NSA Defenders Ratchet Up The Rhetoric: Two Former Gov't Officials Urge Hanging Ed Snowden
from the oh-really-now? dept
It hasn't been a good time for NSA defenders lately, with a court calling the program unconstitutional and the White House's own "independent task force" highlighting serious problems with the programs, and recommending some fairly major changes. This has resulted in many of us suggesting that, at this point, it's kind of crazy to argue that Ed Snowden did something wrong, and rather he should be welcomed back as a hero. After all, he exposed a secret program that has been called unconstitutional. Isn't that the very definition of a whistleblower?However, it seems the visceral hatred of Snowden has only ratcheted up a notch with two top former officials flat out saying that Snowden should be hanged. This is oddly specific (and ridiculously antiquated). First up, we have former CIA director (under Bill Clinton), James Woolsey who said Snowden should be hanged:
"I think giving him amnesty is idiotic,” said Woolsey, who ran the CIA from 1993 to 1995. “He should be prosecuted for treason. If convicted by a jury of his peers, he should be hanged by his neck until he is dead."Then there's John Bolton, former ambassador to the UN, who similarly attacked the idea of amnesty, while arguing Snowden should be hanged:
"I must say absent some other important piece of information, it has to be one of the dumbest things that I've seen in a long time, to be speculating about it publicly, even if they are contemplating a deal with Snowden some kind of amnesty," Bolton said. "The last thing that people ought to be doing is speculating about it publicly. It will inevitably make it a political football and enhance Snowden's bargaining power."The similarity of both comments -- both attacking the idea of amnesty, and focusing on the very specific punishment they're salivating over concerning Snowden, certainly hints at a series of insane talking points being passed around among extreme security state apologists. I expect we'll see more like this. I'm curious, though, how either of these guys can continue making these claims given everything else that's been happening.
Bolton continued, "My view is that Snowden committed treason, he ought to be convicted of that, and then he ought to swing from a tall oak tree. But even if you don’t believe that, if you’re gonna say anything publicly, that is closer to what you should be saying to enhance our own bargaining leverage."
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: ed snowden, hanging, james woolsey, john bolton
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Hey, Mike: the neo-cons still want to invade Syria AND Iran.
The Rich are not ideologues: any "-ism" is fine by entrenched elites (especially American "conservatives" who favor fascism) so long as THEY are entitled to live off laborers in practical feudal-ism.
09:40:34[k-601-7]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Hey, Mike: the neo-cons still want to invade Syria AND Iran.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Hey, Mike: the neo-cons still want to invade Syria AND Iran.
Do you know how many lives could have been saved had intervention in Bosnia and Kosovo happened earlier than they did? Never mind ANY intervention at all in Rwanda and Darfur?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Hey, Mike: the neo-cons still want to invade Syria AND Iran.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Hey, Mike: the neo-cons still want to invade Syria AND Iran.
And there are many things that are supposedly none of our business: starvation in Africa, India and China, homelessness in our own countries, torture and oppression of the worst kinds in all sorts of totalitarian regimes, etc. To pretend otherwise would be to succumb to typical right-wing, isolationist, "poverty is not our problem and you can't take my property away from me" thinking. It's all too easy to forget that serious crises, including pointless civil wars that can be stopped, happen all the time on this planet while we live comfortable, quiet lives back home and get high on capitalism.
You may only live once, but you're not the only one alive.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Hey, Mike: the neo-cons still want to invade Syria AND Iran.
"...the genocidal nightmare that was Saddam Hussein". So when should we invade China because of the genocidal nightmare that is the Chinese government?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Hey, Mike: the neo-cons still want to invade Syria AND Iran.
And even if I WAS being hypocritical here, by the way, by saying "no" to putting pressure on China (what I do say is "yes" to putting pressure on China to stop its authoritarianism, considering the country's size and what scale of pressure that would be most moral), you would have only proved that I was a hypocrite, and not whether taking out Saddam Hussein after 30 years of fascist oppression was the right thing to do.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Hey, Mike: the neo-cons still want to invade Syria AND Iran.
Start your own incomprehensible blog.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Here's how
With their fingers in their ears, their tongues sticking out, saying, "nananananananana we can't hear you"....
rinse/repeat
When someone is paid to believe something, it's difficult (short of more cash) to get them to change their "beliefs".... good politicians know when to stay bought...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Spies on innocent people everyone
- Does not meet any single goal purported to make the program viable.
- Causes the entire world to distrust US servers and US tech.
*wants to hang ed snowden for telling the truth. As the GOV betrays everyone on the planet (literally)
The hypocrisy is so far beyond crazy at this point.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
There are no talking points
It says more about the mindset inherent to those whose jobs involve some form of patriotism / jingoism.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This week on extreme security state apologists....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This actually makes a great deal of sense from their point of view. Snowden is a traitor... not to the country, but to the NSA and their agenda. And the jury of peers they're talking about are his former superiors and ex-coworkers in the NSA.
