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

Don’t just pardon Edward Snowden; give the man a medal

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 241 posts

Re: Don’t just pardon Edward Snowden; give the man a medal

#201

Post by mpyne »

dragonwriter wrote: post #186
tptacek wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hadn't read this and generally admire Gellman. Thanks for the link. We can analyze the claims Gellman makes here, though, and further our understanding of the controversy. I believe these are all of them: * The House report claims Snowden lied saying he left military training due to broken legs, and instead washed out due to "shin splints". Gellman objects, saying he has a documented diagnosis for Snowden saying he…

> The House report claims Snowden lied saying he left military training due to broken legs, and instead washed out due to "shin splints". Gellman objects, saying he has a documented diagnosis for Snowden saying he was discharged with "bilaterial tibial stress fractures". But tibial stress fractures are a form --- a common form --- of shin splint. A stress fracture is a broken bone. Tibial stress fractures are (among…

Having gone through military basic training (and later being peripherally involved with recruiting), we had people wash out relatively often for 'shin splints'.

If you washed out it would have to be severe -- if the shin splints were minor you'd simply be given time to heal and the ability to rollback into the next class. But even if they were severe, we (recruits and staff alike) called them 'shin splints', not 'broken legs'.

However technically true Snowden's usage of 'my legs were broken' may have been, we would never have called it 'broken legs' unless he'd suffered a macroscopic fracture or a break (in other words, something that'd normally require a cast, splint, or crutches).

So the fact that Snowden did so is actually quite consistent with the HPSCI's assertions about his 'narcissistic' and 'self-serving' nature. There /should/ be little shame in washing out for shin splints, certainly not enough to be deceptive about it when your credibility is about to be closely examined for something that is theoretically far more important to you.

Re: Don’t just pardon Edward Snowden; give the man a medal

#202

Post by mpyne »

kenko wrote: post #112
tptacek wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hadn't read this and generally admire Gellman. Thanks for the link. We can analyze the claims Gellman makes here, though, and further our understanding of the controversy. I believe these are all of them: * The House report claims Snowden lied saying he left military training due to broken legs, and instead washed out due to "shin splints". Gellman objects, saying he has a documented diagnosis for Snowden saying he…

"but it's been pointed out repeatedly that he could have obtained an exit visa without a valid passport" But only by grace of some entity with the power to grant him such a visa, right? He couldn't just ask for one and get it (someone in Slate I think said something like, look, Russia could have given him a visa and Cuba could have let him in—yeah, but those are things Russia and Cuba have to decide to do, not things…

Frankly I can't believe we're still debating whether a canceled passport 'trapped' Snowden in Russia or not, Wikileaks admitted two years ago that they told him to go to Russia: https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/461862504243953664?ref_...

Re: Don’t just pardon Edward Snowden; give the man a medal

#203

Post by freehunter »

rhino369 wrote: post #182
freehunter wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe opinions do have to be based on fact. That's the difference between opinion and faith. People have faith that God exists, even if they don't have proof. But opinions are really just your interpretation of the facts you're presented with. Opinions change as you get new facts, faith persists even in the face of facts. If you believe something even though fact says otherwise, that is not an opinion. It's faith…

It's more than just interpreting facts. People make value judgements too. A lot of the pro Snowden support is based on a belief that transparency is a good thing. That isn't a universal truth. Reasonable people can disagree.

Okay, you're right. Opinions can be based on faith, as well. But anyone would be well within the realm of sanity to weight opinions based on faith lower than opinions based on fact.

"I base my opinion on X on the fact that my religion says X is right/wrong, I base that religion on faith" doesn't mean the opinion is based on fact. You've got me on that one.

Re: Don’t just pardon Edward Snowden; give the man a medal

#204

Post by dragonwriter »

tptacek wrote: post #190
dragonwriter wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How is it that the US can prevent Snowden from boarding a plane in Moscow? The US can't prevent Snowden from boarding a plan in Moscow. (Well, I mean, there are all kinds of means by which it might attempt to do so, but no one in this thread has suggested that they would be likely to use them.) It can, and would be far more likely to, OTOH, use its influence to a prevent a plane from Moscow from reaching Ecuador wi…

How would the US even know who was on a flight from Moscow? If you believe Assange, the reason for the Morales incident was that Assange leaked false information to make that happen. Furthermore, what does any of this have to do with Snowden's suspended passport? The passport isn't what's keeping him in Russia. I think the two plausible things that might be are: (1) Snowden, (2) Russia. You think there's a third? Can…

> How would the US even know who was on a flight from Moscow?

The US has foreign intelligence services, utilizing both human and technical means, and they attempt to monitor movements of persons who are of concern to the US, with varying degrees of success.

(The degree to which Snowden is still actively a concern to the US is a bit less clear.)

> If you believe Assange

I don't, particularly, but on this particular point his claim isn't implausible, and, more to the point, isn't materially relevant.

> the reason for the Morales incident was that Assange leaked false information to make that happen.

