I thought the reason that we had seen only a few of the PRISM slides was because Snowden was being cautious rather than cavalier. It strikes me that this way the media can be blamed for any negative public opinions about Snowden on the basis that they gave out too much or too little information.
On a some-what-related note, I wonder if this is going to be a rerun of the Wikileaks state department cables, where a Guardian reporter 'unknowingly' gave away the password to the encrypted 'insurance' cache. I still wonder whether that whole thing wasn't track 2 diplomacy masquerading as espionage theater.
Nobody said it would be too much to ask, but you don't have a constitutional right to released on bail (judges have always decided that on a case-by-case basis) or to decide which court your case will be heard in (I presume Snowden is hoping to have a trial take place within the 9th circuit based on his residence in Hawaii, given the relatively libertarian bent of the 9th Circuit appeals court).
All defendants have the right to make requests for such things...through filing motions in court. Snowden is asking (strictly speaking, his father is asking on his behalf) for extrajudicial guarantees that are not mentioned in the constitution or available to normal defendants.
From what I understand Snowden's father is very eager to get him back to the US. As long as he has "iron clad assurances of his constitutional rights", which is kind of silly. This is an incredibly high profile case and the Justice Dept doesn't want to win this one by cheating. They take pride in their work as investigators and prosecutors, they will want this case to be nice and fair. Despite what the movies have lead use to believe we aren't going to send Jason Bourne to assassinate him in the snow.
Snowden is a very interesting case. On one hand, he seems to have an idealistic view of his actions. He sincerely believes that he did the right thing. On the other hand, he now has what most 29 yr olds would give anything for: international fame. The world is tracking his every move, people are starting to venerate him...I kind of trust that his motives were pure but this is one hell of a side benefit.
Does anyone remember when Kanye West looked into the camera and said "George Bush does not care about black people"? I think that he and Snowden are linked because they both felt very strongly about an issue, but couldn't or didn't pursue recourse through the proper channels. Anyone who saw Kanye's face before he made his statement could see the brew of fear and nervousness inside of him, because deep down he knew that his next action probably wasn't the right thing to do. I would guess that Snowden went through similar emotions. He absolutely had to do what he thought was right, but inside he knew that there was probably a better way.
Snowden isn't an agent of espionage or a traitor. He is a criminal, he clearly broke the law. The perceived Constitutionality of the NSA programs is irrelevant. The Constitution itself says clearly who is in charge of interpreting the Constitution. He doesn't get a pass based on his beliefs or because of our beliefs.
I hope he comes home and faces a trial. If he gets an OJ level superstar legal team he has a good chance of being found not guilty. If he loses he's facing around 10 yrs in a lower security prison. The show trial and national debate he'll spark will probably be more than worth it.
"The perceived Constitutionality of the NSA programs is irrelevant."
This is incorrect. If the NSA programs are found to be unconstitutional by the courts, Snowden will have to be regarded as a whistleblower. If he is a whistleblower, then he is not a criminal.
The very problem here is that a good number of us Americans, and a great many more non-Americans, regard secret surveillance as both an affront to the 4th amendment of the US Constitution, and the basic human right to freedom. Secrecy is simply anathema to democracy.
> I hope he comes home and faces a trial. If he gets an OJ level superstar legal team he has a good chance of being found not guilty. If he loses he's facing around 10 yrs in a lower security prison. The show trial and national debate he'll spark will probably be more than worth it.
Wow, what a terrible and imcompassionate comment. Here's young man who braved it all to give us some factual information about spying. When '1984' scenarios were discussed before this leak, most people shrugged it off as some conspiracy theory or one being unnecessarily cynical. This leak is a big reality check for those people.
Instead of empathizing with Snowden, here you are saying that spending prison time will be 'worth it'. Worth it for whom? The media who can write tons of stories? The US citizens who now got some factual information but put the source in jail anyway?
Snowden _already_ gave up his cushy life for informing the US citizens about this leak. Expecting him to do more speaks more about one's character than anything else.
I am already saddenned that there has been outrage only on the internet but not on the streets in the US. It can only mean one thing - the US people cannot be bothered to leave the comfort of their homes where there is, I am sure, something much more 'entertaining' and 'fun'.
> This is an incredibly high profile case and the Justice Dept doesn't want to win this one by cheating. They take pride in their work as investigators and prosecutors, they will want this case to be nice and fair.
nice joke. Manning would laugh at it if he had any mental or body energy left.
Not sure how many layers of paranoiac overanalysis I'm applying here, but letting Snowden fall into the clutches of Russian intelligence may be a far better deterrent to future leakers than a 'clean' prosecution and imprisonment here in the US.
