Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Don’t just pardon Edward Snowden; give the man a medal

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 241 posts

Re: Don’t just pardon Edward Snowden; give the man a medal

#231

Post by Grishnakh »

Practicality wrote: post #180
Grishnakh wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're obviously hanging around only certain groups of people, and not reading message boards filled with pro-authoritarian people. Go to any message board with right-wingers and you'll see him denounced as a traitor. HN is simply not the place where you're going to see this.

Fair enough, but pro-authoritarian boards do not represent all Americans. I was replying to a post that said "Americans think..." implying that all or most Americans think the same thing, so I was presenting a counter-point that not all or even most Americans think like that.

HN denizens and tech-heads do not represent all Americans either.

Seriously, there are very few traits that I can think of which really represent all Americans; we're much too diverse for that, and we're growing farther and farther apart. The lifestyles and attitudes in rural areas are extremely different from those in urban centers, and it's becoming more and more divergent (for instance, Millennials are abandoning car ownership).

So any time you see someone say something like "Americans think..." you have to take it with a grain of salt, and at best realize that they're talking about some sizeable demographic, which probably is not an absolute majority, but is large enough to make it a valid statement, unless you want to quibble about what qualifies such a statement, as if you demand that it apply to a clear majority (say, over 60%), then no such statement will probably ever be true of Americans, except things that are also true of people in many other places (for instance: "Americans like smartphones" -- not at all unique to Americans).

Pro-authoritarian boards do indeed represent a sizeable swath of Americans, like it or not. Just look at how popular the alt-right is these days.

Re: Don’t just pardon Edward Snowden; give the man a medal

#232

Post by kafkaesq »

zeveb wrote: post #228
kafkaesq wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aside from the fact that the report makes no mention of the crimes Snowden exposed (as if the American public were too dumb to notice, or care) -- would you care to comment on any of the apparently quite egregiously misleading assertions it makes? Questioning his lower leg fractures or his GED, in particular, smacks of birtherism. https://tcf.org/content/commentary/house-intelligence-commit...

> Questioning his lower leg fractures or his GED, in particular, smacks of birtherism. You mean these statements? 'He claimed to have left Army basic training because of broken legs when in fact he washed out because of shin splints. He claimed to have obtained a high school degree equivalent when in fact he never did.' They go to Snowden's credibility (or complete lack thereof). Presumably the full report (an unclas…

Presumably the full report (an unclassified version of which has not yet been released) goes into details.

There's no reason to believe they'd be hiding the "goods" on these accusations in the classified report. The only reason they aren't providing any more detail is because... they don't have any.

Regarding his stress fractures, he made it sound as though he was left a temporary cripple;

Where? Quotes, please.

BTW if you've ever had any kind of a bone fracture -- in that part of the body, it does make you a "temporary cripple". Presumably the Army agreed, which is why they discharged him.

Shin splints aren't that big a deal and plenty of people heal up and complete basic training after having them.

But he wasn't diagnosed for shin splints (or anything equivalent to it); his actual diagnoses was for something different (and categorically more serious). "Shin splints" are just an invention of the Intelligence Committee.

Right now, one of Snowden's allies claims Snowden got a GED; the House Committee claims he did not get a high school degree equivalent. I'll trust the House Committee until the report is released.

The article refers to documents on file with the Maryland State Department of Education, which is the authority I'll trust on this matter. But if you want to believe what the IC report nakedly asserts on the matter (despite not providing a shred of evidence), go ahead -- whatever works for you.

Re: Don’t just pardon Edward Snowden; give the man a medal

#233

Post by ScottBurson »

tptacek wrote: post #225
ScottBurson wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If Obama were to pardon Snowden, and the US reinstate his passport, I can't see Putin keeping him in Russia. Why would he do that? As long as Snowden is a thorn in the NSA's side, Putin is clearly glad to have him, but a pardon would neutralize the benefit. It's not even like he could trade Snowden for some Russian spies; what sense would that make? The US intelligence community does not think of Snowden as someone t…

We're not talking about why Snowden isn't in the US. It's clear: the reason he's not here is that if he sets foot on American soil he will be arrested and prosecuted. We're talking about why, of all the places he could be in the world, he's in Russia --- and not Ecuador, where he claims he intended to go.

Right. He didn't think he could get to Ecuador without winding up in the US's hands. Was that not clear from what I wrote? In fact, is that not clearly the argument being made in this entire subthread?

