Please Give Edward Snowden His Medal of Freedom Already
techcrunch.comLove him or hate him, if Edward Snowden returns to the US, it will be in shackles and he will go to prison for most, if not all, of the rest of his life. The US government doesn't waive off prosecutions because the end justifies the means; it simply looks at the means and whether or not they were illegal. In this case, those means were extremely illegal.
What Snowden did helped us as a society. He exposed Obama as a liar, the NSA as a thief, and made it politically impossible for legislators to ignore or endorse any form of secret surveillance. But he will personally suffer for that. Whether in the figurative prison of Russian citizenship, or more likely in the literal underground Federal prison in Florence, CO, where security is so tight that inmates are shown their mail on television screens instead of being allowed to touch it, he is going to pay for what he did for the rest of his life. In my view, we should all thank him for his sacrifice.
What if he is an american Solzhenitsyn? Prosecution will be waived and he'll return to the USA, while disgruntled authoritarian rednecks will have no more leverage than just curse and mumble irrecognizably that it was him him him who brought the great country down.
Of course you still have to get a huge bubble popped first.
P. S. Military-industrial complex will be too busy selling factories for scraps to care.
Solzhenitsyn only returned after the USSR was dissolved - he essentially returned to an entirely different country. The US government is unlikely to be overthrown anytime soon.
I also think that people are underestimating the sheer level of hatred that government types have for Snowden. My guess is that eventually the CIA will kidnap him and either return him to the US for prosecution under a story that he was traveling somewhere and got caught, or they will simply torture and kill him, making it look like a robbery or kidnapping gone wrong. He wouldn't be the first we've done it to.
I think that's the point of the parent post's reference to a bubble bursting, the fallout from which might include a sudden loss of credibility and power for the American elites who want to prosecute Snowden. And I think it's true that this is probably the only way he'll ever be allowed back to the U.S. as a free man.
He may also become the next MLK (I'm not sure it's doable without dying, tho).
> He wouldn't be the first we've done it to.
Do you have links/names?
(Not doubting, trying to educate myself)
> disgruntled authoritarian rednecks
In this particular case, I think you'll find that the politics work out so that the rednecks aren't the disgruntled ones.
One difference is that Solzhenitsyn never fled to US. He really cared for his country.
He was expelled from USSR and eventually end up in the USA.
He thought too that he will never be able to return.
Technically speaking, what he did does not carry a criminal penalty, because the United States does not have a secrets act. Reality, of course, is a different matter.
What about a presidential pardon?
It would be politically controversial to do so, so I doubt it would ever happen. Definitely not from Obama, whom he exposed as a traitor to the very ideals that got him elected.
True. Pardons are usually only given to people actually did something wrong.
No matter what you think of Snowden, he did break the law. He did break his oath, he did steal government property.
That aside.. this is the least significant piece of information here. None of this is in question.
The most important one, and the question that should be the only one that matters, is were those actions justified?
What oath? The only oath he was required to sign AFAIK is the Oath of Office: one defending the constitution, not the corrupt inbred military-industrial-complex that's grown up. His oath read:
"I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God."
Source: http://www.newyorker.com/news/amy-davidson/did-edward-snowde...
I don't know one way or another about a Medal, but this man has upheld his oath, and he did not allow reservation or evasion to deter him in it discharging it's duty. So help him.
Breaking the law =/=> doing something wrong.
Nothing in your post is responsive to parent. Snowden broke the law and should be pardoned because he did it to fight far worse lawbreaking.
Parent implied that a pardon isn't on the table because Snowden did nothing wrong.
Well, he did break the law. Hence pardon in the first place..
Do you consider dodging the draft during Vietnam to be "something wrong"?
Yes. But that's just my opinion.
Not a crazy opinion, just curious, since I think by number of people pardoned that is the bulk of them (though I could certainly be mistaken).
That was 40 years ago. We have had many pardons since.
