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

Pardon Snowden

pardonsnowden.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

671–680 of 814 posts

Re: Pardon Snowden

#671

Post by pbarnes_1 »

AsyncAwait wrote: post #451
tomaskafka wrote: post #420

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nazi and socialist ideology is quite close. After all, the S in NSDAP stands for Socialist, and they targeted same voters.

This is a gross misrepresentation and I hope that this belief isn't more widespread. The only thing that socialism and naziism had in common was the idea of an economy that will make a group of people better off, (which is pretty much the idea behind every economic model in history), but naziism is based on the idea of a "superior race", which is inherently better than the rest of the population and thus is entitled…

Unfortunately this "belief" is pretty wide spread on the American right.

It's not actually believed, though. It's just an attack point to try and associate "liberals" with Hitler in Internet comments and what not. Pretty standard troll tactic.

Re: Pardon Snowden

#672

Post by labster »

hota_mazi wrote: post #656
SoftwareMaven wrote: post #511

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If people are emboldened to blow the whistle on outrageous, secret, unconstitutional, anti-democratic activities of the US or state governments, then this is the best possible outcome.

Yes but you're being a bit naïve here. Things never really go like this. Snowden didn't just blow the whistle on some shady activities, he dumped hundreds of confidential documents that put at risk the lives of hundreds of operatives working for your freedom and others'.

You're thinking of Manning, not Snowden.

Re: Pardon Snowden

#673

Post by smsm42 »

maxerickson wrote: post #486
clarkmoody wrote: post #344

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A mode of thought I would expect in socialist countries, not the US... The United States government has done an excellent bit of propaganda to convince the bulk of the public that they are the most free people on earth. We salute the flag and sing the national anthem at games. We have the presidents' pictures on the walls of our classrooms. We chant "USA" at political rallies. But the government of the United State…

Yeah, destruction of evidence and seafood smuggling are just everyday activities. (those are both real examples from the book...whether there was a great deal of intent in the lobster tail case is disputed, but it was a pattern of shipments involving thousands and thousands of pounds of tails)

I've read the book and I agree that a lot of it concentrates on cases which are rather unusual for a common person. Not all of it though.

E.g. evidence rules mean you can be committing a felony just by deleting an email that some prosecutor may consider important - even if you haven't been under investigation at the time. And you can be investigated for things as simple as depositing sums under $10000 in the bank on routing course of business - just because it looks like "structuring". And you can also be prosecuted if you make any false statement to a government employee, no matter if it relates to any crime.

Re: Pardon Snowden

#675

Post by wooter »

nzp wrote: post #504
cconroy wrote: post #418

Earlier quoted context omitted.

David Hume came to this conclusion in OF THE FIRST PRINCIPLES OF GOVERNMENT (in the 1st paragraph). people of the United States are heavily controlled by the elite is too simplistic and some "elites" make the world better.

I think the meaning of “elite” is clear from context here (i.e. C. Wright Mills' economic, government, and military elites). He certainly didn't mean elite academic mathematicians, etc.

As an independent/libertarian, I find this distinction lost on most democrats. Sadly, it seems they define people by income - thus the income inequality debate - which, among other confounding variables, completely ignores things like mobility.

Re: Pardon Snowden

#676

Post by maerF0x0 »

rbanffy wrote: post #620
maerF0x0 wrote: post #540

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Carelessness matters a great deal! The risks/damage to the security of the country are tied to the care of what and to whom things are revealed. Its the same reason Hillary should be tried, she was ignorant and careless w/ secure information.

Would you like to be specific about the damage?

for example blindly releasing/disclosing/leaking documents to the public can endanger in field operatives.

Vs a reporter should be smart enough to redact the sensitive bits and report in a general enough way as to not endanger any specific person (in the field).

Re: Pardon Snowden

#677

Post by chopin »

rayiner wrote: post #606
morgante wrote: post #459

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Literally millions of Americans think Snowden should be pardoned. Expressing that belief won't make me a target. That being said, I could see the government trotting it out if there were ever a separate case against you. "captainmuon is already known to harbor sympathies for known traitor Edward Snowden."

I've literally never seen anything like that being trotted out in a case.

This comes close: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oppenheimer_security_hearing

Re: Pardon Snowden

#678

Post by lifeisstillgood »

peterkelly wrote: post #347
captainmuon wrote: post #60

Maybe a naive question, but what would the risk be for me to sign this? I wonder if I (a US citizen) might get trouble the next time at the border? Or get a higher score in some database, that combined with other things might get me into trouble? Increased scrutiny from the IRS (which should have nothing to do with this, but "they" might say hell why not?)? Inability to get security clearances in future? Being target…

This is the so-called "chilling effect" that's one of the most worrying implications of mass surveillance on a society... people feel afraid to speak out due to a concern they may be added to a list of some sort, and face negative real-life repercussions due to expressing their free speech. There were a couple of times where I actually called the public contact numbers for NSA & GCHQ regarding particular stories abou…

I used to work for the UK National Council for Civil Liberties - the UK ACLU if you like. (I was trying to prevent legislation removing right to silence in UK).

The organisation was well respected and had before I got there forced Britain's Security Services to admit and release to holding files on all the workers there - people who later became cabinet ministers under Blair / brown.

I have always assumed I also have a very thin file.

I am not ashamed of having that file or have having taken democratic action to change my society. What I am ashamed of is having done it so badly - the campaign did not really use web or email (This was the when of Internet cafes), I had no suit when I went to the Lords and got flustered on radio interviews.

So in answer to you, sign the petition. Be proud of your dissent and mostly do your best to make an effective protester. there is plenty of time to turn the ship around before western democracies become irredeemable. But we do need to Start. Why not here?

Re: Pardon Snowden

#679

Post by ookdatnog »

kpwagner wrote: post #357
jokoon wrote: post #267

I'm still genuinely curious about what the intelligence community thinks of him, if it's bad, what are the arguments against him. I've heard Mike Baker on the Joe Rogan experience say that he did not trust Snowden one bit. In the intelligence world, it's common to be very cautions about leaks since foreign actors like Russia can really benefit politically from such scandal. It can be difficult to really know all the…

My conservative friends, not in the intelligence community, really don't like him. They try to be civil, but I can almost hear them hiss when I mention "Snowden". It's odd to me. They don't mind digital surveillance at all. They think it's good if it makes everyone safer. Throwing in my two cents, what interests me on the Snowden topic, is his character. While I'm glad Snowden took the initiative and risk, I don't be…

If I recall correctly, Snowden didn't even have concrete plans to escape from Hong Kong after revealing his identity. Wikileaks sent someone to get him to Russia. He just assumed he'd get caught.

If this is true, I find your theory implausible.

Also, from hearing him talk, I'm quite convinced he thought long and hard about the moral implications of what he's doing. To the point where it would surprise me very much if "the greater good" weren't his primary motivation.

Re: Pardon Snowden

#680

Post by TheSpiceIsLife »

captainmuon wrote: post #60

Maybe a naive question, but what would the risk be for me to sign this? I wonder if I (a US citizen) might get trouble the next time at the border? Or get a higher score in some database, that combined with other things might get me into trouble? Increased scrutiny from the IRS (which should have nothing to do with this, but "they" might say hell why not?)? Inability to get security clearances in future? Being target…

Paranoid? Naah. I'm working on the assumption this site (pardonsnowden.org) is run by the CIA, or one of it's proxies, whatever, to gather the names of Snowden sympathisers.

Surely, right. If history has taught us anything. I mean, we know some of the things the CIA has gotten up in the past.

Post reply on HN