Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 17 submissions in the queue.
posted by takyon on Wednesday July 29 2015, @03:16AM   Printer-friendly
from the nice-try dept.

White House spokeswoman and Presidential Advisor on Homeland Security and Counterterrorism Lisa Monaco issued a response to the petition that Edward Snowden receive immunity from any laws he may have broken and be allowed to return to the USA as a free man. Her statement reasserted the Administration's position that Snowden is a criminal, running away from the consequences of his actions and should return to the USA to stand trial (and inevitably serve out the rest of his life in solitary confinement).

The full text of the response:

Thanks for signing a petition about Edward Snowden. This is an issue that many Americans feel strongly about. Because his actions have had serious consequences for our national security, we took this matter to Lisa Monaco, the President's Advisor on Homeland Security and Counterterrorism. Here's what she had to say:

Since taking office, President Obama has worked with Congress to secure appropriate reforms that balance the protection of civil liberties with the ability of national security professionals to secure information vital to keep Americans safe.

As the President said in announcing recent intelligence reforms, "We have to make some important decisions about how to protect ourselves and sustain our leadership in the world, while upholding the civil liberties and privacy protections that our ideals and our Constitution require."

Instead of constructively addressing these issues, Mr. Snowden's dangerous decision to steal and disclose classified information had severe consequences for the security of our country and the people who work day in and day out to protect it.

If he felt his actions were consistent with civil disobedience, then he should do what those who have taken issue with their own government do: Challenge it, speak out, engage in a constructive act of protest, and -- importantly -- accept the consequences of his actions. He should come home to the United States, and be judged by a jury of his peers -- not hide behind the cover of an authoritarian regime. Right now, he's running away from the consequences of his actions.

We live in a dangerous world. We continue to face grave security threats like terrorism, cyber-attacks, and nuclear proliferation that our intelligence community must have all the lawful tools it needs to address. The balance between our security and the civil liberties that our ideals and our Constitution require deserves robust debate and those who are willing to engage in it here at home.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by takyon on Wednesday July 29 2015, @04:05AM

    by takyon (881) <takyonNO@SPAMsoylentnews.org> on Wednesday July 29 2015, @04:05AM (#215234) Journal

    And we always have. The free and brave thing to do would be to accept that we live in a dangerous world rather than violating human rights and the constitution in order to (supposedly) increase safety. Filthy cowards desire safety above all else.

    The security state isn't going away. We have nuclear weapons, eternal enemies, insecure by design Internet, insecure by nature software, and emerging threats from non-state actors (the other NSA). The danger has increased, and the paranoia of govt and law enforcement has increased faster.

    Instead of constructively addressing these issues, Mr. Snowden's dangerous decision to steal and disclose classified information had severe consequences for the security of our country and the people who work day in and day out to protect it.

    The government conducted illegal surveillance, silenced several internal whistleblowers, and it complains that Snowden wasn't constructive. Even in the case of supposedly lawful foreign surveillance, the public has a right to know and a right not to spend tax money on programs that were going to damage our credibility once they came to light. Theoretically this could be expressed through our elected officials, but many of them were not fully aware of the implications of the surveillance programs they approved, including secret legal interpretations by the executive. Misinformation and outright lies have been trotted out regularly in order to discredit Snowden. Of course, "authorized leaks" and "anonymous officials" are still used to push the agenda of the week. Must crush ISIS.

    The classified budget of the NSA is $10 billion or more. Would cutting that to $2 billion improve or damage national security?

    --
    [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +3  
       Insightful=3, Total=3
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   5  
  • (Score: 5, Interesting) by bzipitidoo on Wednesday July 29 2015, @04:55AM

    by bzipitidoo (4388) on Wednesday July 29 2015, @04:55AM (#215265) Journal

    Everyone who agrees that "Snowden is a hero" probably just got their names added to several lists-- the list of people who are ineligible for secret clearances, the list of suspected potential terrorists, the "no-fly" list, and, heck if you also think Bradley/Chelsea Manning is a hero, the sex offender list and the military's secret list of potential soldiers who are not to be trusted because they are sexually confused or homosexual.

    Presumably spy agencies and the military have rather similar attitudes to many things. They have this lamentable tendency to view disagreement as possibly treasonous. The gun turret explosion on the Battleship Iowa back in '89 is most revealing of military attitudes and their completely unwarranted and unfair suspicion of pretty much every outsider, everyone who isn't "America F Yeah!" The navy concocted this ludicrous story that the Iowa was sabotaged by a homosexual sailor acting out his suicidal sexual frustration over a relationship that ended badly. Why did they try to run with such an implausible story, and why choose that particular one? Why couldn't a hetero sailor get just as sexually frustrated and commit suicide? Why couldn't any sailor go postal out of frustration over harsh and unfair discipline, and not sexual denial? Was it because the investigators were trying to play to military prejudices, hoping thereby to get the rest of the military to accept the story regardless of what the general public thought? As it turned out, they were using experimental powder that had already been shown to be unsafe, but the high-ranking officer pushing the powder wanted it to succeed and was all too willing to suppress and ignore contrary findings.

    Another bad time to act out was during the tenure of J. Edgar Hoover. There was also McCarthyism, with the harassment of any Hollywood talent who dared question the stifling norms of the 1950s America.

    I don't think things have changed much.

  • (Score: 5, Informative) by mhajicek on Wednesday July 29 2015, @05:04AM

    by mhajicek (51) on Wednesday July 29 2015, @05:04AM (#215269)

    “We’ll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false.” - CIA director William Casey, February 1981

    --
    The spacelike surfaces of time foliations can have a cusp at the surface of discontinuity. - P. Hajicek
    • (Score: 5, Funny) by dyingtolive on Wednesday July 29 2015, @05:19AM

      by dyingtolive (952) on Wednesday July 29 2015, @05:19AM (#215279)

      Crap. I don't know whether to believe that or not.

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for moose wang!
      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 29 2015, @06:19AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 29 2015, @06:19AM (#215285)

        William Casey, died on a canoeing trip where he was wearing a three-piece suite. Totally credible.

        • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Wednesday July 29 2015, @02:16PM

          by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday July 29 2015, @02:16PM (#215455) Journal

          How in hell did he get a "suite" into a canoe? Either English is not your first language, OR, you don't know how to spell, OR, Casey was one hell of a man to get that canoe out into deep water while carrying an entire suite.

          • (Score: 1) by jdavidb on Wednesday July 29 2015, @08:44PM

            by jdavidb (5690) on Wednesday July 29 2015, @08:44PM (#215603) Homepage Journal
            Nobody actually wears suits any more, but almost every hotel has upgraded all its rooms to be suites.
            --
            ⓋⒶ☮✝🕊 Secession is the right of all sentient beings
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 29 2015, @08:22AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 29 2015, @08:22AM (#215330)

    many of them were not fully aware of the implications of the surveillance programs they approved

    DUH!

    they have to pass the bills to find out what's in them!