Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

askeptic

(478 posts)
Sun May 22, 2016, 11:26 AM May 2016

Snowden calls for whistleblower shield after claims by new Pentagon source

Source: The Guardian

Edward Snowden has called for a complete overhaul of US whistleblower protections after a new source from deep inside the Pentagon came forward with a startling account of how the system became a “trap” for those seeking to expose wrongdoing.

The account of John Crane, a former senior Pentagon investigator, appears to undermine Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and other major establishment figures who argue that there were established routes for Snowden other than leaking to the media.

Crane, a longtime assistant inspector general at the Pentagon, has accused his old office of retaliating against a major surveillance whistleblower, Thomas Drake, in an episode that helps explain Snowden’s 2013 National Security Agency disclosures. Not only did Pentagon officials provide Drake’s name to criminal investigators, Crane told the Guardian, they destroyed documents relevant to his defence.

Snowden, responding to Crane’s revelations, said he had tried to raise his concerns with colleagues, supervisors and lawyers and been told by all of them: “You’re playing with fire.”


Read more: http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/may/22/snowden-whistleblower-protections-john-crane



Well isn't this a fine kettle of fish. Why does it always seem to turn out the gov't is lying on these kinds of things - and Barack has been doubling down along with Hillary. How much corruption are we willing to put up with before shouting... enough!
116 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Snowden calls for whistleblower shield after claims by new Pentagon source (Original Post) askeptic May 2016 OP
Ya think? nt bemildred May 2016 #1
Whislteblower Protection was blown up by the current administration. Dont call me Shirley May 2016 #2
Oh I didnt realize that they revoked cstanleytech May 2016 #4
If you read the article, that's exactly what they're saying - it's not being followed. askeptic May 2016 #12
Not being followed well and being revoked are two completely different things though and cstanleytech May 2016 #44
So you think Snowden is a criminal? KPN May 2016 #93
I think he needs to turn himself in and let a jury decide if what he did broke the law. nt cstanleytech May 2016 #98
He knows better than that. KPN May 2016 #105
Depends on a number of factors, I dont see any way he can avoid some jail time though. nt cstanleytech May 2016 #106
You mean like all the Wall Street bankers? KPN May 2016 #108
Hopefully not because it was complete BS for the government to go so easy on them. nt cstanleytech May 2016 #109
So go after Snowden even though no charges against the banksters. KPN May 2016 #110
Wow you really are grabbing at straws there KPN because we all know cstanleytech May 2016 #111
Yeah, that's probably true. I just think the powers that be could treat KPN May 2016 #112
You are confused because neither one is a hero. You want a hero then try a volunteer firefighter who cstanleytech May 2016 #113
Now that's a load of malarkey. KPN May 2016 #114
Unless the DU ToS have been changed having a different opinion on Snowden than the one you have cstanleytech May 2016 #115
Spot On! -Goldman Sachs steals tens of billions and pays $5 billion fine laserhaas May 2016 #116
Yes. You really don't want to be a whistleblower during this administration. nt SusanCalvin May 2016 #19
The Economic Royalist's tangled web of lies, deceit, conspiring and theft are coming undone. Dont call me Shirley May 2016 #48
Or Hillary's...or Trump ( possibly Romney's) laserhaas May 2016 #73
Not just him. SusanCalvin May 2016 #91
I'm all too well aware laserhaas May 2016 #104
Hey, don't be sanctimonious. Ruining a few lives to cover up our misdeeds is OK, doncha know? Scuba May 2016 #3
Bullshit Drahthaardogs May 2016 #21
So continued cover-up of war crimes is OK with you? Scuba May 2016 #22
Snowden is a stinking rat Drahthaardogs May 2016 #23
I bet you support Hillary Fast Walker 52 May 2016 #25
I bet your fail oozes into every element of your life Drahthaardogs May 2016 #28
are you a Hillary supporter or not? Fast Walker 52 May 2016 #29
Actually, I am not overly fond of either of them Drahthaardogs May 2016 #32
I'm calling you out on the money accusation askeptic May 2016 #54
Call out all you want, it is a fact Drahthaardogs May 2016 #57
As I suspected, no evidence askeptic May 2016 #58
As I suspected, too lazy to look at Wikepedia Drahthaardogs May 2016 #59
You are just such a nice person askeptic May 2016 #60
Sigh... Drahthaardogs May 2016 #61
Seems pretty weak to me askeptic May 2016 #63
Yeah the logic got totally shit on around... intersectionality May 2016 #65
Why did he wait? Drahthaardogs May 2016 #67
The rationalization is he liked the money first. Made sure he was taken care of before he ratted. Drahthaardogs May 2016 #68
