Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: So is anyone else conflicted about the whole Snowden affair? [View all]Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)22. 3 NSA whistle blowers who tried "other ways" disagree with you.
Q: Did Edward Snowden do the right thing in going public?
William Binney: We tried to stay for the better part of seven years inside the government trying to get the government to recognize the unconstitutional, illegal activity that they were doing and openly admit that and devise certain ways that would be constitutionally and legally acceptable to achieve the ends they were really after. And that just failed totally because no one in Congress or we couldn't get anybody in the courts, and certainly the Department of Justice and inspector general's office didn't pay any attention to it. And all of the efforts we made just produced no change whatsoever. All it did was continue to get worse and expand.
Q: So Snowden did the right thing?
Binney: Yes, I think he did.
Q: You three wouldn't criticize him for going public from the start?
J. Kirk Wiebe: Correct.
Binney: In fact, I think he saw and read about what our experience was, and that was part of his decision-making.
Wiebe: We failed, yes.
Jesselyn Radack: Not only did they go through multiple and all the proper internal channels and they failed, but more than that, it was turned against them. ... The inspector general was the one who gave their names to the Justice Department for criminal prosecution under the Espionage Act. And they were all targets of a federal criminal investigation, and Tom ended up being prosecuted and it was for blowing the whistle.
William Binney: We tried to stay for the better part of seven years inside the government trying to get the government to recognize the unconstitutional, illegal activity that they were doing and openly admit that and devise certain ways that would be constitutionally and legally acceptable to achieve the ends they were really after. And that just failed totally because no one in Congress or we couldn't get anybody in the courts, and certainly the Department of Justice and inspector general's office didn't pay any attention to it. And all of the efforts we made just produced no change whatsoever. All it did was continue to get worse and expand.
Q: So Snowden did the right thing?
Binney: Yes, I think he did.
Q: You three wouldn't criticize him for going public from the start?
J. Kirk Wiebe: Correct.
Binney: In fact, I think he saw and read about what our experience was, and that was part of his decision-making.
Wiebe: We failed, yes.
Jesselyn Radack: Not only did they go through multiple and all the proper internal channels and they failed, but more than that, it was turned against them. ... The inspector general was the one who gave their names to the Justice Department for criminal prosecution under the Espionage Act. And they were all targets of a federal criminal investigation, and Tom ended up being prosecuted and it was for blowing the whistle.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/06/16/snowden-whistleblower-nsa-officials-roundtable/2428809/
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
67 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
It's not the "Snowden affair". It's the "NSA/Booz Allen violation of Constitutional Rights affair".
Scuba
Jun 2013
#1
Sorry, but there is NO violations as Smith vs. Maryland 1979 decided this 34 years ago.
graham4anything
Jun 2013
#7
I am more concerned about changing the 2nd, as anyone shot loses all their rights.
graham4anything
Jun 2013
#36
I would wait til there is a new court, maybe 6 to 3 coming in say, 2018.
graham4anything
Jun 2013
#40
I want $100 million dollars so I could give $96 million away. However, we deal with SCOTUS
graham4anything
Jun 2013
#44
That case does not cover the massive scope of the gov spying happening now including CONTENT
usGovOwesUs3Trillion
Jun 2013
#53
So, you agree Heller did not decide the 2nd and a reinterpretation is needed to get rid of bullets
graham4anything
Jun 2013
#55
Yeah, apparently the scope of the program is larger than we realized but that is Snowden's
jimlup
Jun 2013
#5
The scope was realized more than 5 years ago...don't see what's new in Snowdens info
uponit7771
Jun 2013
#50
I am not conflicted. Its a 100% the same thing as the Miami Dade County "riot". Smith vs. Maryland79
graham4anything
Jun 2013
#4
Smith vs. Maryland, 1979, with REASONABLE/unreasonable being the optimum word
graham4anything
Jun 2013
#16
Do you have more respect for the constitutional interpretations of William Rehnquist
Eric J in MN
Jun 2013
#15
shame then that voters did not want LBJ to be reelected in 1968 and let Nixon/Ford/Reagan/Bush/Bush
graham4anything
Jun 2013
#19
Where was the oversight and security to stop him from collecting that information
magellan
Jun 2013
#59
He passed security clearance which should become harder for those who has a trail of
Thinkingabout
Jun 2013
#60
The potential for abuse seems much higher than the potential for usefulness.
GeorgeGist
Jun 2013
#12
Snowden didn't say that someone listens to "every conversation by every person in the world." NT
Eric J in MN
Jun 2013
#30
I agree totally with all your points. Snowden makes the hair on my neck stand up and I get a funny
appleannie1
Jun 2013
#31
No. I think, if the guy had something to say, there were avenues to say it here in USA.
MADem
Jun 2013
#29
I think the entire problem is the way private contractors and subcontractors are used to replace
Lint Head
Jun 2013
#57
I agree, the use of contractors is something that absolutely should not have been done
davidpdx
Jun 2013
#67