Edward Snowden- NSA leaker- hero or traitor?

[nw_hunter]

Anyone saying not a hero, listen to this:
http://lewrockwell.com/yk/us-spy-leviathan.html

Good interview with a man in the know............................And a conscience!

[Oldshooter]

I heard on the news today he leaked some stuff about a summit meeting in 2009 where attendees emails were tapped and information mined from other members. He may be getting close to a close encounter with Black ops!
 
http://www.usnews.com/news/newsgram/articles/2013/06/17/g8-summit-opens-with-revelation-that-uk-spied-on-delegates-in-2009

[SHOOTALL]

There were ways to address his grievances he broke the law.

Would you find him guilty in a court of law, if you were on Jury?

I would have to hear the case first . But if he broke the law and there were legal ways to bring out his findings and hold the govt. accountable then I would have a hard time not voting guilty. We can't expect to hold our govt. to the letter of the law if we don't also obey the laws.
 That said if there was no other way to get the information out it would be a very hard decision.

[Gary G]

There were ways to address his grievances he broke the law.

Would you find him guilty in a court of law, if you were on Jury?

I would have to hear the case first . But if he broke the law and there were legal ways to bring out his findings and hold the govt. accountable then I would have a hard time not voting guilty. We can't expect to hold our govt. to the letter of the law if we don't also obey the laws.
 That said if there was no other way to get the information out it would be a very hard decision.

There were 80,000 laws added to the Federal Register last year. There are laws against the laws. There is an important and long acknowledged  precedent in our court system called Jury Nullification. The jury can find someone innocent, even if a law is broken, based on what is justice in that particular case.


see Nullification, Tom Woods

[SHOOTALL]

There were ways to address his grievances he broke the law.

Would you find him guilty in a court of law, if you were on Jury?

I would have to hear the case first . But if he broke the law and there were legal ways to bring out his findings and hold the govt. accountable then I would have a hard time not voting guilty. We can't expect to hold our govt. to the letter of the law if we don't also obey the laws.
 That said if there was no other way to get the information out it would be a very hard decision.

There were 80,000 laws added to the Federal Register last year. There are laws against the laws. There is an important and long acknowledged  precedent in our court system called Jury Nullification. The jury can find someone innocent, even if a law is broken, based on what is justice in that particular case.


see Nullification, Tom Woods

 I have posted the same thing here several times , just last week posted such. But a jury should consider the law and if it is a good or bad law. Why was it made law ? who or what does it protect ? There is responsibility that goes with the ability to find a law bad.

[nw_hunter]

There were ways to address his grievances he broke the law.

Would you find him guilty in a court of law, if you were on Jury?

I would have to hear the case first . But if he broke the law and there were legal ways to bring out his findings and hold the govt. accountable then I would have a hard time not voting guilty. We can't expect to hold our govt. to the letter of the law if we don't also obey the laws.
 That said if there was no other way to get the information out it would be a very hard decision.

There were 80,000 laws added to the Federal Register last year. There are laws against the laws. There is an important and long acknowledged  precedent in our court system called Jury Nullification. The jury can find someone innocent, even if a law is broken, based on what is justice in that particular case.


see Nullification, Tom Woods

I have practiced Jury Nullification myself. It didn't work in the case I sat on I couldn't get enough to go along with me. I was unsure of guilt by the evidence presented, and even if he was, the penalty would have been unfair IMO. Most were afraid to go against the advice of the judge and prosecutor. I think we have reached the point in America where most of our laws are now being put in place at the federal level to oppress the people.

I like to use the Constitution as a guide for scrutinizing  laws. If the law is unconstitutional, it should be broken.We are either a Republic or not. More and more it appears we're not.

Right or wrong by draconian laws, I think Mr. Snowden is a HERO. He put his life on the line by doing what he did. For what he thinks is best for the country. Took a lot of courage to do that!

[magooch]

Well--I was fairly ambivalent about what label to put on Snowden, but now he is beginning to show his true colors.  The retort to Dick Cheney for calling him a traitor shows him to be just another far left dipwad.  Sure, he wasn't going to blow kisses to Mr. Cheney for calling him a traitor, but his snarky rebuff puts Snowden in the right light, or should I say the left light. 


I have to wonder what Snowden actually expected from those who have been devoted to the mandate that America not be blindsided by another terrorist attack.  It's fine to have doubts about the scope of what NSA has been doing, but it's not like they've gone off in the woods and lost their way.  According to some very serious and conscientious people, the programs are absolutely essential and they are also quite aware of and revere the Constitution as well as anyone. 


Snowden could have been a legitimate whistle blower, but he chose the wrong track and missed it by that much.  It brings to mind a little hymn--hymn, hymn, screw him.

[Gary G]

Well then, I suppose that if we are to be an imperialistic and totalitarian country that invades weaker countries stirring up hornets nests (creating terrorists) for a little oil, then the snooping is necessary, even toward our own people that might oppose such a government. Since natural rights no longer matter, let's find a nice country where we can mail the Constitution and maybe they might actually use it.


As far as the comment on Dick Cheney, I wholeheartedly applaud!

[powderman]

My own preference would be for our government to secure, our borders, kick all non-citizens out who aren't thoroughly cleared and maybe even get us the heck out of the middle east.  All muslims would be free to leave this country as soon as possible.  None of that might prevent future acts of terrorism, but it would make me feel better.

