Rep Mike Rogers told WHMI, a Michigan radio station, that Pte Manning should be charged with treason by a military tribunal.
"If they won't charge him with treason, they ought to charge him with murder," Mr Rogers said.
Asked if treason during wartime was a capital offence punishable by death, he said: "Yes and I would support it 100 per cent."
"The death penalty clearly should be considered here," he said. "[Pte Manning] clearly aided the enemy to what may result in the death of US soldiers or those cooperating. If that is not a capital offence, I don't know what is.
"We know for a fact that people will likely be killed because of this information being disclosed. That's pretty serious."
I'm just old enough to remember the release of the Pentagon Papers during the Vietnam War and calls for Daniel Ellsberg to be convicted, someone else Rep Rogers thinks should have been executed.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/cenk-uygur/rep-rogers-says-daniel-el_b_669825.html
But he went further when I asked him what he would have done with Daniel Ellsberg who leaked the Pentagon Papers. He said he wasn't clear on the facts of that case, but if Ellsberg had released information that put soldiers in the field at risk that he would have "absolutely" called for his execution. I don't think even Nixon went that far.
Individuals and the countries they lead aren't perfect, which is why self-checking systems like democracies are so important. But they make life hard for people who aren't interested in being questioned or thwarted even if that often means misery and death for others. That's where the value of having people like Manning and Snowden comes in, they have the courage to speak truth to power even if it costs them dearly.
I support America as a responsibly led democracy which is what it was intended to be, I don't support it as an empire which a tiny minority are trying to turn it into. And I think it's this change that people like Manning and Snowden are speaking out against and in the spirit of the genuine nature of the country.
What the NSA is doing is also about far more than defending the US.
This is the great importance of the astonishing revelations made by Snowden, as facilitated by Greenwald and Poitras, with help from various news media, including the Guardian. Not only does it confirm what many have suspected – that surveillance is happening – but it also makes clear that it's happening on an almost unimaginably vast scale. One might have expected a certain targeting of individuals and groups, but we now know that data is hoovered up indisciminately. We have learned that over the last decade the NSA has collected records on every phone call made by every American (it gathers the who, what and when of the calls, known as metadata, but not the content), as well as email data. We have learned that this happens with the cooperation of the private sector, with all that implies for their future as consorts in global surveillance. We have learned, too, that the NSA reviews the contents of the emails and internet communications of people outside the US, and has tapped the phones of foreign leaders (such as German chancellor Angel Merkel), and that it works with foreign intelligence services (including Britain's GCHQ), so as to be able to get around domestic legal difficulties. Our suspicions have been confirmed that the use of global surveillance is not limited to the "war on terror", but is marshalled towards the diplomatic and even economic advantage of the US, a point Greenwald teases out using the PowerPoint materials relied on by the agencies themselves. Such actions have been made possible thanks to creative and dodgy interpretations of legislation (not least the Patriot Act implemented just after 9/11). These activities began under President Bush, and they have been taken forward by President Obama. It would be a generous understatement to refer to British "cooperation" in these matters, although Greenwald's intended audience seems to be mostly in the US, and he goes light on the British until it comes to the treatment of his partner, David Miranda, who was detained in the UK under anti-terror legislation.
And as the bulk of the economic benefits produced by the US are going to a smaller and smaller group, the very real question becomes who is the NSA working for.
This certainly doesn’t sound like someone who was intent on betraying his nation, the reverse actually.
When the revelations first came out, in the summer of 2013, Snowden explained that he "had the capability without any warrant to search for, seize, and read your communications". That meant "anyone's communications at any time", he added, justifying the public disclosure on the grounds that this "power to change people's fates" was "a serious violation of the law". Snowden's actions, and the claims he has made, have catalysed an important debate in the US, within Congress (where views have not necessarily followed party lines) and among academics and commentators. Views are polarised among reasonable individuals, such as New Yorker legal writer Jeff Toobin ("no proof of any systematic, deliberate violations of law"), and the New York Review of Books's David Cole ("secret and legally dubious activities at home and abroad"), and in the US federal courts. In Britain, by contrast, the debate has been more limited, with most newspapers avoiding serious engagement and leaving the Guardian to address the detail, scale and significance of the revelations. Media enterprises that one might have expected to rail at the powers of Big Government have remained conspicuously restrained – behaviour that is likely, over the long term, to increase the power of the surveillance state over that of the individual. With the arrival of secret courts in Britain, drawing on the experience of the US, it feels as if we may be at a tipping point. Such reluctance on the part of our fourth estate has given the UK parliament a relatively free rein, leaving the Intelligence and Security Committee to plod along, a somewhat pitiful contrast to its US counterparts.
