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

Panama Papers source issues statement

panamapapers.icij.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 151 posts

Re: Panama Papers source issues statement

#61

Post by samstave »

_lce0 wrote: post #7
mgraupner wrote: post #5

But most of all, the legal profession has failed. Democratic governance depends upon responsible individuals throughout the entire system who understand and uphold the law, not who understand and exploit it. Sigh. One of the most puzzling questions I have to deal with in my mind. Why is there so little moral left in this world?

> Why is there so little moral left in this world? You can buy moral pretty much everywhere nowadays ;-)

However, it would appear that you cannot punish the lack of it anywhere....

Re: Panama Papers source issues statement

#62

Post by themartorana »

nickpsecurity wrote: post #46
chimeracoder wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There's a lot to parse in that statement, but the call for whistleblower protections seems to be the single most important (and achievable) item. Most people are aware of Snowden and Manning One big difference between Snowden and the Panama Papers (and, to a degree, Manning) is that virtually all of what Snowden revealed is illegal action on the part of the government[0], or information directly tied to that (alleg…

"is that virtually all of what Snowden revealed is illegal action on the part of the government[0]" That's nonsense. Snowden revealed both legal and illegal behavior. In the U.S., as in most countries, it's totally legal to spy on foreign countries for political or economic intelligence. Whereas, it's illegal to spy on our own citizens in the U.S.. Snowden leaked both with full details on how they did it to point opp…

Revealing legal but highly offensive/suspect behavior does not make one a traitor.

Re: Panama Papers source issues statement

#63

Post by themartorana »

jobu wrote: post #6

There's a lot to parse in that statement, but the call for whistleblower protections seems to be the single most important (and achievable) item. Most people are aware of Snowden and Manning, but it really surprises me that these haven't been reported more: "Bradley Birkenfeld was awarded millions for his information concerning Swiss bank UBS—and was still given a prison sentence by the Justice Department. Antoine De…

I was unaware of - and totally flabbergasted by - the Birkenfeld case. His boss, who did not come forward at all, served 5 months probation and paid a $100 fine. Another extradited executive was not found guilty of anything. The tax evading client Birkenfeld helped (that was the basis for Birkenfeld's prosecution) paid a fine but served no jail time.

It's not that whistleblowers aren't receiving protections - it's that their prosecutions and punishments far outweigh those whose crimes are being exposed. It's absolutely mind-boggling.

Re: Panama Papers source issues statement

#64

Post by nickpsecurity »

dragonwriter wrote: post #54
nickpsecurity wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"is that virtually all of what Snowden revealed is illegal action on the part of the government[0]" That's nonsense. Snowden revealed both legal and illegal behavior. In the U.S., as in most countries, it's totally legal to spy on foreign countries for political or economic intelligence. Whereas, it's illegal to spy on our own citizens in the U.S.. Snowden leaked both with full details on how they did it to point opp…

> Snowden revealed both legal and illegal behavior. Pretty much all whistleblowing addressing illegal behavior will reveal legal behavior connected or related to, supporting, etc., the illegal behavior. So what?

That's two of you ignoring the point of what I said to bring up nonsense technicalities. Let me being you back to the real world.

In U.S., as in many countries, there exist intelligence agencies whose job is to get secrets out of foreign countries. This is legal. There's usually also laws that protect secrecy of those and other activities. In US, such classification applies by law unless it's a criminal act they're trying to conceal. Leaking that information is a felony that, depending on info, might also damage (i.e betray) the US. Leaking criminal activity that was classified is whistleblowing. Not only form but main form for this conversation.

Snowden's whistleblowing by leaking proof of illegal surveillance and perjury by government I don't dispute. However, Snowden also leaked tons of tools and activities dedicated to legal, foreign surveillance. What NSA was legally required to do and which he personally agreed to in case of stopping foreign hackers (eg China). Worst, he leaked it to news organizations in thd countries NSA was spying on.

So, far from your abstract reply, Snowden betrayed his country by leaking legal, mandated, acceptable-to-Americans operations. He didn't have to and shouldn't have. He also heroically blew whistle on dirty stuff. So, he's both a traitor and whistleblower on leak by leak basis. That simple.

Re: Panama Papers source issues statement

#65

Post by sgnelson »

nickpsecurity wrote: post #46
chimeracoder wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There's a lot to parse in that statement, but the call for whistleblower protections seems to be the single most important (and achievable) item. Most people are aware of Snowden and Manning One big difference between Snowden and the Panama Papers (and, to a degree, Manning) is that virtually all of what Snowden revealed is illegal action on the part of the government[0], or information directly tied to that (alleg…

"is that virtually all of what Snowden revealed is illegal action on the part of the government[0]" That's nonsense. Snowden revealed both legal and illegal behavior. In the U.S., as in most countries, it's totally legal to spy on foreign countries for political or economic intelligence. Whereas, it's illegal to spy on our own citizens in the U.S.. Snowden leaked both with full details on how they did it to point opp…

I would argue that's only true depending on where you stand. (and I mean that quite literally, as in Where are you from, what country do you live in?) If you're the state of Germany, they probably don't think it's legal for others to spy on them. That's certainly true in the US. And of course you'll argue that it was a US citizen reporting on US gov't affairs. But, isn't a whistleblower someone who believe they are serving the common good by uncovering illegal, immoral and unethical behavior? Can it not be argued that Snowden was helping out the countries (especially our allies) that there government and people were also being spied on? Or the fact that governments were making secret deals with each other: ("you spy on our citizens, which we can't do as it's illegal, and we will spy on your citizens, and they'll trade the information. And that way it's all legal!") (Who do they think they're fooling?)

