATHS and Disclosing this DATA is a VIOLATION OF THAT OATH.

I believe in oaths too... Mainly: I, Eric Snowden, do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic;
Seems that is exactly what Snowden is doing!!!

I took that same oath. Giving away Classified Data, especially on how we do it, to Russia and China hardly fits the bill with me.

He should have blown the cover here. Senators, Congressmen, and Press. Hell he could have taken this information to Ron Paul himself. I hardly think Ron Paul would have thrown him under a bus.

Secondly, then people like Ron Paul could have had Classified Briefings on this issue to ENSURE TOP SECRET OR CLASSIFIED DATA is not released.

Prosecute those who violate the oath, and don't condemn all of those at the NSA.

 

[editec]

I believe I could make a case for why the government needs the META DATA it has been collecting.[/I]

That case would be based upon ignoring The Constitution.

Yes, I agree it would, GG.

Another example of how our Constitution has become increasingly outdated due to changes in how the world actually works.

The Constitution was a brilliant political framework for a society forged in the late 18th century.

I believe it needs some serious modifications to make it worth of guiding us in the 21 century.

 

[S.J.]

I believe I could make a case for why the government needs the META DATA it has been collecting.[/I]

That case would be based upon ignoring The Constitution.

Yes, I agree it would, GG.

Another example of how our Constitution has become increasingly outdated due to changes in how the world actually works.

The Constitution was a brilliant political framework for a society forged in the late 18th century.

I believe it needs some serious modifications to make it worth of guiding us in the 21 century.

In other words, we should turn it into a politically correct version of the Communist Manifesto to fit today's current liberal agenda?

 

[The Rabbi]

Snowden is being used as an example of what happens if you blow the whistle on Kingpin Obama.

If obama is going to compare himself to someone, it shouldn't be Trayvon Martin but Whitey Bulger.

Robert Mugabe

Pinochet

No. Pinochet's policies brought economic expansion.

Who cares what Ron Paul has to say about anything? He's just another ex politician trying to remain relevant.

 

[Two Thumbs]

See Graphic:

and he gave info to china

so we either know china is our enemy or they are on equal footing with American citizens.

 

[Two Thumbs]

See Graphic:

Ron's comment, as well meaning as it may be, shows that he has not read the Espionage Act. As such, he comment is ignorantly incorrect.

It originally prohibited any attempt to interfere with military operations, to support U.S. enemies during wartime, to promote insubordination in the military, or to interfere with military recruitment. In 1919, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled in Schenck v. United States that the act did not violate the freedom of speech of those convicted under its provisions. The constitutionality of the law, its relationship to free speech, and the meaning of the law's language have been contested in court since ever. Among those who have been charged with offenses under the Act are German-American socialist congressman and newspaper editor Victor Berger, former Watch Tower Bible & Tract Society president Joseph Franklin Rutherford, communists Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, Pentagon Papers whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg, alleged Cablegate whistleblower Bradley Manning, and NSA leaker Edward Snowden. Rutherford's conviction was overturned on appeal.[3] The most controversial sections of the Act, including the original section 3, under which Rutherford was convicted, were repealed in 1921.[4]

Espionage Act of 1917 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

pos rep for looking shit up

however

snowden did what then, since telling us whats going on isn't covered here. as far as I can tell

 

[dblack]

Who cares what Ron Paul has to say about anything? He's just another ex politician trying to remain relevant.

I do.

He's relevant to me because he speaks up for the principles I believe in. Hardly anyone else on the national stage does.

 

[The Rabbi]

Who cares what Ron Paul has to say about anything? He's just another ex politician trying to remain relevant.

I do.

He's relevant to me because he speaks up for the principles I believe in. Hardly anyone else on the national stage does.

Hint: Ron Paul is not on the national stage.

 

[dblack]

Who cares what Ron Paul has to say about anything? He's just another ex politician trying to remain relevant.

I do.

He's relevant to me because he speaks up for the principles I believe in. Hardly anyone else on the national stage does.

Hint: Ron Paul is not on the national stage.

Lol ... yet you can't stop talking about him.

 

[kaz]

Ron's comment, as well meaning as it may be, shows that he has not read the Espionage Act. As such, he comment is ignorantly incorrect

Ultimately, the idea of espionage is that it benefits our enemies in one way or another. He said "espionage," not "the espionage act." And he was making a point about our government's attitude to its citizens. I don't think Ron Paul is the one word parsing, I think you are. You're saying well, espionage would be tried under the espionage act, so he meant that. And it doesn't say for all the conditions it's given directly to the enemy, so it's not just about helping the enemy. He was making a point. And a good one.

 

[kaz]

Who cares what Ron Paul has to say about anything? He's just another ex politician trying to remain relevant.

OMG, that's funny. So you clicked on a link titled, "Ron Paul's view upon Eric Snowden issue" to say you don't care about Ron Paul's view on anything. That's hilarious. I mean a lot of threads are horribly titled, I think it should be a rule to label threads accurately and clearly. But this one was, it starts "Ron Paul's view..." Here's an idea, if you aren't interested in a discussion, don't click the link. What say you?

 

[Katzndogz]

Snowden is being used as an example of what happens if you blow the whistle on Kingpin Obama.

That would be Papa Doc obama.

 

[The Rabbi]

Who cares what Ron Paul has to say about anything? He's just another ex politician trying to remain relevant.

OMG, that's funny. So you clicked on a link titled, "Ron Paul's view upon Eric Snowden issue" to say you don't care about Ron Paul's view on anything. That's hilarious. I mean a lot of threads are horribly titled, I think it should be a rule to label threads accurately and clearly. But this one was, it starts "Ron Paul's view..." Here's an idea, if you aren't interested in a discussion, don't click the link. What say you?

