I've lost the last remaining shred of the mountain of respect I once had for John Kerry

[radiclib]

His knee-jerk accusation about events in the Ukraine was one thing, but his "traitor" remarks about Snowden make him look like a neocon apologist for the security state. Part of his job as SOS, I suppose.
Oh, well…we'll always have this glimmer of distant nostalgia--

[ProSense]

1. I think

"I've lost the last remaining shred of the mountain of respect I once had for John Kerry"

...he'll live.

Many people who oppose NSA overreach and recognize the value of the debate also don't approve of Snowden's actions that go beyond sparking a debate about the NSA's domestic activities. In the end, a trial is required to hold him accountable.

I stand with Jimmy Carter:

Carter: Snowden's leaks 'good for Americans to know'

Susan Page

NEW YORK -- Former president Jimmy Carter defended the disclosures by fugitive NSA contractor Edward Snowden on Monday, saying revelations that U.S. intelligence agencies were collecting meta-data of Americans' phone calls and e-mails have been "probably constructive in the long run."

<...>

Does he view Snowden, now granted asylum in Russia, as a hero or a traitor?

"There's no doubt that he broke the law and that he would be susceptible, in my opinion, to prosecution if he came back here under the law," he said. "But I think it's good for Americans to know the kinds of things that have been revealed by him and others -- and that is that since 9/11 we've gone too far in intrusion on the privacy that Americans ought to enjoy as a right of citizenship."

Carter cautioned that he didn't have information about whether some of the disclosures "may have hurt our security or individuals that work in security," adding, "If I knew that, then I may feel differently." And he said Snowden shouldn't be immune from prosecution for his actions.

"I think it's inevitable that he should be prosecuted and I think he would be prosecuted" if he returned to the United States, the former president said. "But I don't think he ought to be executed as a traitor or any kind of extreme punishment like that."

- more -

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2014/03/24/usa-today-capital-download-jimmy-carter-edward-snowden-probably-constructive/6822425/

Bernie Sanders:

<...>

BLITZER: What about Snowden? Do you think that he committed a crime or he was simply a well-intentioned whistle-blower?

SANDERS: Well, I think what you have to look at is -- I think there is no question that he committed a crime, obviously. He violated his oath and he leaked information.

On the other hand, what you have to weigh that against is the fact that he has gone a very long way in educating the people of our country and the people of the world about the power of private agency in terms of their surveillance over people of this country, over foreign leaders, and what they are doing.

So, I think you got to weigh the two. My own belief is that I think, I would hope that the United States government could kind of negotiate some plea bargain with him, some form of clemency. I think it wouldn't be a good idea or fair to him to have to spend his entire remaining life abroad, not being able to come back to his country.

So I would hope that there's a price that he has to pay, but I hope it is not a long prison sentence or exile from his country.

BLITZER: You wouldn't give him clemency, though, and let him off scot-free?

SANDERS: No. BLITZER: All right, Senator, thanks very much for joining us.

<...>

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1401/06/sitroom.02.html

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024292659

I stand with anyone who recognizes that one doesn't have defend Snowden, Putin's tool, to be on the "right side of history."

Senator Blumenthal: prosecute Snowden, overhaul FISA courts.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023425884

Rep. John Lewis: "NO PRAISE FOR SNOWDEN-Reports about my interview with The Guardian are misleading"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023427908

“What Mr. Snowden did is treason, was high crimes, and there is nothing in what we say that justifies what he did,” said Richard Clarke, a former White House counter-terrorism advisor and current ABC News contributor. “Whether or not this panel would have been created anyway, I don’t know, but I don’t think anything that I’ve learned justifies the treasonous acts of Mr. Snowden.”

From the beginning, it was clear that Snowden broke the law (http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023439290). There was a point where even Snowden supporters accepted that he knew he broke the law. Snowden said it himself.

Fleeing the country and releasing state secrets did not help his case.

His actions since then have only made the situation worse.

Whistleblowers have been making that point, some in subtle ways.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023236549

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023035550

Of course, this is dimissed because they're also critical of the NSA. It's as if some think that you can't be against NSA overreach (http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023002358) unless you support Snowden.