We've pardoned many people before and since, but in terms of number of people pardoned I think that still dominates.
It would be possible between the next election and him leaving office.
Pardons are granted after someone has been found guilty. So far, Snowden has only been charged of treason and since he's not coming to the US to stand trial, a pardon is not applicable.
"Dropping the charges" would be more accurate.
A presidential grant of amnesty would be the right thing.
http://www.politico.com/story/2014/01/edward-snowden-clemenc...
Maybe a new constitution amendment could be created to protect legitimate whistle blowers... since you can't count on politicians/Obama to do the right thing.
Pardons are often granted before someone is found guilty. The most famous pardon in US history, Ford's pardon of Nixon, was before he was formally charged with anything. The blanket pardon of Vietnam draft dodgers also wound up pardoning many people who had not yet been charged. A pardon of Snowden would not be improper procedure.
His accepting the pardon would be an admission that he performed the actions in question, but he admits that anyway.
Thanking isn't enough. People need to go to the mat for Snowden. It would be our privilege.
And if he wouldn't be in shackles, he would probably not stay alive for very long, considering what kind of concentrated power he has exposed (and let's not forget the fact that probably have of the population have been brainwashed to think he's the traitor).
Perhaps a Freudian slip, but ex-NSA chief Michael Hayden recently called Snowden a whistleblower [1].
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20140727/07183528026/forme...
Also: freedom.
Please don't.
defend your statement.
I'm wondering how Mr Snoden would compare to e.g. A Google employee stealing user e-mails and fleeing to China
A better comparison would be if a Google employee fled to China after leaking the news that Google was intercepting emails from other mail providers and hacking into other companies' servers.
(I have no particular opinion about whether Americans should consider Snowden a hero or a traitor.)
How is that in any way relevant? User emails != extensive world wide spying, HK != mainland China
The only thing he deserves around his neck is a noose. He's a self-righteous prig, a moral child (or possibly a moral cretin) who violated his oath, betrayed his country and leaves the world a far less safe place. His lack of maturity, patriotism and simple common sense have had grievous consequences, and are likely to continue to do so.
The system also failed: no-one like him should have ever been granted the access he received. That does not excuse his misbehaviour.
I doubt he'll ever get what he deserves; rather, he will be feted and glorified by similar immature, unpatriotic idiots. He'll probably never even recognise the magnitude of the evil he's committed.
As you have probably observed by your thoroughly desaturated comment text, many would see "unpatriotic" as a heroic and necessary trait.
Or would see Snowden's actions as patriotic.
I don't particularly mind being unpopular, although I'm sad that so many are so thoroughly wrong. It's not particularly their fault; they've been poorly educated.
If this were the case, surely you'd have no problem answering the sibling to this subtree, posted nine hours before your comment.
But that would be hard.
Please explain, exactly and with cites, what grievous consequences have occurred.
Why? Because he is the best Russian double agent operation in the history of espionage ? Because he skilled gov't secrets citing domestic spying where as the vast majority of what he revealed is actually international espionage? Which although some may / may not support is legal and any country with that sort of ability and know how would only WISH they could do it too.
Medal of Freedom? For the record I was pro-Snowden and for a very long time thought the same - NSA and TOR, etc unwarrented secret courts, etc. Some of them need change and are wrong I agree. But if Snowden was not a a double agent or for that matter a Moscow pawn, he would have had more finesse with the information he released.
People are naive, myself included - no one knows what it takes to keep people safe. Look at the world around you and see whats going on and don't take it for granted.
> Look at the world around you and see whats going on and don't take it for granted.
This statement is so ironic that it is almost dumbfounding. Look up the term "blowback". The U.S. (in particular, our bellicose foreign policy and insatiable appetite for oil) is the originator of many if not all of the geopolitical disasters which jeopardize our national security. That is to say, the security apparatus that Snowden has so deftly undermined is in large part responsible for creating the very phenomenon it claims to counteract. I don't care who he's working for, the fact that hundreds of millions of people around the world are now aware of this fact, including a large number of Americans, makes him a hero.
