Ex-CIA chief: Amnesty for Snowden idiotic, he ‘should be hanged by his neck'

Great Russian leader of the free world he hold Mssr Snowden in hi esteem. Mssr Putin is describing Edward Snowden, as “noble,” but says he has never met him or worked with the famous whistleblower/leaker who has been given asylum Russia.

Putin say "Thanks to Mr. Snowden, a lot has changed in the minds of people around the world," Putin also say "We don’t help him - we just gave him temporary asylum.”

"He has to make his own decision for his future. How is he going to live? Where is he going to live? ... He has made such a decision for himself...he's noble - but he has his own activities and I have my own."

Mr Snowden has respect of many countreys and leaders in our world. He does good things for democratic ways of living - and freedoms.

You know how #%^!~^ crazy this all is? I can't trust what the defense or intelligence agencies say. I'm very suspicious because they seem so omniscient and I know so little about them. I can imagine this Snowden thing to be a psyops. Maybe if I knew more about everything I'd laugh at that idea, but because I'm ignorant about military things I'm led to believe they have the power to do something like that.

I've always seen these billion dollar agencies as something unearthly in scope and dangerous because of its power. I wish I knew more about it and wasn't so distrusting, just to reassure others around me, but I yam what I yam - as popeye says.

Some people believe we're too free and intelligent for tyranny to rule over us. And if tyranny existed we're sure to acknowledge its existence and eliminate it. However, I'm just not as confident about it. I'm not sure we'd see it for what it's and I'm not sure we'd do anything about it. These things might be instinctive too.

I can say all these happy things about what we all want on this planet - things like happiness and prosperity and long life and fairness for all creatures and so on - but you know it's not intentions or what we say, it's what we do. I'm not a man that goes out of his way to help others or to make this planet a better place to live, so if I use that as a measuring device then I have to say I'm not a good man.

My point is I'm very imperfect and I can't expect them to be perfect, but I wish the process was more transparent or not so complicated. I'm reminded of the different kinds of ants in ant colonies and how nature gives them roles to fill. Is that how it works or are we truly the makers of our destiny? Am I to simply just trust that our agencies are good and I must respect secrecy for reasons of national security? I don't have that trust inside me. Nature didn't make me to trust like that.

My dad trusts them. He was in the army. Maybe I don't trust them because I didn't enter into service? Maybe it's my own ignorance of how our nation works. I've been wondering all my life whether I'm a coward or just different or both.

One thing I can say is I do respect servicemen, but I don't always agree with them. I respect pretty much anybody that has showed initiative and tries to be independent. I can't respect somebody who doesn't try and relies on others and isn't disabled.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


It's not up to Snowden what info gets released and when, you should know that by now. It's the Guardian you have a problem with, not Snowden.

As for testifying, who has asked him to testify? IIRC, no one has, therefore he hasn't. You also cannot blame that on him.

If I signed a contract with someone and I reneged on it, that means the contract is null and void. That's what the government did, so any contract he signed, IMHO, is null and void. You guys can think he's a traitor all day long, I will respectfully disagree.

TheSpanishArcher
If I signed a contract with someone and I reneged on it, that means the contract is null and void. That's what the government did, so any contract he signed, IMHO, is null and void. You guys can think he's a traitor all day long, I will respectfully disagree.

Explain this part to me again..

Their is no doubt he broke the law, it's not up for debate.
What you can and can't do with classified information and who you can do it with has nothing to do with the Govt changing anything. That makes him a criminal like many people in all walks of life.

What can be debated is why he did it or what his motivation was and what the outcome will be.

If a government feels the need to spy on its own people then obviously it views everyone as potential criminals, how can politicians who are given power by those who voted them in treat people with such disdain?

How can they be trusted to represent everyone fairly and do everything in their power to seek out the best in the interests of the people? Not to mention the fact the are bought and paid for by corporations.

Whats actually odd is America's government has done more than enough to cause a revolution and some might suggest they are even trying to cause one or just seeing how far they can push people.