In line with the OP question: Were you against Clarke when he went after Bush? Were you for Scooter Libby when he leaked Plame's identity?

[radiclib]

2. I knew I could count on you, Pro

I am truly crushed that I can't hurt JK's feelings. I will be impressed if you can provide evidence that Snowden's revelations have done as much damage as the outing of Plame did. Your Clarke/Bush question is just mystifying.
No one argues that Snowden didn't break the law. Does Daniel Ellsberg mean anything to you?

[ProSense]

21. Speaking of

"Does Daniel Ellsberg mean anything to you?"

...Ellsberg:

Kerry: If Snowden Is A Patriot, He Should Stay In The US And Make His Case

Secretary of State John Kerry said Wednesday that if former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden was a true 'patriot,' like famed Pentagon Papers leaker Daniel Ellsburg, he would return to the U.S. and have his day in court.

"If this man is a patriot, he should stay in the United States and make his case. Patriots don't go to Russia, they don't seek asylum in Cuba, they don't seek asylum in Venezuela. They fight their cause here," Kerry told MSNBC host Chuck Todd on "The Daily Rundown."

"There are many a patriot. You can go back to the Pentagon Papers, with Dan Ellsberg and others, who stood and went to the court system of America and made their case," he continued. "Edward Snowden is a coward, he is a traitor and he has betrayed his country. If he wants to come home tomorrow to face the music, he can do so."

In his own interview with NBC News airing Wednesday night, Snowden told anchor Brian Williams that he was "personally surprised" to find himself stuck in Russia without papers after fleeing the country and placed the blame for his current situation on the State Department.

- more -

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/john-kerry-edward-snowden-asylum

[okaawhatever]

47. +100 nt

[okaawhatever]

48. +10,000 nt

[VanillaRhapsody]

3. You mean Snowden the self proclaimed spy...

Who goes on TV and says such a thing? BTW IF (and that is a big IF) you ARE a spy....doing what he did.....that would then be considered treason!

[MohRokTah]

5. The Double Naught Spy!

Double Naught Spies can say anything they want.

[VanillaRhapsody]

6. Especially proclaim they are a spy....why its all the rage...ALL spies are doing it!

[MohRokTah]

7. .

[MohRokTah]

4. My respect for KErry grew immensely today

The man called it like it is. Snowden is a lowdown traitor and a coward.

[okaawhatever]

49. +100 nt

[rug]

8. Snowden is the least of it.

[karynnj]

12. Yeah ignore that in Syria, Kerry was instrumental in getting 92% of

the chemical weapons out of an unstable country. (No it was not Putin's idea - it was an idea that Kerry and Obama had pushed for several months after Kerry became SoS. Only when there was fear of the US striking because of the Syrian use of CW, did Russia use its leverage to reach an agreement which the UN agreed with.

[rug]

14. That explains his surprise.

Ignore the war mongering.

[karynnj]

15. The only surprise was that he had pushed for it privately and didn't think it would happen

He then was the US lead negotiator both in Geneva and later at the UN.

[rug]

16. Hence, his push for war.

[karynnj]

18. He made Obama's case for a limited strike that was intended to limit

future Syrian use of chemical weapons. I guess you forget McCain's anger that what they intended was LIMITED and strategic.

[rug]

64. I suppose you can take comfort in the euphemism of a "a limited strike".

I suppose 9/11 was "a limited strike" as well. Look what that spawned.

[karynnj]

65. Attacking 2 high ruse buildings where thousands of innocent people worked

is not at all similar to what was spoken of. I realize that ANY attack would likely kill some people.

The problem we had was that the Syrian government was killing huge numbers of its own people AND the rebels were every bit as blood thirsty - and they were fractured into many groups - some (at minimum) connected to Al Quaeda.

That is why Kerry had been arguing both earlier and later that only a political solution could work. Obama had made use of chemical weapons a red line -- and had ignored many smaller usages. At that point, Obama had a difficult choice.

If I recall, I think you would have preferred to do nothing. That really gets to the issue of humanitarian intervention. Would it be right for the WORLD to do nothing in face of mass killings - that happen all too often around the world. It is fair to say that US actions over at least the last decade leave us with no credibility here. From Obama's speech yesterday, I suspect that preferring to align with others and respond through international organizations is the way Obama has chosen to both actively respond when he feels we should.