I think Snowden is getting exactly what he deserves. I hope he is never pardoned. He broke the law then he didn't even stick around to test the waters. He ran to our two biggest antagonists with tera-bytes of State Secrets. Years ago that would have openly reeked of outright treason.
He should consider himself lucky enough there are enough people who are caught up in the whole "Big Brother" scare who sympathize with him.
Why would someone post something like this?
Snowden didn't chose voluntary exile because he was afraid of facing justice in America, he did it because he understood there wouldn't be any for him.
The legal system is corrupt to the top.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/20/us/politics/20koch.html?_r=0
A leading liberal group is now trying to use that connection to argue that Mr. Scalia and Mr. Thomas should disqualify themselves from hearing campaign finance cases because they may be biased toward Mr. Koch, a billionaire who has been a major player in financing conservative causes.
The group, Common Cause, filed a petition with the Justice Department on Wednesday asking it to investigate whether Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas should have recused themselves in the case, involving Citizens United, because of their attendance at past retreats organized by the conservative financier Charles Koch, whose company operates a foundation that is a major contributor to political advocacy groups.
Thomas also has personal links to Citizens United which he failed to reveal while deciding on their case.
And both men agreed that de facto bribery should be a central factor in choosing "elected" leaders.
Snowden is also well aware of the reach of the US military and intelligence services, he picked one of the few places left on Earth where they couldn't reach him without a maximal effort.
Snowden saw what happened to Bradley Manning, he probably doesn't want to spend most or all of the rest of his life in prison for revealing just how ugly the situation has become in the US and allies halls of political and economic power.
The security services are also complaining about how extensive the leak made by Snowden has been, which is true, Snowden released massive amounts of material that involved intelligence agencies around the world who were working with the NSA. But the point is, these secret organizations were everywhere working together sometimes in cooperation with the private sector to circumvent the laws protecting citizens rights in the countries involved and targeting diplomats from around the world and the UN.
They're most likely angry for being exposed for what they are, not for the risk created by the release of the secret information. It makes their task much harder.
I suspect plenty of military officers don't know what the Constitution says or what it stands for. They follow orders.
No doubt.
The point I was trying to make was the importance is placed on the principles that protect individual freedom in America, not on protecting the state. And by violating any real privacy by carpet collection of electronic communications state security is protecting the state at the expense of the principles that guarantee rights and freedoms. Obama isn't too bad, but what if the next President is some Tea Party extremist who thinks we really need to go to war with Norwegia or something.
While Obama is in office he should be doing everything he can to roll back the actions taken under Bush and Cheney to drastically reduce civil rights in the US under things like the Patriot Act.
I agree but I don't see it happening.
Lois
Is there anyone on this discussion who has an opinion of why Snowdon would reveal what he knew if it wasn’t to simply blow the whistle on what he saw as wrongdoing by the government, which as illegally and secretly invading the privacy of millions of Americans? What did he stand to get out of it? A prison sentence? Exile? Approbation by thousands of people with no sense? I see him as a hero that revealed the illegal, unethical, immoral and secretive surveillance by the government on its people. If I were in Snowdon’s position I would have done the same thing, assuming I had his courage to go out on a limb to do what was right, putting myself and my own freedom at great risk.
Lois
It’s obvious how I feel about this.
Just look at the PRISM program alone and tell me it makes any kind of sense in a supposedly free society.
PRISM was publicly revealed when classified documents about the program were leaked to journalists of The Washington Post and The Guardian by Edward Snowden – at the time an NSA contractor – during a visit to Hong Kong.[1][2] The leaked documents included 41 PowerPoint slides, four of which were published in news articles.[1][2] The documents identified several technology companies as participants in the PRISM program, including Microsoft in 2007, Yahoo! in 2008, Google in 2009, Facebook in 2009, Paltalk in 2009, YouTube in 2010, AOL in 2011, Skype in 2011 and Apple in 2012.[36] The speaker's notes in the briefing document reviewed by The Washington Post indicated that "98 percent of PRISM production is based on Yahoo, Google and Microsoft".[1] The slide presentation stated that much of the world's electronic communications pass through the U.S., because electronic communications data tend to follow the least expensive route rather than the most physically direct route, and the bulk of the world's Internet infrastructure is based in the United States.[15] The presentation noted that these facts provide United States intelligence analysts with opportunities for intercepting the communications of foreign targets as their electronic data pass into or through the United States.
