Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
United States Government Privacy Security Your Rights Online

USA Calling For the Extradition of Snowden 955

Posted by samzenpus
from the we-want-a-word-with-you dept.
Taco Cowboy writes "Edward Snowden, the leaker who gave us the evidence of US government spying on its people is under threat of being extradited back to the U.S. to face prosecution. Some people in Congress, including Republican Peter King (R-NY), are calling for his extradition from Hong Kong to face trial. From the article: 'A spokesman for the director of national intelligence, James Clapper, said Snowden's case had been referred to the justice department and US intelligence was assessing the damage caused by the disclosures. "Any person who has a security clearance knows that he or she has an obligation to protect classified information and abide by the law," the spokesman, Shawn Turner, said.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

USA Calling For the Extradition of Snowden

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 10, 2013 @08:57AM (#43960195)
    Seriously ... if there is anyone out there who is a lawyer, or is knowledgeable enough to take this on ... this is your issue. Start a fund. Start it now.
    • by MightyYar (622222) on Monday June 10, 2013 @09:43AM (#43960761)

      At the very least, sign the Whitehouse Petition, if only for the entertainment value of forcing Obama to respond.

      Pardon Snowden [whitehouse.gov]

  • Murrica (Score:5, Insightful)

    by TitusC3v5 (608284) on Monday June 10, 2013 @08:58AM (#43960205) Homepage
    This is a textbook example of the government trying to apply "do as I say, not as I do." If they want us to respect the spirit and letter of the law, they first need to do the same.
    • Re:Murrica (Score:5, Insightful)

      by oztiks (921504) on Monday June 10, 2013 @09:06AM (#43960287)

      I just find it amazing that no one has raised the argument that the Stop SOPA, PIPA, etc protests were a tremendous waste of time.

      The PRISM program looks like the Govt has been making their own rules for some time now and with the surveillance revelations of the EAGLE program which Assange addressed in the past (but nobody really cared about because it may or may not of been speculative). I'd say with better judgement that that NSA is not the only organisation doing this.

      BTW I recommend the Ghostery app for Chrome, great little tool, wont help with any of this but still an eye opener on what big business does.

    • by Atryn (528846) on Monday June 10, 2013 @09:47AM (#43960813) Homepage
      There is something ironic about needing to have a registered account at whitehouse.gov and using it to publicly sign a petition claiming the whitehouse should pardon a guy who disclosed tracking / spying ability for anyone the gov't doesn't like. It seems like you'd end up on that "list" right after signing, right?
  • Abide by the law? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by cuncator (906265) on Monday June 10, 2013 @08:59AM (#43960211)
    Like, say, the 4th amendment protecting against unlawful search and seizure? Bastards were caught with their hands in the cookie jar and are trying anything to deflect attention.
  • by spacepimp (664856) on Monday June 10, 2013 @08:59AM (#43960219) Homepage
    I assume they are worried about what else he plans on releasing. If he has much more damning evidence (Which I assume he does) they want to get into the fold of Mother USA's arms to squeeze... hug him into silence before he says much more.
    • by asmkm22 (1902712) on Monday June 10, 2013 @12:53PM (#43963403)

      I'm more interested in the other 37 slides that he gave to reporters, but didn't get published. It seems they spoke with the Whitehouse before writing the report, and agreed to only publish 4 of the slides. What's on the other 37 that's so damning? And what happened to open journalism? With this state-controlled/influenced news situation we now have, how would you release information like this without it just getting censored anyway?

  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 10, 2013 @09:01AM (#43960233)

    >"Any person who has a security clearance knows that he or she has an obligation to protect classified information and abide by the law," the spokesman, Shawn Turner, said.'"

    Does security clearance prevail on a breach of the constitution ?

  • by mschiller (764721) on Monday June 10, 2013 @09:02AM (#43960237)

    We have an obligation to do what is right and proper above any other law. In the sense of the USA government, the Constitution is the highest law and lies out what is right and proper. If our government is unjust and doing something unethical and against the constitution, then we must first do what is right and proper to protect the constitution.