It was lucky for Obama (and Kerry) that they were able to let the response to use of chemical weapons be the removal of hopefully all of them. (Note that even in the wake of the agreement Kerry and other Obama administration people left open the possibility that it might not be 100% - as 100% is rarely met on anything. Kerry's point was that even if a significant portion was removed and destroyed it was likely MORE than could have been accomplished via the targeted strikes.

As you might note, this solution has led to howls from the right. McCain blasted Kerry as destroying the chances for Syria through his role here. In reality, it shows the political landscape that Obama (and Kerry) have to work with. While the left wanted no attack at all, but then actually claimed that THEY deserved credit for there not being a strike and the agreement to eliminate the chemical weapons, the right never really was motivated by the use of chemical weapons, but were eager to have Obama put the US military to work. (This ignores that many who were against the strike, rather than credit Obama when that threat triggered the UN resolution and the removal of the chemical weapons, gave all the credit to Putin. ) Remember that John McCain led others initially to reject the resolution because he thought Obama needed to commit to far more than he was committing to. Among Obama people, I suspect that many who favored the response of targeted American strikes were also those most wary of giving more powerful weapons to the rebels. The former gives us more control than the latter, where the weapons getting into dangerous hands seems pretty likely.

Syria is still a mess. It seems to me that what Obama is most interested in doing (from his speech) is trying to shore up neighboring countries to try to keep things from getting worse. It seems like the US encouraged the "moderate" protesters in (I think) 2010 and then allied with the rebels in 2011. It almost seemed like our involvement could be modeled as a person standing in quick sand. At the earliest, we were mostly bystanders, but we were then pulled in deeper and deeper. Anyone trying an alternative approach (as Kerry as Chair of SFRC and unofficially someone linked to Obama) - like talking to Assad in 2009/2010 was quickly mocked as naive or attacked as anti American. There was an early attempt back then to get a diplomatic solution - but it was seen as impossible by both Assad and Obama/Clinton.

[Cha]

38. They conveniently Ignore the results.. some even like to give Putin the glory.. EarlG Got It..

[okaawhatever]

50. Absolutely. nt

[rug]

67. Who is "they"?

[Whisp]

9. Now you did it...

[URL=.html][IMG][/IMG][/URL]

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

10. Ths is sarcasm, right?

Because I read on the internet that Kerry sleeps on his right side...

[karynnj]

11. His "knee jerk reactions" on Ukraine?????

Kerry cautioned the Ukrainian government to move very cautiously and to avoid confrontations. He also throughout the time was the key US link to the Russians because he was able to keep things at a professional level with Russian FM Lavrov. He was even very diplomatic after Larvov lied about Crimea - or was himself lied to.

Kerry was a key person in working with the EU to keep responses as close as possible - given that EU's interests were different because they buy substantial oil from Russia.

Obama and the leaders of the EU deserve a lot of credit for using non military means to reign in Russia - when it looked like there would be a repeat of what happened as the USSR developed.

Read the Prosense links on what others have said on Snowden. There is very little difference between where my Senator Sanders is and where Kerry is. The fact is that no responsible elected leader will do anything other than criticize the actions Snowden took. You don't get a security clearance and then even take a different job JUST to get access to more secrets with the intent to spill them.

You mention Daniel Ellsberg, who I know did praise Snowden. However, what he released was an analysis that was classified of what really happened in Vietnam up to 1967. At the time it was released, June 1971, it was already history - and politically embarrassing to some in power. ( As to what was commonly known by then - just listen to Kerry in April 1971.)

Here, Snowden gave huge files of stolen documents to "trusted sources". These included many things that were current procedures. He also exposed intelligence from other countries who shared intelligence with the US. Read the comments that Prosense posted - as you don't trust Kerry - read Sanders comments. Snowden is not a hero.