They are changing laws to define you as a potential terrorist, anyone who disagrees with how government is run or the political system, can be labelled as enemy of the state. Us a generation have done a dis-service to everyone who fought and died to get us what we have now.

And we are going to lose it for future generations all because we are too concerned about are own little individual lives that we forgot to stand up and protest, write letters or make sure we have people who represent our interests.

Fact is.. we are separated by issues that have no relevance if the people voted in are only concerned by the $$$/£££ while you argue they jump on it and deflect from the real issue of total lack of representation.

Its all a con and it only changes when people (a lot of people) stand up and demand it.

reply to post by framedragged


Interesting that you would equate trampling of the 4th Amendment to being an issue of "airing dirty laundry". I would presume that Snowden, even as a contractor, most likely had to take an oath to uphold and protect the Constitution. If he spies what he perceives to be against the Constitution, then is it not his duty as per the very oath that governmental employees have to take, to reveal the issue?

He is actually a whistle blower in that light but his crime is being a whistle blower to the State, itself. In that sense, how the State would view him is as a criminal and that's really not any different from a corporation penalizing an employee who blows the whistle now is it?

Asktheanimals
How many people died from orders given by Woolsey?
How many by Snowden?
I rest my case.
Hypocrites.

edit on 18-12-2013 by Asktheanimals because: (no reason given)

plenty i'm sure but can you really say information leaks don't endanger people too?

as for hypocrisy and this has always irritated me but, this word sure seems to be misused by so many even by those who should know better, you must know another persons morals, beliefs and ideals before proclaiming they act against them by throwing catchy words all over the place like that.

not saying snowden should be executed like this woolsey guy wants but he should get life in prison(or until he can no longer be useful to rival nations) for violating his own word in betraying the nsa when he had to know already what kind of job it was when applying, i mean the cia and nsa don't exist for some moralistic purpose, they have their job and they do it.

if snowden actually acted for the sake of america, for what he proclaims then he should've been prepared to face prison time for it instead of running and hiding, acting as if he's innocent and doing everything possible to befriend rival nations like a traitor would.
if you betray your word you should be prepared and act with honor, to show you stand in righteousness but that you also understand you betrayed others, that it was wrong in that regard and that you apologize.

Fine Mr. CIA, then the same punishment should be offered to the Govt. leaders who break the constitution constantly going against everything our founding fathers fought so hard to attain...

jhn7537
Fine Mr. CIA, then the same punishment should be offered to the Govt. leaders who break the constitution constantly going against everything our founding fathers fought so hard to attain...

You really can't be that naive to think that is how the legals system does or should work.
It doesn't make a difference if you are a janitor working for a small defense contractor building power supply units or a full blown CIA\NSA spook, when you get your clearance you agree to uphold certain clearly defined and well established laws and he has not.

If Snowden faces punishment for being a whistleblower than that will prevent others from doing the same so he shouldn't be punished for the content he delivered. What he should be punished for is the laws he broke. If turns out he took these steps because he failed out of SF school or for other personal reasons then that is a different story but I go back to if he can improve the way certain things are done than that should be taken into account.

I don't get this justification of Party A breaks the law so Party B can do it also..that's called anarchy and watch society fall apart.

opethPA

jhn7537
Fine Mr. CIA, then the same punishment should be offered to the Govt. leaders who break the constitution constantly going against everything our founding fathers fought so hard to attain...

You really can't be that naive to think that is how the legals system does or should work.
It doesn't make a difference if you are a janitor working for a small defense contractor building power supply units or a full blown CIANSA spook, when you get your clearance you agree to uphold certain clearly defined and well established laws and he has not.

If Snowden faces punishment for being a whistleblower than that will prevent others from doing the same so he shouldn't be punished for the content he delivered. What he should be punished for is the laws he broke. If turns out he took these steps because he failed out of SF school or for other personal reasons then that is a different story but I go back to if he can improve the way certain things are done than that should be taken into account.

I don't get this justification of Party A breaks the law so Party B can do it also..that's called anarchy and watch society fall apart.