    Our Government is given power by the people, if they steal powers without consent of the governn than the highest law calls us to correct the misdeed and that trumps the laws on secrecy, etc. A soldier need not follow an illegal order!

    Now that being said: Breaking confidentiality on top-secret stuff is no laughing matter. It's treason, a capital offense. But that doesn't mean we aren't called to follow the higher law if the top-secret stuff is in itself illegal.

    • by Chris Mattern (191822) on Monday June 10, 2013 @09:07AM (#43960301)

      Now that being said: Breaking confidentiality on top-secret stuff is no laughing matter. It's treason, a capital offense.

      It's no laughing matter, but it's not treason. Treason is defined in the Constitution and this ain't it.

      • by fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) on Monday June 10, 2013 @09:38AM (#43960677) Journal

        Now that being said: Breaking confidentiality on top-secret stuff is no laughing matter. It's treason, a capital offense.

        It's no laughing matter, but it's not treason. Treason is defined in the Constitution and this ain't it.

        It's worth noting that 'treason' is one of the very few(possibly only, I can't remember if there are any others) offenses specifically defined in the constitution, rather than being left to "eh, congress will write some laws when they get together, and the several states already have things in place to keep murder and cannibalism to a minimum". And that's because the framers knew how... versatile... 'treason' can be if you allow it to be defined by whatever butthurt government is vexed with somebody at the moment.

    • by ebno-10db (1459097) on Monday June 10, 2013 @09:12AM (#43960345)

      Breaking confidentiality on top-secret stuff is no laughing matter. It's treason, a capital offense.

      It's treason to tell the American people that their government is spying on them? I don't think so.

    • by guibaby (192136) on Monday June 10, 2013 @10:07AM (#43961075)

      Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.

      Unless we are the enemy, I don't see how this definition fits what this guy did. I don't have all of the details, so I hesitate to comment on whether this guys is a hero or a scoundrel, but on its face, without the facts. I do not see how this man has even broken the law. If he had to take the oath all federal employees take:

      I, [name], do solemnly swear (or affirm) thatI 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.

      Then he has lived up to his oath. If he did not take that oath, then everyone else in the room presumably did. I am sure he signed a contract that lays out the details of his clearance. But no contract is superior to The Constitution. The Constitution is our contract with our government. If they fail to live up to their end of the contract we vote them out.

      I saw a comment earlier in this post or another that basically said, "I don't understand why Americans aren't marching in the street over this." The answer is simple. While we do not always have faith in our government, we do have faith in our Constitution. We understand that no matter what the issue is, we have the power to fix it. We have the government we have chosen and therefore the one we deserve. We understand that every congress critter, president, judge and federal employee has the obligation to determine, independently, what is proper under the constitution. We understand in the end, if we really want the government to change what they are doing, all we have to do is vote.

      Here is a hint: Stop voting for republicans and democrats, at least for congress. The collusion that happens between politicians to forward the goals of the party (which is only to get an elected majority) is causing a large percentage of the problems we are seeing today.

  • by intermodal (534361) on Monday June 10, 2013 @09:04AM (#43960261) Homepage Journal

    Even Snowden knew this would happen. There's a reason he's gone public with his identity. Now he can't be killed or disappeared without everyone knowing exactly what's going on.

  • Of course ... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by gstoddart (321705) on Monday June 10, 2013 @09:09AM (#43960325) Homepage

    "Any person who has a security clearance knows that he or she has an obligation to protect classified information and abide by the law,"

    Isn't widespread domestic spying without a specific purpose and a warrant against the law?

    This guys is brave for identifying himself and releasing this information, but I fear he's going to get absolutely destroyed in this process.

    I fear governments have tipped over to the point where security and paranoia will completely obliterate any privacy and anonymity.

    Of course, the biggest fear is that now that Microsoft, Google, and almost everyone else have rolled over to help the US do this spying, every other country is going to demand the same. I'm hard pressed to see how they could refuse given the precedent they've set.

