Civil Rights Icon John Lewis: Snowden’s Actions In Line With Gandhi, Thoreau

[last1standing]

Source: Talking Points Memo

Civil Rights icon John Lewis, a Democratic congressman from Georgia, believes Edward Snowden's decision to leak classified information from the National Security Agency was an act of civil disobedience in-line with the non-violence teachings of figures like Henry David Thoreau and Gandhi.

"In keeping with the philosophy and the discipline of non-violence, in keeping with the teaching of Henry David Thoreau and people like Gandhi and others, if you believe something that is not right, something is unjust, and you are willing to defy customs, traditions, bad laws, then you have a conscience. You have a right to defy those laws and be willing to pay the price," Lewis sad in an interview with the Guardian published Wednesday. "I got arrested 40 times during the sixties. Since I've been in Congress I've been arrested four times. Sometimes you have to act by the dictates of your conscience. You have to do it.

Read more: http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/civil-rights-icon-john-lewis-says-snowdens-actions

---

But what would John Lewis know about civil rights?

[ForgoTheConsequence]

1. Under the bus he goes!!!

John Lewis is obviously a Ron Paul supporting libertarian who never like Obama in the first place.


People who were active in the civil rights movement know a little bit about government spying. I would expect them to be cautious of it.

[last1standing]

2. From the back to the bottom.

He just can't catch a break with some people.

[backscatter712]

27. I never knew John Lewis was a racist!

[ForgoTheConsequence]

53. I'd rather be under the bus with Lewis and Sanders.

Than riding on the bus with Graham, Boehner and McCain. The music probably sucks up there.

[backscatter712]

55. Up on top, they're playing Ashcroft singing "Let the Eagle Soar"

...followed by Lee Greenwood's "God Bless the USA".

[WorseBeforeBetter]

37. He can sit next to Harry Belafonte.

You know, that guy who sang a song about a banana. Or a boat. Or sumthin'. Wish I had bookmarked those threads, they were pretty epic.

[sheshe2]

117. Belittling Harry Belofonte?

"You know, that guy who sang a song about a banana. Or a boat. Or sumthin'."

Jamaican-American musician, actor and human rights activist Harry Belafonte joined the Civil Rights Movement in the 1950s. He became one of Martin Luther King, Jr.'s closest confidants. Over the years he organized demonstrations, raised money and contributed his personal funds to keep movement activities going. Belafonte has advocated for a range of other humanitarian causes. In 1985, he helped to orchestrate the recording of the Grammy Award winning song "We Are The World," a multi-artist effort to raise funds for Africa. In 1987, he received an appointment to UNICEF as a goodwill ambassador. Belafonte has been involved in prostate cancer advocacy since 2006, when he was diagnosed and successfully treated for the disease Belafonte achieved fame when his 1956 breakthrough album Calypso became the first full-length album to sell over 1 million copies. He is perhaps best known for singing the "Banana Boat Song," with its signature lyric "Day-O." He became the first Afrian American to win an Emmy for his 1959 TV special Tonight with Belafonte. He has starred in such groundbreaking films as "Carmen Jones" (1954), "Island in the Sun" (1957), "Buck and the Preacher&quot 1972), and "White Man's Burden" (1995). In 1987 he produced a Broadway play about apartheid entitled Asinamali!" Belafonte owns his own music publishing firm and a film production company.

Though born in Harlem, Harry's mother sent him to live in Jamaica, the island of her birth, when he was still a child. He returned to Harlem as a teenager at the outbreak of World War II. He found it difficult to adjust to life in states, dropped out of high school and enlisted in the Navy. After his honorable discharge, he worked as a laborer until he found his calling in the entertainment world. He started his career as an actor and studied his craft in the Dramatic Workshop of the School of Social Research. There his classmates included Marlon Brando, Walter Matthau, Rod Steiger and Tony Curtis.

In 2000, Belafonte won a Grammy Award for his lifetime achievement in music. In 2002 Africare awarded Belafonte the Bishop John T. Walker Distinguished Humanitarian Service Award for his efforts to assist Africa. Additionally, the American Association of Retired People (AARP) named Belafonte one of nine recipients of 2006 Impact Award.

http://www.nps.gov/features/malu/feat0002/wof/Harold_Belafonte.htm

[WorseBeforeBetter]

124. Spare me the lecture, I'm on Mr. Belafonte's side.

And here's the banner thread I was referring to:

Harry Belafonte Says Obama Lacks "Moral Compass"
http://sync.democraticunderground.com/1002158034#post19

It ain't pretty.

[sheshe2]

122. That thread that you wished you had bookmarked?!

It was about Trayvon Martin.

It was about the Ebony Cover pictures honoring the child. Well you are right about something. They were epic.

As for the references to Harry Belofonte's songs, it was because I posted this comment. See #22 here. this is the link to the thread. It was about Belafonte's activism!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/110213310

Sad that you would be so condescending about a thread honoring Trayvon Martin.

Some of us happened to grow up listening to Belofonte's music. We honor the mans achievements.

[WorseBeforeBetter]

123. LOL Wow, could your ego be any more massive?

The threads I'm referring to predated Trayvon Martin. I have no idea what you're talking about, mostly since I've tuned out the Cha/sheshe Noise Machine and have zero interest in reading yet another link. I don't remember the details, but Mr. Belafonte must have criticized an Obama policy, and the attacks began.

And it's "Belafonte," not "Belofonte." I was introduced to his music, and films, thanks to a dear, departed grandfather who was a fan.

Wag your finger elsewhere.

[MADem]

3. I think the key part of that commentary was "...and be willing to pay the price."

Running off to China and Russia isn't quite paying the price.

Lewis was arrested forty times. Snowden hasn't been arrested once. Yet, anyway.

[last1standing]

4. I think you should read that article again.

If you're only getting one out of context quote from it, you're reading it wrong.

[ForgoTheConsequence]

6. They see what they want to see.

And if not being able to see your loved ones and constantly looking over your shoulder isn't paying a price I don't know what is.

[1StrongBlackMan]

106. When compared to …

ACTUAL incarceration, ACTUAL beatings and ACTUAL death threats … No, living in a foreign country under the protection of a foreign government is NOT paying a price.

[Cha]

118. No, snowden is not willing to pay the price.. he's a hacker/leaker/coward in

that order. That he's in Putin's Russia is all on him.

John Lewis said "if you were willing to pay the price." And, he mentioned all the times he had been arrested.

[MADem]

12. I read it--in fact, I went all the way back to the source document, the Guardian.

And what I am getting from it is PAYING THE PRICE.

Which Snowden hasn't done.

[last1standing]

13. Snowden hasn't paid the price you'd like to inflict on him.

He's lost his country, his friends, his girl friend, his family, etc... but that isn't enough for you. You want more. Much, much more pain inflicted on him. How else will future whistleblowers understand the gravity of their actions?