All of his assets were frozen - he didn't keep any of that money intersectionality May 2016 #69
If you see a horrible crime committed, do you work for three years Drahthaardogs May 2016 #70
what? he tried to raise them to the NSA. intersectionality May 2016 #71
No he didn't Drahthaardogs May 2016 #94
Two words intersectionality May 2016 #107
Based on hyperbolic banter incongruous laserhaas May 2016 #78
Yup...Its like my sending Mitt's overseas Bank acct to WSJ laserhaas May 2016 #77
Ok, thanks for the explanation Fast Walker 52 May 2016 #99
Tell you what - ignore Snowden, and look at what happened to Drake muriel_volestrangler May 2016 #31
Kind of hard to take this reporting seriously when they say Drahthaardogs May 2016 #35
I bet your fail oozes into every element of your life muriel_volestrangler May 2016 #36
Don't you just hate it when little things like facts Drahthaardogs May 2016 #38
The article calls Snowden an "NSA contract employee" muriel_volestrangler May 2016 #41
Nah, Drahthaardogs May 2016 #47
You are such a ..consummate hater laserhaas May 2016 #79
Did you ever wonder askeptic May 2016 #100
It's called "Graham's Heirarchy of Disaggreement laserhaas May 2016 #103
I support Hillary - the Democratic frontrunner! Have you got any more questions Trump-troll? Jeffersons Ghost May 2016 #53
"Trump troll"? WTF? Fast Walker 52 May 2016 #66
Good for you and bad laserhaas May 2016 #80
Yeah....nailing it laserhaas May 2016 #76
And I call people scum who call Snowden scum. ReRe May 2016 #51
He made sure he got paid first. Drahthaardogs May 2016 #52
Spot On....ReRe laserhaas May 2016 #81
Scuba, if Snowden had indeed limited the information he released to cstanleytech May 2016 #45
There,s my 'Scuba' laserhaas May 2016 #75
Careful 'Scuba'....your sarcasm is so Spot On laserhaas May 2016 #74
And the funniest/scariest thing is, this is to protect Bushco policies that were continued Hydra May 2016 #5
It's OK though. Obama gives good speeches. Helen Borg May 2016 #14
Yep. SusanCalvin May 2016 #26
Sad state of affairs...Hydra laserhaas May 2016 #82
Mr Snowden is still IMO a fucking traitor.......... Old Vet May 2016 #6
Don't confuse me with facts - my mind's made up! askeptic May 2016 #11
Your Opinion Only - Others See The World Much, Much Differently - PS - Profanity Not Required cantbeserious May 2016 #13
Concur laserhaas May 2016 #83
"Mr Snowden is still IMO a fucking traitor." I wouldnt go that far, atleast not without cstanleytech May 2016 #46
Happy to K&R this! nt riderinthestorm May 2016 #7
How many of our regularly posting rightwingers here will now rush to defend the Pentagon? villager May 2016 #8
Look above you at #6 n/t tom_kelly May 2016 #9
Ah yes, the "old reliables" start to check in. villager May 2016 #10
Oh, #6 is missing in my thread! Helen Borg May 2016 #16
Yes - Snowden - A Great American Hero - Thank You For Sharing cantbeserious May 2016 #15
I agree vlakitti May 2016 #17
Agree Completely cantbeserious May 2016 #18
Yep. nt SusanCalvin May 2016 #20
Completely agree! Helen Borg May 2016 #34
can't have anyone undermining the credibility of the great American empire, you know Fast Walker 52 May 2016 #24
I'm so sick of being an empire. I want to abdicate. nt SusanCalvin May 2016 #27
Yup...striking back is verboten laserhaas May 2016 #84
So on DU, the usual suspects . . FairWinds May 2016 #30
You cant dare say this about Kiss laserhaas May 2016 #85
Old Veteran shadowmayor May 2016 #33
"What in the hell... kadaholo May 2016 #37
Probably because Snowden really is a traitor jmowreader May 2016 #39
Neither dumped stuff on the Internet Paulie May 2016 #43
I'm always a bit surprised shadowmayor May 2016 #50
And the truth of what you say is to ask who has been prosecuted askeptic May 2016 #56
I agree shadowmayor May 2016 #62
Yup...Empire Rule Book 101 laserhaas May 2016 #86
Good post . . . and a comment. FairWinds May 2016 #42
I was also taught this. 85-91 tazkcmo May 2016 #49
I reflected on this..above..about Mitt thingy laserhaas May 2016 #88
Great Rant! askeptic May 2016 #55
Snowden is a Patriot, and a true American Hero! bvar22 May 2016 #40
Recommend for Truth Will Out! KoKo May 2016 #64
Big thumbs up laserhaas May 2016 #87
You got that right. Bad Dog May 2016 #89
I'm a whistle blower...and it not only sucks...its threatening laserhaas May 2016 #72
Bernie is wrong. eilen May 2016 #90
what are you whistleblowing on-- can you talk about it? Fast Walker 52 May 2016 #92
Bernie is SPOT ON - Wall Street does fraud, openly - cause the DOJ is in partner by revolving doors laserhaas May 2016 #102
Maybe he needs to look at the lack of whistleblower protections Blue_Tires May 2016 #95
Went to the movies yesterday. Saw the trailer for the movie "Snowden" classykaren May 2016 #96
Of course, some people immediately blame Obama or Clinton for this. L. Coyote May 2016 #97
If this happen on Bush's watch, he would be getting the blame here. Probably Cheney too even though 24601 May 2016 #101

