Who Broke The Law, Snowden Or The NSA? - By J. Kirk Wiebe - CNN

[WillyT]

Who broke the law, Snowden or the NSA?
By J. Kirk Wiebe - CNN
updated 12:21 PM EST, Wed December 18, 2013

Editor's note: J. Kirk Wiebe is retired from the National Security Agency, where he worked for more than 32 years. He received the NSA's second highest award, the Meritorious Civilian Service Award; the Director of CIA's Meritorious Unit Award; and a Letter of Commendation from the secretary of the Air Force, among other awards. He was an NSA whistleblower on matters of privacy involving massive electronic surveillance.

<snip>

(CNN) -- Edward Snowden deserves amnesty and the ability to return to the United States without fear of being incarcerated for reporting crimes by people in high places in the U.S. government. Monday's ruling by U.S. District Judge Richard J. Leon that the NSA's widespread collection of millions of Americans' telephone records was unconstitutional bolsters this view.

But for some, whether to give Snowden amnesty is not an easy matter to reconcile. After all, they say, he broke laws in divulging classified information.

Indeed, some say he is a traitor. But just as a member of the U.S. military is not required to follow an unlawful order, it is proper that an employee of the United States intelligence community -- NSA, CIA, DIA and others -- should report any information that concerns law-breaking by the intelligence agencies or their employees.

An NSA official's suggestion that amnesty for Snowden could possibly be put on the table was undoubtedly welcome news for Snowden, yet NSA Director Gen. Keith Alexander rejected the suggestion.

But how can anyone believe that Snowden would not be deserving of amnesty? Clearly it is the government and its senior officials who committed the crime -- people who took oaths to defend the Constitution from enemies both foreign and domestic and who failed to take to heart the words they swore to uphold. Indeed, Snowden did not -- nor does any government employee -- swear allegiance to the president of the United States, or even to the secretary of Defense or the director of NSA. No, he swore to uphold and defend the Constitution.

Unfortunately, while federal law protects whistleblowers who work in other government sectors from reprisals for truth-telling and have paths for reporting wrongdoing and mismanagement, those who work in intelligence are expressly denied such rights...

<snip>

More: http://www.cnn.com/2013/12/17/opinion/wiebe-snowden-amnesty/

[Octafish]

1. Former Top NSA Official: ''We Are Now In A Police State''

http://www.globalresearch.ca/former-top-nsa-official-we-are-now-in-a-police-state/5362080

[WillyT]

2. Yep...

[Octafish]

3. Mr. Wiebe is spot-on.

...those who allowed these programs to be implemented and developed over the past 12 years who should be prosecuted.

[questionseverything]

14. prosecution is the only way back to freedom

By way of background, the government is spying on virtually everything we do.

All of the information gained by the NSA through spying is then shared with federal, state and local agencies, and they are using that information to prosecute petty crimes such as drugs and taxes. The agencies are instructed to intentionally “launder” the information gained through spying, i.e. to pretend that they got the information in a more legitimate way … and to hide that from defense attorneys and judges.

This is a bigger deal than you may realize, as legal experts say that there are so many federal and state laws in the United States, that no one can keep track of them all … and everyone violates laws every day without even knowing it.

The NSA also ships Americans’ most confidential, sensitive information to foreign countries like Israel(and here), the UK and other countries … so they can “unmask” the information and give it back to the NSA … or use it for their own purposes.

Binney told us today:

The main use of the collection from these [NSA spying] programs [is] for law enforcement. [See the 2 slides below].

These slides give the policy of the DOJ/FBI/DEA etc. on how to use the NSA data. In fact, they instruct that none of the NSA data is referred to in courts – cause it has been acquired without a warrant.

So, they have to do a “Parallel Construction” and not tell the courts or prosecution or defense the original data used to arrest people. This I call: a “planned programed perjury policy” directed by US law enforcement.

And, as the last line on one slide says, this also applies to “Foreign Counterparts.”

This is a total corruption of the justice system not only in our country but around the world. The source of the info is at the bottom of each slide. This is a totalitarian process – means we are now in a police state.