[riverbendviewgal]

29. Many have walked the talk

and did not go to jail but paid the price of giving up family and country.

I find people who don't see this as not paying the price as very uninformed.

As a retired fraud analyst , I risked my job going against higher ups reporting fraud within the company. Some departments loved it because it boosted the numbers and looked good on paper.

One time a VP actually went to bat for me. I know the company has changed now and might not have been as lucky now. 4

[last1standing]

31. I'm afraid they're informed all too well.

These people are using silencing techniques on this site to impede the spread of information, why wouldn't they go a bit further to silence the source? It's only one man, after all.

[mazzarro]

62. Exactly - Snowden must pay the price they prescribe!

His nails have to be pulled out one-at-a-time to satisfy their hunger for vengeance.

[MADem]

111. This isn't about ME. Stop making your comments personal and nasty.

This is some pretty dispicable verbiage:

last1standing
13. Snowden hasn't paid the price you'd like to inflict on him.
View profile
He's lost his country, his friends, his girl friend, his family, etc... but that isn't enough for you. You want more. Much, much more pain inflicted on him. How else will future whistleblowers understand the gravity of their actions?

I don't want to "inflict" anything but justice on the guy. If he can make a case that demonstrates that what was happening was illegal and unconstitutional, then he should walk. Otherwise, he needs to face the music.

In the meantime, he needs to tell his family and the girlfriend he ran away from, if he wants to see them, that they need to Google "cheap flights to Moscow Russia." They'll have to be flexible if they want a good fare, but it can be done. I found a round trip fare for five hundred bucks and change. They'd better get their visas first, though, unless they want to hang out in the transit zone. It looks like the KGB lawyer will help with that process.

And, since his father is slated to visit him VERY soon, and his friends have also been invited to come on down, per the Putin Television Network, RT, he's not being deprived of familial attention or the companionship of his buddies.

In fact, the invitation to visit was extended by Putin's old KGB buddy, who conveniently is serving as Snowden's Moscow lawyer:

http://rt.com/news/snowden-father-invitation-kucherena-126/

Snowden growing accustomed to Russian life, waiting for father’s August arrival


...Snowden’s father is expected to arrive in Russia by the end of the month, after receiving an invitation from his son’s attorney, Anatoly Kucherena.

“The invitation was forwarded and it was accepted,” said Lon Snowden’s lawyer, Mattie Fein, as quoted by ITAR-TASS news agency. “I can’t tell you the exact date of his arrival, but it’s going to happen in August.”

Kucherena expressed hope on Tuesday that Lon Snowden will “get a visa in the next couple of days.” The same goes for Edward Snowden’s US attorney and several of his American friends, who received similar invitations to come to Russia.

[cstanleytech]

113. Question for you last1standing and many others here on the DU.

Would you all feel the same about Snowden if the story had nothing to do with any revelation over the NSA collecting phone metadata, in other words would you all feel the same over him if the story was solely that he revealed to China details over US efforts in infiltrating their computer networks?

[Hydra]

43. Can I write you down as supporting kangaroo court, torture and life in prison then

Cuz he's not getting less than that if he comes back. Manning's trial proved that.

[MADem]

50. Can you have a conversation without maligning and impugning fellow DUers?

You haven't managed to do that yet in this conversation with me.

[Hydra]

57. I don't have to malign you

You're asking someone who exposed gov't corruption to pay an unspecified price(possibly in blood) more than they have in order to be "acceptable" in your eyes.

I'm not sure where that sort of thinking is EVER acceptable. You are advocating for another human being to suffer...why is that?

[MADem]

63. If you don't have to, then maybe you should stop doing it.

You are quite eagerly assuming that Snowden will be convicted. You're not Miss Cleo, either.

He should come back, be tried, and make his case. If he does it right, it could go all the way to the Supremes for a constitutionality test, one which might go his way, if his arguments are good enough.

Hanging out in Hong Kong or with Vladimir is not the way to convince anyone that they give a shit about democracy.

[Hydra]

71. And we're back at point 1

Manning was tortured for months without having his constitutional right to due process. He's not the only one to be abused by the system lately, either. Who is going to guarantee his right to be tried fairly? The Obama Administration?

[MADem]

72. You are conflating an apple with an orange.

Manning is being tried in another country, as it were.

He is subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice. He's already entered guilty pleas on a number of charges, because he--unlike his champions--knows what he signed, and what he swore an oath to.

And he wasn't tortured. He was held in uncomfortable circumstances, and his suicidal ideations caused his jailers to take away his clothes and give him the packing blanket robe. That was his own doing. It's never a good idea to joke about killing oneself--people take it seriously.

When you use words like "torture" to describe someone getting three squares a day, held in isolation so he wouldn't get abused in the general population, and carefully watched so he doesn't kill himself, you make a mockery of the word.

Or would you have been satisfied had he been found strangled with his own drawers, or something? Would that have been a proper dramatic ending for the kid? A right good "I told you so" moment for his cheerleaders? Dead is forever. They kept the guy alive.

Who will protect Snowden's rights? I imagine the best constitutional lawyers in the nation will be lining up, slapping one another like Stooges, in order to get ahead of one another in line, bow before Prince Edward and plead to be able to rep him gratis. His case will be the case of the decade, if not the century. It could go all the way to the Supremes. It could be more than a footnote in history, depending on what we learn--IF what Snowden was saying was truthful. If he was lying to just cause a bit of chaos, well...then he wouldn't be treated too kindly.

Of course, this whole imbroglio won't go anywhere unless and until he gets off his ass and comes home to face the music and dance.

And who else will protect his rights? The American people will, that's who. There's a difference of opinion as to his methodology, but I think most Americans think that he deserves a fair trial. But he does deserve a trial, because it sure as hell looks like he's broken a few laws.

[Cha]

77. Excellent post, MADem

Thank you.

[MADem]

78. Gotta tell it like it is...! nt

[cosmicone]

94. It will be a kangaroo court nevertheless

packed with people who think like you do.

You think isolation, nudity and "uncomfortable positions" is not torture? Perhaps you think of waterboarding as sinus treatment too?

[MADem]

97. No it won't and what an ABSURD thing to say.

Lawyers will claw to get on this case--it will either change or settle law in a major way.

And they'll get fame and wealth as a consequence, particularly if they shake up the status quo and actually CHANGE law--and that could happen.

What uncomfortable positions did Manning get put in, aside from handcuffs? He wasn't asked to do anything that any military personnel aren't expected to do. His isolation was for his protection, and his nudity was because he kept threatening to kill himself. When he stopped that, he got his clothes back. How dare they try to keep the guy alive!