A whistleblower like Snowden would've been welcomed with open arms by the US if he was giving out such information on the KGB back during the Cold War. Instead we have a former KGB colonel turned President admiring our surveillance state. Way to go Team USA......
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anybody know Snowden's bitcoin address?
I want to send him something for Russian hookers and...Fanta or something. (I'd say beer, but it it seems he doesn't drink.) He should get some first-class girls who'll give him a good time for Christmas.
As a patriotic American, I feel Snowden has done my country a tremendous service (given us a shot at taking it back from the scum who run it now).
I feel bad for the guy, with all the crap being thrown his way, and being away from his family and girlfriend at Christmas. As a 1st class American hero, he deserves to have some fun. Indeed, he should live like a goddamned king.
So - where do I send the $$$? (Not just any old bitcoin address, please, but one verifiably Snowden's.)
And - WHO'S WITH ME?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Answer: A man who was complicit in that very corruption.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Hey I was just thinking the same thing about the top brass.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No.... He deserves a Congressional Medal of Honor and a Wall St. parade for standing up for the Constitution.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Death penalty
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Did anyone else get the same image?
Sounds like he wants a good old fashioned lynching. Maybe because they served the same purpose: scare everyone else and keep them in line.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The Internet is way smarter than any of us."
~Gabe Newell
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
prosecute
Is violating the constitution illegal in the USA? I have to wonder. Can someone be prosecuted in a state or a federal court for violating the 4th or the 1st amendment? Is there a law on the books with sentencing guidelines?
Of course, you would need a prosecutor to bring the case. It seems that in the USA, government officials can violate the constitution with impunity. They eagerly pursue whistleblowers such as Snowden, while they ignore the corruption in their own house.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: prosecute
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: prosecute
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Official Edward Snowden Defense Fund
1snowqQP5VmZgU47i5AWwz9fsgHQg94Fa
$89,076 raised so far, 2,006 people have donated.
https://wikileaks.org/freesnowden
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Contempt?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Contempt?
Precisely as intended.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
A simple note to Mister Snowden
The UberVolken are starting to fantasize that killing you will end the problems that have arisen because of their new public image - Global Voyeurs with a license to Steal - (which is due entirely to your continual exposure of their criminal and immoral activity, through the disclosure of their own private words.)*1
Because they do not know better, they must and will try.
*1(An act that I personally believe should win Mister Snowden a nomination for the Nobel Peace Prize.)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Curious Blue
Curious?
Its not like anything you, or I, or anyone they lie to, could possibly interfere with their plans, their actions, their intentions, or their claims. They do not really work for us anymore, even though you probably think the law says otherwise.
Politicians merely manufacture the rhetoric from which history will be constructed, and so they create, in andvance, the verbiage which will be recorded, repeated and used by authority to officially prove the necessity of their secret actions and private intentions, should they get caught, or not.
Because only these "talking points" will ever be recorded for use by the official "recorders of events" they become factual reality, by default, due to there being no contrary commentary for the next generation - and much of this generation - to make comparisons with.
It is a politician's job to manufacture and disseminate these false events, causes, and reactions, and government's job to insure that only these 'falsified records' make it into postery's tale.
You might, for instance, note that ALL of their public testimony follows a recognizable set of guidelines for consistency, especially in the face of obviously contrary evidence and that every so often one of the major players: NYT, CNN, ETC., suddenly publishes a bizarrely misinformed (and mis-informing) article that basically gathers all the recent talking points into a nice neat bundle, and then presents the resulting conclusions, as easily repeated proven fact.
Probably just a coincidence eh! :)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I am outraged by this call to harm an oak tree. Trees are an important part of our ecosystem and claiming that damaging one by using it as a hanging post is completely irresponsible.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Thanks, I needed that. :)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Bolton
"But even if you don’t believe that [Snowden should be hung], if you’re gonna say anything publicly, that is closer to what you should be saying to enhance our own bargaining leverage."
So now we know (if we didn't assume before) Bolton will just bullshit about anything and say things he doesn't even believe in order to further his agenda.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Bolton
With a bunch of countries already less-than-trilled about the NSA/USG's activities that have been exposed by Snowden, add the death threats into the equation and you've got a reason for other countries to refuse to deport Snowden, and a politically acceptable excuse to back it up.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Bolton
Maybe there is some sort of political, diplomatic, or legal "brownie points" for the US Federal Assassins, if Snowden is no longer a US citizen when they "accident" him.
Maybe the Fed's attitude till now was based on "...what would the Evil Empire do in this situation..." (as everyone expects they would), but secretly they want Snowden to "defect", or gain asylum in a foreign land, so they can take him out as procedure demands, and "put it all behind them".
Perhaps if Snowden was no longer a US citizen, the legal ramifications of such an assassination, would be far less embarrassing, than if he was still a US citizen.
Perhaps....
These spooks are so perversly deviant that its impossible to see the plan till the day after they put it into action.
:)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Bolton
Where do we get these guys from? Do we look for the craziest ones we can find and put them on the job because they toe the party line?
I know this sounds a little off-beat, but what about hiring people who can actually do a good job?
E.G. not John Bolton.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]