U.S. charges Edward Snowden with espionage • Hacker News Board

Re: U.S. charges Edward Snowden with espionage

#181

Post by cdash » Sat, Jun 22, 2013, 1:03 AM UTC

GabrielF00 wrote: post #95

aspensmonster wrote: post #14

Espionage is punishable by death. I sincerely hope Snowden finds asylum somewhere safe --Iceland perhaps-- as the Department of Justice has made it perfectly clear that this patriot is no longer welcome here.

The only civilians executed for espionage in the US were the Rosenbergs in 1953 and that is widely seen as an overreaction that occurred in the context of the hysteria of the early Cold War. Only three people have been executed by the Federal government for any crime since 1963. It is incredibly unlikely that Snowden would be executed. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_by_the_Unite...

I don't think it really matters, as if life in prison is much better than the death penalty.

Re: U.S. charges Edward Snowden with espionage

#182

Post by georgemcbay » Sat, Jun 22, 2013, 1:03 AM UTC

bertm wrote: post #169

joering2 wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have a great respect towards Snowden for what he did. Knowing his life will be over, he was brave enough to continue believing in his citizen's duty and pledge to the Constitution and all American people (not to the Administration that just happened to be more tyrannical as the days go by) and decided he couldn't stand the abuse anymore. I personally believe the only reason we do not have a full speed tyranny in th…

It happened in the 70s to Daniel Ellsberg, the Pentagon Paper's leaker. "Judge Byrne dismissed all charges against Ellsberg." "He and Russo faced charges under the Espionage Act of 1917 and other charges including theft and conspiracy, carrying a total maximum sentence of 115 years." - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Ellsberg

The charges against Ellsberg were dropped on what was basically a technicality, though.

Re: U.S. charges Edward Snowden with espionage

#183

Post by malandrew » Sat, Jun 22, 2013, 1:04 AM UTC

spdy wrote: post #37

codex wrote: post #11

It looks like this charge can carry the death penalty because it involves "communications intelligence". From http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/794 : "(a) Whoever, with intent or reason to believe that it is to be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of a foreign nation, communicates, delivers, or transmits, or attempts to communicate, deliver, or transmit, to any foreign government, or…

Now the states he can move to just went up. Death penalty: Many countries, such as Australia, Canada, Macao, New Zealand, South Africa, and most European nations except Belarus, will not allow extradition if the death penalty may be imposed on the suspect unless they are assured that the death sentence will not be passed or carried out.

I would hope that those countries also have an extradition exception for torture, including: (1) solitary confinement; (2) sleep deprivation; (3) water boarding and any other cruel and unusual punishment.

Re: U.S. charges Edward Snowden with espionage

#184

Post by dllthomas » Sat, Jun 22, 2013, 1:07 AM UTC

ncallaway wrote: post #174

dllthomas wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about on the 4th? Not ridiculously soon, but seems appropriate, gives us a little time to plan something, and this case isn't moving at a breakneck speed anyway.

Reddit is planning on doing some 4th of July protesting: http://www.reddit.com/r/restorethefourth

Interesting. I've made a habit of protesting on the 4th for some years now, off and on. Good stuff.

The name of the group calls to mind the saying about "painting the forth bridge" - I'm not sure whether that's unfortunate, appropriate, or both...

Re: U.S. charges Edward Snowden with espionage

#185

Post by guelo » Sat, Jun 22, 2013, 1:07 AM UTC

codex wrote: post #11

It looks like this charge can carry the death penalty because it involves "communications intelligence". From http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/794 : "(a) Whoever, with intent or reason to believe that it is to be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of a foreign nation, communicates, delivers, or transmits, or attempts to communicate, deliver, or transmit, to any foreign government, or…

Looks like he's charged under 793 not 794 http://www.documentcloud.org/documents/716865-snowden-compla...