Here are the two slides which Binney pointed us to:

[Octafish]

57. Commie GESTAPO, the STASI, would LOVE what NSACIAFBIDIANROWhoKnowsWhatElse can do.

J Edgar Hoover tracked what books "subversives" checked out of the library to see where their heads and hearts were at. America's most revered federal employee had to rely on index cards and kept his most sensitive stuff in his own office. Besides blackmailing politicians on the federal and state levels, and sending innocent people to prison and the electric chair, he really didn't do that much with what he had to defend the nation. He'd be proud to see his successors in the police state, apart from increasing the volume of the take, have not fared any better in its application.

[sabrina 1]

30. Unbelievable!

From your link:

Binney told us today:

The main use of the collection from these [NSA spying] programs [is] for law enforcement. [See the 2 slides below].

These slides give the policy of the DOJ/FBI/DEA etc. on how to use the NSA data. In fact, they instruct that none of the NSA data is referred to in courts – cause it has been acquired without a warrant.

So, they have to do a “Parallel Construction” and not tell the courts or prosecution or defense the original data used to arrest people. This I call: a “planned programed perjury policy” directed by US law enforcement.

And, as the last line on one slide says, this also applies to “Foreign Counterparts.”

This is a total corruption of the justice system not only in our country but around the world. The source of the info is at the bottom of each slide. This is a totalitarian process – means we are now in a police state.

This is new news to me. I wondered why they were collecting all that data because it definitely wasn't to 'catch terrorists'.

So much deception, and to think, we the people are Paying billions of dollars supposedly for 'national security' while they are hiding what they are really doing with all that data they are collecting. I wonder if there is money involved from selling the information also.

If Congress refuses to look into this, then we know they are bought and paid for themselves.

[whatchamacallit]

4. I consider the people who fail or refuse to understand this the real American traitors

The constitution haters on this forum turn my stomach. K&R

[bvar22]

5. I agree in toto.

Rampant Government Secrecy and Democracy can NOT co-exist.

Persecution of Whistle Blowers and Democracy can NOT co-exist.

A Well-Informed Electorate Is a Prerequisite for Democracy.


These are Protectors of our Democracy:

[Luminous Animal]

6. Thank you!!!!

[Blue_Tires]

7. This is why I hate the names on the guardian documents being redacted

If there is a prosecutable crime here from the NSA stooges (and yes, there clearly is), why protect the names of those who ordered/signed off on what, and when? Aren't signed documents allowed as evidence? Why not build some kind of organizational trail of who answers to whom?

I'm just saying Alexander deserves the brunt of the blame, but he shouldn't be allowed to fall on his sword while all the underlings get to skate...

[Douglas Carpenter]

8. knr

[Uncle Joe]

9. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, WillyT.

[WillyT]

51. Anytime... Uncle Joe, Anytime...

[Thinkingabout]

10. There are jobbs and positions which require the information obtained through these positions

not to be revealed to those who are not entitled to receive the information. Revealing this information can result in charges of Espionage. It was not in the capacity which Snowden was employed to furnish information to others. One may ask why it would be important for this information not to be revealed to sources which are not authorized and it is plain and simple, it is records of phone calls of which many wants to remain private. Just think about if the phone company employees started revealing your phone call records, how would you feel about this? There are many other jobs where privacy is of concern, medical records, credit card companies and this could go on and on. How would you feel if one of their employees stole files from their company and then gave this information at random?

Did Snowden break the laws? When is theft overlooked and for those to say it is proper to steal. He was not authorized to steal from the NSA or any other place he has stolen. In as much as Judge Leon has ruled the collection of phone call records is not constitutional does not give Snowden or any other unauthorized person the right to reveal these records by the same ruling so Snowden has violated our amendment rights.

[WillyT]

13. Except That Judge Leon Could Not Have Made That Ruling In This Case If It Weren't For Snowden...

Snowden was actually protecting our Constitution.

[Thinkingabout]

20. If the collection of phone call records is against the Constitution then it is also wrong for

Snowden to have collected. With the NSA collecting the phone call records they went through the FISC which is by the means of collecting the information, do you know for a fact Snowden went to FISC to ask for the Warrant? If Snowden did not go to FISC and he collected the records then he has by your standards he has violated the Constitution, his actions did not protect the Constitution.