  • by brxndxn (461473) on Monday June 10, 2013 @09:09AM (#43960327)

    We should find out who 'some people in Congress' are, post their names, and make sure constituents in their voting jurisdiction fill their inboxes. And, parade their names all over the Internet so the other people in Congress will see them be vilified. Nobody here wants to see us continuing in the direction of a totalitarian police state.

    According to the article, the people in Congress that are named are 'Republican head of the House intelligence committee, Mike Rogers' and 'Peter King, the chairman of the House homeland security subcommittee'.

  • by Shavano (2541114) on Monday June 10, 2013 @09:13AM (#43960357)
    https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/pardon-edward-snowden/Dp03vGYD879 [whitehouse.gov] --- 8979 signed on in two days.
    Also, over 4000 for repeal of the PATRIOT act so far and over 2000 for the impeachment of Roger Vinson, whose signature authorized some ridiculously broad data collection orders. And 11825 for the resignation of President Obama. I mention this last because people have been calling for his head for years and it's not clear what issue is the biggest factor in people calling for his resignation.
  • by jools33 (252092) on Monday June 10, 2013 @09:13AM (#43960359)

    I hear they do a really good B&B deal.

  • by Endimiao (471532) on Monday June 10, 2013 @09:14AM (#43960377)

    ... how they placed a high school dropout in such a position of trust. Quoting the Guardian "Snowden is a 29-year-old high-school dropout who trained for the Army Special Forces before an injury forced him to leave the military. His IT credentials are apparently limited to a few “computer” classes he took at a community college in order to get his high-school equivalency degree—courses that he did not complete. His first job at the NSA was as a security guard. Then, amazingly, he moved up the ranks of the United States’ national security infrastructure: The CIA gave him a job in IT security. He was given diplomatic cover in Geneva. He was hired by Booz Allen Hamilton, the government contractor, which paid him $200,000 a year to work on the NSA’s computer systems." .. Wtf are people smoking in the US?

    • by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 10, 2013 @09:21AM (#43960453)

      What does that have to do with anything? Maybe he is skilled enough to actual advance without having a degree. Other people doing it all the time.

      It is more a question if he did the right thing or not by coming forward with this information to the people of America, so they actual know that their government is spying on them, not matter what their rights might be. Anyone with 2 cents should know the correct answer to that one.

    • by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 10, 2013 @09:22AM (#43960461)

      Do you think there's a chance he received just a tiny bit more training at Booz Allen? Maybe a teenie tiny bit?

      But more importantly, don't you see the irony that his "poor education" allowed him to know the difference between right and wrong where apparently you don't?

    • by Sockatume (732728) on Monday June 10, 2013 @09:44AM (#43960777)

      I didn't realise that one's qualifications were a measure of trustworthiness. We should play poker sometime. I'll deal.

    • $200k? Dayum!

      But yeah it's scary that they put this guy in IT security at the NSA of all places. Most people with such qualifications would have a hard time doing better than pumping gas, secretary positions require more training with computers.

      On the other hand none of the PhDs at the NSA had the moral fortitude to leak this stuff.

    • how they placed a high school dropout in such a position of trust.

      I'm a high school dropout, and I've worked for IBM and Cisco and quit both jobs. I'm not even sucking the public teat.

      His first job at the NSA was as a security guard. Then, amazingly, he moved up the ranks of the United Statesâ(TM) national security infrastructure

      This is only amazing to people who have watched too many movies. The people who work in alphabet soup are just as competent as anyone else, no more and no less. Actually, if anything, they are probably less competent, because the government screens out a lot of creative, intelligent people in its quest to find those who will toe the line.

      Wtf are people smoking in the US?

      They could tell you, but unfortunately, it's still illegal at the federal level, in violation of our own scheduling guidelines.

