• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Ron Paul Launches Clemency Petition For Edward Snowden

DA60

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 28, 2012
Messages
16,386
Reaction score
7,793
Location
Where I am now
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
'Former Congressman Ron Paul has launched a petition to attempt to garner clemency for NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden. The "Demand Clemency for Edward Snowden" petition includes the clip below, Paul calls on supporters to sign the petition in an attempt to bring Snowden home to the US safely before his temporary visa in Russia expires in July.

On the heels of his son Rand Paul's lawsuit against the Obama nd the NSA seeking to stop its collection of phone metadata, Ron Paul states "Edward Snowden shocked the world when he exposed the NSA’s illegal and abusive spying program. Instead of applauding him for his bravery and patriotism, the U.S. government labels Snowden a traitor."

By signing this petition, Paul notes on his Channel's website, "you are telling the US government that Mr. Snowden deserves the right to come home without the fear of persecution or imprisonment."'

Ron Paul Launches Clemency Petition For Edward Snowden | Zero Hedge
 
'Former Congressman Ron Paul has launched a petition to attempt to garner clemency for NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden. The "Demand Clemency for Edward Snowden" petition includes the clip below, Paul calls on supporters to sign the petition in an attempt to bring Snowden home to the US safely before his temporary visa in Russia expires in July.

On the heels of his son Rand Paul's lawsuit against the Obama nd the NSA seeking to stop its collection of phone metadata, Ron Paul states "Edward Snowden shocked the world when he exposed the NSA’s illegal and abusive spying program. Instead of applauding him for his bravery and patriotism, the U.S. government labels Snowden a traitor."

By signing this petition, Paul notes on his Channel's website, "you are telling the US government that Mr. Snowden deserves the right to come home without the fear of persecution or imprisonment."'

Ron Paul Launches Clemency Petition For Edward Snowden | Zero Hedge



Screw that.....he is a traitor.
 
Ron Paul doing something stupid? How shocking...

I am not into letting probable criminals getting off without persecution. I am a law and order type.
 
Without Snowden, the NSA would have continued increasing their surveillance of everyone and everything. If you think that being watched is necessary for your safety, then Snowden was a bad an. If you think that the NSA and other agencies should respect the 4th amendment and the other constitutional protections, then Snowden is a hero.

I think most people would rather be safe than be private. After all, only a bad person would care about being watched. Good people commit no crimes so their life should be an open book.

Do you realize that if the police could search everyone's home from time to time, you would virtually eliminate all crime and terrorism. Who would dare operate a meth lab or a bomb factory if they could be searched at any time? What do you ever write in your letters that you would care if it was read for the greater good of the nation?
 
Well, the NSA is an enemy of the Constitution.

Hilariously, constitutional scholars seem to disagree with you.

Snowden deserves a bullet to the head, frankly. Even if you think he should've shard the information about phone metadata, he still shared so much more- stuff about spying on other nations. Why are people cool with that? Why do they ignore that?
 
Without Snowden, the NSA would have continued increasing their surveillance of everyone and everything. If you think that being watched is necessary for your safety, then Snowden was a bad an. If you think that the NSA and other agencies should respect the 4th amendment and the other constitutional protections, then Snowden is a hero.

I think most people would rather be safe than be private. After all, only a bad person would care about being watched. Good people commit no crimes so their life should be an open book.

Do you realize that if the police could search everyone's home from time to time, you would virtually eliminate all crime and terrorism. Who would dare operate a meth lab or a bomb factory if they could be searched at any time? What do you ever write in your letters that you would care if it was read for the greater good of the nation?

When you realize he took more information that he himself didn't understand. Then decided to share with other countries. Put others at risk. Despite his argument of wanting to show what the NSA was doing. Then you will realize like most others that are in Special Ops and other Clandestine agencies. How he is classified as a traitor.
 
Well, the NSA is an enemy of the Constitution.

Well, seems Snowden was an enemy to his friend who he used to steal information from......causing his buddy's life to be totally destroyed too Since he discovered that Snowden his pal was using him and password to access more than what Snowden was assigned to.

How would you feel if your buddy who you worked with. Set you up to take the fall with him?
 
