Obama commutes Chelsea Manning's sentence

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Obama commutes Chelsea Manning's sentence

Red and Black: Sep 5, 2011

Before Snowden: The Whistleblowers Who Tried To Lift The Veil

quote:

For Binney, the decision to quit the NSA and become a whistleblower began a few weeks after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, when he says he discovered the spy agency had begun using software he'd created to scoop up information on Americans � all without a court order.

"I had to get out of there, because they were using the program I built to do domestic spying, and I didn't want any part of it, I didn't want to be associated with it," he says. "I look at it as basically treason. They were subverting the Constitution."

Binney says he and two other NSA colleagues who also quit tried sounding the alarm with congressional committees. But because they did not have documents to prove their charges, nobody believed them. Snowden, he says, did not repeat that mistake.

"He recognized right away, it was very clear to me, that if he wanted anybody to believe him, he'd have to take a lot of documentation with him � which is what he did," Binney says.

quote:

Others have tried to work within the system. For example, computer expert Thomas Drake thought blowing the whistle on what he considered unconstitutional NSA programs would shake things up there. Instead, what got shaken up was his own life.

"The only person who was investigated, prosecuted, charged in secret, then was indicted, then ended up facing trial and 35 years in prison was myself," he says.

Drake had taken his case both to the NSA and to Congress. After concluding his complaints were going nowhere, he showed unclassified information from the NSA to a newspaper reporter. For that he was charged with violating the Espionage Act. The FBI raided his home, too � four months after Binney's.

"Your life's never the same. All your colleagues and people you used to work with all disappear. You're persona non grata, you're radioactive," he says.

"On top of that, you're spending tens of thousands of dollars defending yourself with a private attorney. So now you're practically bankrupt, you're declared indigent before the court, your family's questioning who you are and what you're up to and why you brought all this on us."

The case against Drake fell apart days before he was to go to trial in 2011; he got off with a misdemeanor plea bargain and these days works at an Apple store. Like Binney, Drake thinks what happened to him was a cautionary tale for Snowden.

How the Pentagon punished NSA whistleblowers

quote:

During dozens of hours of interviews, Crane told me how senior Defense Department officials repeatedly broke the law to persecute Drake. First, he alleged, they revealed Drake�s identity to the Justice Department; then they withheld (and perhaps destroyed) evidence after Drake was indicted; finally, they lied about all this to a federal judge.

The supreme irony? In their zeal to punish Drake, these Pentagon officials unwittingly taught Snowden how to evade their clutches when the 29-year-old NSA contract employee blew the whistle himself. Snowden was unaware of the hidden machinations inside the Pentagon that undid Drake, but the outcome of those machinations � Drake�s arrest, indictment and persecution � sent an unmistakable message: raising concerns within the system promised doom.

�Name one whistleblower from the intelligence community whose disclosures led to real change � overturning laws, ending policies � who didn�t face retaliation as a result. The protections just aren�t there,� Snowden told the Guardian this week. �The sad reality of today�s policies is that going to the inspector general with evidence of truly serious wrongdoing is often a mistake. Going to the press involves serious risks, but at least you�ve got a chance.�

quote:

After Drake was indicted in 2010, his lawyers filed a Freedom of Information Act request to obtain documents related to the investigation Crane�s office had conducted into the claims of the NSA whistleblowers. According to Crane, he was ordered by his superiors in the IG�s office to delay releasing any documents � which could have exonerated Drake � until after the trial, which was expected to take place later in 2010.

Crane alleges that he was ordered to do so by Shelley and Lynne Halbrooks � who had recently been named the principal deputy inspector general (in other words, the second-highest ranking official in the IG�s office). Crane protested but lost this skirmish as well. (Halbrooks did not respond to repeated requests for an interview.)

In December 2010, nearly five years after the Pentagon�s inspector general�s office had apparently given Drake�s name to FBI investigators, Drake�s lawyers filed a complaint with the inspector general, alleging that Drake had been punished in retaliation for his whistleblowing. According to their complaint, the crimes Drake had been charged with were �based in part, or entirely, on information that Mr Drake provided to the [Pentagon] IG� during its investigation of the NSA whistleblowers.