cstanleytech

(26,080 posts)
44. Not being followed well and being revoked are two completely different things though and
Sun May 22, 2016, 03:23 PM
May 2016

while the law could use some beefing up to better protect real whistleblowers who report specific crimes and or fraud it wasnt a complete failure because Crane did not end up in jail probably because Crane unlike Snowden actually obeyed the law rather than just carelessly release everything he could get his hands on and then flee.

KPN

(15,587 posts)
105. He knows better than that.
Mon May 23, 2016, 01:58 PM
May 2016

He's already a martyr. .... But let's say he did. What do you suppose the outcome of that would be?

cstanleytech

(26,080 posts)
111. Wow you really are grabbing at straws there KPN because we all know
Mon May 23, 2016, 03:36 PM
May 2016

that I never said nor implied that it was ok for the bankers to get off so light and in fact I already stated it was BS to let them off that lightly.

KPN

(15,587 posts)
112. Yeah, that's probably true. I just think the powers that be could treat
Mon May 23, 2016, 03:46 PM
May 2016

Snowden the same way they treated Wall Street if they chose to, but ... you know the rest of that story. In my view, Snowden is a hero. Can't say the same for the banksters.

cstanleytech

(26,080 posts)
113. You are confused because neither one is a hero. You want a hero then try a volunteer firefighter who
Mon May 23, 2016, 03:51 PM
May 2016

goes into a burning building for no pay to save someone elses kid, thats a hero.

KPN

(15,587 posts)
114. Now that's a load of malarkey.
Mon May 23, 2016, 05:35 PM
May 2016

I don't "want a hero". Snowden did something courageous in my view and is paying a price for it. If you don't think so, that's fine but that doesn't give you license to ridicule. That's bullshit. ... and frankly something that *******s do.

cstanleytech

(26,080 posts)
115. Unless the DU ToS have been changed having a different opinion on Snowden than the one you have
Mon May 23, 2016, 05:52 PM
May 2016

Last edited Mon May 23, 2016, 06:32 PM - Edit history (1)

is still allowed and imo he has not done anything heroic on the other hand I wouldnt call him a traitor either like some would because I havent seen any proof that he exchanged the intel he had to another country for anything.

 

laserhaas

(7,805 posts)
116. Spot On! -Goldman Sachs steals tens of billions and pays $5 billion fine
Mon May 23, 2016, 08:20 PM
May 2016

That the investors and tax payers actually pay

Drahthaardogs

(6,843 posts)
21. Bullshit
Sun May 22, 2016, 01:25 PM
May 2016

First of all, why is a CONTRACTOR to the government given a Top Secret clearance? He has also more or less stated he took the position with the intent to reveal anything he could find.