Hilariously, constitutional scholars seem to disagree with you.

Snowden deserves a bullet to the head, frankly. Even if you think he should've shard the information about phone metadata, he still shared so much more- stuff about spying on other nations. Why are people cool with that? Why do they ignore that?

True Constitutional scholars are on my side. I could understand why those who choose to be liars and subvert it while hiding behind their law degree would "disagree" with me.
 
True Constitutional scholars are on my side.

lol what? Did you seriously just say that only people that agree with you are "true"? What's your constitutional law background anyway?
 
A traitor to whom?

To the United States. When you give every frickin' secret of your country to the Russians, you are a traitor.
 
True Constitutional scholars are on my side. I could understand why those who choose to be liars and subvert it while hiding behind their law degree would "disagree" with me.



Which would that be.....Hugh Hewitt is a Constitutional Attorney from Yale and was a former SCOTUS clerk. Jonathon Turley is another Constitutional Attorney. Seem many say Snowden is a traitor.

Even Holder says Clemency would be going to far.
 
Hilariously, constitutional scholars seem to disagree with you.

Snowden deserves a bullet to the head, frankly. Even if you think he should've shard the information about phone metadata, he still shared so much more- stuff about spying on other nations. Why are people cool with that? Why do they ignore that?

an easy question to answer. The Wing nuts hate the country and are in favor of anything that hurts the U.S. Military secrets? No big deal. Intelligence assets? screw them. The rest of the idiots who think this guy is some kind of hero are too dumb to look behind the headlines and ask what exactly was taken and why did he go to Russia?
 
Which would that be.....Hugh Hewitt is a Constitutional Attorney from Yale and was a former SCOTUS clerk. Jonathon Turley is another Constitutional Attorney. Seem many say Snowden is a traitor.

Even Holder says Clemency would be going to far.
I thought we were talking about whether the NSA (and I am referring to the source of their controversy: blanket data collection) was Constitutional or not.

Do Hewitt and Turley support it?
 
The Wing nuts hate the country and are in favor of anything that hurts the U.S.

If by "Wing nuts" you are using the common loon usage referring to Conservatives, this statement is absolute nonsense. Completely out of touch with reality.
 
lol what? Did you seriously just say that only people that agree with you are "true"? What's your constitutional law background anyway?

Anybody who intentionally changes the meaning of the words of the Constitution is inherently dishonest and not a true scholar.
 
Anybody who intentionally changes the meaning of the words of the Constitution is inherently dishonest and not a true scholar.

And anyone that disagrees with you must be changing meaning, right? What was your background, again?

Get out of here with this silly nonsense, no one past grade school believes that kind of stuff: "If you don't share my opinion you're WRONG!!" I'm laughing at you.
 
I thought we were talking about whether the NSA (and I am referring to the source of their controversy: blanket data collection) was Constitutional or not.

Do Hewitt and Turley support it?

Free Edward Snowden -- Really?

7a29ea98-befb-4e20-8803-5808acebd78a.jpg


Former CIA Director James Woolsey has pronounced that the proper punishment for National Security Agency leaker Edward Snowden would be for him to be "hanged by his neck until he is dead."

The news media want to hand him not a rope but a pedestal.

Snowden has argued that he had a moral duty to challenge an intelligence machinery that was out of control. Hudson Institute senior fellow Gabriel Schoenfeld, author of "Necessary Secrets: National Security, the Media, and the Rule of Law," is not impressed. Snowden outed U.S. intelligence "for engaging in activity that almost every state engages in." The former contractor then went into hiding in China and Russia, where he enjoys temporary asylum. "I think it is disgraceful," quoth Schoenfeld, that Snowden lectures Washington but "doesn't have the courage to criticize abuses of free speech in his host country."

To reach its "free Snowden" position, the Times quoted a federal judge who found the NSA program to be "almost Orwellian" while ignoring another federal judge who upheld the program's constitutionality. The Times also ignored testimony that "telephony metadata" prevented as many as 50 potential terrorist attacks, including a 2009 plot to blow up the New York subway.