You used the word "hostage" upthread. I don't think this is in any sense a hostage situation.

Re: Don’t just pardon Edward Snowden; give the man a medal

#234

Post by tptacek »

ScottBurson wrote: post #233
tptacek wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We're not talking about why Snowden isn't in the US. It's clear: the reason he's not here is that if he sets foot on American soil he will be arrested and prosecuted. We're talking about why, of all the places he could be in the world, he's in Russia --- and not Ecuador, where he claims he intended to go.

Right. He didn't think he could get to Ecuador without winding up in the US's hands. Was that not clear from what I wrote? In fact, is that not clearly the argument being made in this entire subthread? You used the word "hostage" upthread. I don't think this is in any sense a hostage situation.

Yeah, I get that you think that. But you haven't explained why that would be. What prevents him from leaving Russia and flying to Ecuador? It's not the passport. But that's the only reason I've seen getting.

There are direct flights between Moscow and Havana every day.

Fun fact: the country Snowden supposedly wanted to flee to has an extradition treaty with the US.

Re: Don’t just pardon Edward Snowden; give the man a medal

#235

Post by freehunter »

erikpukinskis wrote: post #215
freehunter wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Okay, you're right. Opinions can be based on faith, as well. But anyone would be well within the realm of sanity to weight opinions based on faith lower than opinions based on fact. "I base my opinion on X on the fact that my religion says X is right/wrong, I base that religion on faith" doesn't mean the opinion is based on fact. You've got me on that one.

If you only base your opinions on facts, you can't really have opinions about very many things. Very mundane details of historical events. Narrowly defined conclusions of studies which are almost never actually specifically applicable to any situation at hand. If you believe science reporting headlines you might think you are basing your opinions on facts, but if you actually read the papers you realize how little sc…

But there's a difference between "scientific proof" and "fact". Science has never proven that Old Spice is the best scent, but the fact is that's what I wear and my wife likes the way I smell. It is my opinion that Old Spice is the best based on the fact that my wife likes it.

Fact doesn't have to be based on research or science, all it means is "the truth". It is a fact that I have a dog sitting on my couch. I don't need actual research to back that up, it's just a fact. It is not a fact that my friend, who died a few years ago, is also sitting on the couch beside me. That's just a belief, based on faith. There has been zero scientific research into either of these claims, but one is undeniable fact and the other is not. It doesn't matter if you don't believe that I have a dog. Your lack of belief doesn't make it less true.

I honestly don't even remember what we're actually talking about, and at this point I'm pretty sure I don't care anymore. Sorry.

Re: Don’t just pardon Edward Snowden; give the man a medal

#236

Post by erikpukinskis »

freehunter wrote: post #235
erikpukinskis wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you only base your opinions on facts, you can't really have opinions about very many things. Very mundane details of historical events. Narrowly defined conclusions of studies which are almost never actually specifically applicable to any situation at hand. If you believe science reporting headlines you might think you are basing your opinions on facts, but if you actually read the papers you realize how little sc…

But there's a difference between "scientific proof" and "fact". Science has never proven that Old Spice is the best scent, but the fact is that's what I wear and my wife likes the way I smell. It is my opinion that Old Spice is the best based on the fact that my wife likes it. Fact doesn't have to be based on research or science, all it means is "the truth". It is a fact that I have a dog sitting on my couch. I don't…

> It is my opinion that Old Spice is the best based on the fact that my wife likes it.

That's not a rational conclusion. Why make a baseless comparative judgement like "it's the best" when you can make a qualitative judgement, like "it's good" or "my wife likes it".

That's my point. You think you're scientifically minded, but you have opinions like "Old Spice is the best" that aren't based on facts at all.

> It is a fact that I have a dog sitting on my couch.

This falls into the category of "mundane historical events" I mentioned above.

> I honestly don't even remember what we're actually talking about, and at this point I'm pretty sure I don't care anymore. Sorry.

My guess is you don't have any rational disagreement with what I said, so you just started saying random things about hypothetical situations and you bored yourself.

Re: Don’t just pardon Edward Snowden; give the man a medal

#237

Post by ScottBurson »

tptacek wrote: post #234
ScottBurson wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right. He didn't think he could get to Ecuador without winding up in the US's hands. Was that not clear from what I wrote? In fact, is that not clearly the argument being made in this entire subthread? You used the word "hostage" upthread. I don't think this is in any sense a hostage situation.