He can keep his ass in Russia as far as I am concerned.
 

Scuba

(53,475 posts)
22. So continued cover-up of war crimes is OK with you?
Sun May 22, 2016, 01:29 PM
May 2016

Snowden is a hero. We should build a statue to him on the Washington Mall.













Those who are OK with prosecuting whistleblowers who expose war crimes should feel right at home with Putin.

Drahthaardogs

(6,843 posts)
23. Snowden is a stinking rat
Sun May 22, 2016, 01:35 PM
May 2016

who took a position where he made over a $250,000 year with the intent of outing everything he could find. Sorry, he is not a hero. I don't condone War Crimes, but I don't believe in fighting evil with evil.

There are and were proper channels to follow. He is scum.

Drahthaardogs

(6,843 posts)
32. Actually, I am not overly fond of either of them
Sun May 22, 2016, 01:55 PM
May 2016

I am a Labor Democrat, daddy was a miner, grandpa was at Ludlow, my family were the italians Rockefeller lied to to get over here to mine his coal for free.

Hillary is corporate hack and Bernie isn't even a Democrat, until now that he wants to be President. Obama was no friend to Labor either.

I think Booze Allen Hamilton has no business in our government, and the line between government employee and Contractor is not to be blurred for many reasons.

I also find Snowden disgusting because he pulled his stunt after he made half a million dollars or more. Kind of like that model that came out against modeling, but not until she had made her millions and then age had finally caught up to her.

I am not into hypocrites, and Snowden is a big one.

askeptic

(478 posts)
54. I'm calling you out on the money accusation
Sun May 22, 2016, 07:08 PM
May 2016

What evidence do you have to back it up?

Secondly, Snowden did not just do a dump, so you need to check your facts in that area as well.

Personally, I think the disclosure that the government was violating the Constitution against all of us is a big deal.

Drahthaardogs

(6,843 posts)
57. Call out all you want, it is a fact
Sun May 22, 2016, 07:32 PM
May 2016

He did NOT do this when he worked for the government. He waited until he got a nice Booze Allen salary that is much more than a U.S. Senator. Little chicken shit that he is.

Drahthaardogs

(6,843 posts)
59. As I suspected, too lazy to look at Wikepedia
Sun May 22, 2016, 07:39 PM
May 2016

By the way, nice post count! I hope you don't "skip" any answers.

askeptic

(478 posts)
60. You are just such a nice person
Sun May 22, 2016, 08:09 PM
May 2016

you won't actually say it is his salary - in Oahu - you are referring to and not some supposed payoff as you continually insinuate.
I've been away for awhile so just getting to know who makes cogent arguments and those that won't or can't.

Yes, my post count is definitely an issue you should immediately deal with!

Drahthaardogs

(6,843 posts)
61. Sigh...
Sun May 22, 2016, 08:17 PM
May 2016

The point is, Snowden had many opportunities to be a whistleblower when he actually worked for the government as a CIA employee. Instead, he followed the money and did what he did after the fact. He chased the big contract FIRST, then he pulled his shit. He is not Patrick Henry.

askeptic

(478 posts)
63. Seems pretty weak to me
Sun May 22, 2016, 08:59 PM
May 2016

Last edited Sun May 22, 2016, 11:39 PM - Edit history (1)

So Snowden goes off and gets this supposedly big fat salary job for the sole purpose of giving it up in order go live in exile in Russia for the entirely traitorous purpose of exposing 4th Amendment violations by the gov't? Yep, that sounds like the plan for the cushy life he always wanted.

Really? This is the rationalization you have settled on?

And this article exposes the lie about there being any whistleblower protections. If you know history you know that our "hero's" were rarely the people portrayed by the popular culture. It makes me wonder why the fervent need to put down Snowden.

Oh well.

Editing rather than adding a post --

I can't even fathom why you think "he waited" transfers some nefarious purpose other than working up the how to proceed and the courage to go through with it. Seems perfectly normal to me. I'd have to think real long and hard, knowing how whistleblowers are actually treated, and the prospect of having to leave my country.