Crane was at once alarmed and revolted. The complaint from Drake�s lawyers seemed to confirm his suspicion that someone in the IG�s office had illegally fingered Drake to the FBI. Worse, the indictment filed against Drake had unmistakable similarities to the confidential testimony Drake had given to Crane�s staff � suggesting that someone in the IG�s office had not simply given Drake�s name to the FBI, but shared his entire testimony, an utter violation of law.

Drake�s complaint demanded investigation, Crane told Halbrooks. But Halbrooks, joined by Shelley, allegedly rejected Crane�s demand. She added that Crane wasn�t being a �good team player� and if he didn�t shape up, she would make life difficult for him.

But there was even worse to come. As Drake�s trial approached in the spring of 2011, Crane knew that the law required the IG�s office to answer the retaliation complaint filed by Drake�s lawyers. But, Crane says, Shelley now informed him it would be impossible to respond � because the relevant documents had been destroyed. Lower level staff �hosed up�, Crane said Shelley told him: they had shredded the documents in a supposedly routine purge of the IG�s vast stores of confidential material.

Crane could not believe his ears. �I told Henry that destruction of documents under such circumstances was, as he knew, a very serious matter and could lead to the inspector general being accused of obstructing a criminal investigation.� Shelley replied, according to Crane, that it didn�t have to be a problem if everyone was a good team player.

On 15 February, 2011, Shelley and Halbrooks sent the judge in the Drake case a letter that repeated the excuse given to Crane: the requested documents had been destroyed, by mistake, during a routine purge. This routine purge, the letter assured Judge Richard D Bennett, took place before Drake was indicted.

�Lynne and Henry had frozen me out by then, so I had no input into their letter to Judge Bennett,� Crane said. �So they ended up lying to a judge in a criminal case, which of course is a crime.�

Red and Black fucked around with this message at 04:56 on Jan 19, 2017

# ? Jan 19, 2017 04:53

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Apr 28, 2024 23:53

PostNouveau: Sep 3, 2011; VY till I die; Grimey Drawer

Haha, cbs says assange is walking back his extradition promise.

# ? Jan 19, 2017 04:53

hakimashou: Jul 15, 2002; Upset Trowel

is the gender thing going to torpedo any Russia Today gig for Chelsea?

# ? Jan 19, 2017 06:42

exmarx: Feb 18, 2012; The experience over the years
of nothing getting better
only worse.

A Long List of What We Know Thanks to Private Manning

quote:

� Yemeni president lied to his own people, claiming his military carried out air strikes on militants actually done by the US. All part of giving US full rein in country against terrorists.

� Details on Vatican hiding big sex abuse cases in Ireland.

� US tried to get Spain to curb its probes of Gitmo torture and rendition.

� Egyptian torturers trained by FBI�although allegedly to teach the human rights issues.

� State Dept. memo: US-backed 2009 coup in Honduras was �illegal and unconstitutional.�

� Cables on Tunisia appear to help spark revolt in that country. The country�s ruling elite described as �The Family,� with Mafia-like skimming throughout the economy. The country�s first lady may have made massive profits off a private school.

� US knew all about massive corruption in Tunisia back in 2006 but went on supporting the government anyway, making it the pillar of its North Africa policy.

� Cables showed the UK promised in 2009 to protect US interests in the official Chilcot inquiry on the start of the Iraq war.

� Oil giant Shell claims to have �inserted staff� and fully infiltrated Nigeria's government.

� US pressured the European Union to accept GM�genetic modification, that is.

� Washington was misled by our own diplomats on Russia-Georgia showdown.

� Extremely important historical document finally released in full: Ambassador April Glaspie�s cable from Iraq in 1990 on meeting with Saddam Hussein before Kuwait invasion.

� The UK sidestepped a ban on housing cluster bombs. Officials concealed from Parliament how the US is allowed to bring weapons on to British soil in defiance of treaty.

� The New York Times: �From hundreds of diplomatic cables, Afghanistan emerges as a looking-glass land where bribery, extortion and embezzlement are the norm and the honest man is a distinct outlier.�

� Afghan vice president left country with $52 million �in cash.�

� Shocking levels of US spying at the United Nations (beyond what was commonly assumed) and intense use of diplomats abroad in intelligence-gathering roles.

� Potential environmental disaster kept secret by the US when a large consignment of highly enriched uranium in Libya came close to cracking open and leaking radioactive material into the atmosphere.

