Why Snowden Won’t (and Shouldn’t) Get Clemency

[babylonsister]

Why Snowden Won’t (and Shouldn’t) Get Clemency
He went too far to be considered just a whistleblower.
By Fred Kaplan



I regard Daniel Ellsberg as an American patriot. I was one of the first columnists to write that Director of National Intelligence James Clapper should be fired for lying to Congress. On June 7, two days after the first news stories based on Edward Snowden’s leaks, I wrote a column airing (and endorsing) the concerns of Brian Jenkins, a leading counterterrorism expert, that the government’s massive surveillance program had created “the foundation of a very oppressive state.”

And yet I firmly disagree with the New York Times’ Jan. 1 editorial (“Edward Snowden, Whistle-Blower”), calling on President Obama to grant Snowden “some form of clemency” for the “great service” he has done for his country.

It is true that Snowden’s revelations about the National Security Agency’s surveillance of American citizens—far vaster than any outsider had suspected, in some cases vaster than the agency’s overseers on the secret FISA court had permitted—have triggered a valuable debate, leading possibly to much-needed reforms.

If that were all that Snowden had done, if his stolen trove of beyond-top-secret documents had dealt only with the NSA’s domestic surveillance, then some form of leniency might be worth discussing.

But Snowden did much more than that. The documents that he gave the Washington Post’s Barton Gellman and the Guardian’s Glenn Greenwald have, so far, furnished stories about the NSA’s interception of email traffic, mobile phone calls, and radio transmissions of Taliban fighters in Pakistan’s northwest territories; about an operation to gauge the loyalties of CIA recruits in Pakistan; about NSA email intercepts to assist intelligence assessments of what’s going on inside Iran; about NSA surveillance of cellphone calls “worldwide,” an effort that (in the Post’s words) “allows it to look for unknown associates of known intelligence targets by tracking people whose movements intersect.” In his first interview with the South China Morning Post, Snowden revealed that the NSA routinely hacks into hundreds of computers in China and Hong Kong.

These operations have nothing to do with domestic surveillance or even spying on allies. They are not illegal, improper, or (in the context of 21st-century international politics) immoral. Exposing such operations has nothing to do with “whistle-blowing.”

more...

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/war_stories/2014/01/edward_snowden_doesn_t_deserve_clemency_the_nsa_leaker_hasn_t_proved_he.single.html

[TwilightGardener]

1. Mr. Kaplan makes a good case.

[grahamhgreen]

48. A better case is the MIA is an ongoing criminal enterprise.

[DeSwiss]

17. They should use your post in the dictionary.....

...as an example under the definition of the word: slur.

[Gravitycollapse]

3. This story is remarkably hollow given its lofty speech.

Which fundamentally revolves around unexplained claims as to what is moral and immoral. It wreaks of jingoism in its sort of nonchalant implication that support for international espionage is what constitutes moral righteousness.

[idwiyo]

4. +1

[Katashi_itto]

9. +1

[1000words]

20. How he begins the piece is telling

He presents a list of "credentials" as if they were some kind of Profiles in Courage, in order to proceed--with clear conscience--his apology for the status quo.

[KittyWampus]

38. LOL! Your ignoring the FACTS of what Snowden revealed is telling. Just as pointing to the word

"immoral" is misdirection so is pointing the author's preface.

[KittyWampus]

36. Yet neither you nor any of the following posts refute the FACTS of what Snowden actually revealed

and how it has damaged legitimate US intelligence gathering.

The fact you latch onto the word "immoral" exposes your inability to really admit the FACTS.

[former9thward]

49. Snowden is a hero.

The NSA is a nasty agency. The evil they do far out does any good. If because of their misdeeds other things were hampered too bad...

[Cha]

5. Thanks babylonsistah.. I saw this posted on another

site today and saved it for future reference.

"But Snowden did much more than that. The documents that he gave the Washington Post’s Barton Gellman and the Guardian’s Glenn Greenwald have, so far, furnished stories about the NSA’s interception of email traffic, mobile phone calls, and radio transmissions of Taliban fighters in Pakistan’s northwest territories; about an operation to gauge the loyalties of CIA recruits in Pakistan; about NSA email intercepts to assist intelligence assessments of what’s going on inside Iran; about NSA surveillance of cellphone calls “worldwide,” an effort that (in the Post’s words) “allows it to look for unknown associates of known intelligence targets by tracking people whose movements intersect.” In his first interview with the South China Morning Post, Snowden revealed that the NSA routinely hacks into hundreds of computers in China and Hong Kong."

From your link.. This also stood out for me..

"Many have likened Snowden’s actions to Daniel Ellsberg’s leaking of the Pentagon Papers. (Ellsberg himself has made the comparison.) But the Pentagon Papers were historical documents on how the United States got involved in the Vietnam War. Ellsberg leaked them (after first taking them to several senators, who wanted nothing to do with them) in the hopes that their revelations would inspire pressure to end the war. It’s worth noting that he did not leak several volumes of the Papers dealing with ongoing peace talks. Nor did he leak anything about tactical operations. Nor did he go to North Vietnam and praise its leaders (as Snowden did in Russia)."

Thank you, babylonsistah~

[rpannier]

6. Question for you

Since I've seen two articles where Ellsberg considers Snowden a patriot and equates what Snowden did favorably to what he did with Watergate, why shouldn't people see the two in the same light?

