It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Pelosi: NSA Leaker Snowden Not Traitor But 'Should Face the Music'...What Music Nancy?

page: 3
21
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 26 2014 @ 04:55 AM
link   
I'm thinking a return to the US - or any of it's flunkies - would definitely be bad for his health.
Whatever they say.




posted on Jan, 26 2014 @ 05:07 AM
link   

smurfy
It's funny how politicians spend all day throwing paper darts at the other parties, then get all huggy and kissy together when they see a common foe...in this case Snowden who has all the pictures of them with their trousers down.
No wonder fancy Nancy wants him home, probably to smother him with dollars to get him to STFU.
well said smurfy



posted on Jan, 26 2014 @ 07:19 AM
link   

opethPA

If you ever had your clearance you wouldn't be making the case he didn't do anything wrong no matter how good/noble his intentions appear to be.


Not everyone who holds or has held clearances thinks like you.

You sound a little too old school, too rigid, for own good.




posted on Jan, 26 2014 @ 09:53 AM
link   
reply to post by smurfy
 

Revealing classified information is a crime and punishable. Here is the statues that state such:

Snowden did work for a company that was contracted with the NSA. As part of that contract he had access to classified information, of all levels. In his work and aspect, he took full advantage of those perks and benefits of his work there, and would have had to sign agreements and contracts to indicate what would happen if he should reveal said information. Most companies that deal with information or any business have such written into the contracts, and when you are working with or for the federal government they also include in the fine print, a little detail about revealing what you know being a federal crime and the penalties to such. Think about it, the man made close to 200 K a year, doing a job, he had access and a security clearance, thus it is safe to be under the belief that he had looked at and saw information that would have been classified to include things that dealt with national security. Such information would have probably been classified.

It is a federal crime and under title 18, of the US Code, 798-Disclosure of Classified Information.
(a) Whoever knowingly and willfully communicates, furnishes, transmits, or otherwise makes available to an unauthorized person, or publishes, or uses in any manner prejudicial to the safety or interest of the United States or for the benefit of any foreign government to the detriment of the United States any classified information—
(1) concerning the nature, preparation, or use of any code, cipher, or cryptographic system of the United States or any foreign government; or
(2) concerning the design, construction, use, maintenance, or repair of any device, apparatus, or appliance used or prepared or planned for use by the United States or any foreign government for cryptographic or communication intelligence purposes; or
(3) concerning the communication intelligence activities of the United States or any foreign government; or
(4) obtained by the processes of communication intelligence from the communications of any foreign government, knowing the same to have been obtained by such processes—
Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.

So you can see yes, he did break the law, federal law and ultimate should be punished for such, not as some would claim a traitor, but following the law as it is written. It would be up to a sitting president to decide if he should be pardoned or not, but right now, I would say let him come to trial, and let a jury decide on his guilt.

This puts the government in a bind, if he goes to trial, they cannot simply just declare something as classified information, and put a lock on evidence, as it would cause them to lose the court case, nor can it just reveal everything, due to the fact that it would be an embarrassment to the USA and the federal government. Ultimately all it has to show in court is that one of the documents that was released to the media was considered classified information, and justify it to a jury, to convict Snowden of violating the laws.

Even the leaker of the Pentagon papers was charged, but due to misconduct during his trial and got off with such. If there was no misconduct, he would have gone to prison, and possibly pardoned by President Ford.

This case cannot by law, go in front of the FISA court, but rather has to go in front of a grand jury. If the government hopes to put this case to rest, then it will have to have him sit in a court of law and answer to the charges he is accused of. In either case it is a lose/lose case.



posted on Jan, 26 2014 @ 10:11 AM
link   

Taupin Desciple
Not everyone who holds or has held clearances thinks like you.

You sound a little too old school, too rigid, for own good.


So if you had your clearance please tell me how he didn't violate any of the rules, laws and regulations on the proper handling, transport and storage of classified information?