[hueymahl]

23. That has to be the most convoluted twisted argument I have read about this in a while

You are trying to make a defense using a version of the "clean hands" doctrine. The Clean Hands doctrine is normally used by defendants trying to block a plaintiff from seeking injunctive relief in court. Basically the defendant (in your analogy the NSA) would say to the judge "ignore the plaintiff's request because he is just as dirty as I am".

You then take that concept and conflate it with the LAW protecting whistleblowers, and imply that because Snowden acted under orders and of his bosses and took actions that are unconstitutional, he cannot now nor should be given the ability to blow the whistle on unconstitutional acts.

I really should take this as a good sign. NSA supporters are slowly but surely running out of logical, reason based, or principled arguments, and are being left with ad homenum attacks and twisted pretzel reasoning. The tide is indeed turning against the NSA and their illegal spying on Americans.

[Thinkingabout]

58. I did not write the Whistleblower Act nor did I vote on the act, it is what it is, there are good

valid reasons behind this bill. Also, there was proper channels for Snowden to follow, he chose improper way, with some of the post I read here it is more important to inflict problems rather than alter a procedure.

[Hissyspit]

33. !

Don't hurt yourself.

[sendero]

53. You should take "thinking"...

.... out of your user name because you are incapable of doing any "thinking".

[Maedhros]

18. Yes, nevermind the threat to democracy posed by an overreaching security agency...

AN INDIVIDUAL MAY HAVE BROKEN A LAW!!!

[Thinkingabout]

22. Snowden's actions is an overreach, he has not protected our privacy, he has violated our

privacy, he did not seek a warrant but he gathered information and he has given that information to those not authorized, this is a violation of our privacy.

[Luminous Animal]

26. What makes you think that Snowden took records?

What we've seen to date are methods not data gleaned from those methods.

[Thinkingabout]

37. Then he does not have any "proof" and more likely he has violated our privacy since he

acted on his own he violated the Constitution without a warrant. Did he get permission to collect the "methods" or did he steal the information, did he pass this information on to those who did not have proper clearance to receive the information. He has violated our privacy, he has committed espionage and he has stolen.

[Luminous Animal]

50. Just as I thought. You've got nothing. Nobody needs individual records to provide

proof that the systems exist.

The proof lies in the technological schematics, which he does not want published because he believes doing so would provide the architecture for oppressive regimes to "upgrade".

Thanks for this session of making things up! This is usually an activity that I engage with the 8 year old next door but she is out of town so thanks for filling in the gap!

[Aerows]

59. He's trying to use a damned if he does, damned if he doesn't argument.

"There's no proof if he didn't take individual records", and "if he did take individual records, he violated your privacy by reporting it!".

This is the same old crap - they aren't mad about the methods, his motivations or how the information is being disseminated or how it was collected in the first place. They are pissed that it is being discussed at all.

[Thinkingabout]

60. What proof do you have the I have made anything up. The collection of phone call records

was told by Bush in a news conference in 2005, I had no doubt the records was being collected at that time or still being collected today. My comment is Snowden did not have the clearance to collect the records or reveal the records. My concern is Snowden has the records to reveal and is invading the privacy of the citizens of the US and his history of recent is more records will be revealed.

[Aerows]

61. Just admit

that you don't care about the who, what, when, where and how of this information being brought to light. You are upset because it was brought to light, at all.

Then you would be honest. Otherwise, your posts will continue to sound just as disingenuous on this topic as they have here.

[Thinkingabout]

64. There are channels available Snowden could have used, he chose not to for whatever reason.

He has proven he is incapable of handling sensitive information and therefore to ha e him stealing files from NSA does not leave me the assurance he has not stem my private information and he does not know how to protect sensitive information. You may not care if he passes out your information but I prefer to have my Constitutional rights on privacy honored.

[Aerows]

65. "I prefer to have my Constitutional rights on privacy honored"

by making certain no one knows my Constitutional rights on privacy are violated.



Gotcha. Do you work for the EPA, too?

[Thinkingabout]

67. If you are just learning about the phone call records being collected then you have let lots of time

Pass since this was announced in a news conference in 2005, why is it important to you now. And who has revealed and stolen information since this time.

