Treason or Whistle Blower?

Should Edward Snowden be charged with Treason? WHY?

  • YES

    Votes: 19 21.3%
  • NO

    Votes: 70 78.7%

  • Total voters
    89
Both him and Bradley Manning should be given a medal, in my opinion. It's a sad day in America when the truth is considered treason.


so you and Kevin believe everything which the Federal does must be done in public for everyone in the world to be privy to and nothing should be secret?

So before June 6, 1944 The Federal Government had a duty to have a press conference to announce the invasion and if they did not an officer in IKE's command would have a duty to tell the news and thus Hitler?

Yes, because fighting the Nazis and spying on American citizens is almost EXACTLY the same thing... :eusa_eh:
 
I'm not sure about treason (I voted for it in this poll) but he most certainly should be charged with the crime of unauthorized disclosure. As a prerequisite for his security clearance, he agreed to keep classified information secret. There are quite a few paths to report breaches of the public trust, including contacting members of Congress.

He's not a whistleblower, he's an attention whore.
 
"Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court. The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted."

I have no doubt the answer will be offered based on political leaning so give a rational reason for your vote.

STLtoday : NSA contractor risks steep jail time for data leak

IMO this one should be pretty independant of political leanings.

Afterall the boy went to work for the NSA during the reign of Bush when our rights were taken away and blew the whistle when Obama proved to be more of the same.

Folks who supported the Patriot Act back when need to take a consistency check I suppose if they are against it now but it seems to smear both parties evenly....maybe the far right "terrorists hunters" more and the hippies less? I guess?



He was a security guard for the NSA during the Bush administration. What does a security guard know about NSA surveillance?

Then he went to work for the CIA.

THEN he got another job connected with the NSA. He was at that one for less than 3 months.
 
Both him and Bradley Manning should be given a medal, in my opinion. It's a sad day in America when the truth is considered treason.


so you and Kevin believe everything which the Federal does must be done in public for everyone in the world to be privy to and nothing should be secret?

So before June 6, 1944 The Federal Government had a duty to have a press conference to announce the invasion and if they did not an officer in IKE's command would have a duty to tell the news and thus Hitler?

Yes, because fighting the Nazis and spying on American citizens is almost EXACTLY the same thing... :eusa_eh:

Of course they are not. But the principle is the same and glib comments do not validate the criminal behavior. He had legal alternatives.
 
I voted Whistleblower-- but you should have had PATRIOT for a choice!

So, In your opinion any member of the government has a patriotic duty to disclose any information he or she learns in the course of their job which they belief should be released to the public?

Only a Jury can decide that. Not you, not the government. Trial by Jury, not Trial by Government. You'll never find 12 people to unanimously convict of Treason :) U mad?

If they suspend a Jury trial for him, shit will hit the fan.

What caused the American Revolution? The British monopolized our money supply and banned Colonial Script.

Then they suspended Trial by Jury, whilst issuing General Search Warrants (writs of assistance).

Then they tried to take the guns are Lexington and Concord.

GG
 
Last edited:
I voted Whistleblower-- but you should have had PATRIOT for a choice!

So, In your opinion any member of the government has a patriotic duty to disclose any information he or she learns in the course of their job which they belief should be released to the public?

Unlike you and your Progressive comrades, I believe if our government over-reaches and clearly SHITS on the US Constitution and an American citizen knows about , YOU'RE DAMN right he should disclose it! How come we don't see you as pissed off about Obama and company leaking classified intel and getting real people killed, LIKE SEAL TEAM 6??? Doesn't fit with your politics, hmm? I guess we can put you in the corner of supporting Bush/Obama.. good for you.. You must be reallll proud today!
 
Obama in 2005 said what Obama is doing now is a terrible thing. Why didn't President Obama blow the whistle on what Senator Obama considered an atrocity?
 
"Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court. The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted."

I have no doubt the answer will be offered based on political leaning so give a rational reason for your vote.

STLtoday : NSA contractor risks steep jail time for data leak

IMO this one should be pretty independant of political leanings.

Afterall the boy went to work for the NSA during the reign of Bush when our rights were taken away and blew the whistle when Obama proved to be more of the same.

Folks who supported the Patriot Act back when need to take a consistency check I suppose if they are against it now but it seems to smear both parties evenly....maybe the far right "terrorists hunters" more and the hippies less? I guess?



He was a security guard for the NSA during the Bush administration. What does a security guard know about NSA surveillance?

Then he went to work for the CIA.

THEN he got another job connected with the NSA. He was at that one for less than 3 months.

It has been reported he has a GED and while working for a private gov't contractor earned $ 200,000 per year. I think a good deal more needs to be investigated.
 
Both him and Bradley Manning should be given a medal, in my opinion. It's a sad day in America when the truth is considered treason.


so you and Kevin believe everything which the Federal does must be done in public for everyone in the world to be privy to and nothing should be secret?