Sure, that might be what they US believed Snowden was on the plane. Of course, were the US not both able and inclined to stop even a foreign leader's plane from transitting unmolested from Russia to South America if Snowden was believed to be on it, Assange's false leak (assuming that is the source of the belief) would be immaterial. That they have the capacity and will, however, to take such acts is demonstrated by the Morales incident independently of the source of the false belief that Snowden was on the plane.

> Furthermore, what does any of this have to do with Snowden's suspended passport?

Nothing, I wasn't responding to a claim about a passport I was responding to the claim that if Snowden wanted to be in Ecuador, he would be in Ecuador, and there is nothing the US could do to stop him from simply boarding a plane in Moscow and flying to Ecuador.

Their manifestly is something the US could do, and has demonstrated both the ability and willingness to do, to stop him from doing that.

> The passport isn't what's keeping him in Russia. I think the two plausible things that might be are: (1) Snowden, (2) Russia. You think there's a third? Can you explain it in some detail?

The United States. And I think I've explained it in excruciating detail in this post, and my prior post in this subthread.

Re: Don’t just pardon Edward Snowden; give the man a medal

#206

Post by rjacksix »

tptacek wrote: post #59
tvon wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I honestly do not know who to believe, but a counter to the report: https://tcf.org/content/commentary/house-intelligence-commit...

I hadn't read this and generally admire Gellman. Thanks for the link. We can analyze the claims Gellman makes here, though, and further our understanding of the controversy. I believe these are all of them: * The House report claims Snowden lied saying he left military training due to broken legs, and instead washed out due to "shin splints". Gellman objects, saying he has a documented diagnosis for Snowden saying he…

The TAO test is NOT basic and an MCSE has no bearing on the knowledge required to pass it.

Re: Don’t just pardon Edward Snowden; give the man a medal

#207

Post by tptacek »

mpyne wrote: post #201
dragonwriter wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The House report claims Snowden lied saying he left military training due to broken legs, and instead washed out due to "shin splints". Gellman objects, saying he has a documented diagnosis for Snowden saying he was discharged with "bilaterial tibial stress fractures". But tibial stress fractures are a form --- a common form --- of shin splint. A stress fracture is a broken bone. Tibial stress fractures are (among…

Having gone through military basic training (and later being peripherally involved with recruiting), we had people wash out relatively often for 'shin splints'. If you washed out it would have to be severe -- if the shin splints were minor you'd simply be given time to heal and the ability to rollback into the next class. But even if they were severe, we (recruits and staff alike) called them 'shin splints', not 'bro…

A wrinkle: Snowden was 18X, so he wasn't doing standard basic training, but accelerated basic/advanced combined. So a shin splint injury that might have been manageable in normal basic training, in 18X...?

Re: Don’t just pardon Edward Snowden; give the man a medal

#208

Post by tptacek »

dragonwriter wrote: post #204
tptacek wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How would the US even know who was on a flight from Moscow? If you believe Assange, the reason for the Morales incident was that Assange leaked false information to make that happen. Furthermore, what does any of this have to do with Snowden's suspended passport? The passport isn't what's keeping him in Russia. I think the two plausible things that might be are: (1) Snowden, (2) Russia. You think there's a third? Can…

> How would the US even know who was on a flight from Moscow? The US has foreign intelligence services, utilizing both human and technical means, and they attempt to monitor movements of persons who are of concern to the US, with varying degrees of success. (The degree to which Snowden is still actively a concern to the US is a bit less clear.) > If you believe Assange I don't, particularly, but on this particular po…

The same logic suggests they could grab Snowden off the streets in Moscow.

Re: Don’t just pardon Edward Snowden; give the man a medal

#209

Post by maerF0x0 »

Namrog84 wrote: post #171
maerF0x0 wrote: post #107

I dont understand what a pardon or a medal will accomplish. At this point I would assume that the moment the US is aware of his location he would be snuffed out, as discretely as possible. Unsure if there are any verifiable marks that prove he's even still alive (like him sending signed messages or something?).

He already did the thing. Do you think he poses any more real risk beyond that of potentialially becoming a martyr? While it's likely some people wouldn't want him being the voice for some things now. Anyone could probably do that just fine. I'd be surprised if anything happens to him beyond maybe putting him behind bars.

Killing him would have a greater chilling effect.

Re: Don’t just pardon Edward Snowden; give the man a medal

#210

Post by whamlastxmas »

michael_fine wrote: post #88
whamlastxmas wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The parts where we have public defenders that cannot provide adequate representation, plea bargains that ruin any chance for real justice, bails set at outrageous amounts, prison sentences that are ridiculous by most any other first world country standard, contempt of court used to keep people in jail for over a decade, the list is miles long. The judiciary system is thought by some to be the most political of the br…

It seems few of those apply to Snowden -- he wouldn't need a public defender, he probably wants a trial rather than a plea bargain, I'm not sure if there's a systemic problem with outrageous bail but Snowden is a textbook case for flight risk, ridiculous prison sentences -- perhaps, but just because a law is harsh doesn't mean that that law is applied unfairly.

The point is that the outcomes of actual trials are weighted towards too much punishment as a result of having the plea bargain system. We're disincentivizing people to actually have their day in court.

How about the existence of "setting an example" sentences, which would absolutely happen to Snowden?

Post reply on HN