[Aerows]

68. LOL

Talking point #2. "Are you just hearing about this?"

Extremely effective, you are ... NOT. - Yoda

and

"Secret, shall I tell you? Grand Master of Jedi Order am I. Won this job in a raffle I did, think you? 'How did you know, how did you know, Master Yoda?' Master Yoda knows these things. His job it is."

I wonder how Yoda would have thought of the CIA allowing a person to pretend to be one of them, get a federal salary, perks of being a CIA agent, never show up at the head of a Federal agency (EPA), falsify being a Vietnam veteran, and live in the home after it was discovered (not by the CIA, by the way) of another EPA official?

The CIA and NSA are fraud organizations sapping our nation of wealth under the guise of "protecting us". They are "protecting" wealth. Their own.

[Thinkingabout]

69. Talking points indeed, you don't have a talking point when you get the truth so just

On the merry-go- round and maybe one day you could arrive at your destination. If you want your privacy given to anyone just leave it in the hands of Snowden, he knows how to give it out.

[Aerows]

70. I don't need a talking point

I just sit here and see what happens. Wait until the high frequency trading (HFT) story breaks. The NSA and Wall Street will be shitting bricks. So far, all we have is breaking the Constitution, which apparently no one cares about. Wait until it becomes widespread monetary fraud and theft. That will really warm your cockles . Enjoy!

[Thinkingabout]

71. Are you Snowden's puppetmaster?

[Aerows]

72. LMAO!

Sure.

You take the cake.

[DJ13]

27. Telling you that your privacy has been breached is NOT a violation of your privacy

[Thinkingabout]

38. Ergo, then there is not a violation of the Constitution by the NSA.

[WillyT]

41. Ahem...

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

[Thinkingabout]

44. Warrants was issued for the NSA to collect the phone call data through the FISC, Snowden did not

secure a warrant and therefore violated our Fourth Amendment.

[WillyT]

45. And... Here Come Da (FISA) Judge(s)...

Fisa court documents reveal extent of NSA disregard for privacy restrictions
Incensed Fisa court judges questioned NSA's truthfulness after repeated breaches of rules meant to protect Americans' privacy
Spencer Ackerman in New York - theguardian.com
Tuesday 19 November 2013 13.42 EST

Link: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/nov/19/fisa-court-documents-nsa-violations-privacy

[Aerows]

62. I'm expecting something along the lines of

"But that judge stole a candy bar when he was six years old, so he is hardly in the position to determine who is breaking the law!"

[Aerows]

66. I got this in reply

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4201168

It is funny but so ridiculous it is beyond belief. Is this guy related to the one that pretended to be a CIA agent?

[lark]

32. If he'd reported the Bush government doing the same, would it still be a crime in your eyes?

My bet would be that you'd be fine with that.

[Thinkingabout]

39. Do you know the history of the NSA gathering data during the Bush administration? Perhaps

you do not know Bush did not get the warrants through FISC but he ordered it through his "war powers". This was in violation of the FISA Act. Bush did start going through the FISC before the end of his administration.

[Maedhros]

35. I am disinclined to ascribe any validity to your opinions. [n/t]

[Thinkingabout]

40. Perhaps the feeling is mutual.

[Maedhros]

55. One would imagine.

[SpcMnky]

29. Nonsense.

Blowing the whistle with documentary evidence is the only way to PROVE that crimes against the constitution are ongoing.

It can never be a crime to report a crime, unless you are a crime family.

[Thinkingabout]

42. Is whistle blowers covered under the Whistleblowers Act, no, the act exempts matters of

security from protections.

[SpcMnky]

47. Thank you for highlighting the absurdity of the law

[lark]

31. Obfuscate, conceal, rinse, repeat.

If what is being divulged is criminal activity, then the person or organization doing it should not have a right of concealment. It's not like a phone company worker sending a text from a girlfriend to a wife. Screwing around, while immoral, isn't illegal. In this case it was illegal actions done on a massive scale against all Americans by the government which was reported. I for one firmly believe Snowden should be pardonned.

