General Discussion

ProSense

(116,464 posts) Mon Jun 17, 2013, 12:51 PM Jun 2013

Snowden: Obama Should Call For Special Committee To Review NSA Programs

Snowden: Obama Should Call For Special Committee To Review NSA Programs

In an open-to-the-public live chat on The Guardian’s website on Monday, Edward Snowden, the self-proclaimed source of recently leaked top secret National Security Agency documents, called on President Barack Obama to be the President "who looked into the abyss and stepped back."

Snowden detailed several steps he would like Obama to take, and said the documents he revealed provide the President with "an opportunity to appeal for a return to sanity, constitutional policy, and the rule of law rather than men."

"He still has plenty of time to go down in history as the President who looked into the abyss and stepped back, rather than leaping forward into it," Snowden said. "I would advise he personally call for a special committee to review these interception programs, repudiate the dangerous "State Secrets" privilege, and, upon preparing to leave office, begin a tradition for all Presidents forthwith to demonstrate their respect for the law by appointing a special investigator to review the policies of their years in office for any wrongdoing. There can be no faith in government if our highest offices are excused from scrutiny - they should be setting the example of transparency."

http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/snowden-obama-should-call-for-special-committee-to

24 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Snowden: Obama Should Call For Special Committee To Review NSA Programs (Original Post) ProSense Jun 2013 OP

My, you get my first rec for you. JackRiddler Jun 2013 #1

Snowden: Digital Patriot RobertEarl Jun 2013 #2

I agree with Snowden marions ghost Jun 2013 #3

He won't though Aerows Jun 2013 #11

Sure but marions ghost Jun 2013 #14

Either way we're screwed magellan Jun 2013 #20

You may be right but marions ghost Jun 2013 #22

I nominate Al Gore and Ron Wyden. dkf Jun 2013 #4

I nominate Daniel Ellsberg and William Binney. JackRiddler Jun 2013 #5

She's shown her true colors Aerows Jun 2013 #12

Did you post this as something to deride? whatchamacallit Jun 2013 #6

Since you insist ProSense Jun 2013 #8

I see, it's a target for the feces-flinging authoritarians whatchamacallit Jun 2013 #15

"feces-flinging authoritarians" ProSense Jun 2013 #18

Take a guess. n-t Logical Jun 2013 #13

For Christ sakes, the OP provides information. longship Jun 2013 #19

It's an incongruous addition to her litany of snowden hater posts whatchamacallit Jun 2013 #21

Again, address the issue, not the DUer. longship Jun 2013 #23

It does not need to be a committee review since it involves national security but the heads of Thinkingabout Jun 2013 #7

Never a bad idea to review this sort of thing jberryhill Jun 2013 #9

Snowden didn't have to go to China to say this uponit7771 Jun 2013 #10

Lol! As if the leak was not part of the equation whatchamacallit Jun 2013 #16

He must be feeling quite powerful now directing Obama flamingdem Jun 2013 #17

The same people would not trust the committee treestar Jun 2013 #24

JackRiddler

(24,979 posts)

1. My, you get my first rec for you.

Reply to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Jun 17, 2013, 12:56 PM

Jun 2013

Yes, and not just Obama.

Congress.

The corporate media.

The supposed free press.

NGOs.

Movements.

The whistleblowers themselves.

Countries. The United Nations. The EU. The Brics. The Latin American states.

Like so many other institutions of the modern corporate republic, this calls for a lot of Committees... of Correspondance.

RobertEarl

(13,685 posts)

2. Snowden: Digital Patriot

Reply to JackRiddler (Reply #1)

Mon Jun 17, 2013, 01:02 PM

Jun 2013

We are in a digital war. A war on people and their privates.

The pentagon, et al, are organized and financed. But the people are legion and we have fearless spies of our own. Assange, Manning, Ellsberg and now Snowden. Lets not forget anonymous.

NSA.... just kidding guys. Don't look at me, I'm just messing around, nothing serious.

marions ghost

(19,841 posts)

3. I agree with Snowden

Reply to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Jun 17, 2013, 01:02 PM

Jun 2013

Obama has time to act to correct this. It is a clear challenge to his presidency. He can be part of the change that is needed, or he can be part of the problem. History will not reward him for maintaining the status quo.

We who supported him need to work on him. See if he can be moved.

