Is Snowden a traitor or a public servant?

[finesse_r]

I Have To Disagree Totally

My opinion is that this man took an oath to his country, the same oath that many of us in the military took. How do you think our military would work if an officer ordered a private to do something and for whatever reason he decided that he didn't like it and went and complained to the press? Then takes off for China. We have to obey orders no matter if we like them or not.

I disagree totally, for we not only do not have to obey all orders, as there are some orders we should openly disobey. In this case the man was ordered to remain silent about criminal actions that threatened the US constitution and freedom in this nation. Such orders violated a much higher authority than any order is capable of conveying, his prior oath and orders to defend the US constitution. Any man that follows such an order is in my opinion the real traitor. Remember all involved, including those that gave the orders, were first sworn under oath to protect the US Constitution, not to violate it or to endanger it.

Every few years a sampling military personnel are given questionnaires to determine if they would fire on US citizens if so ordered. Each year more and more indicate that they would. Fortunately a majority of them still would refuse to execute such orders. God help us all when the military has enough new immigrants in the military who don't understand what it takes to remain free, that a majority agree that they will blindly and obediently follow such illegal orders.

Since you think soldiers should follow all orders, do you think they should follow an order to set babies on fire; an order to rape women; an order to massacre civilians; an order to torture prisoners; an order to commit treason. How many men went to jail and were put on trial for following such orders in Viet Nam or other combat areas.

Clearly there are limits to any man's responsibility to follow orders in the military. Other wise the Nuremberg Trials were a gigantic farce. The only question is where the line is, not whether or not such a line exists.

 

[BearBio]

Unfortunately, too many are like Jake Spoon "I didn't see no line"

 

[midkansmithfan]

Mike7.62,
Comparing the US Congress to the Nazi parliament seems a bit strange to me.
National Security is neither a veil nor an umbrella but a solid wall against enemies foreign AND domestic.
Yes, I'm sure the former Soviet Union, present day Russia and China
despise the NSA but not out of jealousy.

 

[arjay]

Mike7.62,
Comparing the US Congress to the Nazi parliament seems a bit strange to me.
National Security is neither a veil nor an umbrella but a solid wall against enemies foreign AND domestic.
Yes, I'm sure the former Soviet Union, present day Russia and China
despise the NSA but not out of jealousy.

And who determines who the domestic enemies are?

 

[Comrad]

The land of the free and the home of the brave, well at least we are still the home of the brave.

 

[BlueOvalBandit]

Those who give up freedoms for temporary safety, deserve neither.

Spoken by one of the greatest Americans to ever walk the earth (well its close enough for you history nuts).

No, actually you don't. There are things such as lawful orders and those that are not. Your duty is to obey the former, and refuse to obey the latter. When an order clearly contravenes the UCMJ, the Geneva Conventions, the Hague Agreement, or the US Constitution it is clearly unlawful. If there is confusion over what is or isn't lawful, usually your conscience is a good guide.

Mike nailed it, when it hits the fan history has already established following orders isn't justification, unless there's a good coverup.


As I recall the oath went like this

I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.


Art. 92 states your committing a crime if you disobey a lawful order. You're damned if you do and damned if you don't essentially cause often times that line is blurry or non existent.

I don't know what was leaked so I can't say whether he did the right thing, but its a scary world when people say I don't mind trading freedom for a peace of mind regarding security.

 

[midkansmithfan]

arjay,
They do, by their actions.

 

[arjay]

That's silly.We have a government that appears to be gathering intelligence in huge quantities,looking for a needle in a haystack.This is how a police state operates.It appears that we have headed down a very slippery slope.One thing I've noticed in this thread is that those who are appalled by this seem to be older members who have a closer memory and were affected by nazi germany,the ussr,etc.We've been around awhile.We know how evil those in power can be.

 

[chicagoslim]

Swonden, pointed out the security camera, but he didn't reveal the pictures.

The government was created to protect our rights and freedoms. Today, we are only allowed rights, if we have a large lobbying organization, supporting them. Without the NRA, we would no longer have any gun ownership rights. As it is they tell us what, where and how, we are allowed to exercise those rights.

 

[midkansmithfan]

arjay,
Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely, so I guess I'm agreeing with you to an extent.
It's not the law but our behavior that determines whether or not we are criminals.

 

[dswancutt]

Mike7.62,
Comparing the US Congress to the Nazi parliament seems a bit strange to me.
National Security is neither a veil nor an umbrella but a solid wall against enemies foreign AND domestic.
Yes, I'm sure the former Soviet Union, present day Russia and China
despise the NSA but not out of jealousy.