It seems like a corollary to the Streisand effect. The US pressured Ecuador to not grant Snowden asylum, which in turn prevented Snowden from escaping to a powerless country and living in relative obscurity. Now to remain free he must ask Russia and China for asylum. Most likely a much worse outcome for the US than what they would have had to deal with had they not applied pressure to Ecuador.
Right, FLED. He is fleeing the USA because the government are after him because he revealed their corruption. Sure, the media could spin it but people already know.
If he's willing to give away state secrets (I know we have objections to their content sometimes, but they are state secrets), he should also be willing to face trial in the U.S. in civilian court.
Running across the ocean is possibly the most cowardly thing, and only further cements his future legacy as a "traitor". Unfortunately one narcissist cannot decide the policy of a nation, and Mr. Snowden has made a mistake in attempting to do so via leaks of classified and top secret information. It's... Traitorous.
"If he's willing to give away state secrets (I know we have objections to their content sometimes, but they are state secrets), he should also be willing to face trial in the U.S. in civilian court."
No person acting in their own interest would willingly face trial in a US court, unless they had millions of dollars to spend on lawyers. The way our courts work, acquittals are expensive and actively discouraged, and there is almost no chance of jury nullification. The best bet any defendant has in a US court is for the police to make a procedural error, though even then you better be ready to pay a good lawyer to spot it. There is almost no chance of Snowden getting off on a procedural error, though -- for someone that high profile, a lot of care will be taken to ensure that everything is done by the book.
The government also has a lot of power to keep arresting a person and keep putting them back in a court room. If Snowden were not convicted for espionage, he would be arrested for hacking and tried separately for that. If that failed, it would be for tax evasion, illegal orchids, or some other obscure crime. If that failed, he would just be followed by the police day in and day out until he ate ice cream on a Tuesday afternoon in some county in Georgia. Even if the cases are all thrown out, he could be waiting for years to go to trial, and the judge may not be willing to grant someone with his international connections bail.
"Running across the ocean is possibly the most cowardly thing"
There is nothing cowardly about retreating from and avoiding an adversary that has vastly more resources and capabilities than you. Snowden's adversary is the world's most powerful government. It would be stupid not to run.
In other words, what you are advocating is stupidity, and what you call cowardice is what most people would call intelligence.
The problem is that the government has become corrupt as such the secrets are especially bad. There is no fair trial from a government who picks the judges, the location, the jury pool, and the defendants lawyer and even worse the strategies of the defense (judges have to approve the defence).
People keep saying this but I don't get it. Why should he be willing to face trial, exactly? What's so bad about running when you're sure you'll be punished for doing what you think is right?
[+] [-] jgrahamc|12 years ago|reply
"NOTE: Snowden's leak is basically done. It's newspapers - not Snowden - deciding what gets disclosed and in what sequence."
If that's true then Putin's condition that Snowden stop is easily met, or impossible to meet depending on how you read it.
[+] [-] lawnchair_larry|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] anigbrowl|12 years ago|reply
On a some-what-related note, I wonder if this is going to be a rerun of the Wikileaks state department cables, where a Guardian reporter 'unknowingly' gave away the password to the encrypted 'insurance' cache. I still wonder whether that whole thing wasn't track 2 diplomacy masquerading as espionage theater.
[+] [-] digitalengineer|12 years ago|reply
"...would return voluntarily to the US if there were "ironclad assurances that his constitutional rights would be honored"."
[+] [-] anigbrowl|12 years ago|reply
All defendants have the right to make requests for such things...through filing motions in court. Snowden is asking (strictly speaking, his father is asking on his behalf) for extrajudicial guarantees that are not mentioned in the constitution or available to normal defendants.
[+] [-] hooande|12 years ago|reply
Snowden is a very interesting case. On one hand, he seems to have an idealistic view of his actions. He sincerely believes that he did the right thing. On the other hand, he now has what most 29 yr olds would give anything for: international fame. The world is tracking his every move, people are starting to venerate him...I kind of trust that his motives were pure but this is one hell of a side benefit.
Does anyone remember when Kanye West looked into the camera and said "George Bush does not care about black people"? I think that he and Snowden are linked because they both felt very strongly about an issue, but couldn't or didn't pursue recourse through the proper channels. Anyone who saw Kanye's face before he made his statement could see the brew of fear and nervousness inside of him, because deep down he knew that his next action probably wasn't the right thing to do. I would guess that Snowden went through similar emotions. He absolutely had to do what he thought was right, but inside he knew that there was probably a better way.