  • Request to Obama (Score:5, Insightful)

    by muffen (321442) on Monday June 10, 2013 @09:15AM (#43960387)
    Mr Obama,
    Can you please give me access to all your email and phone conversations? If you are not doing anything wrong, you have nothing to worry about.
  • Hypocrisy (Score:5, Insightful)

    by kimvette (919543) on Monday June 10, 2013 @09:24AM (#43960483) Homepage Journal

    Extreme hypocrisy exhibited by:

    "Any person who has a security clearance knows that he or she has an obligation to protect classified information and abide by the law," the spokesman, Shawn Turner, said.'"

    He WAS abiding by the law by exposing illegal activities carried out by the government on an ongoing basis. How is what he did illegal or wrong, by any stretch of the imagination? A law instructing any citizen to not report any illegal activity is itself an illegal law.

  • by Viewsonic (584922) on Monday June 10, 2013 @09:29AM (#43960565)

    Am I the only one with their jaw on the ground that the NSA and CIA are hiring contractors as full time employees in top secret positions with access to everything, instead of doing actual short term janitorial type of work that contractors are supposed to be used for? If they need a printer installs, sure, use the contractor. Need to have a recorded wire tap scanned and sent over to secret building #2, use a contractor? REALLY??

    • by erroneus (253617) on Monday June 10, 2013 @09:50AM (#43960853) Homepage

      Contractor use is how they get around other aspects of US and [especially] Constitutional legal restrictions and limitations.

      Problem with the military code, rules or laws? No problem -- hire contractors. Got a problem with accountability and being tracked or with requirements of reporting your activities? Just use contractors. Easy to blame and easy to fire.

      Not shocking, but quite disgusting. We put these government controls into place to prevent all sorts of government abuse and they just route around it. And no one is called to the floor for these practices.

    • by guibaby (192136) on Monday June 10, 2013 @10:21AM (#43961269)

      No...I am not shocked. I worked for a defense contractor as contractor from another company. I had clearance. Its pretty common. There are several levels of clearance. Everyone knows about secret and top secret, but there are other levels that don't even have names. In addition to that, you have compartmentalization through program clearance. Which basically means, even if you have super duper top secret clearance, you still don't get to see anything until you are briefed on the specific rules of the specific program. The government hire contractors like BH for their ability to specialize.

  • Strange days indeed (Score:5, Interesting)

    by kilfarsnar (561956) on Monday June 10, 2013 @09:31AM (#43960581)
    I never thought I'd see the day when an American is seeking political protection in China.
  • by bayankaran (446245) on Monday June 10, 2013 @09:55AM (#43960919) Homepage
    ...the fun begins.
    On one side Snowden, who knows the repercussions of what he did, but chose this path. Bravo. He did not go the Wikileaks route, very impressive.
    On the other side whoever who were "appalled" US government is snooping indiscriminately - the list starts with Ron Paul. Lets see if Ron Paul will take a stand and publicly defend Snowden.
    Then we have POTUS - who probably would have personally supported Snowden if he were not the POTUS. The more POTUS and his administration squeaks about "grave danger to US" and other nonsense and proceeds to harm Snowden, the more out of touch, elitist and a tool he will look.
    Excellent drama. I sincerely hope Snowden can go home to a heroes reception.
  • First they came (Score:5, Informative)

    by stewsters (1406737) on Monday June 10, 2013 @10:43AM (#43961661)
    First they came for the communists,
    and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a communist.

    Then they came for the human rights activists,
    and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a human rights activist.

    Then they came for the terrorists,
    and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a terrorists.

    Then they came for the people with Verizon,
    and I didn't speak out because I don't like getting charged that much for a phone plan.

    Then they came for me,
    and there was no one left to speak for me.
  • by echtertyp (1094605) on Monday June 10, 2013 @11:22AM (#43962205)
    Re: he had clearance, and orders, and trusted access... the U.S. itself insisted in 1945, rightly so, that individuals must listen to their conscience, regardless of their official obligations.

You can do more with a kind word and a gun than with just a kind word. - Al Capone

Working...