Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

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: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 29 2015, @03:00PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 29 2015, @03:00PM (#215482)

    Nothing illogical there. Mass surveillance is always unethical, because it will always capture the data of countless innocent people who are not suspected of anything. Foreigners have rights too; I know that may come as a surprise for you. If we have to spy on a foreigner, there should be evidence that they're doing something wrong, or they should be an enemy country.

    Leaking that list is obviously devastating.

    Not only have you not shown that, but even if it was, freedom would still be more important than safety. The ends don't justify the means. And no, it doesn't matter how many other countries also spy on foreigners; if we're the world's leader (as our politicians like to say), we should set an example.

    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   +1  
       Insightful=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   1  
  • (Score: 2) by edIII on Thursday July 30 2015, @12:10AM

    by edIII (791) on Thursday July 30 2015, @12:10AM (#215662)

    Mass surveillance is always unethical, because it will always capture the data of countless innocent people who are not suspected of anything. Foreigners have rights too; I know that may come as a surprise for you. If we have to spy on a foreigner, there should be evidence that they're doing something wrong, or they WILL be an enemy country.

    One of the only reasons why we don't see far, far, far more political fallout in our clearly retarded foreign policy is that we offer our victim's governments a share in our spoils, and an offer to share in future spoils. In other words, there won't be an enemy country created out of these actions, as those countries are all too happy to become enemies to their own people as well. One set of thieves complaining to the other, not about the ethics of the theft, but the acquisition and division of their illicit gains.

    That to me is one of the more depressing realities of our time; There are no governments above corruption, above monied interests, and above wholly abusing their own peoples. All of the grand ideals and American ideology pushed on me in my youth in school were nothing more than a tragic and pathetic lies. I used to believe that I lived in a world governed by the U.S Constitution and the ideals it so passionately expressed, but that's just a beautiful dream and illusion in a world where my politicians respect it about as much as toilet paper. In all practicality, the only differences are in the standards of living, the degree to which the abuse is occurring, and the odds that you will be next. Functionally, my freedom is the same in the United States that it is in Burma. In the US however, my standards of living are just higher, and the odds I become hanged by law enforcement in jail like Sandra Blank are more comfortably low. Make no mistake however, law enforcement in the U.S and Burma are just as likely to abuse you, harm you, and even kill you. They have an equal amount of respect for their fellow citizens, human rights, etc. I can no longer come to any other conclusion when multiple times per month I see another American like John Crawford III, Sandra Blank, Angela Williams, Kelly Thomas, etc. being killed by police in egregious situations that clearly had police acting in a rogue fashion no better than the children in the Lord of the Flies.

    When you watch the tapes of those officers brutally murdering Kelly Thomas, it looks just like a scene playing out in Hell. Literally. Those men were nothing but excited angry beasts, seemingly taking joy in the brutality of beating a homeless man they found objectionable, and amazingly, to this day they claim was an imminent threat toward their lives. Anybody watching the video sees a mentally ill man screaming out in pain and confusion.... for his daddy. Our fellow citizen, beaten to death cruelly, crying out for mercy and his parent. Hyperbole or not, I just cannot see anything different between that and the acts of brutality we condemn on a regular basis in 3rd world countries. The hypocrisy is astounding when we treat these officers as any different than the base animals running around in ISIS decapitating people.

    It used to be that we held governments up the standard of ONLY committing ethical acts, of ONLY being comprised of our best, brightest, and most honorable. Now it's comprised of slick politicians accepting payments from the highest bidder , to enact laws written by sociopathic MBAs drinking the economic Kool-aid from on high.

    Ahhhh, the end days of Rome. Exciting times.

    --
    Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 30 2015, @01:22AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 30 2015, @01:22AM (#215685)

      It used to be that we held governments up the standard of ONLY committing ethical acts, of ONLY being comprised of our best, brightest, and most honorable.

      Those times never existed. We had slavery, had Jim Crow laws, wouldn't allow women to vote, created Japanese internment camps, committed genocide against the Native Americans, etc. When was the US government ever not corrupt in numerous ways? Other governments had different issues, but they were still corrupt.