Live data from Hacker News

Petition to Pardon Edward Snowden

petitions.whitehouse.gov

181–184 of 184 posts

Re: Petition to Pardon Edward Snowden

#181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know, but is it better than just getting up and leaving, since that doesn't really address the reach of the issues that confront the world today?

You don't have to leave if you don't want to. But your choices are to do nothing (which includes meaningless actions like online petitions) or get directly involved in politics. At this point I'd say there is literally no one to vote for, so if you want to change things you'll need to run yourself. If enough of us do that we could make a change. I see literally no other possibilities at this point.

Or to sign petitions, organize protests, do outreach in the community or other more subversive things. Why put limits on what one can do due to the perceived (lack of) value others may give it?

Re: Petition to Pardon Edward Snowden

#182
post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just curious, how old are you?

I think I know what point you are trying to make and I just have to say that it is very sad that passion and the belief that we can change something is associated with youthful naivete

I personally have the opposite impression.

(Not that this whole age discussion is relevant at all, I must add.)

Re: Petition to Pardon Edward Snowden

#183
post #94
post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I love all the doublespeak around this issue but "warrant-based" is a new one. I'm pretty sure that does NOT mean a warrant specifically naming each person whose information was collected. Or does it? You need a lawyer to translate anything our leaders (biz, gov or other) say. It's all form with very little substance. If you thought you heard something definitive you almost certainly misunderstood.

"I'm pretty sure that does NOT mean a warrant specifically naming each person whose information was collected. Or does it?" Nobody (here) knows. This conversation is more heat than light in part because people are spouting all sorts of uninformed nonsense just to perpetuate their theatrical sense of outrage. What I've read so far suggests that there's some sort of FISA-related oversight of the "reports" generated by…

I know for a fact is does not. Even with the traditional criminal warrant (say a mafia boss) they only need a warrant for ONE person on the call.
Post reply on HN