Would you prefer he be given the instruments to end his own life, just so it wouldn't seem like anyone was "being mean" to him? Would you prefer he be flung out into the "general population" where his safety might be compromised, and he could end up dead, just so he can have a bit of idle chit chat?

Had he not downloaded reams of classified data while "rocking out to Lady Gaga" and handed it, unread, to Assange, he wouldn't be in that fix. He brought it all upon himself. He knows that, too, which is why he plead guilty to a number of the charges.

[sheshe2]

103. +1!

[MADem]

129. I am afraid you're the one who needs to do the rereading, and here's a link.

http://johnlewis.house.gov/press-release/rep-john-lewis-no-praise-snowden

Aug 8, 2013
“News reports about my interview with The Guardian are misleading, and they do not reflect my complete opinion. Let me be clear. I do not agree with what Mr. Snowden did. He has damaged American international relations and compromised our national security. He leaked classified information and may have jeopardized human lives. That must be condemned.

“ I never praised Mr. Snowden or said his actions rise to those of Mohandas Gandhi or other civil rights leaders. In fact, The Guardian itself agreed to retract the word “praise” from its headline.

“At the end of an interview about the 50th anniversary of the March on Washington, I was asked what I thought about Mr. Snowden’s actions. I said he has a right as an individual to act according to the dictates of his conscience, but he must be prepared to pay the price for taking that action. In the movement, we were arrested, we went to jail, we were prepared to pay the price, even lose our lives if necessary. I cannot say and I did not say that what Mr. Snowden did is right. Others will be the judge of that.”

So you see, I wasn't reading it wrong at all. You were.

[former9thward]

7. He has paid a price.

He has given up a good job and a very comfortable life. That is what Lewis is talking about whether you think so or not.

[MADem]

9. No he hasn't--he left a job he would have been fired from, because his

security clearance was sketchy and they were about to find out that he lied.

He would never get a job in that industry again. His source of income was about to go down the crapper. Permanently. He had NO future in the business he'd been working at for almost a decade.

He hooked up with a documentary filmmaker, and you can be damned sure he'll get a great payday from the movie they're making.

John Lewis paid the price. The only one calling his comments--and they are entirely valid comments--"praise" is the Guardian.

When Snowden comes home and faces the music, he'll be putting his money where his mouth is. Then he can get some praise, too.

[former9thward]

16. He never will get praise from you.

But he won't lose sleep because of that. There is no evidence he was "about to get fired." The Snowden haters have made up so much stuff in this cause hoping something will stick. But Cheney ("Snowden is a traitor&quot enjoys your efforts.

[MADem]

32. If he comes home and faces the music he will.

If he'd done the right thing in the first place he would have.

But what he's doing is all about putting a stick in the President's eye to the benefit of his Libertarian agenda, AND making a payday with a documentary film.

It was his only option, because he lied on his clearance. And because he lied, he became unemployable. And because he's unemployable, he had to find a new way to keep himself in clover.

If you don't believe that people who lie to the extent that this guy did on his clearance do not get fired, you're unaware of reality. I know a guy who misstated his educational qualifications (he made a Masters a PhD) who was forced into retirement. Snowden pretended he was closing in on another graduate degree when he hadn't even graduated from high school. That's a HUGE lie. He would have been fired once they put an agent on it and confirmed it, and he knew it.

HERE, don't believe ME! Read this--it was written before the Snowden brouhaha, so it's not "tainted" by any of those associations: http://news.clearancejobs.com/2011/11/23/falsification-of-security-clearance-applications/

...If an applicant can not be trusted to provide full and truthful answers to questions on the SF86 or to government security officials, it is extremely difficult to trust the applicant with classified national security information. Most conduct-related security issues can be mitigated by rehabilitation as evidenced by passage of time without recurrence of the conduct. However, concealing relevant unfavorable information or claiming unearned qualifications or achievements on an SF86 indicates a current unwillingness to comply with security requirements and casts serious doubts on an applicant’s honesty, trustworthiness, and judgment.

...In recent years the misrepresentation of educational qualifications has gained increased importance in security clearance investigations and adjudication. Previously educational degrees were merely verified. Today the bona fides of questionable post-secondary schools are being scrutinized.


Mitigating alleged falsification is possible, if the applicant did not deliberately provide false information on an SF86. Mistake of fact, faulty memory, and misunderstanding can be plausible reasons for unintentionally providing false information. When applicants are given an opportunity to correct false information but repeat their false assertions, mitigation becomes impossible even if they later tell the truth. “Prompt, good-faith efforts to correct the omission, concealment, or falsification before being confronted with the facts” are critical to successfully mitigating this issue.

Adjudicators consider the “whole person” when assessing applicants’ intent to falsify and their subsequent actions to correct false information. Mature, highly educated individuals are less likely than young military recruits to convince an adjudicator that they misunderstood questions, inadvertently made mistakes, or incorrectly relied on the advice of other people. When falsification is admittedly deliberate but the applicant promptly attempts to correct it before being confronted, adjudicators can sometimes make a favorable decision if the falsification was an isolated, uncharacteristic lapse in judgment by an otherwise responsible, honest individual.

He recertified the false information at least once, maybe even more than that, before he got to the BHA job. That makes him "untrustworthy." He was toast.

Because he didn't follow politics, he thought that racially pure, America-poking, once Fischer-friendly Iceland would have him. Nice and civilized, low crime rate, lots of internet, a language that isn't too hard to learn. He didn't bother to keep up with them, and notice the warming relationship between them and post-Bush USA, as well as that change in government that happened while he wasn't paying attention. That was a horrible miscalculation on his part.

I doubt "Cheney enjoys" my "efforts." But see, you never fail to say stuff like that--that's what you do--always. You MAKE IT PERSONAL. You call me, and anyone who does not agree with YOU, names. You make associations that are untruthful.

You must be a ....(insert invective associated with right wingers)....! and Cheney loves YEWWWWW~!

Schoolyard taunts, personal insults, that's the SOP, I've noticed. It's a rather stale schtick.

[muriel_volestrangler]

39. "Racially pure"? In a thread about John Lewis praising Snowden, you're going to imply that Snowden

needed somewhere 'racially pure'?

For fuck's sake, have you no shame?

[MADem]

68. I didn't say he "needed" it. But it was his first choice. nt

[ForgoTheConsequence]

56. a language that isn't too hard to learn.

Hahaha. You're grasping at straws that aren't there.