The butt hurt runs strong here.

 

[kaz]

Who cares what Ron Paul has to say about anything? He's just another ex politician trying to remain relevant.

OMG, that's funny. So you clicked on a link titled, "Ron Paul's view upon Eric Snowden issue" to say you don't care about Ron Paul's view on anything. That's hilarious. I mean a lot of threads are horribly titled, I think it should be a rule to label threads accurately and clearly. But this one was, it starts "Ron Paul's view..." Here's an idea, if you aren't interested in a discussion, don't click the link. What say you?

The butt hurt runs strong here.

Back to your gay obsession I see.

So what about the answer to my question. If you're not interested in "anything" Ron Paul says, then would it not be a best practice to not click on a link to a threat who's title starts, "Ron Paul's view?" What do you think? And if you do that, do you really need to tell us you weren't interested? There are BTW a lot of threads I'm not interested in. I do actually follow my advice, I don't click on them. And if I do and I'm yep, don't care, I don't tell anyone that.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

There are 2 sides to every story.

While I No longer trust our Government, I have issues in this case.

The NSA has got to sift through the sand to find the few grains of sand that could stop a Terrorist Attack. Considering they have to find this out while filtering out MILLIONS OF GRAINS OF SAND, their task is ENORMOUS.

They have stopped many Terrorist attacks, while they don't stop them all. So I do have issues with someone coming out and giving out CLASSIFIED OR TOP SECRET information on how they do this.

Being X military, giving out Classified or Top Secret Information on how they get their information is TREASONOUS. While I don't like the current administration, or trust them, I still believe that Snowden has a DUTY to HONOR HIS OATH ON DISCLOSURE OF CLASSIFIED OR TOP SECRET DATA.

This is a devil's advocate post people. I agree with a lot of posters here most of the time. However, I don't like a US citizen giving out information to other countries IRREGARDLESS of my FAITH IN MY OWN COUNTRY.

I believe that MOST OF THE NSA are GOOD AMERICANS trying to do a difficult job attempting to thwart Terrorism. While there may be ROUGE agents, and ADMINISTRATIONS (which we have now), there is still good hard working Americans who are sifting through the sand to stop Americans from being killed by Terrorists.

Therefore, I take the opposing side on this equation and let the chips fall as they may. I don't see Snowden as a HERO, and even my own wife disagrees with me, but I DO BELIEVE IN HONORING OATHS and Disclosing this DATA is a VIOLATION OF THAT OATH.

I believe in oaths too... Mainly: I, Eric Snowden, do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic;
Seems that is exactly what Snowden is doing!!!

I took that same oath. Giving away Classified Data, especially on how we do it, to Russia and China hardly fits the bill with me.

He should have blown the cover here. Senators, Congressmen, and Press. Hell he could have taken this information to Ron Paul himself. I hardly think Ron Paul would have thrown him under a bus.

Secondly, then people like Ron Paul could have had Classified Briefings on this issue to ENSURE TOP SECRET OR CLASSIFIED DATA is not released.

Prosecute those who violate the oath, and don't condemn all of those at the NSA.

If RP didn't reveal his source, they could by the law have prosecuted him too. Granted, it would be a ballsy move. But, my point is that nobody had immunity. Some say Snowden could have went through the courts. Those are the same courts who are validating this nonsense. He did the one realistic option he felt he had; to take his case directly to the people.

 

[numan]

If obama is going to compare himself to someone, it shouldn't be Trayvon Martin but Whitey Bulger.

Robert Mugabe

Pinochet

No. Pinochet's policies brought economic expansion.

And torture, death and oppression to human beings.

Thank you for revealing so clearly what your priorities are.

Oh, and economic expansion could not be attained except through totalitarian corruption and oppression?

I think you are well qualified to serve at the highest levels of the US government.

.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

That case would be based upon ignoring The Constitution.

Yes, I agree it would, GG.

Another example of how our Constitution has become increasingly outdated due to changes in how the world actually works.

The Constitution was a brilliant political framework for a society forged in the late 18th century.

I believe it needs some serious modifications to make it worth of guiding us in the 21 century.

In other words, we should turn it into a politically correct version of the Communist Manifesto to fit today's current liberal agenda?

Editec basically showed that the he has no use for the Constitution. The Constitution is not outdated. And in fact, the Constitution created a process in which it could be changed for a specific era. The problem is, liberals think the govt. should be a vehicle to run rough shot over the people and that's what we like to call tyranny. You support tyranny, Editec.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

If obama is going to compare himself to someone, it shouldn't be Trayvon Martin but Whitey Bulger.

Robert Mugabe

Pinochet

No. Pinochet's policies brought economic expansion.

Who cares what Ron Paul has to say about anything? He's just another ex politician trying to remain relevant.

Pinochet was a genocidal dictator and who really cares about your pathetic attempt to denigrate Paul, who is a patriot.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

i do.

He's relevant to me because he speaks up for the principles i believe in. Hardly anyone else on the national stage does.

hint: Ron paul is not on the national stage.

lol ... Yet you can't stop talking about him.

Zona needs to shut the fuck up. This isn't high school. I don't give a fuck who he thinks is popular ie relevant.

 

[The Rabbi]

Robert Mugabe

Pinochet

No. Pinochet's policies brought economic expansion.

And torture, death and oppression to human beings.

Thank you for revealing so clearly what your priorities are.

Oh, and economic expansion could not be attained except through totalitarian corruption and oppression?

I think you are well qualified to serve at the highest levels of the US government.

.

No, dumbshit. At least Pinochet did something positive. Obama can't even manage that.