Pardon Snowden • Hacker News Board

Re: Pardon Snowden

#591

Post by kristopolous » Wed, Sep 14, 2016, 6:08 PM UTC

codeddesign wrote: post #581

BFatts wrote: post #548

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, laws, acts, and shit suck, right? Because they weren't written by me, especially, by your tally. Maybe if you folks would stop worrying about being "put on some list" as if that'll happen because you say "Snowden should be pardoned!" What about the list for us good people that say "Snowden should be tried and jailed!" Don't you want to be on OUR list?

Good people? I believe the argument is that these "good people" would be counted as sheep compared to those that would be against the powers that be. So yes, you would be counted as "good sheeple"

Critiques can also be sincere, careful, and nuanced. Language like that permits one to dismiss an adversary without considering the critique.

Re: Pardon Snowden

#592

Post by [deleted] » Wed, Sep 14, 2016, 6:09 PM UTC

captainmuon wrote: post #60

Maybe a naive question, but what would the risk be for me to sign this? I wonder if I (a US citizen) might get trouble the next time at the border? Or get a higher score in some database, that combined with other things might get me into trouble? Increased scrutiny from the IRS (which should have nothing to do with this, but "they" might say hell why not?)? Inability to get security clearances in future? Being target…

[deleted]

Re: Pardon Snowden

#593

Post by cureyourhead » Wed, Sep 14, 2016, 6:09 PM UTC

captainmuon wrote: post #60

Maybe a naive question, but what would the risk be for me to sign this? I wonder if I (a US citizen) might get trouble the next time at the border? Or get a higher score in some database, that combined with other things might get me into trouble? Increased scrutiny from the IRS (which should have nothing to do with this, but "they" might say hell why not?)? Inability to get security clearances in future? Being target…

Fate of your country at risk. And you ask where is the risk for you. What's in it for you. That cowardice is a disease of Western culture these days. Ask not...

Re: Pardon Snowden

#594

Post by sosborn » Wed, Sep 14, 2016, 6:09 PM UTC

foo4u wrote: post #412

clarkmoody wrote: post #344

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A mode of thought I would expect in socialist countries, not the US... The United States government has done an excellent bit of propaganda to convince the bulk of the public that they are the most free people on earth. We salute the flag and sing the national anthem at games. We have the presidents' pictures on the walls of our classrooms. We chant "USA" at political rallies. But the government of the United State…

As an US citizen, I no longer salute that piece of cloth or sing the national anthem at sports games. I don't even bother standing for it and encourage others to do the same to show our distaste for how our own government treats us. I was disgusted in the 2000's when being against the Iraq war was not only being flaunted unpatriotic but not supporting our troops. That's BS. I support our troops and would rather not h…

> As an US citizen, I no longer salute that piece of cloth or sing the national anthem at sports games. I don't even bother standing for it and encourage others to do the same to show our distaste for how our own government treats us.

The fact that you can do this and face no consequences says something about our freedoms though. At the very least we have a foundation that is worth taking the effort to improve.

Re: Pardon Snowden

#595

Post by Broken_Hippo » Wed, Sep 14, 2016, 6:09 PM UTC

krschultz wrote: post #378

clarkmoody wrote: post #344

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A mode of thought I would expect in socialist countries, not the US... The United States government has done an excellent bit of propaganda to convince the bulk of the public that they are the most free people on earth. We salute the flag and sing the national anthem at games. We have the presidents' pictures on the walls of our classrooms. We chant "USA" at political rallies. But the government of the United State…

Which country would you suggest is the most free today? Not trolling, just wondering if I was going to move somewhere else, where would I go?

The previous poster was correct - it depends on what sort of things will make you, personally, feel free.

I wound up in Norway, and find a certain freedom here. I don't mind the taxes and such, and I rather enjoy the general equality in opportunity sort of thing. I'm no longer worried that blue hair makes me un-hireable (though it might make it harder to find work). But other Americans here simply hate it and can't wait to wind up going back to the states.

The best bet is if you have some choices in the matter - and know it - join some groups with other americans living there and talk to them about their experiences there.

Re: Pardon Snowden

#596

Post by mixmastamyk » Wed, Sep 14, 2016, 6:10 PM UTC

strictnein wrote: post #470

icecold12741 wrote: post #450

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Basically, yes. Also, the evidence shows that he didn't one day "see something wrong and decided to report it" as the narrative claims. He quit a job on one contract to take another job (which he lied about his experience to get) and then stole information from there before releasing it all roughly 6 months after he was hired. Some reports I have seen estimate that roughly 90% of the information he released was from…

Yeah, the narrative that he tried to follow the rules to get the "egregious" programs stopped is almost entirely false. He may have made one off-the-record attempt with a superior. He also once emailed someone that a test he took had a wrong answer in regards to Executive Orders being able to override laws, and that email got forwarded around until it hit an NSA lawyer and they stated that he was correct. EOs and law…

Watch the Frontline special "The US of Secrets," to find out what happens to those who complained loudly enough.