� US used threats, spying, and more to try to get its way at last year�s crucial climate conference in Copenhagen.

� American and British diplomats fear Pakistan's nuclear weapons program � with poor security � could lead to fissile material falling into the hands of terrorists or a devastating nuclear exchange with India.

� Hundreds of cables detail US use of diplomats as �sales� agents, more than previously thought, centering on jet rivalry of Boeing vs. Airbus. Hints of corruption and bribes.

� Millions in US military aid for fighting Pakistani insurgents went to other gov�t uses (or stolen) instead.

� Israel wanted to bring Gaza to the �brink of collapse.�

� The US secret services used Turkey as a base to transport terrorism suspects as part of its extraordinary rendition program.

� As protests spread in Egypt, cables revealed that strong man Suleiman was at center of government�s torture programs, causing severe backlash for Mubarak after he named Suleiman vice president during the revolt. Other cables revealed or confirmed widespread Mubarak regime corruption, police abuses and torture, and claims of massive Mubarak famiiy fortune, significantly influencing media coverage and US response.

# ? Jan 19, 2017 09:21

Dead Reckoning: Sep 13, 2011

Bishounen Bonanza posted:

Are you autistic or work for the US government? What exactly is your deal here.

It's incredibly grating that a large fraction of the people lining up to give Manning sloppy blowjobs for damaging our national security and relationships with allies in a childlike tantrum refuse to even acknowledge that the United States has a legitimate interest in conducting private diplomacy and foreign espionage. See: Chomskyan's breathtakingly stupid assertion that the Chinese Politburo have the same expectation of freedom from U.S. Government surveillance as an American citizen does.

Chomskyan posted:

e: Furthermore, from a broader moral perspective anything that it's wrong to do to a US citizen it's wrong to do to a Chinese citizen. Human rights don't depend on Nationality and Nationalism is a cancer on humanity hth

# ? Jan 19, 2017 10:09

Agnosticnixie: Jan 6, 2015

Dead Reckoning posted:

It's incredibly grating that a large fraction of the people lining up to give Manning sloppy blowjobs for damaging our national security and relationships with allies in a childlike tantrum refuse to even acknowledge that the United States has a legitimate interest in conducting private diplomacy and foreign espionage. See: Chomskyan's breathtakingly stupid assertion that the Chinese Politburo have the same expectation of freedom from U.S. Government surveillance as an American citizen does.

The delusion is on the american citizen expecting this freedom really.

# ? Jan 19, 2017 10:20

Dead Reckoning: Sep 13, 2011

Agnosticnixie posted:

The delusion is on the american citizen expecting this freedom really.

Watch out, Donald Trump said he's going to start deporting edgelords next week.

# ? Jan 19, 2017 10:28

Agnosticnixie: Jan 6, 2015

Dead Reckoning posted:

Watch out, Donald Trump said he's going to start deporting edgelords next week.

Excuse me for being cynical about a country that has Tuskegee and Iran-Contra on its recent resume. Maybe the US should stop treating its crimes as a matter of national security.

# ? Jan 19, 2017 10:30

Dead Reckoning: Sep 13, 2011

Agnosticnixie posted:

Excuse me for being cynical about a country that has Tuskegee and Iran-Contra on its recent resume. Maybe the US should stop treating its crimes as a matter of national security.

Oh, I see, you're not being edgy, you're actually that dumb.

American citizens have a right and expectation that they will be free from unwarranted government surveillance, irrespective of whether or not the government lives up to this standard. Foreign entities have no such right, nor expectation, and the U.S. Government has a duty to its citizens to assess and monitor the actions and decision-making of foreign entities by covert means. This is why non-stupid people object to the FBI tapping Martin Luther King's phone, but not the NSA tapping Xi Jinping's.

Dead Reckoning fucked around with this message at 10:43 on Jan 19, 2017

# ? Jan 19, 2017 10:40

Agnosticnixie: Jan 6, 2015

They definitely have the right and expectation, I'm just not quite sure what you're trying to say otherwise?

Also like, some if not most of the diplomatic cables were about the spying the US was doing on allies who are ostensibly liberal democracies, not about China, if you're going to go by that standard.

