Let Snowden Come Home • Hacker News Board

Re: Let Snowden Come Home

#141

Post by hueving » Wed, Jun 03, 2015, 11:01 PM UTC

yodsanklai wrote: post #139

tzs wrote: post #130

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…

> The former is arguably whistleblowing, but the latter is not. It's not because something is technically legal that it's moral. For instance, killing civilians with drones, torturing people, or recording the whole world's communications may be legal according to some twisted laws, but it doesn't make it right. At least voters should have a clear view of such issues, and it's not coming from the US government.

Voters pretty much do have a clear view that the nsa's job is to spy on foreign countries.

Re: Let Snowden Come Home

#142

Post by grey-area » Wed, Jun 03, 2015, 11:01 PM UTC

tzs wrote: post #130

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…

There's a distinction between legally wrong and morally wrong, Snowden makes that distinction I think, whereas you seem to think that the NSA's actions being defined as legal makes them ok. It doesn't.

Re: Let Snowden Come Home

#143

Post by chejazi » Wed, Jun 03, 2015, 11:01 PM UTC

On the flip side, by not bringing charges against the NSA, there is a clear double standard:

"...the agency had breached its own privacy rules or overstepped its legal authority thousands of times a year since 2008."

"Mr. Snowden committed very serious crimes... that he should face."

Re: Let Snowden Come Home

#144

Post by krylon » Wed, Jun 03, 2015, 11:02 PM UTC

If I was Edward Snowden, I don't think I would return to the USA, even if the president offered me a complete pardon and a medal on top.

I don't think I could trust the US intelligence apparatus to not get me into some kind of "accident" or come up with some fake charges to put me into prison. Not to mention the risk of some "patriot" taking justice into his/her own hands.

Which is very sad, but unless the political landscape in the USA - and internationally - undergoes some major changes, coming back to the USA would be a stupid move for Mr. Snowden, unless he is ready to go to Jail for a long time. And given the example of Bradley/Chelsea Manning, that does not sound very inviting.

Re: Let Snowden Come Home

#145

Post by josu » Wed, Jun 03, 2015, 11:02 PM UTC

tzs wrote: post #130

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…

>legal foreign spying

I'm not a lawyer, but that doesn't sound right.

Re: Let Snowden Come Home

#146

Post by leohutson » Wed, Jun 03, 2015, 11:03 PM UTC

tzs wrote: post #130

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…

I think that expecting the information a whistle-blower leaks to correspond 100% to illegal activity is a ridiculous standard to hold them to. Certainly police are not held to that standard when gathering evidence.

Let the possibility of other information being leaked act as a further risk entailed in breaking the law.

Re: Let Snowden Come Home

#147

Post by vezzy-fnord » Wed, Jun 03, 2015, 11:04 PM UTC

tzs wrote: post #130

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…

This is a reasonable point, but not in of itself conclusive of anything. The Espionage Act of 1917 has a history of being applied quite liberally and is not without contest, notably in the case of Daniel Ellsberg and the Pentagon Papers, who did very much leak information on misconduct pertaining to foreign as opposed to domestic policy, but was acquitted because of parallel construction and other criminal acts done in response to his leaks. He is now generally held in a positive light.

As such, simply looking at this in a legalistic vacuum isn't helpful at all.

Re: Let Snowden Come Home

#148

Post by dragonwriter » Wed, Jun 03, 2015, 11:05 PM UTC

Retric wrote: post #140

dragonwriter wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I've always hated how celebrities join up causes Why? I can understand disliking some of the particular causes, or disliking the disproportionate attention given to celebrities, but why would you hate the fact that people who happen to be famous also advocate for causes they care about?

Celebrities often use causes to further there career, which makes many of these things seem less important. Also, the often advocate pointless solutions which can be either pointless or even harmful.

I don't see either of those, particularly the latter, as different than non-celebrities. Non-celebrities often use paid or unpaid association with non-profits to advance their careers, and non-celebrities often advocate solutions which might be ineffective or harmful to the stated goal of the cause they are supporting, because, celebrity or not, advocacy for a cause doesn't require expertise in the domain necessary to design solutions.

Re: Let Snowden Come Home

#149

Post by hueving » Wed, Jun 03, 2015, 11:05 PM UTC

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.

But most folks I talk to (even not in tech) know that the nsa is supposed to be doing foreign spying and are fine with it. You quickly fall into a minority thinking that exposing foreign operations was "right".

Re: Let Snowden Come Home

#150

Post by DominikR » Wed, Jun 03, 2015, 11:08 PM UTC

tzs wrote: post #130

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…

He probably broke the law. (I'm no legal expert)

But when I take a look at the general conduct of the US government both internal and external, and the insane chaos it is creating around the globe, it doesn't feel morally wrong to sabotage the US government in every conceivable way.

The US government tortures and executes people without trial. (even its own citizens in some cases) The president signs a kill list every week. And then there's various terrorist organizations that are seemingly run out of Washington. This is beyond anything I could have imagined 20 years ago. Not even in my wildest dreams. (or nightmares)