Re: Pardon Snowden

#597

Post by rayiner » Wed, Sep 14, 2016, 6:12 PM UTC

captainmuon wrote: post #60

Maybe a naive question, but what would the risk be for me to sign this? I wonder if I (a US citizen) might get trouble the next time at the border? Or get a higher score in some database, that combined with other things might get me into trouble? Increased scrutiny from the IRS (which should have nothing to do with this, but "they" might say hell why not?)? Inability to get security clearances in future? Being target…

I think you're being ridiculous. This is being run through the ACLU, which has over 500,000 members.

I just signed and donated $50.

Re: Pardon Snowden

#598

Post by cconroy » Wed, Sep 14, 2016, 6:14 PM UTC

TaylorAlexander wrote: post #533

cconroy wrote: post #418

Earlier quoted context omitted.

David Hume came to this conclusion in OF THE FIRST PRINCIPLES OF GOVERNMENT (in the 1st paragraph). people of the United States are heavily controlled by the elite is too simplistic and some "elites" make the world better.

In what way is it too simplistic? Is it not correct? I don't think I commented on whether or not it's good. Though I happen to think we'd be better off with a more democratically organized society.

You are giving them too much credit, we live in a system of rules (loosely speaking) and it is these rules which have the power. In fact "elites" are probably more frustrated by them than the average citizen because they stumble onto them more quickly.

Who is too blame for advertising to children directly? Is it a few people? Probably not, in fact it brings in a lot of talented people, of whom each may in fact have a negative opinion of advertising to children when asked.

If you are talking about giant corps that can influence rule(s), then ok, but these are not individuals but are the stakeholders and can be large swaths of people.

Re: Pardon Snowden

#599

Post by tptacek » Wed, Sep 14, 2016, 6:15 PM UTC

nabla9 wrote: post #500

tptacek wrote: post #491

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not what you said. We could further litigate your revised summary of what happens to NSA whistleblowers, and I'd be happy to do so, but first I'd like to know that we're not just playing Calvinball.

I think you were right and I was wrong using the term arrest.

Thanks!

So I think my objection to this narrative is clearer if we put it back into context.

What we're really debating is whether someone like Snowden had the means to appropriately handle the issues he discovered through official channels. The narrative on places like HN is that by raising issues and escalating them, perhaps beyond NSA, and NSA's IG, all the way to Senate Intelligence, someone like Snowden would face retaliation.

Here, I think, I have two points to raise:

* First, if by retaliation we mean "termination", it's hard to fit that into the actual Snowden story. Snowden took the Booz job in the first place in order to gain access to this information and route it to the people he thought needed it. His only reason to be there was to do the thing we're saying he'd get fired for. That's not a real deterrent.

* Second, if we look at actual prosecutions --- or even FBI investigations, like what happened to Binney and Roark --- they're tied up with news leaks. It's hard, I think, to find a case of an NSA whistleblower who faced law enforcement retaliation for escalating concerns to the NSA IG or Senate committees. Where you see the DOJ go ape-shit is when NSA secrets wind up on the front page of the New York Times. Indeed, that's what happened to Roark and Binney and Loomis! They got caught up in an investigation into an NYT story that was launched at the (direct!) behest of George Bush.

Re: Pardon Snowden

#600

Post by e12e » Wed, Sep 14, 2016, 6:15 PM UTC

Inlinked wrote: post #512

To pardon Snowden seems like a very popular opinion around here. Can anyone help me change my opinion on this matter? The way I currently see it: - Snowden indiscriminately hovered up so many documents, it was impossible to vet all of them. - The vast majority of these documents do not constitute whistleblowing, but are standard operating procedure for the NSA. The US expects the NSA to do this. - Leaking standard-op…

> - Snowden did not attempt to go through internal channels.

See Binney, eg:

"William Binney HOPE 9 KEYNOTE": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hqN59beaFMI

The "internal channels" have been broken for years, and do not work. Snowden was aware of this, and AFAIR has commented on that on several occasions.

> - Snowden gave the document cache to incompetent journalists. Greenwald send his boyfriend to smuggle documents through British customs.

What? Incompetent? They managed to do their job, in the face of GCHQ and the NSA. Just because they made some mistakes, that doesn't make them "incompetent". If they were, we wouldn't have heard anything at all!

> - Snowden leaked / whistleblowed these documents in an operation using his secret agent skills.

So, being competent is a strike against Snowden, but being incompetent is a strike against Greenwald (who presumably doesn't have any training from GCHQ)?

> - The vast majority of these documents do not constitute whistleblowing, but are standard operating procedure for the NSA. The US expects the NSA to do this.

Everyone who was paying attention knew a lot about the clearly illegal stuff that NSA have been doing, from previous leaks - that doesn't mean the leaks didn't have value.

> I do not believe in a pardon for someone who misuses his admin privileges to download all the documents he could get his hands on, then flees to Russia.

The first part was in my eyes a prerequisite for having a sizable useful set of documents to leak. The second part is really two parts: he fled - he didn't submit himself to capture, torture and/or assassination in the US. He did this by fleeing to Hong Kong.

Then he went to Russia, the only port within reach that offered sanctuary. I'm ashamed that Norway didn't - for example. But of course we're NATO allies, and with the not too distant history of Mossad carrying out a botched assassination (successful kill, wrong person) on Norwegian soil, and Norway being complicit in extralegal detention and torture by allowing CIA's "white planes" to transit through - it would probably have been hopelessly naive for Snowden to try to flee here, even if offered "safe passage".