If party A breaks the law then we wouldn't get to know about until someone from party A decides to leak it and thus they are allowed to continue to do as they please, unchecked. Those laws are designed to protect themselves and are not in the interest of the people.

Horus12
If party A breaks the law then we wouldn't get to know about until someone from party A decides to leak it and thus they are allowed to continue to do as they please, unchecked. Those laws are designed to protect themselves and are not in the interest of the people.

Exactly why should the common person know classified information again?

In what business would that be an accepted practice? Post the intellectual property of whatever company you work for and see how long you keep your job or how long you don't have legal issues.

Again I am not saying he should be punished for whistleblowing but he should be held accountable for breaking the law.

reply to post by opethPA


Well if the Snowden's of the world never existed then the Govt. would continue to break the constitution... I guess you would prefer to have it that way where Snowden just "does his job like a good soldier" instead of speaking up against the horrible things our Govt. is doing on a regular basis...

Option A
Snowden does nothing and the Govt. continues to act as they were with no one knowing.

Option B
Snowden does something bringing attention to a major breach of trust between the Govt. and the citizens, but by doing this breaks his security clearance.

Option C (which would never happen)
There is no need for the Snowden's of the world to ever speak up, because our Govt. doesn't breach our trust snooping around, watching us constantly... They respect the citizens privacy and respects the laws that are in place. They don't act out of their jurisdiction...

I choose Option B. I don't appreciate the Option A-types of the world who turn a blind-eye because of a security clearance (stupid excuse)... And Option C is total fiction that would NEVER HAPPEN..

jhn7537
Well if the Snowden's of the world never existed then the Govt. would continue to break the constitution... I guess you would prefer to have it that way where Snowden just "does his job like a good soldier" instead of speaking up against the horrible things our Govt. is doing on a regular basis...

Please show me in which post I said he should have just done his job like a good soldier?
I mean I certainly never said "if his efforts can effect change" .

opethPA

Horus12
If party A breaks the law then we wouldn't get to know about until someone from party A decides to leak it and thus they are allowed to continue to do as they please, unchecked. Those laws are designed to protect themselves and are not in the interest of the people.

Exactly why should the common person know classified information again?

In what business would that be an accepted practice? Post the intellectual property of whatever company you work for and see how long you keep your job or how long you don't have legal issues.

Again I am not saying he should be punished for whistleblowing but he should be held accountable for breaking the law.

Spy agencies are an arm of the government who are voted in by the people, for the people and when they decide to turn against us they should not be able to use the law protect themselves.

We are supposed to be free are we not? We vote these people in to serve us, when did we become so unimportant and untrustworthy as to have every aspect of our lives under a microscope?

If classified means do what you want as long as we don't find out, then something is very wrong with the world.

opethPA

jhn7537
Well if the Snowden's of the world never existed then the Govt. would continue to break the constitution... I guess you would prefer to have it that way where Snowden just "does his job like a good soldier" instead of speaking up against the horrible things our Govt. is doing on a regular basis...

Please show me in which post I said he should have just done his job like a good soldier?
I mean I certainly never said "if his efforts can effect change" .

Well you wrote this: It doesn't make a difference if you are a janitor working for a small defense contractor building power supply units or a full blown CIA\NSA spook, when you get your clearance you agree to uphold certain clearly defined and well established laws and he has not.

I took that as, playing good soldier... What's funny is that the President takes an oath to the country but constantly breaks that oath... I wonder if you have a problem with that?

Horus12
Spy agencies are an arm of the government who are voted in by the people, for the people and when they decide to turn against us the law should not be able to protect them.

We are supposed to be free are we not? We vote these people in to serve us, when did we become so unimportant and untrustworthy as to have every aspect of our lives under a microscope?

If classified means do what you want as long as we don't find out, then something is very wrong with the world.

The Intelligence community and it's subcontractors are not voted on by the people. They are companies that hire skilled workers to fill various roles either from the military or civilian population.

