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

Email exchange between Edward Snowden and former GOP Senator Gordon Humphrey

m.guardian.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 222 posts

Re: Email exchange between Edward Snowden and former GOP Senator Gordon Humphrey

#201

Post by AnthonyMouse »

anigbrowl wrote: post #157
aetherson wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I understand the sentiment that says, "I'd prefer it if Snowden were possessed of infinite strength, that he should be willing to suffer years of imprisonment while speaking truth to power," I don't understand the sentiment that says, "So I'll dismiss everything he says given that he doesn't have limitless moral courage." I note that the same standard never seems to apply to the other side of the argument. You…

Actually, I do hear a lot of people who reflexively disbelieve anything Obama says; also, you're making a terribly flawed analogy. A more appropriate one would be to say you didn't trust anything Obama said on the subject of drug policy because he used cocaine etc.

> A more appropriate one would be to say you didn't trust anything Obama said on the subject of drug policy because he used cocaine etc.

How would that modification to the analogy change the outcome? You can't dismiss every insightful statement or independently verifiable piece of factual information someone says about drug policy just because that person is a crackhead. That's just the ad hominem fallacy.

Re: Email exchange between Edward Snowden and former GOP Senator Gordon Humphrey

#202

Post by gcb0 »

pvnick wrote: post #3

"Further, no intelligence service - not even our own - has the capacity to compromise the secrets I continue to protect. While it has not been reported in the media, one of my specializations was to teach our people at DIA how to keep such information from being compromised even in the highest threat counter-intelligence environments (i.e. China). You may rest easy knowing I cannot be coerced into revealing that info…

maybe he's simply bluffing. If you have nothing, you can't give up even if they torture your mother in front of you.

Re: Email exchange between Edward Snowden and former GOP Senator Gordon Humphrey

#203

Post by gcb0 »

abstractbill wrote: post #126
tokenadult wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think he comes off as naive and more than a little pompous, but I guess it's in the eye of the beholder. This is my take too. If he had had more knowledge about the historical background of the other countries he has visited, and especially if he had STRONG knowledge of another language, he might view the position of the United States in these matters a bit differently, and might resolve the trade-offs about what t…

I would take Snowden's claims more seriously in general if he were on United States soil preparing to face trial for his alleged wrongdoing, ready to bring forward any defenses he thinks he has to possible criminal charges. I'm not convinced we would be hearing anything from him at all - claims or otherwise - were he currently on US soil.

He would probably have 'resisted arrest' at some point.

Re: Email exchange between Edward Snowden and former GOP Senator Gordon Humphrey

#204

Post by gcb0 »

mrt0mat0 wrote: post #10

Edward Snowden makes me proud of my country, and the people that fight for it. But he also makes me ashamed of my Government and the people that hide behind it.

This raise an interesting point.

The guy is risking his life, and no one even wonder who is the branch/person in government that should be responsible for what he says is going on.

Who should be taken accountable for this? why people is not on the streets? ...well people are on the streets, but for the wrong reasons. media is transforming a, sadly, commonplace killing in hate/race crime. Any conspiracy theorist already linked the time they scheduled the trial with the snowden thing? didn't another army whistle blower was on trial on the very same day as the zimmerman one?

Re: Email exchange between Edward Snowden and former GOP Senator Gordon Humphrey

#205

Post by anigbrowl »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #201
anigbrowl wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, I do hear a lot of people who reflexively disbelieve anything Obama says; also, you're making a terribly flawed analogy. A more appropriate one would be to say you didn't trust anything Obama said on the subject of drug policy because he used cocaine etc.

> A more appropriate one would be to say you didn't trust anything Obama said on the subject of drug policy because he used cocaine etc. How would that modification to the analogy change the outcome? You can't dismiss every insightful statement or independently verifiable piece of factual information someone says about drug policy just because that person is a crackhead. That's just the ad hominem fallacy.

I'm not dismissing anything, but pointing out that the gp was comparing two unlike things.