# ? Jan 19, 2017 10:51

evilmiera: Dec 14, 2009; Status: Ravenously Rambunctious

PostNouveau posted:

Haha, cbs says assange is walking back his extradition promise.

So he's as cowardly as imagined?

# ? Jan 19, 2017 11:01

Red and Black: Sep 5, 2011

Dead Reckoning posted:

Oh, I see, you're not being edgy, you're actually that dumb.

American citizens have a right and expectation that they will be free from unwarranted government surveillance, irrespective of whether or not the government lives up to this standard. Foreign entities have no such right, nor expectation, and the U.S. Government has a duty to its citizens to assess and monitor the actions and decision-making of foreign entities by covert means. This is why non-stupid people object to the FBI tapping Martin Luther King's phone, but not the NSA tapping Xi Jinping's.

You're an idiot. The information Snowden disclosed in Hong Kong was related to NSA attacks on civilian machines. One of the targets was a university that hosts the Hong Kong Internet Exchange, in order to bulk collect information on private Chinese citizens. Despite what you may believe, Chinese people are human beings who are fundamentally entitled to the same rights as any American. If you're opposed to bulk surveillance against Americans, you can't rationally back these kinds of attack against Chinese individuals (Nationalism isn't a rational ideology).

# ? Jan 19, 2017 11:34

Frogfingers: Oct 10, 2012

Agnosticnixie posted:

The delusion is on the american citizen expecting this freedom really.

Manning, whether you love her or hate her depends how you feel about American Exceptionalism. People who buy into that think betraying American interests and allied stability is some sort pact with Satan and nothing less, whereas those who don't feel that if America presumes to lay down the rules of statecraft, it should be expected to live by them also.

Somebody fucked around with this message at 15:01 on Jan 19, 2017

# ? Jan 19, 2017 11:37

evilweasel: Aug 24, 2002

Frogfingers posted:

Manning, whether you love him or hate him depends how you feel about American Exceptionalism. People who buy into that think betraying American interests and allied stability is some sort pact with Satan and nothing less, whereas those who don't feel that if America presumes to lay down the rules of statecraft, it should be expected to live by them also.

that is an exceptionally stupid post

what on earth do you think "the rules of statecraft" are

# ? Jan 19, 2017 14:20

evilweasel: Aug 24, 2002

Chomskyan posted:

If you're opposed to bulk surveillance against Americans, you can't rationally back these kinds of attack against Chinese individuals (Nationalism isn't a rational ideology).

of course i can, the primary danger from bulk surveillance by a nation's government is its aid in totalitarianism

its like thoughts have never entered your head

# ? Jan 19, 2017 14:24

Agnosticnixie: Jan 6, 2015

evilweasel posted:

of course i can, the primary danger from bulk surveillance by a nation's government is its aid in totalitarianism

its like thoughts have never entered your head

"Why do these people even deserve human rights or privacy, they're not flying my flag" - a very serious person

# ? Jan 19, 2017 14:32

The Kingfish: Oct 21, 2015

exmarx posted:

A Long List of What We Know Thanks to Private Manning

What manning did was very good. I don't care about our "national security relationships" with brutal dictatorships and I especially don't care if the leaked information got some CIA spooks killed.

# ? Jan 19, 2017 14:36

botany: Apr 27, 2013; by Lowtax

The Kingfish posted:

I especially don't care if the leaked information got some CIA spooks killed.

it didn't.

# ? Jan 19, 2017 14:39

evilweasel: Aug 24, 2002

Agnosticnixie posted:

"Why do these people even deserve human rights or privacy, they're not flying my flag" - a very serious person

man, you are going to be furious when you learn that the chinese government monitors its citizens internet and uses it to squash dissent quite openly

privacy lol

# ? Jan 19, 2017 14:39

Yardbomb: Jul 11, 2011; What's with the eh... bretonnian dance, sir?

The Kingfish posted:

What manning did was very good. I don't care about our "national security relationships" with brutal dictatorships and I especially don't care if the leaked information got some CIA spooks killed.

I want to emptyquote this but I'll just say I strongly agree instead, laffo that I should care about our "ally" status with fuckin Pakistan and similar places.

Oh nooooo, not the feelings of the place(s) that would put me to death.

# ? Jan 19, 2017 14:40

il_cornuto: Oct 10, 2004

Frogfingers posted:

Manning, whether you love him or hate him

Please don't misgender her.

