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

A former head of the Central Intelligence Agency has said that anyone thinking about granting NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden amnesty is out of their mind and that Snowden should be “hanged” if he is ever convicted of treason.

James Woolsey, who served as director of the intelligence agency from 1993 to 1995, and former Chairman of the Joint Chief of Staff General Hugh Shelton told Fox News the prospect of giving Snowden legal immunity would be a serious mistake.

“I think giving him amnesty is idiotic,” Woolsey said. “He should be prosecuted for treason. If convicted by a jury of his peers, he should be hanged by the neck until he is dead.”

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

Oh how they hate getting caught. Then you see the true extent of their crap. Threats beyond threats. I feel that Snowden wasn't a traitor but a man who wanted to protect the rights of the people by exposing this crap.

I'm sure that the web and ATS might be fed up with the stuff, but the NSA spying program hasn't stopped and I doubt it will. Snowden should be looked at as more of a hero than a traitor. He knew what he was doing and wanted to expose it. Many of America's "allies" are no longer allies because they even spied on them, Brazil and Germany to name a couple.

Former CIA Director Woosley previously criticized the US for failing to use a strong hand with Russia, implying that President Vladimir Putin’s past experience with the US taught him that granting Snowden asylum would not come with any negative consequences.

“His general attitude is don’t be weak, and that’s fine, but he’s not really doing anything else except avoiding being weak, simply trying to throw his weight around with respect to the United States,” Woosley told MSNBC in June.

“He’s not cooperating, really, on anything substantial, and there’s no risk in it for him. He doesn’t have anything negative happen when he behaves that way with us, so the kind of cooperative relationship we had from time to time in the past, say with Gorbachev, is just not here…he’s almost impossible to work with.”

Interesting article none the less.

-SAP-

reply to post by SloAnPainful


Haha!

The only thing thats idiotic is that they somehow think hes stupid enough to accept amnesty

reply to post by SloAnPainful


I think that a majority of people agrees with him in at least one point, traitors should be killed, what diverges in who is the traitor...

I'm not a defender of death penalty for any crime ever, it is just too easy to use it to silence people and keep errors mum. But I would go along with some form of physical punishment and extreme social shame for those that work against national (not governmental) interests...

reply to post by SloAnPainful


Did you see the latest Snowden Leak:

“These Programs Were Never About Terrorism: They’re About Economic Spying, Social Control, and Diplomatic Manipulation. They’re About Power” - Snowden. Just leaked today

Link:
S ource

reply to post by dominicus


I have always thought that. It was never about terrorism. They use that term to incite fear and wash the masses. They have a bigger agenda.

-SAP-

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

The problem is for those that have never had a clearance or worked in the defense/intelligence community, Snowden seems like nothing more than a hero.

To those that have done both of those things he has broken multiple rules, laws, regulations and the contract he agreed to when choosing that career in life.

I'm not here to argue if it's justified that he did those things because the Govt does them. That's not the point for me. When you get your clearance you know what you are signing up for.

That being said...if he can effect change that allows those agencies to keep us secure while reducing the big brother element then I think the following would be fair:

1. Found guilty of treason
2. Thrown out of the country forever.
3. Suspended/Minimal jail sentence that anyone would get if they violated the clearly defined terms of getting your clearance.

I know if I would have improperly transported specific info on the grounds of a secured installation when I had my clearance I would have faced jail time and or significant fines plus loss of job and that pales in comparison to the infosec breach he caused.

reply to post by opethPA


Read here again..

dominicus
reply to post by SloAnPainful

 

Did you see the latest Snowden Leak:

“These Programs Were Never About Terrorism: They’re About Economic Spying, Social Control, and Diplomatic Manipulation. They’re About Power” - Snowden. Just leaked today

Link:
S ource

Also definition of Traitor..

Like my sig? You should look up the rest of the song..

SloAnPainful

“I think giving him amnesty is idiotic,” Woolsey said. “He should be prosecuted for treason. If convicted by a jury of his peers, he should be hanged by the neck until he is dead.”

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

I have no problem with that stance, provided government officials are in the same line to the gallows. While I don't agree with the manner in which Snowden released the information, im willing to overlook that simply because the info he released about the NSA has exposed serious legal / constitutional issues / violations.

If snowden sticks to information on illegal actions (and by illegal I mean just that and not personal opinions) then I think good can come from it. Personally speaking, and based solely on his attempts to hold the NSA / Government accountable, I would support amnesty for him. If he strays outside that box, like Manning and Assange or If its determined he provided classified info to China or Russia, then all bets are off.

Before we delve into the back and forth over national security, secrets and protection from threats overseas. I would rather face the prospect of terrorism rather than shredding the Constitution to combat terrorism.