Yeah, I get that you think that. But you haven't explained why that would be . What prevents him from leaving Russia and flying to Ecuador? It's not the passport. But that's the only reason I've seen getting. There are direct flights between Moscow and Havana every day. Fun fact: the country Snowden supposedly wanted to flee to has an extradition treaty with the US.

Assange addressed this; I guess you didn't read the interview. I still recommend it; I think it would be interesting even if you're not inclined to believe Assange.

Anyway, you yourself mentioned the possibility of grabbing Snowden off the streets. I don't think for a moment that Putin would allow that to happen; the governments of Central and South America are another matter (not that they would willingly cooperate, necessarily, only that they couldn't do anything about it).

(For the record, I don't accept your claim that the passport is irrelevant. I don't really know how these things work, but I don't have the impression that it's easy for a known international fugitive to persuade a commercial carrier to board him with a canceled passport. I will grant that if Putin wanted Snowden to leave Russia, he could have made it happen; in that sense, the passport is not a barrier.)

As for the extradition treaty -- is it possible Snowden would have made a mistake in selecting his destination? Of course it is. What's your point? [ETA: I get it. You think the whole story is a lie and Snowden planned to stay in Russia all along. I think the absurdity of that view is matched only by its cynicism.]

Re: Don’t just pardon Edward Snowden; give the man a medal

#238

Post by nikdaheratik »

omginternets wrote: post #8
Sneakos wrote: post #7

One thing this article doesn't take into account is that the movie the author undoubtedly watched before writing this was full of inaccuracies, and had the purpose of establishing Snowden as a martyr or sorts. This is evident because rather than just prove their point, the author makes several attempts to make sure the reader knows that if you hold an opposing view, you are intellectually lazy and unable to cope with…

>don't make an article about how the opposing stance is only held by the weak minded. What if you really think that's the case? Screw it, I'll say it. I think anyone who condemns Snowden is intellectually lazy or has vested interests in NSA surveillance. I have yet to see a single cogent rebuttal of Snowden's moral case.

I think there's a big leap between saying Snowden should get a pass and saying he should get a medal. WTH kind of message does this send to other "would be Snowdens" who turn out to leak data that is important to national security and cause people, both civilians and US soldiers, to get killed.

One person may not have the whole picture or understand everything they need to know to weigh the costs. IMO, Snowden didn't know everything he needed to prove what he was doing was the right course at the time. He just got help from the fact that the government is too secret for its own good and that we are in a relatively peaceful time and don't have many existential threats.

Re: Don’t just pardon Edward Snowden; give the man a medal

#239

Post by nikdaheratik »

RodericDay wrote: post #38
watwatwatwat wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I condemn Snowden. Prove that I'm intellectually lazy.

How come proven collateral damage such as innocent deaths caused by US military interventionism is widely considered reasonable and acceptable. So, tenuous upside/blatant downside = no outrage. But the unproven collateral damage of Snowden's leaks, which had the giant upside of revealing democracy-chilling surveillance techniques, leads to mass reaction from the government. So, undeniable upside/debatable downside =…

I don't think it's acceptable, but at least "collateral damage" has the virtue of having been approved by elected officials and is something considered before we go to war or order attacks somewhere. Snowden's leaks weren't approved of by anyone but Snowden, and if they had managed to get people killed even if that wasn't Snowden's intention they would still be enough to consider as Treason.

In counter point, if we start allowing anyone who feels like they can leak this stuff on their own authority, and it starts costing lives of Americans, how many would you consider "worth it"? At what point does it move from whistle-blowing so it's okay to treason?

Re: Don’t just pardon Edward Snowden; give the man a medal

#240

Post by nikdaheratik »

DogPawHat wrote: post #152
JulienRbrt wrote: post #117

I am wondering, we always discuss about Snowden, OK he needs to be pardoned, but what about Assange... I would like to remind you that he (and WikiLeaks) revealed, as well, important documents about what do our governements and he's still stuck in an embassy in England...

I think what needs to happen there is that the US needs to promise not to extradite him in exchange for him surrendering to the Swedish authorities for the rape claims. I don't believe he should be extradited to the US to be incarcerated under criminally draconian anti-whistle blower; I do believe that he has to submit to a fair trial after being legitimately charged with a unambiguously horrific crime. Assuming (and…

Assuming that everything Assange is saying about this is on the level and that he's not just hiding out in the embassy to dodge both legal problems.
Post reply on HN