You know what, you can't because he did multiple things wrong that way.

Again if you actually read what I posted you will see that I basically defended him on multiple levels which doesn't change the fact I think the way he went about it was wrong.

None of the above has anything to do with me being "old school, rigid" ..

Even better ..read the great post sdcigarpig made above.

edit on 2014pAmerica/Chicago3110pam by opethPA because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2014 @ 10:33 AM
link   
If Snowden's employer was working with the government to deny our rights.

They are all guilty along with Pelosi of Conspiracy to deny American Citizen's their rights.

It seems that killing the messenger serves no useful purpose.

Unless, you are trying to justify the Conspiracy.

The Government is completely out of control. Snowden did what he did to tell us.



posted on Jan, 26 2014 @ 11:34 AM
link   

opethPA

My guess is you never had your clearance in America or any other country with laws and regulations around classified info. If you did then you would understand what I am saying below.




You'd be wrong then.

As for 'the way he did' the whistleblowing, it was quite brilliant actually!



posted on Jan, 26 2014 @ 11:42 AM
link   

sdcigarpig
reply to post by smurfy
 

Revealing classified information is a crime and punishable.




The information was illegally obtained, no matter what was done with it, that's why reporters and the like are going to gaol for obtaining information in the same way. Snowden realised he was living in, and acting for a rogue state.
edit on 26-1-2014 by smurfy because: Text.



posted on Jan, 26 2014 @ 12:02 PM
link   

smurfy
The information was illegally obtained, no matter what was done with it, that's why reporters and the like are going to gaol for obtaining information in the same way. Snowden realised he was living in, and acting for a rogue state.
edit on 26-1-2014 by smurfy because: Text.


And broke clearly defined laws in obtaining that info for which I believe he should serve a minimal term like anyone would have to if they did the same or lesser things..If he has a positive impact on the nation then that punishment should be lessened even more. Again I don't think he should be punished for blowing the whistle, I think he should be punished for the laws he broke.

At no point in any Snowden post I have ever made here have I not said the Govt is horrible and does bad things on an hourly basis. You can make that statement about every Govt everywhere in the world as much as people want to think the US is the only problem child in the world. My hope is that from this experience some meaningful reform takes place in the Govt. I don't think it will happen but I can hope for the best. If one reform takes place then it was all worth it.

You think you way is right which tells me you never had a SECRET or higher clearance in the US or else you wouldn't be claiming he did nothing wrong. I know my way is right because I am just going by the clearly defined laws so let's just agree to disagree.



posted on Jan, 26 2014 @ 12:54 PM
link   

opethPA

You think you way is right which tells me you never had a SECRET or higher clearance in the US or else you wouldn't be claiming he did nothing wrong. I know my way is right because I am just going by the clearly defined laws so let's just agree to disagree.



Who mentioned the US?
In Northern Ireland all civil servants are required to sign the official secrets act. In my day I had also to sign the Oath of allegiance.

Also when I was talking about information illegally gained I was talking about the NSA and the rest's illegal gathering and classifying of that information. I was not talking about Snowden's gathering of evidence, that's what a whistleblower needs to do for credibility.
So, you want him to do a 'little time' for that? That sounds a little Nancy.



posted on Jan, 26 2014 @ 12:59 PM
link   
Snowden is a hero. When country spies on it's citizens in order to keep them in line, you're going down the wrong path. It took Snowden to bring all of this out, to open all of this for discussion and to bring more oversight and heat to the alphabet agencies. The pressure Snowden put on the Alphabet agencies is a good thing. We had to stop this country from turning into communist Soviet era Russia. This man is a true hero and life is better for all of us because of him. Only a Communist would think otherwise....really.