[MADem]

115. Ha ha ha! Aren't YOU ever-so-clever?

It's way easier than this:

数码摄影天书（第六版）
市场价：￥89.00
会员价：$35.60 VIP价：$33.82
作者：伍振荣 著
出版社：中国摄影出版社
出版日期：2013年6月 ISBN：9787802369009
版次：1 版 印次：1 次
开本：16开 页数：288 装帧：平装
商品所属分类：图书 - 摄影 - 数码摄影


Or this:

Сокровища Российской Империи представляет читателям красоту этих изысканных произведений Фаберже. Заслуживший признание своих современников в России, Петер Карл Фаберже прославился как самый известный в мире ювелир и художник прикладного искусства. Необычайно редкое сочетание государственного величия, исторической драмы и искренних человеческих чувств, запечатленное в этих совершенных творениях, ставит работы Фаберже в ряд мировых художественных шедевров высшего ранга. Это книга о жизни и творчестве Карла Фаберже и созданных им уникальных пасхальных яйцах, которые сделали бессмертным его имя. Широкая историческая перспектива освещает также становление Ювелирного дома Фаберже как официального поставщика императорского двора.

Nice try, though.

[former9thward]

65. I have read bureaucratic boilerplate many times.

There is zero evidence "he was about to be fired". Are you the head of employee relations for BHA?

[MADem]

66. I've given evidence in this thread. The fact that you refuse to

read and comprehend is not my problem.

[muriel_volestrangler]

34. You seem to have inside knowledge

"his security clearance was sketchy" - perhaps, but what is your evidence that this worried anyone at the NSA at all? This would need to be something dated before he made his revelations, because arse-covering by someone who doesn't want to look like they thought he was reliable, after the fact, doesn't count.

"they were about to find out that he lied" Source?

"He would never get a job in that industry again" Who promised that to you?

"The only one calling his comments--and they are entirely valid comments--"praise" is the Guardian. " Well, seeing as the interview was with them, that's not surprising. They write the headline, and other sites use it. Lewis agreed that Snowden's actions were civil disobedience, and in line with Thoreau, Gandhi, and what he himself did. It's correct he is praising him.

[MADem]

76. I've had to fill out those forms. I know how detailed and precise they are.

I've had to renew clearances. I had to start the whole frickin' process over after a jerk named Walker caused EVERYONE's clearance to be pulled many decades ago; and this was before computers, where all your info could be saved and you'd just have to update the form. It's an onerous process.

As I've said elsewhere, I know a guy who was pushed into retirement for calling a Master's a PhD.

The agency that failed to re-vet his paperwork is in very hot water.

It didn't worry anyone at the NSA at all--at first. But Snowden knew it was only a matter of time before they would be worried.


See this article: http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/06/21/us-usa-security-snowden-idUSBRE95K01J20130621

Hiring screeners at Booz Allen Hamilton, a contractor for the National Security Agency, found possible discrepancies in a resume submitted by Edward Snowden, but the company still employed him, a source with detailed knowledge of the matter said on Thursday.

Snowden, who disclosed top secret documents about U.S. surveillance of telephone and Internet data after leaving his job as a systems administrator at an NSA facility in Hawaii, was hired this spring after he convinced his screeners that his description of his education was truthful, said the source, who is not authorized to speak publicly about the matter.

If BHA told him there was a problem with his clearance (and they did), the SOP is to send the documents back through the system to be re-vetted. Snowden assured them that all was well, in essence, he doubled down on his lies, so they weren't worried, initially--mistakes do happen and they are usually resolved IF the person is telling the truth, which Snowden was not.

But he HAD to know the SOP for resolving a discrepancy after a decade in public service, the clock was ticking against him the minute he obtained the knowledge that his employers were aware of a problem. Very quickly, he scooped up some shit, did a bunk and ran; he was only employed there for three months, and actually only worked for four weeks before he was hauling ass out of there.

And if you can find anyone who bullshitted on their security clearance forms, and got caught, and got hired again at the same clearance levels, I'll be very surprised indeed. Lying--particularly when it happens multiple times-- and getting caught is the kiss of death. Some things can be forgiven if you don't understand what they are asking for, if you're young and clueless, if you screwed up and then made it right, or if you simply "forgot"-- but one's education level is not the kind of thing one forgets. And it's pretty hard to "remember" degrees that you've never received.

It was only a matter of time before the Big Old "Clearance Denied" report came back to bite him in the ass.

See some redacted clearance denials and approvals at this link:

http://www.dod.mil/dodgc/doha/industrial/2013.html

...Applicant is a 32-year-old employee of a defense contractor. She has unresolved financial problems, and she has been consistently untruthful about her education since 2003. Clearance is denied. CASE NO: 11-11000.h1

...The Applicant lied to the Government in a questionnaire and in an interview concerning his education, job history and arrest history. He has not shown sufficient rehabilitation. Clearance is denied. CASE NO: 10-02156.h1

...Applicant has dual citizenship with the United States and Israel. His wife and adult children are U.S. citizens living in the United States. For nearly 40 years, he and distant family members have owned an undeveloped piece of property in Israel. He renewed his long-expired Israeli passport in 2006 and uses it to travel in and out of Israel. He owns two properties worth $56,000,000 in Israel, and he started an education foundation in Israel. He has not renounced his Israeli citizenship nor has he surrendered or destroyed his Israeli passport. He intentionally falsified his e-QIP and intentionally provided false information to the security clearance investigator. He has not mitigated the Government's security concerns about his foreign influence, foreign preference, and personal conduct. Eligibility for a security clearance is denied. CASE NO: 09-00268.h1 DATE: 10/06/2010

...Security concerns were raised under personal conduct because Applicant provided false information on two security clearance applications and a resume pertaining to his educational background. Specifically, Applicant listed that he was awarded a Bachelor of Arts degree in August 2002, when he had not earned a degree. His explanations and the information provided in support of the whole person factors do not mitigate the concerns raised due to his deliberate falsifications. Clearance is denied.

[muriel_volestrangler]

82. So you're making the stuff up about him being in trouble

All you have is that there were doubts before they employed him - but they went ahead and took him on anyway, because the doubts were cleared up. There's nothing about him still being under investigation once he was employed. You'd like to think that the NSA, or their contractors BHA or USIS, were about to uncover something about him, but there's no evidence for it at all. For your scenario to make sense, they'd have to be saying "well, we think there's something not quite right right about this guy, but we'll take him back in anyway, and give him access to these sensitive documents, and some time, we'll get round to rechecking his background. What could possibly go wrong?"

[MADem]

88. You can play the "obtuse" game if you'd like.

I am telling you that once there was a problem with his personal details, a protocol was initiated. He knew that, and he knew what the outcome would be. He knew he was in trouble--even as you pretend he wasn't. His discrepancy HAD to be resolved. They may have given him an "interim" clearance based on his declarations and his work history, but that was NOT the end of it.


BAH "took him back in" (correction--not "back in"--this was part of his employment in-processing) because he had nearly a decade of service under his belt, and he had survived previous re-vets. He lied to them, sufficiently glibly, but all that did was buy a little time.