Snowden's subsequent disclosures included statements that governments such as the United Kingdom's GCHQ also undertook mass interception and tracking of Internet and communications data[37] – described by Germany as "nightmarish" if true[38] – allegations that the NSA engaged in "dangerous" and "criminal" activity by "hacking" civilian infrastructure networks in other countries such as "universities, hospitals, and private businesses",[13] and alleged that compliance offered only very limited restrictive effect on mass data collection practices (including of Americans) since restrictions "are policy-based, not technically based, and can change at any time", adding that "Additionally, audits are cursory, incomplete, and easily fooled by fake justifications",[13] with numerous self-granted exceptions, and that NSA policies encourage staff to assume the benefit of the doubt in cases of uncertainty.
Alleged NSA internal slides included in the disclosures purported to show that the NSA could unilaterally access data and perform "extensive, in-depth surveillance on live communications and stored information" with examples including email, video and voice chat, videos, photos, voice-over-IP chats (such as Skype), file transfers, and social networking details.[2] Snowden summarized that "in general, the reality is this: if an NSA, FBI, CIA, DIA, etc. analyst has access to query raw SIGINT [signals intelligence] databases, they can enter and get results for anything they want."[13] According to The Washington Post, the intelligence analysts search PRISM data using terms intended to identify suspicious communications of targets whom the analysts suspect with at least 51 percent confidence to not be U.S. citizens, but in the process, communication data of some U.S. citizens are also collected unintentionally.[1] Training materials for analysts tell them that while they should periodically report such accidental collection of non-foreign U.S. data, "it's nothing to worry about."
They can go pretty much anywhere they want and get the benefit of the doubt even when that results in the invasion of privacy of Americans.
He should consider himself lucky enough there are enough people who are caught up in the whole "Big Brother" scare who sympathize with him.
Even a brief examination of the evidence shows the falseness of this statement, the evidence indicates that the NSA sought and virtually achieved the ability to go anywhere in the pursuit of information. Information is power and those who are in positions of leadership are already showing profound disregard for their democratic responsibilities.
Destroying any real privacy completes an environment of intimidation and control that millions feel has already gone much too far.
@Occam,
According to German and European law , it is strictly prohibited to a domestic intelligence ; in their own country to spy on citizens. There are rules. But secret services all over the world shit on rules. And if their filth reach the public , know the policies that they are supposed to control , usually nothing . This happens in the U.S., this is done in Germany , in Europe , all over the world.
Regarding Snowden : He wants to return to the United States. And he tried to negotiate on that with the Justice Department . I fear they will promise him anything , and if he has set foot on American soil , they will cheat him , and arrest him immediately.
Is he military officer , or a private person ( I wonder if he comes before a military court because the NSA is a military agency ) ?
By the way , Snowden fled to Russia because he had made a deal with Putin. Because Putin now have all the documents by Snowden . That was the price for getting asylum in Russia . Now Putin does not need him anymore . And a detected spy is a " burned " spy , as we would say by the “Company” . He is useless.
Snowden was a civilian. So he will not be tried in a military court. Witch, do you have evidence of the deal that you asserted that Snowden made with Putin, or are you simply speculating that is what must have happened?
Our agencies that employ secrets were given extended legal powers, after 9/11, by a Law called The Patriot Act. But surfacing evidence suggests that they even went beyond those legitimately extended powers, or as you say, “shit” on them.
By the way , Snowden fled to Russia because he had made a deal with Putin. Because Putin now have all the documents by Snowden . That was the price for getting asylum in Russia . Now Putin does not need him anymore . And a detected spy is a " burned " spy , as we would say by the "Company" . He is useless.
Where are you getting that information?
According to the press and Snowden he turned all files over to journalists in Hong Kong from which they have been releasing them at their discretion.
Witch, do you have evidence of the deal that you asserted that Snowden made with Putin, or are you simply speculating that is what must have happened?
If you mean documents or eyewitness reports mean with it , I must disappoint you . I know Putin from his time in the former GDR , when he worked for the KGB . And I know the man ; Putin had encouraged. Putin was already an excellent chess player. He may well think strategically . And he goes, as they say here in Germany , " over dead bodies " .