[Thinkingabout]

43. Check the Whistleblower Act, matters concerning security is exempt from protections.

[grahamhgreen]

11. Failure to report crimes is also a crime:

'accessory after the fact':

Whoever, knowing that an offense against the United States has been committed, receives, relieves, comforts or assists the offender in order to hinder or prevent his apprehension, trial or punishment, is an accessory after the fact.

Except as otherwise expressly provided by any Act of Congress, an accessory after the fact shall be imprisoned not more than one-half the maximum term of imprisonment or (notwithstanding section 3571) fined not more than one-half the maximum fine prescribed for the punishment of the principal, or both; or if the principal is punishable by life imprisonment or death, the accessory shall be imprisoned not more than 15 years. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/3

So what Snowden was doing was his duty as a citizen, according to the last court decision.

[Cleita]

12. It's becoming more and more apparent that the NSA is in violation

of the Fourth Amendment. One Federal Judge is already of the opinion that it is. Why isn't our Attorney General calling for an investigation and issuing subpoenas as we write this?

[randome]

15. Maybe because it started in 2006 and virtually no one cared.

Joe Biden did but his was definitely a minority opinion. No one paid any attention to this until Snowden took the spotlight and yelled 'Fire!'. That's why this all seems like more disaffection with the real world than any real 'affection' for the Constitution.

Change needs to occur but Snowden did no one a favor by tossing a butt-load of classified information to the winds.

If this is what counts as changing the world ("Keep your hands off my precious metadata!&quot then I fear for the future of organized protest. Consider how tiny a victory this would be if metadata collection was stopped.

You might say that starting small is the way to go but...no.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Precision and concision. That's the game.[/center][/font][hr]

[Maedhros]

21. Speak for yourself.

Snowden did me an immense service by taking the action that he did, and I'm thankful for it. As a result, we're seeing increased scrutiny of the security state and the beginning of an attempt to make it accountable to citizens - both excellent results from Snowden's whistleblowing.

[hueymahl]

24. Stopping the collection of Meta Data would be a huge victory

Meta-data is more important in most cases than the actual content the meta-data refers to. There are litterally dozens of posts discussing this.

Even if all that is accomplished is the prohibition on collection of meta-data, that would be a HUGE victory for individual liberty.

[randome]

46. Oh, the metadata collection may well be stopped.

But 'huge victory'? I think you set your sights too low.

Especially as no one has been harmed by this any more than the IRS harms us by keeping copies of all our tax returns.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]

[woo me with science]

16. Absolutely.

[cantbeserious]

17. Thank You For Sharing

eom

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

19. Who has done more harm to the world? The NSA or Snowden.?

Apparently, to the apologists, revealing the harm done by the NSA is more criminal than what the NSA has done and continues to do.

Question for the apologists: If what the NSA did and continues to do is benign, why keep it secret from the people who pay them?

[Jefferson23]

25. He is absolutely, correct. K&R

[SamKnause]

28. Who broke the law you ask ?

Our corrupt government broke the law.

All branches of our corrupt government broke the law.

They have been breaking the law for decades.

They despise the Constitution and their actions prove it repeatedly.

[TheKentuckian]

34. That is correct!

[Solly Mack]

36. K&R

[me b zola]

48. K&R

[one_voice]

49. Who broke the law...

Both.

NSA....unconstitutional.

Snowden.....took an oath broke it...stole documents...

So in my opinion both broke the law.

[Luminous Animal]

54. Who did Snowden take an oath to?

[diabeticman]

52. amazing how short our knowledge is about history. It was the W. administration's fault that created

the Patriot ACT in the guise of protecting us that "protected" us our of our privacy. This gave way to NSA to do what they are doing right now AND it does help that social media like twitter and facebook and google make such infringes on our privacy standard business practice that most people just shrugged.

Snowden not the evil hear. To answer this question it is the Patriot act and Americans allowing themselves to be scared out of their liberty for security.

We did Mr. Franklin Proud didn't we.

[Wilms]

56. ^

[Dustlawyer]

63. For all of Snowden 's critics, how else could be have blown the whistle

on this Constitutional violation? He only had 2 options, ignore it and allow them to get away with massive over-reach, or blow the whistle and show the proof like he has. The important thing is he did it and now things are starting to change.