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

Let Snowden Come Home

newyorker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 311 posts

Re: Let Snowden Come Home

#101

Post by rhino369 »

sneak wrote: post #74

Fuck "seeking some sort of deal with his lawyers". A plea bargain would require him admitting wrongdoing. He raised internal concerns over the illegal activities he saw and was told to be quiet. Snowden himself has said he feared what happened to John Kiriakou (the whistleblower who exposed CIA's illegal torture program) happening to him had he made an even bigger issue out of it. The people who should be supporting…

>A plea bargain would require him admitting wrongdoing.

Even if you think he did good overall, he did so some wrong.

Much of what he leaked is unambiguously legal and exactly the sort of thing that the NSA is supposed to be doing.

Clearly legal:PPD-20, spying on China, Tempura/Upstream, Embassy spying, spying on Germany, spying on al Jeezera, various spying methods, etc. etc. etc.

Murky: internet meta data program that ended in 2011, prism, collection of US data on overseas cables

Illegal: telecom metadata, various personal abuses by employees

Snowden wasn't elected to make US policy and he doesn't get to dictate what US policy should be. The bulk of his secrets were directed at policies he disagreed with, not law breaking.

Re: Let Snowden Come Home

#102

Post by thoman23 »

ra1n85 wrote: post #4

Don't just bring him home, honor him. Ticker tape parades, a federal holiday, buy 1 get 1 free at Carl's Jr. - celebrate what this man did.

lol...the Carl's Jr. BOGO offer would probably go a long ways toward teaching the average American who he even is.

Re: Let Snowden Come Home

#103

Post by at-fates-hands »

aerique wrote: post #62
tosser-004 wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many, many more people view him as a traitor for exposing legal foreign intelligence programs. He obviously did it for what he thought were valid reasons, but that does make it right.

Actually, it is right what he did. Given how much dirt has been exposed do you really think there was another way to do this? What Snowden did is a prime example of civil disobedience: sometimes a country needs to be called out on what it's doing is wrong, no matter what the laws say. That said, whistleblowers are in for a rough time and usually get acknowledged for what they did when they're either too old or dead.

He painted himself into a corner, and that's on him. There are a myriad of other ways he could have done this, but his intent was clear to damage the government more so than expose government surveillance.

Most of what he leaked has nothing to do with the government spying on its citizens. Most of the documents relate to how the US deals with its own international interests and how it protects those interests - right or wrong.

For this reason, he's not a patriot or a whistle blower. He's just another government employee who stole and released a ton of classified documents that did more damage to his own country than what he's been telling people about the NSA spying programs. And let's be honest, it was something most people already knew about anyways. His documents only confirmed a lot of what people already suspected. The only difference was his documents showed how deep the rabbit hole went.

In a few more years, nobody will care - let him rot in Siberia for all I care. All he did was weaken a country by his actions.

Re: Let Snowden Come Home

#104

Post by skidoo »

alfiedotwtf wrote: post #96
mortehu wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the being known to a majority of the US population is a way too high bar. In a 2010 poll[1], only 59% knew the name of the vice president, as mentioned in a Greenwald article[2] about this issue. 1. http://www.pewforum.org/2010/09/28/u-s-religious-knowledge-s... 2. https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2015/04/06/john-oliver-in...

I've always hated how celebrities join up causes, but I'm now beginning to understand why - exposure to the masses. Maybe the biggest way to get Snowden's name out there and make eveyone listen is to get the Kardashians on board.

Or get Oliver Stone to direct your biopic.

Re: Let Snowden Come Home

#105

Post by mortehu »

alkonaut wrote: post #64
eli wrote: post #11

Perhaps a minority opinion, but I believe the NSA vastly overstepped and that they need to be reined in (much further than what the USA Freedom Act contains)... but also that Snowden probably should face charges. Snowden is charged with "willful communication of classified communications intelligence information to an unauthorized person," which -- I think sensibly -- is illegal even if the unauthorized person is a r…

Since the legislation is missing whistleblower protection (a fundamental flaw) there is no way Snowden can make any arguments in a U.S. court, at least not until the legislation is fixed. Unconstitutional or not, the law is just broken. It's painfuly obvious, and I can't fathom why fixing it isn't a higher priority (for example, wouldn't politicians who want votes promise to work for such reform now, after the Snowde…

Are whistleblowers allowed to blow their whistle to anyone? US has several whistleblower protection laws[1], but it seems to me that if you want protection from the law, you should report to the correct instances first, and then escalate from there. From Wikipedia:

> If the information that is being reported is classified, then the recipient must have a need-to-know and the recipient must hold a security clearance.