Editing to add that...sure Snowden technically broke laws, but when it's for a cause as big as showing how corrupt the USA government is, those laws need to be tossed aside. signing a security clearance and disclosure laws should always be secondary considerations when our very freedom is at stake.
edit on 26-1-2014 by amazing because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2014 @ 01:12 PM
link   

smurfy
Who mentioned the US?
In Northern Ireland all civil servants are required to sign the official secrets act. In my day I had also to sign the Oath of allegiance.

Also when I was talking about information illegally gained I was talking about the NSA and the rest's illegal gathering and classifying of that information. I was not talking about Snowden's gathering of evidence, that's what a whistleblower needs to do for credibility.
So, you want him to do a 'little time' for that? That sounds a little Nancy.


Great that has nothing to do with any other countries INFOSEC standards.

Yup, the Govt and the associated agencies here do bad things like every other country in the world. The should be held accountable as should Snowden who broke multiple laws.

Since you never had a clearance here trying to discuss this logically with you would be as silly as me trying to explain how INFOSEC works in Ireland.

I have said all along he shouldn't be held accountable for being a whistle blower but rather for the laws he broke. Given the volume of info he took things that were not illegally obtained were also included in that breach. If you throw out everything he took that helps the people then you still should charge him for everything he took that doesn't help the people.



posted on Jan, 26 2014 @ 01:58 PM
link   

sdcigarpig

It is a federal crime and under title 18, of the US Code, 798-Disclosure of Classified Information.
(a) Whoever knowingly and willfully communicates, furnishes, transmits, or otherwise A: makes available to an unauthorized person, B: or publishes, or uses in any manner prejudicial to the safety or interest of the United States or for the benefit of any foreign government to the detriment of the United States any classified information—
(1) concerning the nature, preparation, or use of any code, cipher, or cryptographic system of the United States or any foreign government; or
(2) concerning the design, construction, use, maintenance, or repair of any device, apparatus, or appliance used or prepared or planned for use by the United States or any foreign government for cryptographic or communication intelligence purposes; or
(3) concerning the communication intelligence activities of the United States or any foreign government; or
(4) obtained by the processes of communication intelligence from the communications of any foreign government, knowing the same to have been obtained by such processes—
Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.



A: Define unauthorized person. If an unauthorized person is one without clearance, it needs to state that. Otherwise I'm going to assume that "unauthorized" means a person who is not a citizen of the U.S.

B: What Snowden did was not prejudicial to the safety and interest of the United States, unless you are to mean that the safety and interest of the LEADERS of the United States were caught with their pants down. He didn't disclose the locations of military bases or anything else of that nature which, taken in the time frame when this code was drafted, is the spirit of this code. Rather, he disclosed acts that really can be described as crimes as they pertain to the constitution, against the people of the United States and breaches of trust against foreign nations. If that doesn't interest you then how can you call yourself a patriotic member of this country? Your leaders have been lying to you, breaking the law and smearing the reputation and lives of those who try to call them out. This doesn't concern you in the least?

I'm not a lawyer, but this really isn't that difficult to pick apart. This code was drafted in 1995. That is so pre-9/11 that any argument stating that the spirit of the code deals with national security as it stands today, would be laughable. It also has little to no relevance to what people like Snowden are capable of technologically and, apparently, morally.

So no, he didn't break the law. He broke the Government and for that he should be applauded by the very people who elected those animals into office, and in turn got screwed for it.

And for the record, A) I don't consider Snowden a hero. All he did was the right thing. In this day and age it seems, all a person has to do is the right thing, and they're considered a hero. That's a pretty telling indictment of our society if you ask me.

B) You do bring up some good points, you stand by them and you stay civil about it all. I may not agree with your opinion but I respect how you present it.


edit on 26-1-2014 by Taupin Desciple because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2014 @ 02:11 PM
link   
Here is a somewhat timely article by Snowden's legal adviser. Snowden Clemency

"Any negotiations with Edward Snowden regarding his return to the US would require guarantees of amnesty, his legal adviser said Sunday."