You may have convinced yourself, but I don't think you are convincing anyone else with this line...

intersectionality

(106 posts)
65. Yeah the logic got totally shit on around...
Sun May 22, 2016, 09:31 PM
May 2016

"He waited till he had a cushy job." And then doesn't follow through with the logical conclusion that... Oh yeah, he doesn't have that job anymore.

Drahthaardogs

(6,843 posts)
68. The rationalization is he liked the money first. Made sure he was taken care of before he ratted.
Sun May 22, 2016, 10:08 PM
May 2016

The man had an IQ of 150. There is a calculated reason he waited to do what he did. Unfortunately, I don't think it panned out for him and he wound up fleeing to Russia.

intersectionality

(106 posts)
69. All of his assets were frozen - he didn't keep any of that money
Sun May 22, 2016, 10:21 PM
May 2016

Are you crazy? Do you not know what we do to people we classify as criminals?

Drahthaardogs

(6,843 posts)
70. If you see a horrible crime committed, do you work for three years
Sun May 22, 2016, 10:26 PM
May 2016

then quit, take a job as a contractor, double your pay, and THEN decide to do something about it? FFS, that makes no sense. Why didn't he report it while working for the CIA?

intersectionality

(106 posts)
71. what? he tried to raise them to the NSA.
Sun May 22, 2016, 10:47 PM
May 2016

Did you even read the wikipedia article or are you just randomly picking at things out of context? He was at Booz Allen for like 3 months - so "double your pay" at $13k/mo into an account that got frozen... umm.... what? please dear jesus read what you prescribe to others.

Drahthaardogs

(6,843 posts)
94. No he didn't
Mon May 23, 2016, 09:39 AM
May 2016

And why did he try to cut a deal with Brazil? Why did he out documents about NSA tactics in other countries? Why didn't he seek out a Congress member? Why did he release info about China? Germany?

Much of what he released pertains to foreign nations and has NOTHING to do with our Constitution . He even tried to use some of it to save his traitorous scrawny ass. Yeah, he is a regular Patrick Henry...

 

laserhaas

(7,805 posts)
77. Yup...Its like my sending Mitt's overseas Bank acct to WSJ
Sun May 22, 2016, 11:16 PM
May 2016

How is it a crime...to expose a Smoking Gun on a racketeer?

How is what Snowden , Assange or what Manning did ...a crime

When they exposed assualts upon the Constitution, criminal conspiracy cover ups if..even... murders!

It is all hateful ...snide..banter...against someone else who is actually making a difference.

And I DO KNOW from experience

Drahthaardogs

(6,843 posts)
35. Kind of hard to take this reporting seriously when they say
Sun May 22, 2016, 02:22 PM
May 2016

"Drake was a much higher ranking NSA official than Snowden", when the truth is, Snowden was NOT a government OFFICIAL. He was a CONTRACTOR to the NSA for Booze Allen and Hamilton.

Poor journalism. There is no reason to read the whole tedious piece if they do not even get the basics correct.

muriel_volestrangler

(101,150 posts)
41. The article calls Snowden an "NSA contract employee"
Sun May 22, 2016, 03:04 PM
May 2016

So it's quite clear what they know, and tell the readers. It's truly pathetic to see a DUer refuse to read, on the grounds that they don't like the way one phrase is put. Your head is stuck firmly in the sand. You have no credibility if you consider that a valid reason.

askeptic

(478 posts)
100. Did you ever wonder
Mon May 23, 2016, 12:18 PM
May 2016

What the real game is here?

I mean no matter how weak the argument is he stays with it until it is destroyed and then raises something else. Then he hones in on everything but the main grievance of the US Gov't and the 4th Amendment. Trivial crap like how the article is written, or that the exact word wasn't used. Makes you think maybe he is on these message boards to promote these weak lines of defense for the agency itself. Just sayin'

 

laserhaas

(7,805 posts)
103. It's called "Graham's Heirarchy of Disaggreement
Mon May 23, 2016, 01:53 PM
May 2016

The goal is to destroy "the truth" - which is always an enemy of the damnation bent

ReRe

(10,597 posts)
51. And I call people scum who call Snowden scum.
Sun May 22, 2016, 04:50 PM
May 2016
So, in your mind, his $250,000 salary was hush money? $250,000 was the price of turning off Snowden's conscience? He did follow the procedures and it didn't work in his case.

