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

121–130 of 311 posts

Re: Let Snowden Come Home

#121

Post by rayiner »

rosser wrote: post #69
rayiner wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can one reasonably believe that acceptance of transsexuals in the U.S. is a much bigger deal than NSA surveillance?

It's easier to understand, and easier to have a visceral, attention-grabbing (and, more importantly, attention-keeping ) reaction to. That's what appears to matter most in American "news" reporting.

That's not what I asked. My question is, can a reasonable person believe that the acceptance of transexuals in mainstream American society is a more important and newsworthy concern than NSA surveillance?

Re: Let Snowden Come Home

#122

Post by gertef »

mortehu wrote: post #105
alkonaut wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

When you are blowing the whistle on the President of the United States, who do you escalate to?

Re: Let Snowden Come Home

#123

Post by linkregister »

at-fates-hands wrote: post #103
aerique wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

I didn't know about the 215 collection until the public disclosure.

I think there's a difference between hearing some unsubstantiated claims from a disgruntled employee (Binney) versus getting a legitimate-looking document that the government made no effort to deny. Once that failed to happen, we knew it was real.

Soon after, government officials acknowledged the mass collection renewal under §215, demonstrating the document's authenticity. So I dispute that it was something people knew about prior to the disclosure.

Re: Let Snowden Come Home

#124

Post by linkregister »

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.

> And they also do not know much about the America's support of Chinese civil unrest

Me either, can you give a recent example or two?

Re: Let Snowden Come Home

#125

Post by mjevans »

at-fates-hands wrote: post #103
aerique wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

What, in your opinion, SHOULD he have done? Keeping in mind the contents of the very article we are commenting on.

Re: Let Snowden Come Home

#126

Post by manghoti »

at-fates-hands wrote: post #103
aerique wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

There's a difference between suspicion and actionable knowledge.

If I'm not mistaken, there were whistle-blowers before Snowden that were "responsible", following legal means to raise these issues, and completely ignored.

http://www.npr.org/2014/07/22/333741495/before-snowden-the-w...

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/06/16/snowd...

Since we know they were blowing the whistle on issues the public cared about, and we know they were ignored, is that not proof that the legal channels for this are ineffective? Perhaps if these channels actually had lead to actual changes, then the harm Snowden has brought to your country would not have been necessary.

Re: Let Snowden Come Home

#127

Post by mapmap »

mVChr wrote: post #115
austinhutch wrote: post #6

If he were to come back to the USA and then subsequently be detained, I would join the hopefully overwhelming protests in favor of his release. I am hoping if such a time comes, that there will be a historic level of demonstration advocating for his freedom.

More likely a few years after his return, when public attention has waned, he would die due to an unfortunate accident of some sort, perhaps a hit and run or the like. While this may sound like conspirilogic, I can site many similar instances of deaths of journalists and other instigators under mysterious circumstances in this country if necessary.

Michael Hastings:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Hastings_(journalist)#...

Re: Let Snowden Come Home

#128

Post by rosser »

rayiner wrote: post #121
rosser wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's easier to understand, and easier to have a visceral, attention-grabbing (and, more importantly, attention-keeping ) reaction to. That's what appears to matter most in American "news" reporting.

That's not what I asked. My question is, can a reasonable person believe that the acceptance of transexuals in mainstream American society is a more important and newsworthy concern than NSA surveillance?

I know that's not exactly what you asked, but my response is relevant, if indirectly.

That is to say, no, they can't. But mainstream news in the US isn't targeted at reasonable people — or, more strictly speaking, it isn't targeted at the reasonable parts of people. They're going for the visceral, emotional reaction from the audience, because that's what keeps people tuned in long enough to throw ads at their eyeballs.

Re: Let Snowden Come Home

#129

Post by toomuchtodo »

rayiner wrote: post #121
rosser wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's easier to understand, and easier to have a visceral, attention-grabbing (and, more importantly, attention-keeping ) reaction to. That's what appears to matter most in American "news" reporting.

That's not what I asked. My question is, can a reasonable person believe that the acceptance of transexuals in mainstream American society is a more important and newsworthy concern than NSA surveillance?

There are two levels of importance. That which you as a person think is important, and that which truly is important to you.

Re: Let Snowden Come Home

#130

Post by tzs »

There was an interesting comment on Reddit pointing out some things often overlooked in these discussions [1]. People seem to forget that he leaked information on both illegal and legal foreign spying (which is what the NSA is supposed to be doing).

The former is arguably whistleblowing, but the latter is not. Even Greenwald and Binney admit this.

See the reddit comment for details and links to sources. Particularly interesting are Snowden's admitted reasons for working at the NSA in the first place, before he knew of the domestic spying.

[1] http://www.reddit.com/r/technology/comments/38cej4/elected_o...

Post reply on HN