[okaawhatever]

51. Thank you for taking the time to spell out the truth. Too much misinformation around DU. nt

[MH1]

13. Snowden is, objectively, a traitor to the government he signed on to serve. (the US govt, that is)

Is he truly a "traitor" to the American people? There is at least room for discussion on that, and it is widely discussed here and all around the internet, but objectively, he meets every definition for traitor to the U.S. Government.

But who knows, maybe he signed on to serve the Russian government too at some point, either before or after he got there. Whether or not he thinks he signed on for it, he's sure as hell doing it.

[okaawhatever]

53. Amen to that. nt

[pa28]

17. His tenure as SOS so far has been surprising ideological.

He seems perfectly fine with the idea of destabilizing elected governments rather than promoting stability and peace. Re-making governments according to the neoliberal recipe book seems to be his major policy objective.

[geek tragedy]

19. which elected, stable governments has he sought to destabilize? nt

[pa28]

20. Venezuela.

[geek tragedy]

22. how, by criticizing it? nt

[karynnj]

24. Kerry and Obama have fought the Congress that wants sanctions

Kerry, early on, reached out to Maduro. He has criticized Manduro for violently attacking unarmed protesters. Maduro has accused Kerry of interfering JUST for those criticisms. The US has done nothing because their is no good strategic thing to do and it would just give Manduro a scapegoat for all his problems.

The MAIN statement on Latin America Kerry made was a rejection of the Monroe Doctrine.

Not to mention - they are not that stable and their economy is a mess.

[pa28]

25. I've followed the sanctions story and I'm glad the admin seems to be against it.

What I'm mainly referring to here is the refusal to recognize the results of the election. If that was Kerry's way of reaching out I think I'd rather stay off his Christmas card list.

[karynnj]

26. Kerry accepted the election after it was certified as official

The US did nothing to delegitimize Manduro. Soon after the election, Kerry met Manduro at a Latin American conference.

Given that Manduro has blamed the US for every problem he has had -- and kicked out people in the embassy who had done nothing wrong --- is that Manduro destabalizing the US?

[karynnj]

23. Which governments are those?

Syria was already in chaos when he came in - and he pushed for a peace conference that failed. I assume you are speaking of Ukraine, but he was not involved at all until there were massive demonstrations and he canceled a trip there because things were unstable.

You can make a stronger case for Russia causing the destabilization after the President opted to sign the agreement with EU --- and then left the country.

[sabrina 1]

27. It's sad to watch, isn't it? He seems so uncomfortable in this role. I wonder if they know what is

going to be expected of them when they accept these positions.

[karynnj]

28. I think he seemed completely comfortable at both Yale and Boston College

recently giving two very personal and inspiring graduation speeches. He seemed very excited to have the opportunity to work on some very tough problems in a very troubled world.

Snowden - on the other hand -- seems very troubled. I really do not get what he thought he was doing in insisting that he was very important and a spy. This and his idiotic calling into the Putin conference -- where anyone would know Putin would have as firm a control of the mike after a question is asked as Rush Limbaugh.

[sabrina 1]

29. 'Man up'! No, that seemed like a talking point, not a good one, why not 'woman up' eg, that he was

provided with. It sounded desperate, not normal phraseology for Kerry, an attempt to sound 'tough' in advance of Snowden's interview, which was very impressive btw.

As they always tell us, 'if they have nothing to hide, what are they afraid of'? But they are afraid, and as more is revealed, they have good reason to be, as polls grow in favor of Whistle Blowers and specifically the one Kerry told to 'man up'.

I think it is very sad. It's always sad to see Dems following the example of those we elected them to replace and to prosecute for their violations of our laws, of our Constitution, and for the war crimes they, Bush/Cheney committed.

[karynnj]

32. I think it meant essentially the same as the more normal comment

on NBC, that he should STAND up, return and make his case.

I was NOT impressed by the Snowden clips. The polling is actually very flat on Snowden - and ONLY the question that forces people to chose between traitor or whistle blower goes in his favor. (and then only about 55%) -- however more than 50% think he has harmed the US.

I don't think the US is "afraid" of Snowden. There is no one in the Obama administration who was in a position of having to handle the negative reactions worldwide that Snowden caused. For at least 6 months, nearly every trip he took to any country was covered by the media as Kerry having to soothe bad feelings caused by it. He has already done most of the damage he can do.