In terms of real politik it looks like a net win for the US, which is presumably why foreign policy hasn't changed much.
I doubt he's working with the Russians for one simple reason: If the Russians got our classified documents, they wouldn't release them to the public. Most intelligence is more powerful if your opponent doesn't know you know it.
I doubt he's working for the Russians either, but the damaging effect of the disclosures might be worth more to Russia than the actual intelligence itself.
> People are naive, myself included - no one knows what it takes to keep people safe. Look at the world around you and see whats going on and don't take it for granted.
So you're saying we need a government babysitter then? Sure, there are some things you need a government to help protect you from. How, though, is reading all my emails and recording all my phone calls keeping ME safe? Are they protecting me from myself? No. It's an excuse for the powers that be to control the population and expand their power.
You hear that NSA? You're a bunch of schmucks. I don't care how many watchlists you have me on.
Schmucks? No no no no no, that is a clever ruse that you should not fall for.
There is an agenda here. We may not be able to see all of it at once, but it exists, and projecting incompetence is part of it.
I wouldn't go so far as malice (history's greatest monsters thought they were doing right by their country), but to portray the NSA's behavior as incompetent does a great disservice to you, me, and everyone else who should be outraged by this. We should feel as if these intrusive searches and such are a direct attack on us and our culture and our country.
Because that's what they are.
OK, so working at the NSA == terrorism?
Of course not. Even if you believe that "working at the NSA" is necessarily an example of terrorism (and I certainly don't) what you would have is a subset relationship not equality.
The only reason Snowden is in Russia is because the U.S. government revoked his passport while he was in Moscow. So if you want someone to blame for that, look no further than the State Department.
They revoked his passport the day before he left Hong Kong [1]. He traveled to Russia on what turned out to be an invalid travel document issued by the Ecuadorian embassy in London [2] (same one that Julian Assange is holed up in).
EDIT: Added citations
[1] http://bigstory.ap.org/article/ap-source-nsa-leaker-snowdens...
[2] http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jul/02/ecuador-rafael-...
Is there a reason that a country cannot just let someone in if they want, even without a valid passport? What exactly is preventing his travel if everybody is OK with it except for the USA?
Seems to me the lack of finesse is a pretty clear indication he was working unplanned and alone.
If some secret police came to your house to kill you because they determined that that's needed in order to keep people safe, would you still stand by your argument? If not, why not?
Thats a loaded question and bit paranoid IMO. Has the secret police come to anyones house in the US? All the stuff NSA is doing is not to raid your house. My stance was and is:
that Domestic Spying is wrong but Snowden revealed international espionage way more than domestic. I am fine with international espionage its why I pay taxes and if the USA stops guess whats going to happen via China ?
Nope, it's neither loaded nor paranoid, it's simply a conclusion from your justification that "no one knows what it takes to keep people safe". Either you believe that noone knows, but those people who decide in secret, in which case a secret police killing citizens should also be fine with you if they decide that that's what's needed, or you don't actually believe that justification yourself and do think that the public does actually have something meaningful to say on the topic, in which case you would at least have to justify why that would not apply to mass surveillance.
Now, if your stance is that spying on my private life (not being a US citizen, and not being a public/political/military figure either) by your government is something you like to support, then you are an asshole, in particular if you are at the same time telling me we are "friends". I mean, I hope you do see the difference between keeping tabs on foreign military and mass-surveilling the population of allies?
Two words: Brandon Mayfield. Mis-identified by the FBI as being related to the Madrid train bombings. The Spanish police told the FBI his fingerprint didn't match. The Feds used National Security Letters to search his house and computer and plant bugs. And, finding NO evidence he ever traveled to Spain, deduced he was a master terrorist, capable of travelling under false papers. Locked up for weeks in solitary - under a fake name - as a material witness. Oh yes, it can happen here!