He is a Hero!
 

laserhaas

(7,805 posts)
81. Spot On....ReRe
Sun May 22, 2016, 11:22 PM
May 2016

Im living proof (so far) that following procedures

Isnt worth Jack Chit

Just sayin........

cstanleytech

(26,080 posts)
45. Scuba, if Snowden had indeed limited the information he released to
Sun May 22, 2016, 03:32 PM
May 2016

things like fraud or other such things that the whistleblower laws are supposed to shield whistleblowers from then your defense of him would be 100% valid but he went beyond that and released specific information about the intelligence the US had gathered on foreign governments, thats a major no no and it and thats not something the whistleblower laws are written to allow.

Hydra

(14,459 posts)
5. And the funniest/scariest thing is, this is to protect Bushco policies that were continued
Sun May 22, 2016, 11:46 AM
May 2016

Makes a lot more sense now that we are seeing the party leaders inviting Bushco into our tent openly.

We are Bushco now.

SusanCalvin

(6,592 posts)
26. Yep.
Sun May 22, 2016, 01:37 PM
May 2016

And he's a pretty good president for a corporatist, that being all that can generally get that far.

Old Vet

(2,001 posts)
6. Mr Snowden is still IMO a fucking traitor..........
Sun May 22, 2016, 11:56 AM
May 2016

Let him go back to china, or stay in Russia putting many people in danger with his revelations. I don't know how but there had to be a better way of leaking our countries secrets then giving them to the people who would do us serious harm.

askeptic

(478 posts)
11. Don't confuse me with facts - my mind's made up!
Sun May 22, 2016, 12:34 PM
May 2016

I'm an old 'Nam vet too, but ignoring new information doesn't help anyone.

cstanleytech

(26,080 posts)
46. "Mr Snowden is still IMO a fucking traitor." I wouldnt go that far, atleast not without
Sun May 22, 2016, 03:35 PM
May 2016

evidence say along the lines of him exchanging any of the information he had for money from some of the varies governments and or exchanging any of it for safe passage when he was fleeing from being arrested.

 

villager

(26,001 posts)
8. How many of our regularly posting rightwingers here will now rush to defend the Pentagon?
Sun May 22, 2016, 12:10 PM
May 2016

I dunno, where I come from, the definition of "Underground" just used to be different...

 

villager

(26,001 posts)
10. Ah yes, the "old reliables" start to check in.
Sun May 22, 2016, 12:32 PM
May 2016

You got to hand it to the expansive, constant disinformation campaigns of the ruling elites: When you have people seriously considering themselves part of an oppositional "underground" while defending every excess of the MIC with a straight-face....

...well, let's just that kind of successful mind-fucking is precisely the point. Their point.

vlakitti

(401 posts)
17. I agree
Sun May 22, 2016, 12:58 PM
May 2016

Mr. Snowden has done a lot for this country by educating people and has gotten a lot of grief for his efforts.

He deserves much better. And no, he had no other options.

 

FairWinds

(1,717 posts)
30. So on DU, the usual suspects . .
Sun May 22, 2016, 01:48 PM
May 2016

loudly denounce Ed Snowden, but have nothing to say
about Kissinger . .

Speaks volumes.