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whistleblower_protection_in_th...

Re: Let Snowden Come Home

#106

Post by dragonwriter »

sneak wrote: post #74

Fuck "seeking some sort of deal with his lawyers". A plea bargain would require him admitting wrongdoing. He raised internal concerns over the illegal activities he saw and was told to be quiet. Snowden himself has said he feared what happened to John Kiriakou (the whistleblower who exposed CIA's illegal torture program) happening to him had he made an even bigger issue out of it. The people who should be supporting…

> Fuck "seeking some sort of deal with his lawyers".

Why?

> A plea bargain would require him admitting wrongdoing.

A deal with his lawyers is not necessarily a plea bargain.

For instance, he could be granted transactional (sometimes called "total") immunity in exchange for testimony regarding matters related to the information released, either to support executive investigations into any potential illegalities or to support congressional investigations. While either is, perhaps, unlikely, they would constitute a "deal with his lawyers" that would not be a plea bargain or involve a admission of legal guilt; they'd also not be a pardon.

Re: Let Snowden Come Home

#107

Post by LordKano »

alfiedotwtf wrote: post #96
mortehu wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the being known to a majority of the US population is a way too high bar. In a 2010 poll[1], only 59% knew the name of the vice president, as mentioned in a Greenwald article[2] about this issue. 1. http://www.pewforum.org/2010/09/28/u-s-religious-knowledge-s... 2. https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2015/04/06/john-oliver-in...

I've always hated how celebrities join up causes, but I'm now beginning to understand why - exposure to the masses. Maybe the biggest way to get Snowden's name out there and make eveyone listen is to get the Kardashians on board.

I used to feel that way until I heard Angelina Jolie speak on the issue.

I'm not going to google the quote right now but the heart of it is that when they care about an issue, their celebrity can bring more attention than the righteousness of the cause.

We have an abstract understanding of the fact that, in different parts of the world, people are facing hardship but a celebrity can get television cameras to show us what is happening.

Re: Let Snowden Come Home

#108

Post by shit_parade2 »

eli wrote: post #34
nickbauman wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would agree with you as long as we also indict members of the US state security apparatus in VA and DC and around the world who authorized these programs as well. I'm not holding my breath.

At the least, I think Clapper should be investigated for perjury over lying to Congress. But the fact that other criminal acts are going unpunished doesn't really have any bearing on Snowden's case. The crime Snowden is charged with is the same regardless of who else is charged.

It does in fact make a difference when the law prosecutes some but not others. That is how kings and dictators rule, by enforcing 'the law' selectively and in secret.

Re: Let Snowden Come Home

#109

Post by yodsanklai »

ipsin wrote: post #36
fourply wrote: post #2

It is infuriating to see SO many articles, even from publications that can usually be trusted, referring to this legislation as "commendable" or "significant reform". It is far from it, and we can't expect the couch-dwellers to pay attention while the dying gasps of the 4th estate trumpet this kind of non-change.

The USA Today headline was "NSA Data Collection Ended". I don't even know what to do with something so far from the truth.

I've just heard similar reports on French radio. For some reasons, they forgot to mention that nothing has changed concerning the surveillance of non-US citizens.

This leads to a question: in the movie Citizenfour, Snowden explains that the NSA uses british surveillance system when they need information that they can't legally obtain in the US. I'm wondering, under this new "freedom act", can the NSA legally query the british system to access information about US citizen?

Re: Let Snowden Come Home

#110

Post by meatysnapper »

themeek wrote: post #90
derefr wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a similar bubble in the PRC: if you talk to someone inside it, they know all about Tiananmen Square, Tibet, the recent Hong Kong protests, etc. Whereas if you talk to someone outside of it, they'll tell you the Chinese government is a beloved-to-neutral entity (like the Queen of England, a bit) in the eyes of the populace, and that American terrorism is responsible for most-any Chinese civil unrest. It isn't…

Most people I meet seem to be under the persuasion that China is evil, corrupt and dictatorial - a unique wielder of force and propaganda. And they also do not know much about the America's support of Chinese civil unrest or the self-actualized pockets of civil unrest. Maybe there's a Venn Diagram of information bubble in there somewhere.

Much of America is concerned about only 3 things: 1) Unborn babies being killed 2) Gay people having anal sex 3) A bunch of sand-people having nuclear weapons (news flash, it's pretty obvious Iran has nukes, and has had them for years)

:(

Post reply on HN