If Snowden is a traitor, what does that make the NSA?

Re: Panama Papers source issues statement

#66

Post by philangist »

sohcahtoa wrote: post #4

And yet... why no American names in the leaks? Funny that.

There's going to be a second batch of papers released on Monday, May 9th - http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2016/04/28/second-panama-paper... - that will supposedly have more informations on Americans.

Re: Panama Papers source issues statement

#67

Post by nickpsecurity »

mindcrime wrote: post #60
nickpsecurity wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"is that virtually all of what Snowden revealed is illegal action on the part of the government[0]" That's nonsense. Snowden revealed both legal and illegal behavior. In the U.S., as in most countries, it's totally legal to spy on foreign countries for political or economic intelligence. Whereas, it's illegal to spy on our own citizens in the U.S.. Snowden leaked both with full details on how they did it to point opp…

He's not a traitor because a subset of the things he leaked were actually legal. In fact, the legal stuff may be more damning for the government, since there's even less justification for the government to avoid transparency and accountability for things are are legal. Say the CIA spied on, oh, I don't know, Toyota. And they got some good designs for a new engine or fuel injector or something. Legal, possibly? OK.. n…

"He's not a traitor because a subset of the things he leaked were actually legal."

Strawman this time. You m are fun. He's a traitor because he leaked national secrets critical to ongoing operations that were legal and mandated. Further, Americans approved of NSA spying on foreign countries as they know it works both ways.

Hope you get it now. Violating classified info laws in a way that damages American ops but doesn't protect American rights. That's treason.

Re: Panama Papers source issues statement

#68

Post by lolc »

sievebrain wrote: post #31
jobu wrote: post #6

There's a lot to parse in that statement, but the call for whistleblower protections seems to be the single most important (and achievable) item. Most people are aware of Snowden and Manning, but it really surprises me that these haven't been reported more: "Bradley Birkenfeld was awarded millions for his information concerning Swiss bank UBS—and was still given a prison sentence by the Justice Department. Antoine De…

I'd think it's the least achievable thing of all. Governments will happily pass laws to {increase transparency / reduce privacy} and will happily pass laws that {add new taxes / close tax loopholes}, because these things align with their pre-existing agendas. They will not, under any circumstances, make it easier to engage in whistleblowing and especially not large data dumps, because governments absolutely do not wa…

> so far all the stories I read about the Panama Papers were about things that are not illegal

So the accusation of perjury left you cold? It was linked in the piece.

https://www.publicintegrity.org/2016/04/03/19506/offshore-la...

Re: Panama Papers source issues statement

#69

Post by nickpsecurity »

themartorana wrote: post #62
nickpsecurity wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"is that virtually all of what Snowden revealed is illegal action on the part of the government[0]" That's nonsense. Snowden revealed both legal and illegal behavior. In the U.S., as in most countries, it's totally legal to spy on foreign countries for political or economic intelligence. Whereas, it's illegal to spy on our own citizens in the U.S.. Snowden leaked both with full details on how they did it to point opp…

Revealing legal but highly offensive/suspect behavior does not make one a traitor.

Offensive/suspect to who? Americans and most countries in the leaks condone spying so long as they're the spies. Spying is legal here. Americans imllicitly support it by how they react to media on it.

So, yes, leaking it makes you a traitor. Especially if you're a trained US spy who did it youself.

Re: Panama Papers source issues statement

#70

Post by mindcrime »

nickpsecurity wrote: post #67
mindcrime wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He's not a traitor because a subset of the things he leaked were actually legal. In fact, the legal stuff may be more damning for the government, since there's even less justification for the government to avoid transparency and accountability for things are are legal. Say the CIA spied on, oh, I don't know, Toyota. And they got some good designs for a new engine or fuel injector or something. Legal, possibly? OK.. n…

"He's not a traitor because a subset of the things he leaked were actually legal." Strawman this time. You m are fun. He's a traitor because he leaked national secrets critical to ongoing operations that were legal and mandated. Further, Americans approved of NSA spying on foreign countries as they know it works both ways. Hope you get it now. Violating classified info laws in a way that damages American ops but does…

Where's the evidence that his info leaks actually damaged American ops? Oh, right, it comes in the form of testimony from the NSA, CIA, etc... and we all know they never lie.

Hope you get it now.

Post reply on HN