So before June 6, 1944 The Federal Government had a duty to have a press conference to announce the invasion and if they did not an officer in IKE's command would have a duty to tell the news and thus Hitler?

And that's not a straw-man argument at all. :rolleyes:
 
Both him and Bradley Manning should be given a medal, in my opinion. It's a sad day in America when the truth is considered treason.


so you and Kevin believe everything which the Federal does must be done in public for everyone in the world to be privy to and nothing should be secret?

So before June 6, 1944 The Federal Government had a duty to have a press conference to announce the invasion and if they did not an officer in IKE's command would have a duty to tell the news and thus Hitler?

Yes, because fighting the Nazis and spying on American citizens is almost EXACTLY the same thing... :eusa_eh:

Right. You know classifying bad things that you do so that the public can't hold you accountable for them is essentially the same as keeping your battle plans secret from your enemies.
 
I don't think our founding fathers had in mind for the government to snoop in to places that is none of their business. That was the whole purpose of getting out from under British rule, wasn't it? And the reason for the Constitution and Declaration of Independence. So no. He did not commit treason. He is being another Paul Revere.
 
This was government over-reach.

It's like 1984...Big Brother is watching.

Snowden is a whistle blower...

I also think this is different than the Manning case.

1) Snowden carefully ONLY released information on programs, tactics and techniques...Manning gave away everything including the kitchen sink without regard for the lives and safety of men and women involved in ongoing overseas operations.

2) Snowden goal was informing U.S. citizens of the government that is elected to represent them.

3) Snowden didn't try to hide his identity...he came right out and said "here's what I did and this is why I did it.". Manning, did not.

4) From what I've seen and read, I believe Snowden's intentions were pure and his motivations honorable. Manning's...not so much.
 
Treason is a bit much, but there are a lot of other charges that can be made against him.

First, when he took that job he would have had to sign a statement saying that he would not disclose any secret information - "The Industrial Security Code". This gets pretty specific about the punishments for any infractions.

Second, as a systems administrator, he is not supposed to be poking around with either the applications or the data. This isn't a law, it's more of the standard ethics. It should be that systems administrators are bonded or something. We are routinely exposed to all kinds of data and usually have full administrative rights to everything in any network that we work on.

I've been surprised how there is no legal standards required for system administrators. I guess companies wouldn't want a legal requirement because sysadmins are already a very highly paid position. Any legal requirement would force our salaries up - most companies would rather take the risk, but government shouldn't.
 
Both him and Bradley Manning should be given a medal, in my opinion. It's a sad day in America when the truth is considered treason.


so you and Kevin believe everything which the Federal does must be done in public for everyone in the world to be privy to and nothing should be secret?

So before June 6, 1944 The Federal Government had a duty to have a press conference to announce the invasion and if they did not an officer in IKE's command would have a duty to tell the news and thus Hitler?

And that's not a straw-man argument at all. :rolleyes:

Nice try Kevin. Suppose you offer an example of when the disclosure of secret information is LEGAL?
 
Notice how Wry Catcher ignores condemning Obama for doing the very thing, LEAKING CLASSIFIED INTEL, this PATRIOT did? But Obama did it for personal reasons and actually cost American lives.. BUT THATS OK.. He's a leftist god.
 
so you and Kevin believe everything which the Federal does must be done in public for everyone in the world to be privy to and nothing should be secret?

So before June 6, 1944 The Federal Government had a duty to have a press conference to announce the invasion and if they did not an officer in IKE's command would have a duty to tell the news and thus Hitler?

And that's not a straw-man argument at all. :rolleyes:

Nice try Kevin. Suppose you offer an example of when the disclosure of secret information is LEGAL?

Who says it's legal? I only ever said that it was heroic and the right thing to do. When the law is terrible then criminals become the heroes.

And there was no "Nice try," your last post was a terrible straw-man that deserved less attention than I gave it.
 
Treason is a bit much, but there are a lot of other charges that can be made against him.

First, when he took that job he would have had to sign a statement saying that he would not disclose any secret information - "The Industrial Security Code". This gets pretty specific about the punishments for any infractions.

Second, as a systems administrator, he is not supposed to be poking around with either the applications or the data. This isn't a law, it's more of the standard ethics. It should be that systems administrators are bonded or something. We are routinely exposed to all kinds of data and usually have full administrative rights to everything in any network that we work on.

I've been surprised how there is no legal standards required for system administrators. I guess companies wouldn't want a legal requirement because sysadmins are already a very highly paid position. Any legal requirement would force our salaries up - most companies would rather take the risk, but government shouldn't.

Just goes to show you how easy it is for someone to abuse that power with no oversight.
 

Forum List

Back
Top