He wants amnesty or clemency because he knows he broke multiple laws, it appears for the greater good, and it's a pretty cut and dried case against his improper handling of over 1.7 MILLION classified documents. The minute he took something as simple as the names of servers from a classified network and stored them on anything unclassified he broke the law. That has nothing to do with the crimes the NSA apparently committed. If you want to give him a pass on the illegal things the NSA gathered on the people I have no issue with that but the remaining INFOSEC violations should be handled.

Personally I have said all along that if his actions create a better US then I would have no issue with clemency or amnesty. Additionally if I was on his team I would make any deal contingent on not only clemency but hearings going over the bigger issue which was the NSA approach to info gathering.



posted on Jan, 26 2014 @ 02:21 PM
link   
"It is a federal crime and under title 18, of the US Code, 798-Disclosure of Classified Information.
(a) Whoever knowingly and willfully communicates, furnishes, transmits, or otherwise A: makes available to an unauthorized person, B: or publishes, or uses in any manner prejudicial to the safety or interest of the United States or for the benefit of any foreign government to the detriment of the United States any classified information—
(1) concerning the nature, preparation, or use of any code, cipher, or cryptographic system of the United States or any foreign government; or
(2) concerning the design, construction, use, maintenance, or repair of any device, apparatus, or appliance used or prepared or planned for use by the United States or any foreign government for cryptographic or communication intelligence purposes; or
(3) concerning the communication intelligence activities of the United States or any foreign government; or
(4) obtained by the processes of communication intelligence from the communications of any foreign government, knowing the same to have been obtained by such processes—
Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both. "


Taupin Desciple

A: Define unauthorized person. If an unauthorized person is one without clearance, it needs to state that. Otherwise I'm going to assume that "unauthorized" means a person who is not a citizen of the U.S.


An unauthorized person would be someone without clearance to view whatever level of info is being shown. A reporter in the UK does not have the clearance to view TS or compartmentalized information. That is just common sense.

The problem I have with this argument is that you are basically ignoring the rest of that law or trying to void it because it was written prior to 9/11 so it shouldn't matter in your opinion .

He broke each of the 4 major points listed there along with violating other more basic rules on the handling of classified information.

Again, I don't want him held accountable for blowing the whistle I just want him held accountable for what he did wrong. Most importantly I want the Govt/NSA to change because of this.
edit on 2014pAmerica/Chicago3102ppm by opethPA because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2014 @ 02:44 PM
link   

Taupin Desciple

whyamIhere
reply to post by Taupin Desciple
 


Once the facts come before a jury....

Only the "OJ Jury" could screw this up..


When you have a job like Snowden had, there is no time off. You're always on the job because you have Government clearances you can take home with you. He took them to Russia after the fact, that should be proof enough that he was on the top tier of his job.

If he committed any crime, it was a breach of confidentiality from his employer that is more than likely covered in a contract that I know Snowden would have had to sign before he was hired for the position he was in. I would've said a breach of trust, but you can't put that in a contract. And for good reason. If it were a crime to betray trust on a high corporate level you wouldn't have any corporate heads left.

Would you Pelosi?



It's an NDA that he has broken. Most likely one with BAH, as well as with the NSA which petitioned for and granted his security clearance.

I'm not saying he's wrong. I'm not saying he should be "held accountable".



posted on Jan, 26 2014 @ 02:54 PM
link   
I've said this before, but I'll say it again.

Although I am glad he came forward, Snowden's story does not sit well in my mind.

High School Dropout.
Went to Jump School in the US Army, fell and broke both legs. Discharged. This is almost unheard of, as bones heal.
Worked as a rent-a-cop for a security company.
Somehow became an employee of the CIA.
Was given a very high ranking clearance, and posted as an "operative" in next to no time in Europe.
Decided to leave.
Went to work for BAH.
Was placed in Hawaii, working for the NSA.
Made $250K a year.