However, as a Senator, Kerry was known to have a strong dislike for leaks and neither his office or his campaign had problems with them. From all I have read of Kerry, I think he really does mean exactly what he said -- and he likely does see Snowden as having betrayed his country.

[sabrina 1]

35. If they think he has harmed the US it is ONLY because of the lies being told by those with a vested

interest in protecting the money flow to the Security Contractors we to whom we have handed over our National Security. Booz Allen eg, Clapper being a former CEO of that particular very profitable Security Contractor. Clapper, Bush loyalist and appointee, going through the revolving door from Corporate profiteer to head of a Govt Security Agency where he gets to funnel MORE billions to his former, and most likely future Corporation.

If bad feeling is all our Govt is worried about, maybe they should not be doing stuff that CAUSE those 'bad feelings'.

Snowden did not betray his country, like all the other Whistle Blowers before him, Blake, Binney, Elllsberg, Tice, Manning, all LOVED this country enough to take their oaths of office seriously enough to risk their own freedom to inform the American public of wrong doing by Govt Agencies.

Btw, did you think Tice 'harmed his country' when back in 2005 he revealed the massive spy program being conducted by the Bush/Cheney gang? Airc, every Dem on these forums viewed HIM as a hero. Of course Bush/Cheney were not happy with him at all.

I am very grateful to every Whistle Blower who has come forward to let us know how 9/11 has been exploited to take away our Constitutional rights, and I expect that so long as our rights ARE being violated, there will be more courageous Whistle Blowers.

The way to stop that is to STOP VIOLATING OUR RIGHTS. Clearly the American people CARE about those rights as the polls increasingly show.

The last polls taken on this show that now only one third of the population view Snowden as a traitor. The rest view him as a Whistle blower.

[karynnj]

37. The FISA information was already known - it was covered

in great detail in 2007/2008 and later when it was changed slightly.

The new stuff involved spying on other countries -- something all countries do.

As I pointed out, it did take a toll on every American diplomatic mission for at least 6 months. There were comments last month that suggested that it still affects the relationship that Obama has with Germany! That is what I am speaking of --- not the contractors working for the NSA.

[sabrina 1]

39. The 'new stuff' did NOT involve just ' spying on other countries'. And no, it was NOT 'all covered'

by ANY MEANS. Do you think that the 2005 leaks affected the Bush government's credibility around the world? YES, and they SHOULD HAVE. At least that was the position of Democrats back then. What has changed? NOTHING, apparently. In fact things have only gotten WORSE, as these latest leaks demonstrate.

We are STILL being spied on by our own government. Why? We elected DEMOCRATS to STOP ALL THIS. So all those 'discussions' in 'detail' you speak of have resulted in NOTHING that benefits the American people.

So why vote for Dems then, if as you say, 'this is old news'??? It should NOT be 'old news'. There should have been firings, Clapper eg, WHY is this Bush loyalist still in a position of power in a Democratic Administration, still doing what he did when his old Boss, Bush, put him in that position?

Are there no Democrats who could handle that position? And our rights are STILL being violated. Why? We worked HARD to end these abuses, but apparently we failed, didn't we? You just said so yourself.

[karynnj]

40. The Fisa information did not particularly hurt Bush -- it was domestic

It was know in August 2008 that both Houses passed the FISA bill that legalized what had previously been illegal. It also set up FISA courts that had to approve any data pulls from the collection. The information collected was essentially the telco billing record.

1) IF they needed approval of a court, this was not that different than when prosecutors went to court to get the billing records to prove contacts made - a staple in 1960 vintage detective shows.

2) Snowden saying that an analyst could pull anything --- is true, but what they are doing is likely grounds for getting fired. No different than a telephone operator before direct dialed calls listening in. Point being it is NOT how the system was supposed to be used and whatever checks needed to catch it should have been set up.

[sabrina 1]

41. All I can say to you is, Frank Church, may that great Democrat RIP, would roll over in his grave

if he were to read this discussion.

We so need more like him NOW, but sadly, we do not have them.

And that is why we have Whistle Blowers, like Snowden, who would make Church proud.