I am 100% sure you have no need to know anything my company does from an intellectual property standpoint just like I am sure I have 100% no need to know anything your place of employment does. I can't believe you actually think it's your right to know classified things like nuclear launch codes, passwords, asset management, names, numbers, ect..

Yes.. that is the meaning of classified.
My information is classified for me..Yours is for you.. All countries around the world have state secrets that the average person has no need to know about.

jhn7537
Well you wrote this: It doesn't make a difference if you are a janitor working for a small defense contractor building power supply units or a full blown CIA\NSA spook, when you get your clearance you agree to uphold certain clearly defined and well established laws and he has not.

I took that as, playing good soldier... What's funny is that the President takes an oath to the country but constantly breaks that oath... I wonder if you have a problem with that?

Since you obviously didn't read any of my posts in this thread , here is a direct quote from earlier, "Make no mistake about it, I 100% believe that their are Govt (everywhere on the planet) elements, people, departments, polices , agencies that do horrible and bad things on a daily , hell probably an hourly basis. I believe those criminals need to be audited , investigated and arrested for their crimes against humanity. "

I never said anything about being a good solider..I said he broke the law and for someone that failed out of SF school and worked as a CIA and NSA contractor he knows the risk and rules he is breaking.

opethPA

Horus12
Spy agencies are an arm of the government who are voted in by the people, for the people and when they decide to turn against us the law should not be able to protect them.

We are supposed to be free are we not? We vote these people in to serve us, when did we become so unimportant and untrustworthy as to have every aspect of our lives under a microscope?

If classified means do what you want as long as we don't find out, then something is very wrong with the world.

The Intelligence community and it's subcontractors are not voted on by the people. They are companies that hire skilled workers to fill various roles either from the military or civilian population.

I am 100% sure you have no need to know anything my company does from an intellectual property standpoint just like I am sure I have 100% no need to know anything your place of employment does. I can't believe you actually think it's your right to know classified things like nuclear launch codes, passwords, asset management, names, numbers, ect..

Yes.. that is the meaning of classified.
My information is classified for me..Yours is for you.. All countries around the world have state secrets that the average person has no need to know about.

Read my post again please "Spy agencies are an arm of the government who are voted in by the people, for the people" they are not representing themselves, they work for us.

I did not say we have to know everything, I simply stated when they turn against the people who they work for then they should have no right to use the law to protect themselves.

And this..

"I am 100% sure you have no need to know anything my company does from an intellectual property standpoint just like I am sure I have 100% no need to know anything your place of employment does."


You are aware they have been caught up in corporate espionage also right? You also have no right to know what I do at home, on my phone or at my computer.

Being loyal and agreeing by signing your name to a binding contract between yourself and the U.S. any other government or individual, creates a dilemma when you willfully choose to no longer honor that pledged loyalty on your own good name, he had many other ways to have gone about exposing what he perceived as wrong, so now he must face the punishments which when you do sign certain agreements the penalties are clearly there for you to read.

You either agree or disagree and do not sign your name and assign your loyalty to anyone, if you do breach it, be prepared to be subjected to the penalties and do not look for sympathy.

There is perhaps a technicality for Mr. Snowden , that would be if he never signed any of those agreements, which does sometimes happen.

reply to post by TheSpanishArcher

As for testifying, who has asked him to testify? IIRC, no one has, therefore he hasn't. You also cannot blame that on him.

Specifically, Germany has been in recent talks with him about the possibility of testifying in their process about NSA excesses. That ought to be interesting to see Germans learn the extent of their own security service's complicity in everything, and all the better for it.

You're welcome to disagree, but you'd want to look and see I don't have a solid position yet. I'm sure wondering about his loyalties and how spur of the moment it ever was. We have his word and 3rd party statements about who has what data and who has physical control of everything he left with but quite frankly he worked for both the NSA and CIA for many years and I don't automatically believe Edward Snowden. He was too much what we worked in before having a change of heart to just accept all on face value and that seems hasty.

It's a story without an end yet, is how I put it and that is what this really is...so disagreement really is what I may come to take as a position at some point, as it's just speculation at the moment.