# ? Jan 19, 2017 14:40

evilweasel: Aug 24, 2002

the bans against domestic survelliance are precisely to prevent what china does against its citizens, while spying on other countries communications is literally what every nation ever has done whenever possible

# ? Jan 19, 2017 14:41

Frogfingers: Oct 10, 2012

evilweasel posted:

that is an exceptionally stupid post

what on earth do you think "the rules of statecraft" are

Don't be dense, America has always portrayed itself as the exemplar of the rule of law. Manning's leaks exposed the undercurrent of human rights abuses and flagrant corruption it takes other countries to task over. Being just and honest is good, but it carries a featherweight load when your prime example is a hypocrite. It's poo poo like the Wikileaks material that Manning leaked, whether it was malicious towards the US or not, that invites whataboutism. Example: how can America say its poo poo doesn't stink when it's still flirting with Monroe doctrine in Honduras?

# ? Jan 19, 2017 14:42

The Kingfish: Oct 21, 2015

evilweasel posted:

the bans against domestic survelliance are precisely to prevent what china does against its citizens, while spying on other countries communications is literally what every nation ever has done whenever possible

Just lol if you don't think that security apparatus will be turned around on us sooner or later. In some ways it already is, and the only meaningful oversight is a literal secret court.

# ? Jan 19, 2017 14:43

evilweasel: Aug 24, 2002

Frogfingers posted:

Don't be dense, America has always portrayed itself as the exemplar of the rule of law. Manning's leaks exposed the undercurrent of human rights abuses and flagrant corruption it takes other countries to task over. Being just and honest is good, but it carries a featherweight load when your prime example is a hypocrite. It's poo poo like the Wikileaks material that Manning leaked, whether it was malicious towards the US or not, that invites whataboutism. Example: how can America say its poo poo doesn't stink when it's still flirting with Monroe doctrine in Honduras?

rule of law isn't "rules of statecraft"

it was the right thing to do to leak the info on war crimes in iraq, it was not to data-dump diplomatic cables

as to hypocricy if you would rather that the united states not push to end human rights abuses and corruption elsewhere, you're going to get your wish tommorow so w/e

# ? Jan 19, 2017 14:49

The Kingfish: Oct 21, 2015

evilweasel posted:

as to hypocricy if you would rather that the united states not push to end human rights abuses and corruption elsewhere, you're going to get your wish tommorow so w/e

The US already does not push to end human rights abuses and corruption.

# ? Jan 19, 2017 14:52

Agnosticnixie: Jan 6, 2015

evilweasel posted:

man, you are going to be furious when you learn that the chinese government monitors its citizens internet and uses it to squash dissent quite openly

privacy lol

"China does bad thing, therefore we are allowed to stoop to their level and consider ourselves good" - What very serious persons believe.

Also in case you missed it, cointelpro has been a thing for literally decades.

# ? Jan 19, 2017 14:53

evilweasel: Aug 24, 2002

Agnosticnixie posted:

"China does bad thing, therefore we are allowed to stoop to their level and consider ourselves good" - What very serious persons believe.

those two things do seem the same, to an idiot

# ? Jan 19, 2017 14:59

Koalas March: May 21, 2007

Don't misgender Chelsea. This is the last warning I'm giving in this thread, considering I said it it already on the first page

# ? Jan 19, 2017 15:03

Frogfingers: Oct 10, 2012

evilweasel posted:

as to hypocricy if you would rather that the united states not push to end human rights abuses and corruption elsewhere, you're going to get your wish tommorow so w/e

Forgive my broad expression, I said 'rules of statecraft' to encompass what someone else said about the US having some right to conduct espionage, which is ridiculous.

And the US and other countries should absolutely pursue abuses around the world provided they are not, synchronously, committing them or protecting those to commit them, themselves. The final moves Obama is making with Israel is great, but why isn't this being applied in the Phillipines, in Hungary, Egypt, etc.

People have said this about conservatism in this forum, but it holds true to any ideal: if you hold yourself to an ideal (like justice, or universal rights) that ideal cannot fail, it can only be failed. Anything you do to undermine that is like stepping into a pit you dug yourself.

And yes, it will be sad to enter an era where America doesn't even try, but those failures it made for itself made the plinth on which the US upholds those ideals fragile in the first place.