 
MAGOOCH. Well said Sir, and it would make me feel better too. POWDERMAN. 

[mcwoodduck]

Well then, I suppose that if we are to be an imperialistic and totalitarian country that invades weaker countries stirring up hornets nests (creating terrorists) for a little oil, then the snooping is necessary, even toward our own people that might oppose such a government. Since natural rights no longer matter, let's find a nice country where we can mail the Constitution and maybe they might actually use it.


As far as the comment on Dick Cheney, I wholeheartedly applaud!

But aren't secret courts, spying on Political Rivals and using the power of the government to attack those rivals the road to a dictatorship? 
After all what Richard Nixon did was bad in asking people to break in and see what the DNC plans for the ellection were at the Watergate hotel.  Obama has used the IRS to attack TEA party groups, has used the ownership of GM and Chrysler to close hundreds of Dealerships owned by Republican supporters.  We have the President sayiong he is willing to us Drones on US soil to attack enemies, and finally the secret warrants have been expanded from Forgien elements under Bush, (that all the Dems hated) have been expanded 10 times and now the Demare OK with these secret warrents and the tapping of people's phones.  Not tomention the tapping of and the gatherieng of information to gather black mail on reporters both on the right and on the left.  Did Nixon go after Woodward and Bernstien?  Did they attack their charicter? 
And if the war in Afganistan and Iraq were over Oil where is the oil?  Paid $4.01 For regular today.  If gas was under $2.50 a gallon when the terrorists flew planes into buildings and we attacked and took over two countries in the following four years and managed them for the next 10 so far why is gas going higher and higher? 
You need to stop listening to the crazy people that put out sound bites and hope you just believe them and become one of the sheep and not employ a little critical thinking to what you blert out that makes you feel good. 

[mcwoodduck]

There were ways to address his grievances he broke the law.

Would you find him guilty in a court of law, if you were on Jury?

I would have to hear the case first . But if he broke the law and there were legal ways to bring out his findings and hold the govt. accountable then I would have a hard time not voting guilty. We can't expect to hold our govt. to the letter of the law if we don't also obey the laws.
 That said if there was no other way to get the information out it would be a very hard decision.

There were 80,000 laws added to the Federal Register last year. There are laws against the laws. There is an important and long acknowledged  precedent in our court system called Jury Nullification. The jury can find someone innocent, even if a law is broken, based on what is justice in that particular case.


see Nullification, Tom Woods

 I have posted the same thing here several times , just last week posted such. But a jury should consider the law and if it is a good or bad law. Why was it made law ? who or what does it protect ? There is responsibility that goes with the ability to find a law bad.

My Question to you is this.
Was the man known as Deepthroat a Trator or a whislter blower.
Did Deepthroat break the law and his nondislcosure, secrets act or did he inform the American people of illegal acts being done by the administration? 
Some how the left sees him as a hero and commend him for showing how the administration was attacking it's political enemies.
And now the left hates the wistler blowers if they reveal a liberal for breaking the law. 

[ultramag44]

Ed Snowden did the WRONG thing for all the RIGHT reasons.
The administration is doing the RIGHT thing for all the WRONG reasons.
I spent 20 + years in the Army.  A Federal non-disclosure form you sign when you hear things and see things (that never happened of course) is easy to understand.  It leaves no grey area.         
 He broke the law. Put me on a jury, I would convict him.  When he got out of prison, I would buy him lunch.   
I don't buy the regime's PR where they are saying, "Due to Ed Snowden's diclosure, our enemies are changing the way they do business."
They already knew.

[SHOOTALL]

There were ways to address his grievances he broke the law.

Would you find him guilty in a court of law, if you were on Jury?

I would have to hear the case first . But if he broke the law and there were legal ways to bring out his findings and hold the govt. accountable then I would have a hard time not voting guilty. We can't expect to hold our govt. to the letter of the law if we don't also obey the laws.
 That said if there was no other way to get the information out it would be a very hard decision.

There were 80,000 laws added to the Federal Register last year. There are laws against the laws. There is an important and long acknowledged  precedent in our court system called Jury Nullification. The jury can find someone innocent, even if a law is broken, based on what is justice in that particular case.


see Nullification, Tom Woods

 I have posted the same thing here several times , just last week posted such. But a jury should consider the law and if it is a good or bad law. Why was it made law ? who or what does it protect ? There is responsibility that goes with the ability to find a law bad.

My Question to you is this.
Was the man known as Deepthroat a Trator or a whislter blower. Could he not be both ? Depending on your perspective ?
Did Deepthroat break the law and his nondislcosure, secrets act or did he inform the American people of illegal acts being done by the administration? 
Some how the left sees him as a hero and commend him for showing how the administration was attacking it's political enemies.
And now the left hates the wistler blowers if they reveal a liberal for breaking the law.

[scootrd]

Ed Snowden did the WRONG thing for all the RIGHT reasons.
The administration is doing the RIGHT thing for all the WRONG reasons.
I spent 20 + years in the Army.  A Federal non-disclosure form you sign when you hear things and see things (that never happened of course) is easy to understand.  It leaves no grey area.         
 He broke the law. Put me on a jury, I would convict him.  When he got out of prison, I would buy him lunch.   
I don't buy the regime's PR where they are saying, "Due to Ed Snowden's diclosure, our enemies are changing the way they do business."
They already knew.

Well said !!!!

Semper Fi