And that is all I need to know about all this.

You are free to go on making excuses for the Security State set up by Bush/Cheney which we Democrats so vehemently opposed, and which not only continues to this day, but has been enhanced as these leaks have shown.

But I will continue to oppose it as I did when Bush was occupying the WH and always will.

I value our Constitutional Rights and will never accept any of the pretzel-like defenses of the egregious violations of it we have witnessed since 9/11 became the all inclusive reason to destroy those rights, no matter who resides in the WH.

[ProSense]

43. What nonsense

if he were to read this discussion.

We so need more like him NOW, but sadly, we do not have them.

And that is why we have Whistle Blowers, like Snowden, who would make Church proud.

And that is all I need to know about all this.

You are free to go on making excuses for the Security State set up by Bush/Cheney which we Democrats so vehemently opposed, and which not only continues to this day, but has been enhanced as these leaks have shown.

But I will continue to oppose it as I did when Bush was occupying the WH and always will.

I value our Constitutional Rights and will never accept any of the pretzel-like defenses of the egregious violations of it we have witnessed since 9/11 became the all inclusive reason to destroy those rights, no matter who resides in the WH.

To claim that Churh would have been "proud" of Snowden for stealing documents and fleeing overseas is beyond absurd.

[ProSense]

31. Kerry is dead to me!!!

"Snowden - on the other hand -- seems very troubled. I really do not get what he thought he was doing in insisting that he was very important and a spy. This and his idiotic calling into the Putin conference -- where anyone would know Putin would have as firm a control of the mike after a question is asked as Rush Limbaugh."

It's really funny to see Kerry being thrown under a bus for calling out a self-confessed spy who stole government documents (some admittedly damaging) and fled the country. I mean, everyone knows he broke the law, and his lawyers are making pleas. What did they expect Kerry to say?

It's like Snowden has become their last anti-Democratic hope. He's not to be criticized, and anyone who does so goes under the bus.

LOL!

[karynnj]

36. Hi :)

To me it is no surprise. Everything Kerry has done or said has LONG been parsed for why it is wrong. Any good he does, well that thread only grows in DU JK. It is remarkable that some would expect Kerry, or any governmental figure, to not call him a lawbreaker. From their point of view, Kerry probably should have told him that if he came home Obama would pardon him, appoint him head of the NSA and that everyone in the administration and Congress would apologize to him for inconveniencing him.

Snowden on the other hand has really been a fan favorite for longer than most of their favorites last. You would think they would have seen him let Putin use him. It will be interesting where people come out on this interview. I suspect only his "fans" will watch the entire thing. The only clip I watched was the spy one -- and he seemed all nervous energy, defensive, and very strangely trying to inflate his importance.

The good thing is that Kerry is out of politics. I liked Obama's speech today -- and recognized many things where either they have always had the same goal or Kerry has influenced him.

[ProSense]

44. Hi.

"Snowden on the other hand has really been a fan favorite for longer than most of their favorites last. You would think they would have seen him let Putin use him. It will be interesting where people come out on this interview. I suspect only his "fans" will watch the entire thing. The only clip I watched was the spy one -- and he seemed all nervous energy, defensive, and very strangely trying to inflate his importance. "

Kerry's is being attacked for calling out Snowden, whose fans expected that he would simply go unchallenged by anyone with stature.

[sabrina 1]

45. Ellsberg broke the law also. The SC ruled that when Whistle Blowers, who ALWAYS break laws,

provides information that the 'public needs to know', that supercedes the laws he may have broken.

Ellsberg was called a traitor also, but history shows he was a patriot after all.

Snowden is fully supported by Ellsberg. He is opposed by the likes of Sarah Palin.

I'll take Ellsberg's judgement of Palin's any day.

You are known as much by your enemies as by your friends.

Snowden has some pretty impressive supporters. Liberal Supporters, lots of Right Wing enemies, true, but who cares what THEY think? Right?

[ProSense]

46. Yet

"Ellsberg broke the law also. "

...he didn't flee the country like a coward.