Snowden isn't an agent of espionage or a traitor. He is a criminal, he clearly broke the law. The perceived Constitutionality of the NSA programs is irrelevant. The Constitution itself says clearly who is in charge of interpreting the Constitution. He doesn't get a pass based on his beliefs or because of our beliefs.
I hope he comes home and faces a trial. If he gets an OJ level superstar legal team he has a good chance of being found not guilty. If he loses he's facing around 10 yrs in a lower security prison. The show trial and national debate he'll spark will probably be more than worth it.
[+] [-] andrewljohnson|12 years ago|reply
This is incorrect. If the NSA programs are found to be unconstitutional by the courts, Snowden will have to be regarded as a whistleblower. If he is a whistleblower, then he is not a criminal.
The very problem here is that a good number of us Americans, and a great many more non-Americans, regard secret surveillance as both an affront to the 4th amendment of the US Constitution, and the basic human right to freedom. Secrecy is simply anathema to democracy.
[+] [-] general_failure|12 years ago|reply
Wow, what a terrible and imcompassionate comment. Here's young man who braved it all to give us some factual information about spying. When '1984' scenarios were discussed before this leak, most people shrugged it off as some conspiracy theory or one being unnecessarily cynical. This leak is a big reality check for those people.
Instead of empathizing with Snowden, here you are saying that spending prison time will be 'worth it'. Worth it for whom? The media who can write tons of stories? The US citizens who now got some factual information but put the source in jail anyway?
Snowden _already_ gave up his cushy life for informing the US citizens about this leak. Expecting him to do more speaks more about one's character than anything else.
I am already saddenned that there has been outrage only on the internet but not on the streets in the US. It can only mean one thing - the US people cannot be bothered to leave the comfort of their homes where there is, I am sure, something much more 'entertaining' and 'fun'.
[+] [-] VladRussian2|12 years ago|reply
nice joke. Manning would laugh at it if he had any mental or body energy left.
[+] [-] dmix|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] wissler|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] happy_dino|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tippytop|12 years ago|reply
[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/02/world/europe/snowden-appl...
[+] [-] jbattle|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] brg|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] greyman|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] llomlup|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mokash|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] staunch|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dnautics|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ramblerman|12 years ago|reply
We understand, really?? This double talk really makes me sick, they took his passport away, at least call a spade a spade.
[+] [-] lgomezma|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jusben1369|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jlgaddis|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] JoeCoo7|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] anigbrowl|12 years ago|reply
However, Kim Shevchenko, a consul at Sheremetyevo airport, said that Snowden did apply for asylum in Russia.
[+] [-] fusiongyro|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jabiko|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] codenapper|12 years ago|reply
- Austria - Bolivia - Brazil - China - Cuba - Finland - France - Germany - India - Italy - Ireland - Netherlands - Nicaragua - Norway - Poland - Russia - Spain - Switzerland - Venezuela - Ecuador - Iceland
[+] [-] antihero|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] hindsightbias|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] pointillistic|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] pc86|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] lmgftp|12 years ago|reply
Running across the ocean is possibly the most cowardly thing, and only further cements his future legacy as a "traitor". Unfortunately one narcissist cannot decide the policy of a nation, and Mr. Snowden has made a mistake in attempting to do so via leaks of classified and top secret information. It's... Traitorous.
[+] [-] betterunix|12 years ago|reply
No person acting in their own interest would willingly face trial in a US court, unless they had millions of dollars to spend on lawyers. The way our courts work, acquittals are expensive and actively discouraged, and there is almost no chance of jury nullification. The best bet any defendant has in a US court is for the police to make a procedural error, though even then you better be ready to pay a good lawyer to spot it. There is almost no chance of Snowden getting off on a procedural error, though -- for someone that high profile, a lot of care will be taken to ensure that everything is done by the book.
The government also has a lot of power to keep arresting a person and keep putting them back in a court room. If Snowden were not convicted for espionage, he would be arrested for hacking and tried separately for that. If that failed, it would be for tax evasion, illegal orchids, or some other obscure crime. If that failed, he would just be followed by the police day in and day out until he ate ice cream on a Tuesday afternoon in some county in Georgia. Even if the cases are all thrown out, he could be waiting for years to go to trial, and the judge may not be willing to grant someone with his international connections bail.
"Running across the ocean is possibly the most cowardly thing"
There is nothing cowardly about retreating from and avoiding an adversary that has vastly more resources and capabilities than you. Snowden's adversary is the world's most powerful government. It would be stupid not to run.
In other words, what you are advocating is stupidity, and what you call cowardice is what most people would call intelligence.
[+] [-] john_b|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] gscott|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mikeash|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|12 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] happy_dino|12 years ago|reply