Former CIA spokesman Bill Harlow is not unfamiliar with that sneaking suspicion. He thinks Snowden is a "traitor." If the administration is toying with a deal, he said, it would send a catastrophic message to would-be leakers. To wit: "Just make sure you steal enough."

It's almost funny when you follow the editorial boards' logic. The papers argued that Snowden is a hero because he leaked material about which the public has a right to know. Then they supported granting amnesty or leniency if Snowden would agree to hand over any remaining documents rather than share them with the world. A trial would give Snowden the opportunity to tell his story, the American public a chance to find out what exactly Snowden leaked and Washington the burden of proving a criminal case -- but the Times and The Guardian apparently prefer a backroom deal.....snip~

Free Edward Snowden -- Really? - Debra J. Saunders - Page 2

Both Turley and Hewitt write for Townhall.
 
Last edited:
And anyone that disagrees with you must be changing meaning, right? What was your background, again?

Get out of here with this silly nonsense, no one past grade school believes that kind of stuff: "If you don't share my opinion you're WRONG!!" I'm laughing at you.

Unless you have any relevant points, YOU get out.
 
Free Edward Snowden -- Really?

7a29ea98-befb-4e20-8803-5808acebd78a.jpg


Former CIA Director James Woolsey has pronounced that the proper punishment for National Security Agency leaker Edward Snowden would be for him to be "hanged by his neck until he is dead."

The news media want to hand him not a rope but a pedestal.

Snowden has argued that he had a moral duty to challenge an intelligence machinery that was out of control. Hudson Institute senior fellow Gabriel Schoenfeld, author of "Necessary Secrets: National Security, the Media, and the Rule of Law," is not impressed. Snowden outed U.S. intelligence "for engaging in activity that almost every state engages in." The former contractor then went into hiding in China and Russia, where he enjoys temporary asylum. "I think it is disgraceful," quoth Schoenfeld, that Snowden lectures Washington but "doesn't have the courage to criticize abuses of free speech in his host country."

To reach its "free Snowden" position, the Times quoted a federal judge who found the NSA program to be "almost Orwellian" while ignoring another federal judge who upheld the program's constitutionality. The Times also ignored testimony that "telephony metadata" prevented as many as 50 potential terrorist attacks, including a 2009 plot to blow up the New York subway.

Former CIA spokesman Bill Harlow is not unfamiliar with that sneaking suspicion. He thinks Snowden is a "traitor." If the administration is toying with a deal, he said, it would send a catastrophic message to would-be leakers. To wit: "Just make sure you steal enough."

It's almost funny when you follow the editorial boards' logic. The papers argued that Snowden is a hero because he leaked material about which the public has a right to know. Then they supported granting amnesty or leniency if Snowden would agree to hand over any remaining documents rather than share them with the world. A trial would give Snowden the opportunity to tell his story, the American public a chance to find out what exactly Snowden leaked and Washington the burden of proving a criminal case -- but the Times and The Guardian apparently prefer a backroom deal.....snip~

Free Edward Snowden -- Really? - Debra J. Saunders - Page 2

Both Turley and Hewitt write for Townhall.

1-I was still talking about the NSA, not Snowden.

2-Who cares if Turley and Hewitt write for Townhall? You do know what op-eds are, right? That article was written by Debra Saunders.
 
Hilariously, constitutional scholars seem to disagree with you.

Snowden deserves a bullet to the head, frankly. Even if you think he should've shard the information about phone metadata, he still shared so much more- stuff about spying on other nations. Why are people cool with that? Why do they ignore that?

First, they prosecute Clapper and McCullogh, and then let's discuss the persecution of Snowden. Clapper and McCullogh perjured themselves before our elected representatives and we're not even sure Snowden did anything criminal. If Justice is to be served, we should start at home, don't you think?
 
First, they prosecute Clapper and McCullogh, and then let's discuss the persecution of Snowden. Clapper and McCullogh perjured themselves before our elected representatives and we're not even sure Snowden did anything criminal. If Justice is to be served, we should start at home, don't you think?

No, we should be starting with the guy who gave state secrets to the Chinese and Russians and basically everyone else on the planet.
 
Back
Top Bottom