So basically your saying we should become just like our enemies to protect us from our enemies. Throw the constitution, the one document that makes different from everyone else out the window, to protect the state. The rights of the state becomes more important than the rights of the people. What good is your wall when it smothers us?

 

[arjay]

Exactly! And right now it looks like our government (don't they all?) believes they are above it.

 

[S&W45Colt]

Just because it is "prescribed" by Congress doesn't make it either Constitutional or right. The "law" as you describe it has been used by charlatans and dictators for millennia to enhance their power. The Nazi's used the law to kill six million Jews and a few million other "undesirables"; that doesn't make it right-but it was lawful.

The problem is that almost everything that the NSA and other black ops groups do is hidden behind the veil of "national security" and never sees the light of day, and if it does, then the representatives who are questioning the activities are routinely lied to. All OK under he umbrella of "national security". That may seem acceptable on its face, but allows massive abuse, some of which we're now becoming aware.

And yes, I'm sure that the former USSR and the present day Russia and China despise the NSA and wish that they had something as effective, but only when they see how efficient the surveillance of their own population can be. The dilemma of any organization such as the NSA is that yes, it is effective, and initially aimed at foreign enemies, but the potential for abuse that it has against its own internal population is high, and we're learning how high through sources such as Binney and Snowden. I personally would rather do without the effectiveness of the NSA if it means giving up my rights under the Constitution and living in a police state.

Excellent point. I can think of a highly efficient and effective organization who most agree was the most effective organization man for man in WW2, the SS. Anyone for recreating it here? Raise your hand high.

 

[black1970]

Careful guys-all of your posts are being recorded and stored for future use by your government. Big brother is listening.

 

[Grayfox]

You know what the really sad part is?
Right now its big news, many people have their panties in a bunch and lots of whoopin' and hollarin'.
But in a few weeks, maybe a couple of months at most, this will all fade away. The media will find a new crisis to go on and on about, the "average" citizen will be watching American Idol and .gov will go right back to what they were doing as if nothing ever happened.
Even sadder, come next election the very same people who allowed this to happen in the first place will most likely be re-elected.
And that is the real danger.

 

[PALADIN85020]

Excellent point. I can think of a highly efficient and effective organization who most agree was the most effective organization man for man in WW2, the SS. Anyone for recreating it here? Raise your hand high.

This reminds me of a story. I seems that a young man was talking with his grandfather, and complained that his life was humdrum.

His grandfather chided him, and told him "When I was your age, I went to Paris with my friends, took over the Follies Begere, drank everyone under the table, got on the stage and had our way with every girl in the chorus line!"

The young man decided he'd try to do the same. About a month later, he came back to his grandfather; his face was bloody, he had bruises all over him, his arms were broken and he had cuff marks on his wrists. "Grandpa, I decided to go to Paris with some of my friends and we tried to do what you did. It sure didn't work out the way we planned. Just who, exactly, were your friends at the time?"

His grandfather replied: "The SS."

John

 

[mstuhr]

Good point

Bout sums it up.... what if he took his Oath seriously?

I, [name], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.[1]

We will never know WHAT he was privvy to that made him think this was the correct course of action, we will only know what our elected officials tell us he did.... Just like the civil war, the victor writes the history, for right or wrong. I couldn't sleep if I monday morning quarterbacked this with the thought that the signers of our Declaration of Independence were also traitors (per the crown).....

Good point.
He may be subject to more than one oath.
I'd like to see this incident spilled out in a public court for all of America to see.
Bad thing is, The truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth." don't seem to pop up in court much anymore.
Thanks
Mike

 

[the ringo kid]

To me on this one-there is a fine line between traitor and hero. Its a fine line and I can barely "see" as it is. I may be wrong but-what Manning did ive been told-has indeed led to the deaths of Americans--what Snowden did-so far as far as i know it--has not cost the lives of anyone. Therefore-that's one reason why I think there is a fine line.

 

[venomballistics]

To me on this one-there is a fine line between traitor and hero. Its a fine line and I can barely "see" as it is. I may be wrong but-what Manning did ive been told-has indeed led to the deaths of Americans--what Snowden did-so far as far as i know it--has not cost the lives of anyone. Therefore-that's one reason why I think there is a fine line.

ultimately, that fine line is defined by who's left to do the measuring.
History is written by the winner

 

[the ringo kid]

ultimately, that fine line is defined by who's left to do the measuring.
History is written by the winner

Good point.