The only reason he survived the previous vets, though, is because no one did the work at USIS. He looked bland, he had no "financials" or "foreign conflicts" to cause concern.

Once his check came back with a "flag" on it for mismatched education, though, the investigative work would be initiated and there was no stopping it. He was only able to get away with it in the past because the work was NOT done. He slipped through the cracks.

The only clearances they gundecked at USIS were the ones that didn't look like they'd be problematic, like white-bread, no debt, no boozing, no drugging, no prostituting, no hanging out with furriners Snowden. He paid his bills, he didn't get arrested, he didn't have foreign friends or associates, kept his overseas travel outside of his foreign assignments to tourism, and he led a tidy life. In sum, he flew under the radar for all those years, and then, when challenged, he actively lied.

Read the clearance denials I provided. Lying about one's education, particularly when one does it over time, unrepentantly, is a Bozo No No.

[muriel_volestrangler]

98. Yes, *you're* telling me - it's all made up by you

And it's a bizarre tale you've concocted - that the NSA and its contractors would say "we have something we find suspicious about this guy, but we'll give him the secret access anyway, because our super-duper processes will pick up what's wrong eventually".

[MADem]

99. Interim clearances happen ALL THE TIME.

I've worked using an interim clearance.

Eventually, though, the full clearance has to be obtained, and when there are discrepancies, they have to be resolved.

Example from USSD: http://www.state.gov/m/ds/clearances/c10978.htm

THE INTERIM SECURITY CLEARANCE

In exceptional circumstances, the hiring office may request an interim security clearance. The Office of Personnel Security and Suitability may be able to grant an interim security clearance within a few weeks after the individuals has submitted a complete security package. Final clearances usually are processed and adjudicated in less than 90 days.

Another example from DoD/DSS:

http://www.dss.mil/about_dss/fact_sheets/disco_faqsheet.html

All applicants for personnel security clearances (PCL) are considered for an interim eligibility. An interim eligibility, when granted, is usually granted within five days after the clearance application is submitted to DISCO. An interim Secret eligibility will permit the individual to have access to most of the classified information needed to perform his or her duties. The interim eligibility is made concurrently with the initiation of the investigation and will generally remain in effect until an investigation is completed, at which time the applicant is considered for a final eligibility.

The decision to issue interim and permanent clearance eligibility is made by a DISCO adjudicator -- a person trained in the process of reviewing and evaluating security clearance information. DISCO, like all U.S. government departments and agencies, uses 13 adjudicative guidelines that provide consistent evaluation standards. Financial considerations, criminal conduct, allegiance to the United States and outside activities are examples of adjudication standards.

It is a very straightforward process. Snowden didn't have any suspicious adjudicative guidelines, and he told his employers that the discrepancy was an error.

Anyone who has worked in government at any level, and who has held a clearance, is aware of how this works.

[bluedigger]

104. Yup.

e-Qip is a bitch, and contractors routinely get 90 day interim clearances. I've had to do two e-Qips for DHS, and you know what you're talking about, whether others choose to believe it or not. I was in the security office once to get my photo ID taken and I heard them fire a government employee for student loans in default.

[MADem]

110. Thank you. I really didn't appreciate "muriel's" rudeness.

I can't understand why anyone would speak in this fashion. This is just uncivil, and there's no need for it.

Hopefully the State Department and DOD won't be given the "made up bizarre tale" treatment as well~!

98. Yes, *you're* telling me - it's all made up by you

And it's a bizarre tale you've concocted - that the NSA and its contractors would say "we have something we find suspicious about this guy, but we'll give him the secret access anyway, because our super-duper processes will pick up what's wrong eventually".

[deurbano]

15. No kidding! He could have traveled a much easier path. Instead, he chose to become one of the rare

witnesses to this travesty who has been willing to speak out, deliberately sacrificing that good job and comfortable life for what he believes is the greater good.

[Maedhros]

21. Snowden committed the ultimate sin:

he revealed information that tarnishes the image of the President. In a Cult of Personality, there is no greater crime than undermining the Great Leader. Thus, the hyena pack descends.

[Bodhi BloodWave]

40. you are aware that your statement can just as easily be turned on snowdens supporters

here on DU as well as greenwalds, assanges and who knows who else.

As there are packs that will descend to attack anybody who dares criticize them as well

[Maedhros]

41. I think not.

Refuting misinformation used to smear journalists is entirely different than making ad hominem attacks to silence them.

[Hydra]

49. Depends on what you are criticizing them for

We're more concerned about what they leaked than whether they are as pure newly fallen snow, but if you want to lie about things they are doing or our gov't is doing, expect at least a comment.

[Bodhi BloodWave]

60. that is very true

but just as there are those who will defend anything the administration does, there are those that will defend anything the earlier mentioned people have done as well, often referring to any negative information about them as ad hominem attacks.

Both sides acting somewhat silly in my eyes as none are as you say 'as pure newly fallen snow', one of the larger problems is getting people to accept that minor fact.

[Hydra]

69. I don't have a problem dealing with the facts

So I can't speak for those who do. I have a problem with the people who are deflecting criticism from the NSA and anyone who is on their side- the NSA was caught red-handed outside the law, and they need to be brought up on charges. Anyone in power who is defending/covering for them, and this includes the Obama Admin, needs to be dealt with accordingly.

If we let this be another Nixon gets pardoned moment, rule of law is officially done with and we'll reap some ugly consequences.

[1StrongBlackMan]

108. When compared to …

ACTUAL incarceration, ACTUAL beatings and ACTUAL death threats … No, living in a foreign country under the protection of a foreign government is NOT paying a price.

[backscatter712]

28. And Lewis was the one who lauded Snowden's civil disobedience.

I think he knows more about the subject than you.

[MADem]

36. That's one way to look at it. There are others.

I see Lewis telling it like it is--pay the piper, take responsibility, do your time.

I think I know as much as you do about what Lewis's thought process is, here--and I don't think his "accept the consequences" portion of his comment should be ignored.

But hey, go on ahead, make it about ME, because that's the only available smackdown. It's a poor substitute for actual discussion, but it works in a schoolyard sort of way.

[questionseverything]

42. look at what "do your time " means now

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023220775

[questionseverything]

46. no bail,no family visits,solitary

There's a war going on about corporate spying and access to information," said defense attorney Sarah Kunstler at a press conference immediately following the hearing. "Jeremy is someone who worked toward making information public."

Hammond has already been in jail for 15 months without bail at the Manhattan Correctional Center in New York City. He has been denied family visits and was held for weeks in solitary confinement.

[MADem]

79. Why are you giving me a link to a guy who hacked?

Hacking IS against the law, you know.