Where he had only a few (under five, if I remember correctly) years experience, had all these amazing occurrences in his career, and then lands a primo job for BAH in HAWAII of all places...earning $250K a year?

Snowden is a box jockie. Networking. Operating Systems. Woop-di-doo. This happens to be a fairly common denominator for a huge bunch of IT folks.

When I went to work for BAH in approximately 2003, had eight years experience in a very specific and difficult to get training for software package used as a key component of IT systems world wide by major corporations and governments...I had a salary of $105K year. I was working at sites like Bolling AFB for the DOD.

Not Hawaii.

I'm waiting for something about his background that actually rings true when I hear it. Something tells me, Snowden is a play by another US agency to disgrace the NSA publicly. Like all children, siblings do have their squabbles....

Possibly the CIA?



posted on Jan, 26 2014 @ 03:23 PM
link   
reply to post by zeroBelief
 





I'm waiting for something about his background that actually rings true when I hear it. Something tells me, Snowden is a play by another US agency to disgrace the NSA publicly. Like all children, siblings do have their squabbles....


Interesting theory....

I think it should be explored. Usually these guys sell the information for profit.

This breach seems highly unusual and punitive. The government talks he punishes.

Very strange....Unless we are seeing a true Patriot come to the rescue of his Country.

Or, this is high stakes payback.....I smell something.....🐟 🐠 🐁 🐀



posted on Jan, 26 2014 @ 03:41 PM
link   

zeroBelief
I've said this before, but I'll say it again.

Although I am glad he came forward, Snowden's story does not sit well in my mind.

High School Dropout.
Went to Jump School in the US Army, fell and broke both legs. Discharged. This is almost unheard of, as bones heal.
Worked as a rent-a-cop for a security company.
Somehow became an employee of the CIA.
Was given a very high ranking clearance, and posted as an "operative" in next to no time in Europe.
Decided to leave.
Went to work for BAH.
Was placed in Hawaii, working for the NSA.
Made $250K a year.


Where he had only a few (under five, if I remember correctly) years experience, had all these amazing occurrences in his career, and then lands a primo job for BAH in HAWAII of all places...earning $250K a year?

Snowden is a box jockie. Networking. Operating Systems. Woop-di-doo. This happens to be a fairly common denominator for a huge bunch of IT folks.

When I went to work for BAH in approximately 2003, had eight years experience in a very specific and difficult to get training for software package used as a key component of IT systems world wide by major corporations and governments...I had a salary of $105K year. I was working at sites like Bolling AFB for the DOD.

Not Hawaii.

I'm waiting for something about his background that actually rings true when I hear it. Something tells me, Snowden is a play by another US agency to disgrace the NSA publicly. Like all children, siblings do have their squabbles....

Possibly the CIA?


That sucks doesn't it? So Snowden just gave up this $250K job to go and live in Russia all for the CIA who by this time are a rich bunch of oligarchs' in their own right, that makes some sense. Besides the NSA and CIA and FBI and all the rest answer to the NCTC now.



posted on Jan, 26 2014 @ 03:42 PM
link   

whyamIhere
reply to post by zeroBelief
 





I'm waiting for something about his background that actually rings true when I hear it. Something tells me, Snowden is a play by another US agency to disgrace the NSA publicly. Like all children, siblings do have their squabbles....


Interesting theory....

I think it should be explored. Usually these guys sell the information for profit.

This breach seems highly unusual and punitive. The government talks he punishes.

Very strange....Unless we are seeing a true Patriot come to the rescue of his Country.

Or, this is high stakes payback.....I smell something.....🐟 🐠 🐁 🐀


Honestly, the single biggest red flag to me is what his supposed income was....$250K.....for being a glorified network admin.....

When my IT field specialty is much much more narrow of a field...far fewer of us out there....and the skill is highly in demand...and yet, he made 150% more than I did ?

Just...doesn't...make....sense.



new topics

top topics



 
21
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join