The Government needs to stop treating the American people like addle minded schoolchildren... The NSA / Administration has demonstrated, with spectacular results, that they have absolutely no business telling the American public to trust them.

Its sad really....
Snowden violates the law and they call for charges...
Obama / members of his administration violate the very same laws and its ignored.

In for a penny in for a pound...

You want to charge Snowden then do it. Just make sure the arrest warrants for Obama and the others are in the same batch.

ThichHeaded
Also definition of Traitor..

Like my sig? You should look up the rest of the song..

edit on 12/18/2013 by ThichHeaded because: (no reason given)

Not sure how to take your response because I'm tired and it's been a long day..

What can't be denied in anyway is the laws of transporting/caring for/communicating/insert something else classified information are clearly and legally defined and explained when you go for the most basic clearance you can get. He broke those laws and the contracts he signed and if I or anyone that is cleared would have done less their would have been clearly defined repercussions.

Again, if he can effect positive change then I think the penalties should reflect that.
Right now he is just acting as judge, jury and executioner and that is just as wrong as what the govt does.

reply to post by SloAnPainful

“I think giving him amnesty is idiotic,” Woolsey said. “He should be prosecuted for treason. If convicted by a jury of his peers, he should be hanged by the neck until he is dead.”

This statement is at logger heads with the recent court ruling that NSA phone/internet tapping activities are highly likely unconstitutional. Does the ex Cia chief statement comes across to posters as paranoid, like he is a man who is afraid and with something to hide?

What is contained in Snowdensunreleased material Snowden. Perhaps it contains dirt on him?.

AthlonSavage
What is contained in Snowdensunreleased material Snowden. Perhaps it contains dirt on him?.

From comments I have seen by some in the administration, Snowden essentially has "the keys to the kingdom" which is why they are nervous and why the discussion of amnesty has come up.

If the recent court ruling is a sign of things to come, its entirely possible snowden wont need to release anything else.

I think Snowden should be "Times - Person of the Year"..... Exposing the Govt. might not make a difference over night, but it finally opened the eyes to millions of Americans and many many more internationally to what our Govt. is up to... Nothing better then catching them with their hand in the cookie jar...

SloAnPainful

A former head of the Central Intelligence Agency has said that anyone thinking about granting NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden amnesty is out of their mind and that Snowden should be “hanged” if he is ever convicted of treason.

James Woolsey, who served as director of the intelligence agency from 1993 to 1995, and former Chairman of the Joint Chief of Staff General Hugh Shelton told Fox News the prospect of giving Snowden legal immunity would be a serious mistake.

“I think giving him amnesty is idiotic,” Woolsey said. “He should be prosecuted for treason. If convicted by a jury of his peers, he should be hanged by the neck until he is dead.”

How ironic these authority figures talk so easily about treason.

Mr. Woolsey, maybe you should reconsider the true meaning of this word. By doing so, you would probably have to face the inner truths of your darkest self and why not much of the security agencies all around the so well-respected United States.

Hanged by the neck, really? I wonder what we should do then to all these soulless World Elite Bankers...

opethPA
The problem is for those that have never had a clearance or worked in the defense/intelligence community, Snowden seems like nothing more than a hero.

You mean those who still think and act for themselves rather than signing away their will to some invisible authority?

To those that have done both of those things he has broken multiple rules, laws, regulations and the contract he agreed to when choosing that career in life.

So you're saying he joined up knowing and signed a contract which stated that his job was to be illegal activities against his own nation and it's people?? Did you also sign a contract which outlined your job to be against it's own country and it's people??

I'm not here to argue if it's justified that he did those things because the Govt does them. That's not the point for me. When you get your clearance you know what you are signing up for.

I'm not surprised that you don't want to argue it either. Neither would I in that position. Once again, are you saying that you Knowingly sign up for a position which is acting against it's own people and country??

That being said...if he can effect change that allows those agencies to keep us secure while reducing the big brother element then I think the following would be fair:

1. Found guilty of treason
2. Thrown out of the country forever.
3. Suspended/Minimal jail sentence that anyone would get if they violated the clearly defined terms of getting your clearance.

I know if I would have improperly transported specific info on the grounds of a secured installation when I had my clearance I would have faced jail time and or significant fines plus loss of job and that pales in comparison to the infosec breach he caused.

edit on 2013pAmerica/Chicago3110ppm by opethPA because: (no reason given)

When the "Big Brother Element" and "those agencies that keep us secure" are the ones who are actually the real problem and the ones who are putting us in harms way, it kind of negates any and all Legal and Moral grounds for which they stand in the first place, don't ya think??