Would you be crying for this guy if he "hacked" your bank account and emptied it? Or what if he "hacked" your emails and published your personal details, because he didn't like your political stances or attitudes, or otherwise felt you were doing something wrong?

You'd probably think he got off easy if it was YOU on the other end of this guy's "hack."

[questionseverything]

80. twas you that said snowden would not be silenced

and what was done to "this guy" denying bail,denying family visits and solitary were BEFORE the conviction...that should scare any American that loves the Constitution

[MADem]

84. You do know the guy bullshitted, didn't you?

He later admitted everything he did. He also stole credit cards.

No one forced him to plead guilty--he did it because he mouthed off to another "hacker" who had been turned by the FBI. He was CAUGHT by "one of his own."

See, that's the problem with this "Anonymous" nonsense ....with the childish little face masks made by Warner Brothers, and the stupid electronic voice, and all the dramatic "Expect Us" silliness. Half of the people in that outfit are INFORMANTS.

“While he billed himself as fighting for an anarchist cause, in reality, Jeremy Hammond caused personal and financial chaos for individuals whose identities and money he took and for companies whose businesses he decided he didn’t like," Manhattan U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara said in a statement. "He was nothing more than a repeat offender cybercriminal who thought that because of his computer savvy he was above the law that binds and protects all of us."

During the Stratfor attack, Hammond and other hackers, who were part of an offshoot of Anonymous known as Antisec, found e-mail correspondence, financial and personal data -- including 60,000 credit card numbers -- belonging to 860,000 clients.....

Before his arrest last year, Hammond, of Chicago, served two years in prison for hacking a conservative political group's server and stealing 5,000 credit card numbers.

He has spent 15 months in prison on the Stratfor charges. During that time, he claims he has been held in solitary confinement and denied visits and phone calls with family and friends.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/28/jeremy-hammond-anonymous-hacker-guilty-stratfor_n_3347215.html

How would you like it if he hacked a "liberal political group's server" and stole 5000 credit card numbers--maybe YOURS? Would you still call this clown a hero?

But yeah, he's some kind of "hero" freedom fighter. He's not. He is a thief.

People get put in solitary for being assholes in the general population, not for "political reasons."

He's got all the time in the world to opine, now--he'll just have to learn to do it with a pencil and paper.

[questionseverything]

100. nothing you said changes the facts

you dont like the guy that exposed the chamber of commerce activities and informed us all about "personas" that is your choice but in America we are supposed to "innocent until proven guilty",so to be denied bail,denied family visits and placed in solitary BEFORE he was tried is wrong and un Constitutional...so back to the original focus....evidently you are fine with throwing peops in prison to silence dissent,so just say that...do not pretend it is not happening

[MADem]

107. What "facts?"

What are you talking about? Chamber of Commerce? Personas? Are you talking about the insane accusation that people here are paid shills? Skinner has something to say about that in ATA. Check it out.



The guy was a cybercriminal, a thief. He PLEAD GUILTY. He didn't get tried. It wasn't his first offense, either--he'd already done two years for a similar offense. He wasn't a Robin Hood, he used those credit cards and spent a bundle:

http://www.justice.gov/usao/nys/pressreleases/May13/HammondJeremyPleaPR.php

HAMMOND and his co-conspirators also stole credit card information for approximately 60,000 credit card users and used some of the stolen data to make more than $700,000 in unauthorized charges. HAMMOND and his co-conspirators also publicly disclosed some of the confidential information they had stolen.

That's some pretty expensive "dissent" if you ask me.


He boasted about his exploits to his buddy, who had flipped and ratted him out.

If he stole YOUR credit card number, I rather doubt you'd be so sanguine about him. If he hacked your website and stole your information, you wouldn't be jumping for joy either.

And he "claimed" that he was kept from his family--no source save his online supporters says this is the case. Where are his family saying they were prevented from seeing him? It's only "advocacy" sites that are saying this. And he wasn't held continuously in solitary--even he admits this. When you act up in jail that's what they do--it's better than beating the inmates.

He didn't have to make the deal--he knew it was the best one he could get. He would do well to not talk much until the sentence is formalized next month.

What I find interesting is that while so many of these people who fed information to Assange are in jail, Assange sits in his embassy room in London, chatting with friends, entertaining visitors, eating takeaway, enjoying strong drink, and clicking away on his computer. If one were a conspiracy theorist, it's almost enough--not quite enough, but almost enough-- to make one wonder if Assange isn't a hacker-honey trap, on someone's payroll!

[backscatter712]

52. He didn't say that. That's just you conjuring that talking point out of thin air.

But I'm out of patience trying to persuade those that are paid to make their personas unpersuadable.

Welcome to my ignore list. DU is better with you filtered out.

[MADem]

58. Yes, he did.

"In keeping with the philosophy and the discipline of non-violence, in keeping with the teaching of [Henry] David Thoreau and people like Gandhi and others, if you believe something that is not right, something is unjust, and you are willing to defy customs, traditions, bad laws, then you have a conscience," Lewis said. "You have a right to defy those laws and be willing to pay the price."

That doesn't mean put your head on a soft pillow at night, and walk freely somewhere else. Being willing to pay the price means being willing to face the legal consequences of one's actions, like those that Lewis named.

I suppose "Ignore" is easier than actually refuting the argument. It's certainly more civil than the usual insults and name-calling.

You have a great day now--free of any troubling opinions that don't match your own!

[Dawgs]

127. So, basically, you're deciding what "pay the price means" and/or what John Lewis meant?

Is that about right?

[MADem]

130. I speak English pretty well--and it turns out, I was right.

I don't have to "decide" what Mister Lewis meant--his meaning was entirely clear to anyone reading his comments with an unbiased eye. Here, read, learn:

Aug 8, 2013
“News reports about my interview with The Guardian are misleading, and they do not reflect my complete opinion. Let me be clear. I do not agree with what Mr. Snowden did. He has damaged American international relations and compromised our national security. He leaked classified information and may have jeopardized human lives. That must be condemned.

“ I never praised Mr. Snowden or said his actions rise to those of Mohandas Gandhi or other civil rights leaders. In fact, The Guardian itself agreed to retract the word “praise” from its headline.

“At the end of an interview about the 50th anniversary of the March on Washington, I was asked what I thought about Mr. Snowden’s actions. I said he has a right as an individual to act according to the dictates of his conscience, but he must be prepared to pay the price for taking that action. In the movement, we were arrested, we went to jail, we were prepared to pay the price, even lose our lives if necessary. I cannot say and I did not say that what Mr. Snowden did is right. Others will be the judge of that.”

http://johnlewis.house.gov/press-release/rep-john-lewis-no-praise-snowden

See? Hate to say I told ya so, but I did. He doesn't "praise" Snowden, he CONDEMNS his actions.