Aerows

(39,961 posts)

11. He won't though

Reply to marions ghost (Reply #3)

Mon Jun 17, 2013, 01:31 PM

Jun 2013

because he's like every other President and will refuse to do it just because he is asked to do so. Men don't get into that position of power without having an ego.

marions ghost

(19,841 posts)

14. Sure but

Reply to Aerows (Reply #11)

Mon Jun 17, 2013, 01:44 PM

Jun 2013

now that he knows WE know--we have more leverage. At any rate IMO we should still put out the challenge directly to him. If he refuses to hear our concerns, refuses to do anything over the next couple of years, he will go down in history as part of the problem. And we just have to look beyond & elsewhere. But if he does not act on this--(I agree with Snowden) he will have missed a big opportunity to change the direction of this disastrous policy. It would change the course of our future radically. And the future of the world.

magellan

(13,257 posts)

20. Either way we're screwed

Reply to marions ghost (Reply #14)

Mon Jun 17, 2013, 02:17 PM

Jun 2013

If he doesn't empanel a committee then nothing will be done. If he does we'll never know what's said, or be able to judge the content for veracity, because it'll take place behind closed doors due to the secrecy. And besides, who will be on the committee? Career politicians who can barely use email? We know the people in charge of these programs have already lied through their teeth to Congress. It'll be a whitewash. We'd never know if any potential recommendations are actually carried out.

Sorry, just feeling extremely jaded.

marions ghost

(19,841 posts)

22. You may be right but

Reply to magellan (Reply #20)

Mon Jun 17, 2013, 02:29 PM

Jun 2013

things are different now.

They know WE know.

(And I don't just mean people who read Wired. That's the big diff now, post Snowden).

I would say to be credible, any investigation must be done with public scrutiny.

We at least have to call for it. If for nothing more, than to call them at their game.

They are watching us, but for the first time, we are watching THEM.

dkf

(37,305 posts)

4. I nominate Al Gore and Ron Wyden.

Reply to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Jun 17, 2013, 01:04 PM

Jun 2013

If all they do is get people like Feinstein then it's worthless.

JackRiddler

(24,979 posts)

5. I nominate Daniel Ellsberg and William Binney.

Reply to dkf (Reply #4)

Mon Jun 17, 2013, 01:07 PM

Jun 2013

Aerows

(39,961 posts)

12. She's shown her true colors

Reply to dkf (Reply #4)

Mon Jun 17, 2013, 01:33 PM

Jun 2013

She needs to be primaryed.

whatchamacallit

(15,558 posts)

6. Did you post this as something to deride?

Reply to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Jun 17, 2013, 01:12 PM

Jun 2013

Something to appreciate?

ProSense

(116,464 posts)

8. Since you insist

Reply to whatchamacallit (Reply #6)

Mon Jun 17, 2013, 01:20 PM

Jun 2013

"Did you post this as something to deride? Something to appreciate?"

...on making the OP about me, I'll respond.

I have no problem with valid suggestions even when they're coming from someone who I believe is delusional. Snowden's story is filled with holes, many of his claims are bogus and he better get a good lawyer because it's likely there will be no pardon.

Source: Obama Considering Releasing NSA Court Order
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023032285

whatchamacallit

(15,558 posts)

15. I see, it's a target for the feces-flinging authoritarians

Reply to ProSense (Reply #8)

Mon Jun 17, 2013, 01:46 PM

Jun 2013

That's what I figured.

ProSense

(116,464 posts)

18. "feces-flinging authoritarians"

Reply to whatchamacallit (Reply #15)

Mon Jun 17, 2013, 02:07 PM

Jun 2013

Wow, you self-declared non-"authoritarians" are sure good at name calling.

Logical

(22,457 posts)

13. Take a guess. n-t

Reply to whatchamacallit (Reply #6)

Mon Jun 17, 2013, 01:34 PM

Jun 2013

longship

(40,416 posts)

19. For Christ sakes, the OP provides information.

Reply to whatchamacallit (Reply #6)

Mon Jun 17, 2013, 02:17 PM

Jun 2013

Read it, or not.

Agree with it, or not.

Expressing an opinion on the information or providing additional information about it, positive or negative, is always welcome.

Attacking a DUer for posting information is childish and counter-productive. It makes DU suck.

Please stop.

Thank you.

whatchamacallit

(15,558 posts)

21. It's an incongruous addition to her litany of snowden hater posts

Reply to longship (Reply #19)

Mon Jun 17, 2013, 02:25 PM

Jun 2013

That's why I asked.

longship

(40,416 posts)

23. Again, address the issue, not the DUer.

Reply to whatchamacallit (Reply #21)

Mon Jun 17, 2013, 02:44 PM

Jun 2013

The issue within the post 's content, in this case an off-site article.

Thanks.

Thinkingabout

(30,058 posts)

7. It does not need to be a committee review since it involves national security but the heads of

Reply to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Jun 17, 2013, 01:16 PM

Jun 2013

any agency should review those who require security clearance. We do not need spies like Snowden who is more interested in his cause. I wonder if the Chinese did not pay enough or let him know they already knew his information and therefore not worth paying any money.

jberryhill

(62,444 posts)

9. Never a bad idea to review this sort of thing

Reply to ProSense (Original post)

Mon Jun 17, 2013, 01:28 PM

Jun 2013

There's a difference between algorithms looking for traffic patterns and Dick Cheney pulling up stuff on his laptop. As long as it is the former and not the latter, then we're set.