I don't know anyone can say that is was bad those cables came out and not condemn the contents as well? Aren't you better off knowing that not knowing? Aren't we all?

# ? Jan 19, 2017 15:04

Agnosticnixie: Jan 6, 2015

evilweasel posted:

those two things do seem the same, to an idiot

"I am a very serious person who brings rational arguments to this thread by calling them morons" - Much serious, so argument, wow

(You have yet to make a cogent argument that holds up, and you have yet to respond to a single criticism by anything but "well you're a moron", which is great to showcase how you can't even defend your ethically and morally bankrupt natsec bullshit)

# ? Jan 19, 2017 15:05

evilweasel: Aug 24, 2002

like espionage is older than even the concept of nations and the idea that people would be ~outraged~ and demand protection for someone who reveals ongoing espionage operations as a "whistleblower" is laughable. bulk surveillance against china is absolutely the right thing to do, it's a territorially expansionist country and while we have been on relatively friendly terms with them, the more we know the better. given that it's a foreign country the concern about domestic bulk surveillance doesn't apply. also, russia! the nsa is, almost certainly, responsible for us knowing exactly who was doing what in interfering with our election.

yes in a perfect world we'd all be one happy nation without such things, that's nice. who cares. exposing american capabilities for foreign espionage is absolutely exactly what the law bans and what it should ban, and whining that you don't see a difference between domestic surveillance and foreign espionage really only reflects poorly on you

# ? Jan 19, 2017 15:10

Space Camp fuckup: Aug 2, 2003

Koalas March posted:

Don't misgender Chelsea. This is the last warning I'm giving in this thread, considering I said it it already on the first page

I mean, everything she did of note occurred before she transitioned so it seems like an easy mistake to make. But if you feel that's the most important element of this story then knock yourself out.

# ? Jan 19, 2017 15:13

evilweasel: Aug 24, 2002

Frogfingers posted:

Forgive my broad expression, I said 'rules of statecraft' to encompass what someone else said about the US having some right to conduct espionage, which is ridiculous.

ok thats even dumber because (a) all countries conduct espionage and the united states is quite open that it does, just like other countries and (b) the united states has never ~laid down the rules of statecraft~ that states aren't allowed to conduct espionage

we stop any espionage on us anytime we can, just like any other country. that is different from some idea that it's a bad thing a whistleblower needs to blow a whistle on considering that any american was completely aware we had government agencies that did that (they might not have known the nsa by name but would have assumed that we did that)

Frogfingers posted:

I don't know anyone can say that is was bad those cables came out and not condemn the contents as well? Aren't you better off knowing that not knowing? Aren't we all?

no, my knowing what's in those cables has done very little to no good but the idea that america can't keep a secret prevents us from, say, talking to dissidents in countries that prosecute dissidents

# ? Jan 19, 2017 15:14

Frogfingers: Oct 10, 2012

evilweasel posted:

like espionage is older than even the concept of nations and the idea that people would be ~outraged~ and demand protection for someone who reveals ongoing espionage operations as a "whistleblower" is laughable. bulk surveillance against china is absolutely the right thing to do, it's a territorially expansionist country and while we have been on relatively friendly terms with them, the more we know the better. given that it's a foreign country the concern about domestic bulk surveillance doesn't apply. also, russia! the nsa is, almost certainly, responsible for us knowing exactly who was doing what in interfering with our election.

yes in a perfect world we'd all be one happy nation without such things, that's nice. who cares. exposing american capabilities for foreign espionage is absolutely exactly what the law bans and what it should ban, and whining that you don't see a difference between domestic surveillance and foreign espionage really only reflects poorly on you

Oh I know, I'm not saying espionage is an abomination or even unwise, but don't even think about giving it pretensions of righteousness. And the US has a bad habit of giving their intelligence companies such a long leash they graduate from information gathering to coup d'etats. What Russia did with the US election was scummy, and if I remember Obama made threats in kind about the Russian electric grid. So don't get so loving worked up the infiltration works both ways.

By the way, I'm not a US citizen, so I admit I get the benefits of the Five Eyes system but when my countrymen die for nothing following the US on its grubby little crusades it looks more than a bit hollow.