I bet my fat ass that Putin has made a deal with Snowden : Liberty vs. documents. For Putin , the U.S. government where he wanted her always : blackmail .
Because Putin is mortally offended because Obama and George W. Bush rather than the see / saw him as what he sees himself : as a second superpower alongside the United States . That's why its veto in the Security Council because of Syria . That's why its blockade in the UN. And that is why he is so because of the Ukraine. He fears losing power , and the loss of his own pride. He also mourns the defunct Soviet Union , like many of his compatriots.
Our agencies that employ secrets were given extended legal powers, after 9/11, by a Law called The Patriot Act. But surfacing evidence suggests that they even went beyond those legitimately extended powers, or as you say, "shit" on them.
There is not a single goddamn proof that "Patriot Act" or the snooping of the NSA would have prevented any attack of fundamentalist Muslims.
Snowden wasn’t welcomed in Russia with open arms, he was stuck in Moscow’s Sheremetyevo Airport transit zone for over a month while the US government tried to arrange a way to arrest him, no other nation would take him.
By the time he was granted temporary asylum in Russia and left Moscow's Sheremetyevo airport on Thursday, the National Security Agency whistleblower Edward Snowden had spent 40 days in the confines of the airport's transit zone.
Considering the scale of the information released by Snowden to the press, I see no indication he made any kind of deal with Putin. He was already in Russia and had no other place to go. The press had already begun releasing large amounts of the material he turned over to them.
I also think it’s ridiculous to claim that the vast intelligence collection program is being done mainly for US national security when you look at the extent of the NSA and other programs.
“We hack network backbones — like huge Internet routers, basically — that give us access to the communications of hundreds of thousands of computers without having to hack every single one," he told the newspaper.
According to Snowden, the NSA has engaged in more than 61,000 hacking operations worldwide, including hundreds aimed at Chinese targets. Among the targets were universities, businesses and public officials.
I guess if the US government and it's close associations with the private sector such as the fossil fuel and financial lobbies considers everyone else on the planet a potential threat then it makes sense to do what the NSA is doing. But's it not part of any kind of of open and free society.
Just look at who's being spied on by the government.
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/earth-insight/2013/jun/14/climate-change-energy-shocks-nsa-prism
Top secret US National Security Agency (NSA) documents disclosed by the Guardian have shocked the world with revelations of a comprehensive US-based surveillance system with direct access to Facebook, Apple, Google, Microsoft and other tech giants. New Zealand court records suggest that data harvested by the NSA's Prism system has been fed into the Five Eyes intelligence alliance whose members also include the UK, Canada, Australia and New Zealand.
But why have Western security agencies developed such an unprecedented capacity to spy on their own domestic populations? Since the 2008 economic crash, security agencies have increasingly spied on political activists, especially environmental groups, on behalf of corporate interests. This activity is linked to the last decade of US defence planning, which has been increasingly concerned by the risk of civil unrest at home triggered by catastrophic events linked to climate change, energy shocks or economic crisis - or all three.
Little of real value is being done to mitigate the effects of climate change because of the political power that having such vast wealth gives certain sectors, but at the same time an equally vast intelligence and security network is being built to control people when the inevitable impacts occur.
How is this not nuts?
Not only is Snowden a whistleblower, he’s most likely the most important one we’ve ever had.
I also think this strongly indicates that those corporations and individuals are who are most responsible for some of the biggest negative impacts now happening in the US and the world don’t intend to change. Instead of allowing us to control their activities they seem quite intent on controlling ours.
The bill (H.R. 3361), also known as the USA Freedom Act, amends the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) of 1978, adding restrictions on the use of FISA by the National Security Agency to prevent the indiscriminate collection the phone records and other communications of U.S. citizens. Yet changes to the legislation earlier in the week caused many of the original supporters of the legislation to back away from supporting the bill.
Critics fear that changes to the definitions of what types of records can be targeted continue to leave open the possibility of mass surveillance.
"I am troubled by the changes that were made to the bill behind closed doors that stripped key protections and open the door to bulk collection," U.S. Representative Bennie G. Thompson, D-Miss., a ranking member of the House Committee on Homeland Security, said in a statement. "The Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board found that the NSA's bulk collection of metadata is illegal and called for it to be stopped." -
Civil liberties groups, such as the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), spoke out against the amendments to the bill. On May 20, the EFF released an analysis that took issue with the amended bill's modified definitions of what information could be targeted as well as the lack of reform to a second section of FISA, Section 702, which covers intelligence collection about foreign individuals outside the United States. Finally, the EFF and other groups had called for a special advocate to be present during FISA Court hearings that could represent the interests of the people of the United States.