Kerry: If Snowden Is A Patriot, He Should Stay In The US And Make His Case

Secretary of State John Kerry said Wednesday that if former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden was a true 'patriot,' like famed Pentagon Papers leaker Daniel Ellsburg, he would return to the U.S. and have his day in court.

"If this man is a patriot, he should stay in the United States and make his case. Patriots don't go to Russia, they don't seek asylum in Cuba, they don't seek asylum in Venezuela. They fight their cause here," Kerry told MSNBC host Chuck Todd on "The Daily Rundown."

"There are many a patriot. You can go back to the Pentagon Papers, with Dan Ellsberg and others, who stood and went to the court system of America and made their case," he continued. "Edward Snowden is a coward, he is a traitor and he has betrayed his country. If he wants to come home tomorrow to face the music, he can do so."

In his own interview with NBC News airing Wednesday night, Snowden told anchor Brian Williams that he was "personally surprised" to find himself stuck in Russia without papers after fleeing the country and placed the blame for his current situation on the State Department.

- more -

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/john-kerry-edward-snowden-asylum

[sabrina 1]

52. Ellsberg lived in a different country where there were actual protections for Whistle Blowers.

Today, Whistle Blowers are persecuted in the US, more so in the past five years than even during the Bush years, which were pretty bad.

Ellsberg completely supports Snowden's decision to seek political asylum from a country that has temporarily, I hope, gone insane. I'll take HIS opinion of Snowden's decision to seek political asylum over Sarah Palin's any day.

IF this country ever returns to the rule of law, where Whistle Blowers are not tortured, isolated and demonized, persecuted, see Blake and Binney, and smeared, then perhaps Whistle Blowers might be willing to do as Ellsberg did, when the rule of law was still in place and Whistle blowers did have the protection of the law.

But at this point in our history, from now on, it is more than likely that future Whistle Blowers, and there will be more patriots who will feel compelled to expose crimes committed by the government, will seek political asylum elsewhere. The treatment of Manning eg, made it imperative for Whistle Blowers to seek political asylum elsewhere.

[ProSense]

54. I know,

"Ellsberg lived in a different country where there were actual protections for Whistle Blowers."

...he lived in the good old days.

In August 1971, Krogh and Young met with G. Gordon Liddy and E. Howard Hunt in a basement office in the Old Executive Office Building. Hunt and Liddy recommended a "covert operation" to get a "mother lode" of information about Ellsberg's mental state in order to discredit him. Krogh and Young sent a memo to Ehrlichman seeking his approval for a "covert operation be undertaken to examine all of the medical files still held by Ellsberg's psychiatrist." Ehrlichman approved under the condition that it be "done under your assurance that it is not traceable."

On September 3, 1971, the burglary of Lewis Fielding's office – titled "Hunt/Liddy Special Project No. 1" in Ehrlichman's notes—was carried out by Hunt, Liddy and CIA officers Eugenio Martínez, Felipe de Diego and Bernard Barker. The "Plumbers" failed to find Ellsberg's file. Hunt and Liddy subsequently planned to break into Fielding's home, but Ehrlichman did not approve the second burglary. The break-in was not known to Ellsberg or to the public until it came to light during Ellsberg and Russo's trial in April 1973.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Ellsberg#Fielding_break-in

[sabrina 1]

58. Was Ellsberg tortured, as Manning was? They were NOT the 'good old days', they were pretty

bad old days, but now they are WORSE. Maybe if this country had prosecuted those criminals, things would be different today, but instead they were pardoned, we 'moved forward' and they all returned to positions of power, some behind the scenes, others right up front, blatantly. And then, we 'moved forward' AGAIN. And things, naturally just got even worse.

Ellsberg was never silenced, as Manning was, nor tortured, as Manning was, the criminals had to be a bit more careful back then. NOW, they act with impunity as we just keep 'moving forward' from the war crimes Manning exposed eg, while HE, the Whistle Blower, is sentenced to decades in prison.

If you want to argue about this, talk to Ellsberg. HE understands WHY Snowden had to seek political asylum, sadly, as many others from other oppressive governments, have done throughout history.

[okaawhatever]

56. You just make shit up and expect people to believe it. There were no actual protections for

whistleblowers for Ellsberg in 1971. There are now. It is the exact opposite of what you said, but then the truth doesn't serve your purpose does it?