shadowmayor

(1,325 posts)
33. Old Veteran
Sun May 22, 2016, 01:55 PM
May 2016

Why am I never surprised to see folks calling out those who speak truth to power as traitors? And all too often, they are veterans. Well trained I might add. The first thing (or one of them) taught in basic training is a soldier's obligation NOT to follow an illegal order. Easier said than done when on a battlefield. But when it comes to OPS and TOC orders etc. there's a general genuflection to the powers that be. I suppose that telling the truth about the My Lai massacre was inappropriate? And who the fuck gets the pleasure of stamping all this shit Top Secret? A bunch of go-along to get-along types. Unbelievable. The fact that Rumsfeld, or Cheney, or Wolfowitz gets to determine what is secret or top secret makes my skin crawl. And the suck-up Generals running the entire goddamned show are even worse. If the American public were to know the whole truth about the criminal activities (like the formation of the Office of Special Plans) leading up to the Iraq War and the absolute crimes against humanity we committed once we invaded that country, heads would roll. Of course, suppressing the truth is always the first defense. The way the military acts is much like the Catholic church hiding the rape of boys because it might be "harmful" to the institution. The DoD is possibly the thinnest skinned entity in our government, and there's no shortage of "patriotic" people to carry the torch. Watching a helicopter crew slaughter a group of Iraqis and sticking around to blast the folks that come to help them is something every American should be required to watch. Spent 2005 or OIF3 in Abu Ghraib prison and I can say with complete certainty that a vast majority of people have no friggin' clue what we were doing to the Iraqi population and nor do they care. And god forbid somebody tries to tell the truth. The pictures of torture that have been released are the Disney version of what America was doing to a group who had "committed" the egregious crime of living in a country we decided to invade. What in the hell did the people of Iraq ever do to the people of the United States?

kadaholo

(304 posts)
37. "What in the hell...
Sun May 22, 2016, 02:36 PM
May 2016

...did the people of Iraq ever do to the people of the United States?" A question that will reverberate throughout the ages.




Thanks for your post!

jmowreader

(50,451 posts)
39. Probably because Snowden really is a traitor
Sun May 22, 2016, 02:39 PM
May 2016

He did the same thing that's pissing me off about Chelsea Manning: stole everything he could get his untrained little hands on and dumped it on the Internet.

shadowmayor

(1,325 posts)
50. I'm always a bit surprised
Sun May 22, 2016, 04:34 PM
May 2016

Why no outrage at the military committing crimes and covering them up with Top Secret classifications? Just because our military does something, doesn't make it right. And if it weren't for whistle blowers, we would never know the truth. I'll take the truth and a big black eye for the DoD over the suppression of war crimes any day of the week. Our oaths were to defend the Constitution from all enemies, foreign and domestic - not to cover up the crimes and incompetencies of our leaders and agencies. How many of us know that white phosphorous and the new version of napalm were used in Iraq? Only those who dare to tell the truth give us a chance to know what is really going on. Do you honestly think the information that Manning or Snowden collected would have ever been released by the DoD or State Dept. or the CIA or NSA? I think not.

To defend the indefensible is a bit Nixonian - "you see, when the President does something, it's not a crime".

askeptic

(478 posts)
56. And the truth of what you say is to ask who has been prosecuted
Sun May 22, 2016, 07:29 PM
May 2016

...for the war crimes exposed by Manning. They're still covering it up, so there's no doubt that was the intent. Why else would it be "classified" or even with other classified material, when that itself is a clear violation of classification directives. I didn't know they used Napalm in Iraq, but I guess burning to death isn't a heck of a lot worse than being hit by 20mm's or just blown to pieces by a 500 lbr. I think cluster bombs are probably the nastiest of all - those ball bearings go everywhere.

shadowmayor

(1,325 posts)
62. I agree
Sun May 22, 2016, 08:25 PM
May 2016

But I must take exception to the classification directives themselves. Again - who gets to stamp these things? Wolfowitz? Condi Rice? Cheney? Fuck them and the directives they sign.

 

laserhaas

(7,805 posts)
86. Yup...Empire Rule Book 101
Sun May 22, 2016, 11:29 PM
May 2016

Destroy the messenger and nobody will give a chit

Bout collateral damages

 

FairWinds

(1,717 posts)
42. Good post . . . and a comment.
Sun May 22, 2016, 03:14 PM
May 2016

When I joined the Army in 1967 I was NOT taught this . .

"The first thing (or one of them) taught in basic training is a soldier's obligation NOT to follow an illegal order."

But I would like to know if it is taught now, and where . .