Re: Email exchange between Edward Snowden and former GOP Senator Gordon Humphrey

#206

Post by Natsu »

anigbrowl wrote: post #155
pvnick wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your statement is completely nonsensical. The whole point is we have primary documents supporting what he says. His personality has nothing to do with those claims. Greenwald and Snowden have a 100% accuracy rate regarding these leaks, and your comment comes off as very head-stuck-in-the-sand-y.

Greenwald and Snowden have a 100% accuracy rate regarding these leaks You seem like the sort of fellow who ought to own a bridge.

If you wish to dispute the GP comment, it would be more productive to pick a specific item you believe to be inaccurate and give your reasons for believing it to be inaccurate.

Re: Email exchange between Edward Snowden and former GOP Senator Gordon Humphrey

#207

Post by jasonkolb »

inzax wrote: post #61
bobo1357 wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Shouldn't the interpretation of our Constitution be left to the Supreme Court? I mean, the Constitution explicitly grants the Court those powers.

Do you really trust the supreme court these days? 7 men and women designed to decide the fate of our country? also, the supreme court has no say in this. Its the fisa court....

The Supreme Court is just another political body. If you have any doubt about this just look at the nomination hearings, as well as the huge number of 5-4 rulings. If the law were clear and it wasn't political, most of the rulings would be heavily slanted one way or another as it would be clear to the justices and there would be very little disagreement.

In short I agree: the Supreme Court is NOT The Voice of God.

Re: Email exchange between Edward Snowden and former GOP Senator Gordon Humphrey

#208

Post by jasonkolb »

bobo1357 wrote: post #54
pbreit wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Replying to bobo: no. Anyone should be able to interpret the constitution as no person or group of people are infallible. It's obvious that SCOTUS opinions change over time, due to composition and prevailing attitudes.

So it's okay to pick and choose which texts to follow from our Constitution? The Constitution doesn't give Snowden the power to interpret it. It does however give that duty to our federal courts. Should we just ignore that part in our Constitution?

Here:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights... That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed , --

And here's the important part, pay attention:

That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it

Re: Email exchange between Edward Snowden and former GOP Senator Gordon Humphrey

#209

Post by declan »

Natsu wrote: post #206
anigbrowl wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Greenwald and Snowden have a 100% accuracy rate regarding these leaks You seem like the sort of fellow who ought to own a bridge.

If you wish to dispute the GP comment, it would be more productive to pick a specific item you believe to be inaccurate and give your reasons for believing it to be inaccurate.

I'm not aware of any false statements that Snowden made, or any doctoring of the NSA documents he provided. (Senators and other officials have confirmed the legitimacy of at least some, as has a federal indictment.)

But journalists can and do make mistakes interpreting the documents. Here's one example of a report trying to set the record straight: http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57588337-38/no-evidence-of...

Re: Email exchange between Edward Snowden and former GOP Senator Gordon Humphrey

#210

Post by declan »

SolarNet wrote: post #190
twoodfin wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Huh? There's no law or budget that requires PRISM. Any of these programs could be shut down with one phone call from the Oval Office, and Congress couldn't say boo. That's sort of the reason they're Constitutional in the first place: The executive has broad national security powers.

Not since nixon: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congressional_Budget_and_Impoun... Also, he must execute the law faithfully, if the Congress gives him the power to use secret courts to wire-tap people he is expected to use it to it's fullest extent, to do otherwise would be illegal: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_Two_of_the_United_State... PRISM is the president faithfully executing the laws set by congress, betw…

Um, the above is the Sunday School version of U.S. politics.

In reality, the executive has a tremendous amount of discretion. Just look at the Obama admin unilaterally extending an Obamacare deadline that was set by Congress -- and which did not give the executive branch the ability to alter. Didn't matter.

It's true that Congress is also responsible for NSA domestic surveillance. But every branch of government has a duty to ensure their conduct is constitutional.

Post reply on HN