Do we punish undercover agents who infiltrate the Mob or other Organized Crime or feel that those organizations are "Justified" in punishing those who bring their institutions down?? No, because as an criminal agency they have no credible claim by which to seek retribution against those who exposed and stopped their illegal activities.

reply to post by opethPA

Very well said. I also believe that while they're subjecting him to review ... every single member of the government involved, drawing a salary of $40K+ ... should face review with the exact same potential consequences.

I hate what he did ... but there's clearly more than one 'guilty' party here.

Everyone keeps going on and on about how 'reactionary' the government is being to Edward Snowden.

A: He committed treason; it's a defined word and his actions fit the definition. Instead of blowing the whistle on corruption and trying to actually do something about it he aired dirty laundry again and again for no other purpose to embarrass the united states.

B: Nothing he has provided has been revelatory, sorry to anyone who hasn't been paying attention for the last 30 years.

C: Any complaints about misuse of nsa systems by employees for personal reasons should be directed at this self centered culture we seem to be so good at cultivating and the nature of bureaucracy itself.

If anyone actually thinks that we shouldn't keep track of external enemies and anyone they have regular contact with stateside, well then I don't know what to tell you.

mOjOm
You mean those who still think and act for themselves rather than signing away their will to some invisible authority?

Snowden failed out of Special Forces training, worked as a contractor for the CIA and the NSA. Clearly he was intent on spending his professional life not signing away his will to some invisible authority.

So you're saying he joined up knowing and signed a contract which stated that his job was to be illegal activities against his own nation and it's people?? Did you also sign a contract which outlined your job to be against it's own country and it's people??

See my opening response. This is not a person that was naive to the ways of the Intelligence world both domestically and foreign. It would basically be like me walking into the ocean and then feigning surprise that I got wet.

I'm not surprised that you don't want to argue it either. Neither would I in that position. Once again, are you saying that you Knowingly sign up for a position which is acting against it's own people and country??

I'm saying that people that work in that industry know the rules of the game. They know that bad things happen and they know that like every single line of business everywhere since the history of time, their are bad people and that they are signing up to be exposed to those elements in some way or on some level.

When the "Big Brother Element" and "those agencies that keep us secure" are the ones who are actually the real problem and the ones who are putting us in harms way, it kind of negates any and all Legal and Moral grounds for which they stand in the first place, don't ya think??

What exactly is your involvement in that world that makes you so sure what the real problem is? It seems safe to assume you have never had a clearance or you would understand how he broke the law.

When you sign up for that life their are clearly defined laws that state how you can transport/store/interact with classified information. Additionally their are clearly defined lists that state which countries you can trade or export that classified info to. Any country with any state secret has rules around the handling of classified information so that would pretty much be every country on the face of the planet. In some places around the world doing a fraction of what he did would result in automatic death without a trial and in others he would be spending the rest of his life in a dark hole so this isn't an "American" thing.

Additionally if you are naive enough to think their are not bad people all over the world trying to do bad things to America, Canada, Iraq, England, France , insert every other country then I don't know what world you live in.

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.

None of that changes the fact that what Snowden did was illegal and their will and should be consequences he will have to pay for his choice no matter how noble it appears. The only caveat I add to that is if his efforts are to bring about then change then their should be leniency but if he acted out of retribution in any way for falling out of SF school or for being unhappy with his current job assignment or anything similar then he should have the full weight of the law thrown at him.

Snarl
reply to post by opethPA

 

Very well said. I also believe that while they're subjecting him to review ... every single member of the government involved, drawing a salary of $40K+ ... should face review with the exact same potential consequences.

I hate what he did ... but there's clearly more than one 'guilty' party here.

Without question though I don't make any distinction on salary.
You can find a small town anywhere with a mayor making a few grand a year and he can be corrupt.
Making money no more means you are a criminal than not having it means you are more noble.

I'm back and forth on this because it's a story without an ending at this point. Is he going to do some GOOD ...or is he simply going to trickle feed out juicy nibbles to keep his new life in the suburbs of Moscow safe and comfortable? There is a real big difference between those two and it starts with leaking vs. testifying. I want to see him testifying in some open forum and laying out what matters to get something accomplished by all this.

Otherwise? I've honestly begun to wonder if he's more properly referred to as a defector or foreign agent?

I'm also sure I'm not the only one to wonder that. 20 years ago, there wouldn't have BEEN a question because this pattern was clear, fresh and frequent enough for people to know as something that happened. It usually ran East to West, but the pattern wasn't different. Flip, Hoover up and Flop across the political line to be safe on the other side.

Is he an idealist, trying to survive? ...or did he become an agent well before he flopped across and simply completed what had been planned out? What he's released doesn't change and his motivation doesn't undercut it's value. It DOES bring into question whether enough will ever be released to actually change our nation or whether it'll just be what hurts it most.

We'll see how the story plays out, IMO.