Snowen said, "What I would like to see ... would be that we reform whistleblower laws in the United States to cover contractors -- we reform the Espionage Act to distinguish between people who sell secrets to foreign governments for their own gain and people who return information to public hands for the purpose of serving the public interest."

I agree with the idea of reforming the whistleblower laws but one reform would be that if there is no reasonable assumption of wrong doing on the part of the people or organization that is accused, then the whistleblower laws don't apply.  In Snowden's case, every document he leaked where a case could be made that illegal spying was being done, would stand as a great example of blowing a whistle that needed to be blown.

But his idea of distinguishing between traitors or spys and simply people who think they are doing good? That's nonsense. Most of the worst damage ever done to our country by traitors was done because of ideological beliefs rather than getting paid.  They believed they were doing good. They believed they were acting in the public interest.  What is needed is to relate their acts to violations of individual rights - to objective harm that warrants criminal treatment.

I agree with what he said about not getting a fair trial if accused of espionage - they have to change the rules to allow a defendent to make the argument that the act of breaking confidentiality could not be illegal if what was being kept confidential is unconstituional.

"The road to hell is paved with good intentions"

I agree with you Steve that everybody should be held personally accountable for their actions, not for their intentions. However that should also be the case with each and every person in our governments. Even the voters who voted such powers to their government and it's representatives, if you follow that line of reasoning to Teresa's conclusion.

One guess which side is not held responsible for it's actions and clamors about it's intentions ;)

What I was mostly shocked at though, was a court that does not allow an accused to present evidence on his behalf, is held in secret, and cannot be overruled by any other court. I can't think of a single reason that would justify such a court or such laws. Their mere existence is reason enough to discredit any government.

Vera,

I agree that government officials should be held liable, criminally liable, for violations of the law, especially when it is the constitution they are violating. A government official should have fewer legal rights, not more - held to a higher standard, not allowed to make excuses.

But you can't prosecute voters for voting for a candiate that promises to give them goodies. We have to treat the vote the way we treat freedom of speech, freedom of press, freedom to assemble - as an expression of a free mind. It has to be the constitution that stands as the dividing line between the freedom to advocate for socialism, versus not having the right to use government in anyway that isn't a constitutionally granted power.  That is the best system I can imagine, and it will work if we can get enough people educated to the needed degree. Anything else ends up being subjective and being fraught with practical problems to the degree it just wouldn't work.

If, in the end, society can't acquire sufficient good sense and understanding of what liberty is and what it requires, then we won't have liberty.  Sovereignty resides in the individual, not the system or the government.  If there are too many ignorant or misguided individuals, then there is no workable method of establishing lasting liberty.

Snowden is raising a clear distinction between defense of nation and defense of government and its agencies.

There is a growing disconnect these days.  The entrenched interests inside the beltway and/or those connected to the public trough in some way shape or form would like that to forever be interpreted as the same thing, to grant them a kind of perpetual carte blanche for the same old same old, flag waving or not.

Increasingly so ever since WWII.  It is only growing larger, and has nothing at all to do with political party.

This government forgot why this nation once went to war.   The American people have bifurcated; those fed from the government in some way shape or form and all of its chronic wars and emergencies, and those feeding it.

Its not a special breed of people that end up doing this.   It is what humans do when they unfetter their local state for the latest really, really good cause and/or existential national emergency.   Unfettering our own state to fight totalitarianism in WWII is something this nation has never recovered from, no matter how shiny the monuments are in DC.

Inevitably, it is the same E1s who bleed in the wars who end up paying for the gig when their service is over.   That pyramid in and around DC is not made up of the bleeders.

Our version of The Hunger Games is not what they thought they were bleeding for.

regards,

Fred