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

114. Edward Snowden is a modern day Paul Revere with a thumb drive full of news that Tyranny is coming!

Edward Snowden's Dad Calls Him 'Modern Day Paul Revere'
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/edward-snowdens-dad-calls-modern-day-paul-revere/story?id=19554337

Hmmm... who knew how influential a DU meme could be

[MADem]

116. You're evil!!! And I have to admit, you made me laugh out loud!!!

Thank you for that!

[kelliekat44]

119. Thank you. Every civil rights leader I am aware of paid the consequences of their actions either

by going to jail or being assassinated. Snowden is still a deceitful coward in my book. And no, I don't agree with the surveillance program in all its aspects but the Congress and most of out here in Internet land knew about these programs years ago...and we weren't even this exasperated when the FBI spied on MLK. It's all part of the effort to continue to attack the Obama administration...at all costs. This was Snowden's real motive...he just as much as admitted it.

[MADem]

121. I think if he comes home (and his father suggested he might

in an interview--but who knows when, really) that he will get a fair trial.

He's not going to resolve his legal status by staying away.

If he chooses to defect, well, then that's his decision. Since he's laying low (or being kept incommunicado, hard to know), we'll have to wait for his father to pipe up after he returns from his visit.

[ronnie624]

125. If he's arrested once, he'll never know freedom again.

Snowden has sacrificed everything, and he will likely never have a moment of real peace for the rest of his life, as he will be hounded by the US government until the day he dies.

[bluedigger]

5. Did Gandhi and Thoreau flee prosecution?

I don't remember that part.

[MADem]

10. +1 nt

[former9thward]

11. Did they face life in prison?

I don't remember that part. But Lewis is just one on those Paulbots and hates Obama so don't be concerned about what he says.

[MADem]

18. Ghandi never ran from prison, never, ever--and he got thrown in jail a lot.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahatma_Gandhi

[last1standing]

24. Ghandi used prison for PR purposes. Prison and hunger strikes were how he expressed dissent.

Yet you want to use prison as a way to silence dissent.

So sad, yet expected, that so many here don't understand the difference.

[MADem]

44. Heckuvajob--making it about ME.

How do you know that's what I want? That I want to "use prison to silence dissent?"

That is an inaccurate statement, I have no wish to do that sort of thing at ALL, and you made it without a shred of evidence, because that is the only way you can discuss an issue, by getting personally insulting and disparaging.

What's "sad" is that you have to get down so low in order to cough up an answer. You don't know how to have a civil conversation, that's what we've learned here.

Will a day ever come when you can respond to a post without calling the person names, or impugning their character, simply because they have a view that differs from yours?

[last1standing]

48. Then you tell me what you want beyond a vague "come home and face the consequences."

What are those consequences? You know exactly what they are as well as I do. You know the purpose of this exercise is to ensure that Snowden, and by extension all whistleblowers, are forever silenced through death, solitary, insanity or fear.

That is what one gets for embarrassing the president. It doesn't seem like the punishment fits the crime there.

[MADem]

54. My name is not Miss Cleo. He will have to make his case.

If he has a moral imperative, it will soon become obvious.

I do not know any such thing as you are insisting.

And you're the one who has already laid out the punishment before there has even been a trial. Do you WANT a long sentence, to justify your expectations? Would five years with time off for good behavior somehow disappoint you?

[last1standing]

59. Yep. Just what I thought.

n/t

[MADem]

90. Not sure what that gratuitous remark is all about.

But have a nice day anyway.

[questionseverything]

51. prison does silence dissent..even before conviction

There's a war going on about corporate spying and access to information," said defense attorney Sarah Kunstler at a press conference immediately following the hearing. "Jeremy is someone who worked toward making information public."

Hammond has already been in jail for 15 months without bail at the Manhattan Correctional Center in New York City. He has been denied family visits and was held for weeks in solitary confinement.

[MADem]

91. Poor widdle "Jeremy" stole 65000 credit card numbers.

And he yucked it up with one of his "Anonymous" cyberthief buddies. Too bad for him, his pal was an informant.

Stop trying to make a cybercriminal into a saint, just because he ALSO hacked places that you don't like. If he emptied your bank account, you wouldn't be calling him a hero.

He worked toward stealing personal financial data, is what he did.

That's why he entered a guilty plea--because even HE knew they had the goods on him.

[deurbano]

73. How much prison time did Thoreau serve for his act of conscience? I'll bet Snowden would be

tmore than willing to trade Thoreau's "sentence" for the price he is paying now... and will continue to pay for the foreseeable future.

[MADem]

81. That's just silly. Snowden can't live without wifi.

We'll see how much money he makes off that documentary. I'll bet he gets a good piece of the pie.

[deurbano]

87. So, yes... Thoreau spent only one night in jail, and got a book deal out of it!

(And hey... jail was like a palace compared to the way he was living!)

Who else can we reduce to a caricature?

[MADem]

89. And Ghandi ended up murdered.

Not sure what your point is.

The guy hasn't even been tried yet, and you're already convicting him.

[deurbano]

92. My guy? John Lewis made the comparison.

But it seems you concede only the Gandhi comparison is worth challenging.

[MADem]

95. If you can't bother to read what is written, I can't be bothered to continue on.

I did not say "your guy"--I said "THE guy" and THE guy I was talking about, THE guy who has NOT been convicted, is Snowden.

Not Lewis, not Ghandi, not you.

But have a nice day. No point going on, here.

[deurbano]

102. I'm sorry... you're right, I made a mistake and responded to something you didn't say...

You never answered my original question, though... since I was pointing out that Thoreau did not have to pay much of a price in terms of jail time. (Thus, your focus on Gandhi.) Your response was to mock and caricature Snowden, rather than to consider whether he might be willing to exchange the price he is now paying (and will continue to pay, documentary windfall or not) for one night in jail.

MADem: <<And Ghandi ended up murdered. Not sure what your point is. The guy hasn't even been tried yet, and you're already convicting him.>>

Me (revised response): Not sure what your point is about Gandhi being murdered, but it seems you concede only the Gandhi comparison is worth challenging. (Since Thoreau only spent a night in jail... and I believe Snowden faces MUCH more time than that, even without--or before--being convicted.)

Have a nice day.

[MADem]

112. Snowden hasn't spent five minutes in jail. There's my answer to you.

He ran away, instead.

That's not snark, that's fact.

[rtracey]

19. no

But he was assassinated January 30, 1948...does that count for anything? That seems to be putting your life on the line for your cause. I don't remember Ghandi running to Hong Kong, and Russia for his cause....

[former9thward]

22. Count for what?

He was not assassinated by the British or the Indian government.