# ? Jan 19, 2017 15:25

Main Paineframe: Oct 27, 2010

Archonex posted:

Not saying it was right or wrong but weren't the NSA's actions being spearheaded by members of congress and that one weird NSA head with the Star Trek room that had a hard on for invading the privacy of citizens? Granted, I may be mis-remembering that part of the leaks. If not then i'm not sure how much higher you can take it than that.

My point is that if you believe that the very highest levels of government already approve of the behavior you believe is immoral or illegal, you probably shouldn't expect those very same people to give you a medal for revealing it. Considering the existence of current whistleblower protection laws, the only reasons to go public with a disclosure are if you believe Congress/the President approves of the behavior and will act to protect it, or if you oppose the entire concept of government security at an ideological level. In either case, you probably shouldn't expect the government to approve of your leaks or give you immunity for them. The government has no interest in having programs it wants to keep secret be revealed to the public.

# ? Jan 19, 2017 15:32

Peel: Dec 3, 2007

I'm pretty sure he doesn't expect the government to approve of his leaks or give him immunity for them, and that's why he's not in the country.

# ? Jan 19, 2017 15:53

evilweasel: Aug 24, 2002

Agnosticnixie posted:

"I am a very serious person who brings rational arguments to this thread by calling them morons" - Much serious, so argument, wow

(You have yet to make a cogent argument that holds up, and you have yet to respond to a single criticism by anything but "well you're a moron", which is great to showcase how you can't even defend your ethically and morally bankrupt natsec bullshit)

and when you post a criticism with any merit beyond your feelings and whining that i am not giving your feelings sufficient respect, perhaps i will bother to respond to them in kind

until then don't whine that your posting receives precisely the effort back you put in

Frogfingers posted:

Oh I know, I'm not saying espionage is an abomination or even unwise, but don't even think about giving it pretensions of righteousness. And the US has a bad habit of giving their intelligence companies such a long leash they graduate from information gathering to coup d'etats. What Russia did with the US election was scummy, and if I remember Obama made threats in kind about the Russian electric grid. So don't get so loving worked up the infiltration works both ways.

By the way, I'm not a US citizen, so I admit I get the benefits of the Five Eyes system but when my countrymen die for nothing following the US on its grubby little crusades it looks more than a bit hollow.

True, the CIA did not exactly slather itself with glory during the cold war and a lot of the James Bond poo poo was stupid and counter-productive. The NSA's mission though just doesn't really lend itself to that sort of freelancing because they're not doing the whole human intelligence angle, they're just trying to read everyone's mail. They're not covert ops guys, that's more of a CIA concern. The NSA's job is to read everyone's mail and be able to hack systems, they don't really leave the country.

And nobody's come up with any better way to respond to cyberwarfare attacks than measured retaliation in kind, so i'm certainly not upset that the US government has been developing that capability. The issue with Russia's interference wasn't so much they collected the information but that they used it offensively. China has been repeatedly hacking personnel databases but there's been no real mutters we should retaliate because everyone collects information and vulnerabilities, it's using the information that crosses the line.

# ? Jan 19, 2017 16:08

Main Paineframe: Oct 27, 2010

Peel posted:

I'm pretty sure he doesn't expect the government to approve of his leaks or give him immunity for them, and that's why he's not in the country.

Oh, absolutely. I'm more targeting my argument at the people who for some reason expect President Obama to pardon Snowden for revealing the NSA spying programs that President Obama already knew about and thought were perfectly fine. Snowden knew full well what he was doing and that he would never again be able to return to the US, but there are far too many supporters who don't seem to understand why the government is not in the business of granting clemency to people who think the government is wrong about things.

# ? Jan 19, 2017 16:45

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Apr 28, 2024 23:53

Deceitful Penguin: Feb 16, 2011

The Iron Rose posted:

Her leaks literally caused a financial crisis in Iceland. There's a pretty big loving difference between releasing evidence of illegal behaviour and dumping hundreds of thousands of diplomatic cables that caused a shitton of problems with our allies.

LOL and it helped clean out our corrupt and disgusting neoliberals.

Only a massive moron would think that the people of Iceland aren't grateful, when in fact one of the largest political parties in the country is built out of Wikileaks-Iceland

you retard

# ? Jan 19, 2017 17:53

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Obama commutes Chelsea Manning's sentence

«‹›9 »