[sabrina 1]

57. That is total BS, and if you don't know that I can't help you. Ellsberg, unlike Manning eg, was

never tortured, as Manning was, was never cut off from the media, as Manning was. I take HIS word for his treatment over yours any day.

There are NO protections for Whistle Blowers in this country today, the laws protecting them are IGNORED. See the attacks on them by ELECTED OFFICIALS. The CALLS FOR THE DP from ELECTED OFFICIALS.

The UN Rappateur on Human Rights tried to intervene on behalf of Manning regarding the torture he was subjected to.

See what Blake has to say about the treatment of Whistle Blowers today, he ought to know! Or Binney.

You must be joking as I cannot think of any other reason for your comment. Ellsberg has spoken extensively on this subject and FULLY SUPPORTS Snowden's decision because of the persecution of Whistle Blowers in this country today. It is a WELL KNOWN FACT, so all I can say is, 'where have you been'?

[closeupready]

69. So answer me this: denying Americans due process is legal?

[1000words]

42. Bush had his "good soldier," in Powell.

Obama has his very own, too.

[Peregrine Took]

30. Like John Edwards, I spotted "Kerry" has a phony the first time I saw him. n/t

[MohRokTah]

34. The irony, the irony!

John Edwards

[Drunken Irishman]

60. I hope you're less a phony than John Edwards.

[carolinayellowdog]

72. Dean was the only real anti-war candidate with any chance

and somehow the scream thing happened and Kerry became inevitable and Edwards the inevitable running mate, and we had two pro-Iraq War voters representing "our side."

There was a lot of military patriotic jingo flavor to the 2004 convention, now that I recall-- he'd be a BETTER WARTIME LEADER than Bush, not that we needed a leader OUT of the goddamned war.

[RufusTFirefly]

33. Skull and Bones One Percenter who voted to authorize the Iraq invasion?

Come on! What's not to like?

[closeupready]

70. Oh, for fuck's sake! He was AGAINST the Iraq War.

Okay, so that was AFTER he was FOR it, but still.

[villager]

55. "How do you ask someone to be the last man to apologize for a mistake?"

Or for an entire corporatist/security state?

[gwheezie]

59. I kinda thought we were doing this spying all along

I am suspicious of Snowdon for winding up in Russia. I watched the nbc interview and know it was edited but Snowdon doen't seem 100% credible. Greenwald is a journalist, it would be impossible not to write a story about this. I do question the continued threats of dripping out the information. On the whole I am more suspicious of any story the intel agencies tell but I don't see how anyone would logically think spy agencies would be transparent.
Kerry doesn't disappoint me, he didn't leave the country, he went before congress. Ellsberg didn't leave the country.
I hope the power of the executive branch is taken back a notch. I worried about this when Cheney made the grab for more power. I didn't think the next president would give up power easily, no matter if it was a dem or gop. I figured this sort of thing was going to be entrenched and difficult to unravel.

[Rex]

61. John Kerry has known about us spying forever, I don't think it bothers him.

I think it bothers him that someone working in America ran off and spilled a treasure trove of information to our traditional enemies. I can see that being his only line of thought on this.

[closeupready]

71. Of course it doesn't. He's part of the DC elite, like Dianne Feinstein.

None of them care because none of them is subjected to the indignities which you and I are (on a daily basis) by virtue of their elitist status.

[NYC Liberal]

62. Funny because my respect for him increased.

He's absolutely right.

[whistler162]

63. Why do I suspect it went from 0 to -.000001!

[Scuba]

66. Sorry John, but your "man up" comment was disgraceful ...

[treestar]

68. The people who will get thrown under the bus for Eddie

Wow! You've known of Kerry for 40 years now. But what Eddie did is so much more goddamned important! You'd think Eddie saved the USA from nuclear attack or something.

Guess what, Kerry is SOS, he is having to deal with any damage on that level.

Kerry has been presidential candidate and Senator and SOS and served in Vietnam and protested Vietnam, but that doesn't outweigh a hacker who purposely took a job to steal documents, ran to China, and thinks he is above the law. Amazing.