[MADem]

47. So, if Snowden is assassinated by a Russian mobster, then all bets are off? nt

[former9thward]

61. I haven't placed any bets on someone's life.

Unlike some.

[MADem]

64. Sure you did--you bet against Ghandi because the wrong guys assassinated him--just upthread. nt

[former9thward]

67. What did I bet and who did I bet?

This should be funny. The Snowden haters are really desperate today.

[MADem]

93. You're getting personal again--why do you do that?

You're also getting excessively literal.

You opined "Count for what" in post 22.

I'll refrain from calling you a " desperate Snowden lover" any such childish label. But I will point out that you have a tough time talking to anyone who doesn't agree with you on this matter without lowering yourself to immature snarky remarks.

[bluedigger]

45. I have great respect for Lewis.

Don't know why you need to drag Paulbots into the discussion. Fuck Ron and Rand Paul.

I do remember in MLK's great opus Letter from an undisclosed Birmingham location... "One who breaks an unjust law must do so openly, lovingly, and with a willingness to accept the penalty. I submit that an individual who breaks a law that conscience tells him is unjust, and who willingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment in order to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in reality expressing the highest respect for law."

Maybe history will prove me wrong, but I am not ready to put Snowden up on a pedestal with Gandhi, Thoreau, or even Lewis himself.

[former9thward]

70. I have yet to see any Snowden supporter put him on par with Gandhi, Thoreau or Lewis.

It is the Snowden haters who keep bringing them up claiming they did not flee so Snowden "is a coward, traitor, etc." Of course the always ignore Daniel Ellsberg who initially fled. The fact is there have been government whistleblowers through out history of mankind who have had to flee to avoid imprisonment or worse.

[backscatter712]

96. John Lewis just did.

I think he's got more right to make the comparison than anyone here.

[bluedigger]

105. Lewis made a poor comparison.

One more time, from Dr King - "I submit that an individual who breaks a law that conscience tells him is unjust, and who willingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment in order to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in reality expressing the highest respect for law."

I wish Snowden would deliver himself for trial, where he could make his case in a court of law, and keep the spotlight on government abuse of power, but instead he has chosen to traffic with foreign powers for his own well being, and he and his efforts will likely be futile in effecting any lasting reform.

[MADem]

131. Turns out the Guardian misrepresented Lewis's remarks--surprise....

http://johnlewis.house.gov/press-release/rep-john-lewis-no-praise-snowden

[Octafish]

17. Persecution.

No bond. Years of solitary confinement and sensory deprivation. Forced feeding of pharma's worst.



Other than that a walk in the park.

http://www.alternet.org/story/59958/how_u.s._interrogators_destroyed_the_mind_of_jose_padilla

[questionseverything]

30. and padilla

was/is an American citizen

[last1standing]

35. This is what they want. Suicide or insanity.

That will be the only punishment severe enough to satisfy them for Snowden's greatest crime - embarassing the president.

[MotherPetrie]

8. K&R

[99th_Monkey]

14. Lewis is such a gem. Thank you John L. eom

[SoapBox]

20. Oh please...Snowden is a Traitor.

Where is the Mr. Snowden, the Great AMERICAN "civil rights example"?

Becoming a Russian citizen...or where ever.

What he DID, was the acts of a Traitor.

If he seriously wanted to bring this to the attention of Americans, he should have taken a "whistleblower" route...or maybe
have talked to Congress persons privately.

The best thing is...he's now a lap dog for any Human Rights Abusing Country around the world! Now ain't that grand.

[last1standing]

25. Let's play your game.

Snowden comes back and turns himself in. Then what?

[zeemike]

26. No, destroying the bill of rights you swore to uphold

makes you a traitor...he just blew the whistle on the traitors, and for that the traitors want to punish him as if he was the traitor.

[carla]

33. Mr. Edward Snowden

is more of an American patriot and a jthero than all you who attempt to justify the unjustifiable and defend the indefensible. Government violation of the Constitution gave Mr. Snowden trhe moral superiority. His crimes are for fools to consider, his actions are of great merit for the nation and the world. Now have you never broken a law and hidden from the consequences? Adults consider the grey road that moral conviction usually dictates. Long live Edward Snowden, American patriot and more honest than all the enablers out there who stick by the letter while losing the spirit of the law. meh.

[RC]

75. +10

Well said.

[PSPS]

38. There's always a #13 in the crowd

Worshiper/Apologist Hit Parade:

1. This is nothing new
2. I have nothing to hide
3. What are you, a freeper?
4. But Obama is better than Christie/Romney/Bush/Hitler
5. Greenwald/Flaherty/Gillum/Apuzzo/Braun is a hack
6. We have red light cameras, so this is no big deal
7. Corporations have my data anyway
8. At least Obama is trying
9. This is just the media trying to take Obama down
10. It's a misunderstanding/you are confused
11. You're a racist
12. Nobody cares about this anyway / "unfounded fears"
13. I don't like Snowden, therefore we must disregard all of this
14. Other countries do it

[forestpath]

23. K&R

[Enthusiast]

74. Kicked and Recommended! nt

[AverageJoe90]

83. As I said on the other thread....John Lewis is a great guy....

But Fast Eddie Snowden's pulled the wool over the eyes of a LOT of good people, John Lewis included.

As I pointed out elsewhere:

At least Bradley Manning didn't sell classified info to another country(or 2!), and faced up to what he did. Snowden? He fucking ran like the coward he is and is now hiding in Russia!

Manning, for all his faults, did truly believe that he was helping people by doing what he did. Snowden? No such luck! Snowden was a crook from the very beginning(not to mention that he's a Ron Paul fanatic, which set off a LOT of alarm bells in my mind).

And I find it to be extremely hypocritical that many of the far-right "libertarians" now crowing about Obama, didn't have a DAMN problem with surveillance when Dubya Bush was doing this, and WORSE, back in the day. But when the black guy from the Aloha State came in; it's like they did a mental 180.

And people like Glenn Greenwald are too fucking naive to notice this, and many of the other things wrong with Snowden.....guy was a crook from start to finish.

[riderinthestorm]

85. So lets see, John Lewis, Jimmy Carter, Daniel Ellsberg, Juan Cole, Naomi Klein

Rabbi Micheal Lerner, Noam Chomsky... etc etc etc... All in support of Snowden.

The list just keeps growing and growing. He's standing with a great crowd of people.

[burnodo]

101. Valerie Plame and Joe Wilson

[riderinthestorm]

109. Yup. Who you going to stand with on this issue? Its important... nt

[DeSwiss]

86. K&R

[Splinter Cell]

120. Sorry Congressman...

but Snowden is a traitor.

[Dawgs]

128. Sure, a traitor to who? n/t

[blkmusclmachine]

126. +1.