Snowden wasn't welcomed in Russia with open arms, he was stuck in Moscow's Sheremetyevo Airport transit zone for over a month
Do you believe everything you read? Since I left my "company", no more. And that was in 1980/81, and that was a good decision. For all the intelligence agencies manipulate news..
Remember yet again to the permanent fear that was stoked during the Bush administration. Or the lies about the African American in the 60s (Black Panther). In intelligence there for their own departments. In the GDR, it was the Department of "agitation and propaganda". NSA, CIA and DIA, to name but a few, have similar divisions. The Intelligence and Security Command (NSA division) has a division that deals exclusively with it.
Do you believe everything you read? Since I left my "company", no more. And that was in 1980/81, and that was a good decision. For all the intelligence agencies manipulate news..
Remember yet again to the permanent fear that was stoked during the Bush administration. Or the lies about the African American in the 60s (Black Panther). In intelligence there for their own departments. In the GDR, it was the Department of "agitation and propaganda". NSA, CIA and DIA, to name but a few, have similar divisions. The Intelligence and Security Command (NSA division) has a division that deals exclusively with it.
This is coming from multiple sources, do you have anything besides your opinion that first off Snowden had any classified files still on him when he arrived in Moscow or that he made any deal whatever with Putin. The sources I've looked at say he was stuck in the transit terminal until a Russian lawyer was able to get temporary resident status for him. There was also wide public support in Russia for Snowden.
Considering this is a story about how much secret activity has been revealed in the press through documents obtained by Snowden, which secret service are you claiming is manipulating the story? They all come out looking very bad, but I see no indication this was done for personal benefit by Snowden, in fact he's probably not going to be able to return to his own country.
Witch, do you have evidence of the deal that you asserted that Snowden made with Putin, or are you simply speculating that is what must have happened?
If you mean documents or eyewitness reports mean with it , I must disappoint you . I know Putin from his time in the former GDR , when he worked for the KGB . And I know the man ; Putin had encouraged. Putin was already an excellent chess player. He may well think strategically . And he goes, as they say here in Germany , " over dead bodies " .
I bet my fat ass that Putin has made a deal with Snowden : Liberty vs. documents. For Putin , the U.S. government where he wanted her always : blackmail .
Because Putin is mortally offended because Obama and George W. Bush rather than the see / saw him as what he sees himself : as a second superpower alongside the United States . That's why its veto in the Security Council because of Syria . That's why its blockade in the UN. And that is why he is so because of the Ukraine. He fears losing power , and the loss of his own pride. He also mourns the defunct Soviet Union , like many of his compatriots.
Our agencies that employ secrets were given extended legal powers, after 9/11, by a Law called The Patriot Act. But surfacing evidence suggests that they even went beyond those legitimately extended powers, or as you say, "shit" on them.
There is not a single goddamn proof that "Patriot Act" or the snooping of the NSA would have prevented any attack of fundamentalist Muslims.
Witch, first you said,
"Snowdon fled to Russia because he had made a deal with Putin. Because Putin now have all the documents by Snowden . That was the price for getting asylum in Russia . Now Putin does not need him anymore ." An unequicoval statement, with no indication that you have nothing to back it up.
Then when you were asked for evidence, you said,
"If you mean documents or eyewitness reports mean with it , I must disappoint you . I know Putin from his time in the former GDR , when he worked for the KGB . And I know the man ; Putin had encouraged. Putin was already an excellent chess player. He may well think strategically . And he goes, as they say here in Germany , " over dead bodies " .
I bet my fat ass that Putin has made a deal with Snowden : Liberty vs. documents. For Putin , the U.S. government where he wanted her always : blackmail."
In other words, it's nothing but your opinion with nothing to back it up but your claim (also undocumented) that you know Putin and that you had some personal involvement in the KGB.
If, as you say, you are now "betting" your "fat ass" that Putin has made a deal with Snowdon, you are admitting you have absolutely no evidence. How about saying that when you first make the empty claim instead of making it, unequivocally, as if you have evidence for it and then only backing down on evidence when you are called on it?
One of the unwritten rules of contributing to a forum like this is to refrain from making unsupported claims.
This sort of thing does not give any of us any confidence that all of your posts are not just based on your fertile imagination, a lot like your Wiccan beliefs.