Exec order, donate to Snowden defense, have your property confiscated

a reply to: crazyewok

Thanks for the info. But are you honestly telling me you trust the word of a spy agency/information gathering organization?

originally posted by: NightFlight

originally posted by: abe froman
But I can still donate money to Bowe Bergdahl with no problem right?

Hell, you can still contribute to Jonathan Pollard if you so desire...

Hell, you can still contribute to a campaign. And when you do...its called free speech.

Snowden? He is obviously a 1st Amendment Free Zone.

Snowden was right to blow the lid on domestic spying.

Snowden was wrong to blow the lid on foreign spying.


Two issues wrapped in the same package. Releasing any information on foreign government activities is treasonous. That's why his butt is in a sling.

Help, Vladmir Putin! Maybe he can save us from Obama's reign of terror and pay for the defense. What's Obama gonna do to Putin? Jack squat, as usual.

a reply to: Hr2burn

So, basically anyone working for NSA OPS would fall into this very same category. They are engaging in this sort of activity.

So, how shall we deal with them?

originally posted by: Greathouse
a reply to: TinfoilTP

Do you hear any Australians complaining about Australian involvement?

In 1901 the Australian government established a department to manage ALL domestic telephone, telegraph and postal services. This company was known as Telecom, and they had a (self admitted) absolute monopoly on the telecommunications industry in Australia right from the very beginning. They still do in a way, because they built the communications network that Australia relies on.

This company still exists today, and is now called Telstra. The commonwealth still owns 17% of telstra, the rest of it has been privatised. I remember reading somewhere about allegations that telecom/telstra has used its monopoly to spy on Australian citizens.

And they are still doing it. A quick search led me to this link from 2013
m.theage.com.au...

And now the Australian government has just passed legislation making it legal for them to keep doing an activity they've been doing illegally for probably the last 100 years. Does your average australian even care about this though? No they don't, and it's extremely hard to wake people up and make them see the bigger picture.
I mean, just look at how many people in our capital cities turn up to political events and rallies, compared to population. Most Australians just don't care enough and they can't see the end of the road that we're currently headed down. We have a reputation for being easygoing, but we take it too far.

Fear........This is the tactic they are using because it works. Look how far off the path of liberty we have traveled. This is cut and dry unconstitutional just like the patriot act.

originally posted by: Hr2burn
There are not many agencies carrying this story right now....they're probably gun shy considering the risks of upsetting our "leader". You can find the story in a few places but here is the executive order from the White House's website. They didn't like the money that was rolling in to defend Edward Snowden...so they made it illegal.

www.whitehouse.gov...

I just read it. Can you show me the exact spot that describes donations to someone like Snowden?

a reply to: SubTruth

I'm quite interested in what would result if somebody from another country, say... Australia? were to donate.

N/A

a reply to: lambs to lions

Good. He is a treasonous criminal and shouldn't be allowed to hoard money from his fan club to pay for some high-priced celebrity lawyer.

Whether he is a traitor is irrelevant to this issue. Remember, even John Adams, one of the most radical revolutionaries of the day, demanded that the redcoats be represented in court for the "massacre". He even around up defending them personally. We owe it to everyone who has sacrificed life and limb for our country to allow him to be represented fairly. Let's face it, without lord of money for an expensive fancy lawyer, it wouldn't be even with what the government will use.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: TinfoilTP

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: crazyewok

What is the "right way" to go about this? Which channels should he have used to expose this? The government literally shut down every option he had until Russia agreed to take him in. If you recall, he spent quite a bit of time hiding out in airports and hotels in other countries seeking asylum there. Russia wasn't his first choice. Now, for some reason, everyone acts like he wanted to go there all along...

That is exactly how a successful extraction would be made to appear.

Is that how they are supposed to look? Like a complete random string of attempts to go to every country but Russia then Russia? Riddle me this, why after Snowden left the country didn't he just return to Russia right away? If he was truly a spy for Russia, why would he care what the American public or government thought of him? He'd just go right away to Russia and be done with it. There is no need for the subterfuge outside of a ridiculous Hollywood plot.

It wasn't for his sake, it was to protect Russia. It would be terrible for Russia if it didn't look innocent on their part, sanctions, kicking out their diplomats all kinds of embarrassment, Putin would never allow it to play out like that, and neither would we if the plot was in reverse with one of our guys.

a reply to: TinfoilTP

Since when did Putin care what Obama thought of him?

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: TinfoilTP

originally posted by: miniatus
Executive orders are more like executive suggestions.. with that said.. this is still a big deal because the suggestion is likely to be backed up..

I never touched the Snowden situation because of that ... I keep my commebts on it limited .. which is scary when you think about it ... Why should we as free Americans have to? ... that in and of itself is a HUGE problem... this would never stand in mass... it would stand in individual private cases I suspect...

Aiding and abetting along with conspiracy charges could come to his supporters some day after he is found guilty of treason.

Aiding and abetting has to do with helping with the crime. Not only is in not a crime to defend oneself in court, but it is a Constitutionally guaranteed right. Sending in money for his defense is not in any way "aiding and abetting."

Snowden may be a treasonous asshole, but he does deserve his day in court and people have the right to support his defense if they wish.

He is still leaking classified stuff while in exile. That is criminal activity and anyone aiding him while he does that could get charged.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: TinfoilTP

Since when did Putin care what Obama thought of him?

Nations don't ever play the spy game trying to get caught.

a reply to: TinfoilTP

Still don't see why that would necessitate Snowden keeping up his alias even after safely making it back to Russia. If he were a Russian spy, then once back in Russia we'd never hear from him again. Also, why release the information to a public news outlet? Why not just give the information to Russia. Your entire account is just full of holes.

a reply to: Krazysh0t
Well, I can think of a few reasons he would give information to mainstream news and not disappear... Being a Russian spy (not saying he is! F if I know).

Deniability for Russia, and creating discord for America.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: TinfoilTP

Still don't see why that would necessitate Snowden keeping up his alias even after safely making it back to Russia. If he were a Russian spy, then once back in Russia we'd never hear from him again. Also, why release the information to a public news outlet? Why not just give the information to Russia. Your entire account is just full of holes.

No holes.
The plot was a blow to allied intelligence gathering as well as the NSA in the states. This causes international intelligence to not cooperate and share information. There has been a big push to share intel since the war on terror, seizing large funds world wide. Big money is involved and Russia funds a lot of stuff the West does not look kindly at. It is as clear as day to see the motive. Snowden is just some dumb kid who likely thought he was saving the day and fighting for the Constitution, but he was really fighting for Russia and they handled him like a piece of clay.

originally posted by: lambs to lions
Good. He is a treasonous criminal and shouldn't be allowed to hoard money from his fan club to pay for some high-priced celebrity lawyer.

Why? He is a citizen of the United States. That entitles him to a trial and to the right to adequately defend himself. Any trial involving the government requires a lot of money.

You may not like him, but that's irrelevant. If they can make funding his defense illegal, they can make funding your defense for a crime illegal as well.

originally posted by: TinfoilTP
Exactly.
He is also under the control of Russia. Probably was long before we knew who he was.

It's the US's fault he's in Russia in the first place. Anyways from all indications he's not under their control.