793 is less serious in that it doesn't accuse him of aiding a foreign government http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/part-I/chapter-37

Re: U.S. charges Edward Snowden with espionage

#186

Post by nhangen » Sat, Jun 22, 2013, 1:07 AM UTC

DanielBMarkham wrote: post #7

So now is the time to identify the federal prosecutors who filed this and petition the government to have them fired. In addition, of course, to asking for a complete pardon for Snowden. It also should be noted that any of the Congressional investigations into this mess are perfectly capable of giving Snowden a grant of immunity from prosecution. People ask what to do. There are at least two avenues open to nip this…

I'm sure the prosecutors that filed this did so at the behest of their superiors, and/or the POTUS, Justice Department, and everyone with a dog in this fight. Going after them would probably be the best thing that could happen for the rest. Have to aim higher.

Re: U.S. charges Edward Snowden with espionage

#187

Post by timr » Sat, Jun 22, 2013, 1:08 AM UTC

jychang wrote: post #124

krapp wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These are political charges, and as the governed we should stand up to the people who are supposed to be working for us and demand that they be dropped. Immediately. Did or did not Edward Snowden leak classified material to the press? Does or does not the government have a duty to attempt to prosecute him? You make it sound like he didn't actually break any laws, when he actually did break a couple. Whether the charg…

Soldiers are supposed to disobey their military superiors if told to commit crimes against humanity. Breaking a law, especially when doing something obviously right, does not mean that you need to have charges brought against you. Say you see a dog about to drown in a creek on private property. If you ran in and saved it, the owner could charge you for trespassing. That doesn't mean they SHOULD.

"Soldiers are supposed to disobey their military superiors if told to commit crimes against humanity."

Well, no. A soldier isn't supposed to say "I think that command is illegal under international law, therefore I will choose not to follow it." They'll be court-martialed, and rightly so. Choosing to make that call is intentionally risky, because it's supposed to be rare.

Likewise, Snowden will be prosecuted...and rightly so. He broke a bunch of laws. Maybe he did that out of a sense of righteousness, but the greater legality of his decision is not for him to decide.

But even ignoring all of that, the premise of your metaphor is absurd: Snowden revealed information about legal surveillance programs that weren't acutely harming anyone, and he might have hurt national security in the process. That's a far cry from preventing "crimes against humanity". Perspective, please.

Re: U.S. charges Edward Snowden with espionage

#188

Post by georgemcbay » Sat, Jun 22, 2013, 1:09 AM UTC

redthrowaway wrote: post #81

The non-print, non-mobile version: http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/us-cha... This actually seems to be a pretty big problem with the web right now. We've been balkanized into mobile and desktop versions of sites, to the point where sharing one with the other inevitably pisses someone off. This article is all but unreadable on desktop, and I suspect the same would be true in reverse. The point of…

I sort of agree with you... but then OTOH when it comes to virtually any newspaper/media site I almost always prefer viewing the mobile version to the "full site" (even when browsing on a traditional computer), because the mobile versions tend to be less stuffed up with garbage ads, interstitials, social networking buttons and other such shit-fuckery.

Re: U.S. charges Edward Snowden with espionage

#189

Post by mtgx » Sat, Jun 22, 2013, 1:10 AM UTC

Time to take it to the streets on July 4th:

http://www.reddit.com/r/restorethefourth

"Restore the Fourth is a non partisan group of concerned citizens working to restore privacy and fourth amendment rights. We are planning nationwide protests in over 100 locations on July 4th."

Re: U.S. charges Edward Snowden with espionage

#190

Post by malandrew » Sat, Jun 22, 2013, 1:13 AM UTC

mindstab wrote: post #31

wisty wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you imagine a jury of 12 all believing that what he did was not in the interests of his country?

Sadly that's not how your legal system works any more. I don't have the link handy but it came up here recently with that environmental activist who just got out of jail for breaking up an illegal auction of land. He thought he'd be fine but when the prosecution found that many of the jurors had received a juror's rights pamphlet out lining the basic foundations of your country like that jurys are supposed to be a so…

Do you know where one can find an online copy of those jury's rights pamphlets?