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

Time to Pardon Edward Snowden?

infosecurity-magazine.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 131 posts

Re: Time to Pardon Edward Snowden?

#11

Post by colordrops »

dustingetz wrote: post #10
avmich wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Keeping employees/contractors in fear that they will never stop chasing you is a good way to stop people from doing this. This is contradicting to the idea of government existing for people and serving people. If government uses fear to reduce accountability, it needs to be changed.

"it needs to be changed", as in, someone else should change it but not you (I am merely pointing out the paradox of inaction. Enacting change is a lot of work, so one must first decide to contribute actual work, then figure out what actual work needs to be done, then do the work and measure the result. Work = force * displacement and if nothing is displaced, no work has been achieved. Rosa Parks wanted change so she…

One of the best levers many of us have is public forums, so this commenter is doing something great - enforcing the idea that the government should be changed in thousands of readers' minds. Once an idea gets enough traction, it often can turn into actual change. You are only reenforcing the fatalism you seem to criticize.

Re: Time to Pardon Edward Snowden?

#12

Post by mindslight »

dustingetz wrote: post #10
avmich wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Keeping employees/contractors in fear that they will never stop chasing you is a good way to stop people from doing this. This is contradicting to the idea of government existing for people and serving people. If government uses fear to reduce accountability, it needs to be changed.

"it needs to be changed", as in, someone else should change it but not you (I am merely pointing out the paradox of inaction. Enacting change is a lot of work, so one must first decide to contribute actual work, then figure out what actual work needs to be done, then do the work and measure the result. Work = force * displacement and if nothing is displaced, no work has been achieved. Rosa Parks wanted change so she…

Well yes. Personally blowing up a federal building, assassinating politicians, etc is frowned upon and generally produces the opposite of the intended effect. Ridding ourselves of this metastasized illegitimate government will take collective action.

Re: Time to Pardon Edward Snowden?

#13

Post by ChicagoDave »

Snowden didn’t just expose national wiretapping. He also exposed international spying capabilities that endangered our people and our allies. If he had not crossed that second line, he’d just be a legitimate whistleblower, but he decided to actively harm the U.S. intelligence community and they will never allow a pardon.

I’d lay odds if he ever steps foot in an unprotected setting, a slip on a banana peel and a fatal head injury wouldn’t shock me.

He’s a traitor. I’m as liberal as it gets and even I think he went too far.

Re: Time to Pardon Edward Snowden?

#14

Post by pravda »

ChicagoDave wrote: post #13

Snowden didn’t just expose national wiretapping. He also exposed international spying capabilities that endangered our people and our allies. If he had not crossed that second line, he’d just be a legitimate whistleblower, but he decided to actively harm the U.S. intelligence community and they will never allow a pardon. I’d lay odds if he ever steps foot in an unprotected setting, a slip on a banana peel and a fatal…

Nah. He's a hero.

Re: Time to Pardon Edward Snowden?

#15

Post by LatteLazy »

ChicagoDave wrote: post #13

Snowden didn’t just expose national wiretapping. He also exposed international spying capabilities that endangered our people and our allies. If he had not crossed that second line, he’d just be a legitimate whistleblower, but he decided to actively harm the U.S. intelligence community and they will never allow a pardon. I’d lay odds if he ever steps foot in an unprotected setting, a slip on a banana peel and a fatal…

He couldn't expose one without the other could he?

Re: Time to Pardon Edward Snowden?

#16

Post by jbay808 »

ChicagoDave wrote: post #13

Snowden didn’t just expose national wiretapping. He also exposed international spying capabilities that endangered our people and our allies. If he had not crossed that second line, he’d just be a legitimate whistleblower, but he decided to actively harm the U.S. intelligence community and they will never allow a pardon. I’d lay odds if he ever steps foot in an unprotected setting, a slip on a banana peel and a fatal…

International spying on your allies, including corporate espionage against countries like Germany. That angered your allies much more than it endangered them. Whistleblowers like Snowden are the mechanism that keeps that spying from happening in the first place.

Edit -- And yes, this harmed America by undermining the trust that those countries had in it. But to be clear, it wasn't Snowden's disclosure that broke that trust, it was the spying. It's hubris to think that if not for Snowden it would never have been discovered, and the longer it went on, the more harm that would have been done between America and its allies when it eventually got found out. So by revealing it early, Snowden really minimized the damage, rather than causing it.

Re: Time to Pardon Edward Snowden?

#18

Post by jbay808 »

trident1000 wrote: post #3

The reason he will never be pardoned has nothing to do with if his leaks were merited or not merited (they clearly were as the activities of the govt were proven illegal). Its because then you green light a govt leaker in critical programs you open pandoras box for govt secrets spilling out and you can lose control. Keeping employees/contractors in fear that they will never stop chasing you is a good way to stop peop…

If you only "never stop chasing them" when they reveal legal activities, that mechanism still works fine, and still provides an important check against the government attempting to do illegal activities in secret, including rogue government agencies doing things that they aren't allowed to do by other branches of government.

What if the CIA were wiretapping the president, or the supreme court? Well, that would be illegal wouldn't it? Wouldn't you want a whistleblower to feel like they could safely expose it?

By and large, it's the government that decides what's legal and what's not. Even the Constitution can be amended with enough support. So exposing illegal government activities means you're exposing that a part of the government was doing something that it wasn't empowered to do, by the government. There are multiple branches of government for a reason. When the government is doing something illegal, it means an office of the government has either made a serious legal error, or gone rogue and disregarded its legal responsibilities.

That's a serious problem right?

Re: Time to Pardon Edward Snowden?

#19

Post by sb057 »

ChicagoDave wrote: post #13

Snowden didn’t just expose national wiretapping. He also exposed international spying capabilities that endangered our people and our allies. If he had not crossed that second line, he’d just be a legitimate whistleblower, but he decided to actively harm the U.S. intelligence community and they will never allow a pardon. I’d lay odds if he ever steps foot in an unprotected setting, a slip on a banana peel and a fatal…

>He also exposed international spying capabilities that endangered our people and our allies.

Really, like what?

Re: Time to Pardon Edward Snowden?

#20

Post by mcculley »

ChicagoDave wrote: post #13

Snowden didn’t just expose national wiretapping. He also exposed international spying capabilities that endangered our people and our allies. If he had not crossed that second line, he’d just be a legitimate whistleblower, but he decided to actively harm the U.S. intelligence community and they will never allow a pardon. I’d lay odds if he ever steps foot in an unprotected setting, a slip on a banana peel and a fatal…

Opinions differ on this. We should have a very public trial and put all of the evidence out there for a jury to evaluate. We have a duty to history.
Post reply on HN