It would be good if it was . .

tazkcmo

(7,286 posts)
49. I was also taught this. 85-91
Sun May 22, 2016, 03:58 PM
May 2016

Generally speaking, it's the difference between an order from an NCO (Must be lawful, can't order you to violate a law) vs one from an officer (direct and may violate a law like "Run that red light, soldier." but must not violate specific circumstances expressley laid out in the UCMJ.

http://www.justanswer.com/military-law/296q8-definition-lawful-order-ucmj-so.html

 

laserhaas

(7,805 posts)
88. I reflected on this..above..about Mitt thingy
Sun May 22, 2016, 11:37 PM
May 2016

And in the Manning thread

It cant be considered breaking the law..when you are doing the dynamic to point out that those who swore an oath to protect the law...are the one's assualting the Constitution of the United States.
[br][hr][br]

§ U.S. Supreme Court case Cooper v Aaron §

No judge can assualt the Constitution of the United States ..without being in direct diametric opposition of the Oath sworn to protect it.

bvar22

(39,909 posts)
40. Snowden is a Patriot, and a true American Hero!
Sun May 22, 2016, 02:54 PM
May 2016

I hope I would have as much courage as this man demonstrated under the same circumstances.
It would be so much easier to just keep your mouth shut, play the game,
draw your check, go home, and get lost in the TV or drink away your conscience if you have one. The majority of those who know about government wrong doing choose that easier, softer path.
Snowden chose the hard road.








Bad Dog

(2,025 posts)
89. You got that right.
Mon May 23, 2016, 05:46 AM
May 2016

Some people only care about their country looking good. The last thing they want is the truth to come out.

It's not limited to America either, I remember talking to a work colleague about the Birmingham 6. (6 men falsely jailed for IRA bombs by an over zealous police force.) He thought they should stay in jail even if they were innocent.

 

laserhaas

(7,805 posts)
72. I'm a whistle blower...and it not only sucks...its threatening
Sun May 22, 2016, 10:56 PM
May 2016

Snowden is 'Spot On'!

Getting the story out in more than 169 outlets, in dozens of different ways..doesn't work....either.

Lawyers..federal agents and even judges...all either join the dark side.....or they don't go where angels fear to tread.

Because America only pays homage to winners...defined as those that suffer extremely...But get paid..in the end.

Like Erin Brokervich

And ALL Administrations know this....that they can use their media might to disparage..andbmost of America will be happy to pounce on a victims grave.

Nobody believes Assange, Snowden or Manning

Until the system has made sure they are destroyed

Even Bernie says Snowden must be punished

 

laserhaas

(7,805 posts)
102. Bernie is SPOT ON - Wall Street does fraud, openly - cause the DOJ is in partner by revolving doors
Mon May 23, 2016, 01:49 PM
May 2016

For 15 years, with billions lost, law firms closed, dozens in jail, the big fish of Romney, Paul Traub, MNAT and Goldman Sachs

are all getting away Scot Free; because DOJ personnel are partners in the crimes.

Best- most succinct - online story, is "Romney Slapped Racketeering"; because I sued Mitt & Goldman Sachs, for Racketeering.

Problem is, the story makes the solid case against Mitt Romney/Goldman Sachs lawyer, Colm F. Connolly;
but then it guts its own investigative journalism, when it says "Mr. Haas alleges has ties to Mr. Romney"

Of course I ALLEGE - but the proof is out there, in the open, plain as the nose on anyone's face.

Mitt Romney (as MoveOrg did argue) lied about being "retroactive" retired Bain Capital, from August 2001, back to Feb 1999

And Colm Connolly was a Mitt Romney/Bain Capital/ Goldman Sachs MNAT.com law firm partner,
from 1999 until August 2, 2001.

Does NOT get to be any more Black & White - than that.

Here's the DOJ resume of Colm Connolly

When I reported this - to the Pubic Corruption Task Force - They SHUT IT DOWN

Hence, this argument of - going through proper channels

IS ALL BULLCHIT!

Blue_Tires

(55,445 posts)
95. Maybe he needs to look at the lack of whistleblower protections
Mon May 23, 2016, 09:45 AM
May 2016

in his adopted fucking country before pointing a finger at us

24601

(3,940 posts)
101. If this happen on Bush's watch, he would be getting the blame here. Probably Cheney too even though
Mon May 23, 2016, 12:19 PM
May 2016

VPs are not in any Chain of Command for other than their personal and Senate Staffs.

But I would not claiming the Secretary of State responsible in any case. DoD falls under the President and Secretary of Defense without going through any other cabinet officers. Likewise, Justice is under the President and Attorney General. And the Director of National Intelligence, although not a cabinet officer, also is a direct report to the President.

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Snowden calls for whistle...