[Cha]

7. I just don't agree with what Ellsberg says now.

"There are no such extenuating circumstances favoring forgiveness of Snowden. The Times editorial paints an incomplete picture when it claims that he “stole a trove of highly classified documents after he became disillusioned with the agency’s voraciousness.” In fact, as Snowden himself told the South China Morning Post, he took his job as an NSA contractor, with Booz Allen Hamilton, because he knew that his position would grant him “access to lists of machines all over the world [that] the NSA hacked.” He stayed there for just three months, enough to do what he came to do."

[rpannier]

15. That's fine

I was merely asking and I appreciate your response
Thank you much

[pnwmom]

13. Because even though Ellsberg is a hero, he is wrong about Snowden.

As the article fully explains, what Snowden did went far beyond whistle-blowing about U.S. internal surveillance. There is no excuse for his continued revelations about international spying.

[mike_c]

52. this is just the latest in a series of lame smoke screens....

It is equally immoral to spy on everyone else, too. Universal surveillance of private citizens, without probable cause. Do you really defend that? Is it different when the victims are not American?

Most important, if it's proper to conduct that surveillance of everyone else, is it not proper then for everyone else to conduct that surveillance against US? Not the government, not the military, not our industrial capacity. Universal surveillance of you and I living our daily lives. You condone this?

[pnwmom]

53. Your position would have resulted in many more deaths in WW2.

Which were prevented because we had already cracked some of the codes that were used, in our previous "immoral" spying.

[mike_c]

55. and, you've sent up the smoke again....

Please read carefully. Those "cracked codes" you refer to were military and diplomatic communications, NOT the private communications of innocent citizens hoovered up without regard to personal privacy. I have said repeatedly-- including to you-- that whenever there is conflict between governments there will be "spying" to assess one anothers' military and industrial capacity, to further the arms races, and to discover an adversary's political intent.

That is expected, and appropriate.

Universal surveillance of private citizens without probable cause is entire different. It played little or no role in "saving lives in WWII." That sort of mass surveillance was not even possible during the mid-twentieth century except under limited conditions, such as the German Stasi, and they were rightly condemned as tools of totalitarian oppression and held up to the world as an example of how NOT to govern. THAT is the surveillance regime you are defending today, not the sort of "spying" that intercepted military communications and cracked codes during WWII.

[BluegrassDem]

8. I agree.

The domestic surveillance is one thing and something that has to pass constitutional muster, but Snowden went too far and done irreparable damage to the U.S. externally. Even if, he had stood in the U.S. and accepted the charges he would be in much better shape to get clemency than running off to Russia and China. And likely, they have access to everything the U.S. has ever done. That is inexcusable.

[DeSwiss]

18. ''irreparable damage''

- Right words, wrong party. It's the clowns we have running things that have fucked everything up. Snowden hasn't stolen, stepped-on, nor ignored anyone's rights here. That would be the US government you're thinking of.

[grahamhgreen]

50. It is the MIC that has/is damaging US interests, not Snowden.

Or maybe you think the war on terra has been beneficial...

[grahamhgreen]

10. The CIA's involvement involvement in all that crap causes more terror, not less. Hero, IMHO.

[1000words]

11. Despite his progressive rhetoric, Kaplan is firmly entrenched in the status quo.

He proved it with "The Insurgents." I'll bet he still has the scent of Petraeus' ass on his nose.

[Cha]

22. Like Snowden has the "scent of

Putin's ass on his nose? Like that?

"These nations, including Russia, Venezuela, Bolivia, Nicaragua, and Ecuador have my gratitude and respect for being the first to stand against human rights violations."

http://wikileaks.org/Statement-by-Edward-Snowden-to.html

[msongs]

12. if snowden murdered thousands of people with drones he would be an american hero and do

far more damage to the USA than anything he has done so far

[DeSwiss]

14. Mr. Snowden is not the one who should be worried about justice coming.

- He turned on the lights to expose the scurrying roaches and other vermin that have infested our government and turned it into Police State, monitoring its citizens and most of the world. We should be concerned with insuring that justice be meted out to these criminals who still threatens us all. Apparently including our elected officials.

Wake up!

[ScottyEss]

16. He won't be pardoned. And he absolutely should be pardoned.

It is truly astounding what pathetic sheeple this nation has become.

Shame on all who would give up their rights for perceived security. You now have neither.

And in the age where we the sheeple should not expect privacy, why should the government expect secrecy.

I have done nothing wrong, and I still have EVERYTHING TO HIDE. Why? Because those with the powers to spy will decide if you've done nothing wrong.

[Scuba]

28. "You now have neither." Bingo! Welcome to DU ScottyEss.

[ScottyEss]

30. Thanks!

I thought I might have ranted a bit. It's just so disheartening sometimes.

[Scuba]

34. This is a good place to rant. Feel free.

[JDPriestly]

19. Before thinking about what should happen to Snowden, we need to re-organize the NSA.

What Snowden has told us is enough to establish that the NSA's excesses have probably done more damage than good to our country. Eavesdropping on the leaders of some or all of our allies? (And, apparently without informing President Obama about it.) If they have monitoring devices in places like North Korea, that's fine. That should have been their job. But a lot of the spying could only have been intended to gain economic advantage at the expense of offending our allies.

So, there are arguments to be made on both sides of the Snowden question. Personally, I think he should be forgiven. The NSA, on the other hand, should be reorganized and better overseen.

What Snowden and others, including Drake, revealed is a wake-up call to freedom-loving Americans. We should heed that call and rein in and better supervise our intelligence services.. They have become yet another threat to our Constitution, to our ability to work with our sllies, and to the American people.

The OP on this thread makes some interesting points:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1269539

Re-organize the NSA.

[snot]

21. So, again, . . .

what actual harm has resulted? Because surely by now, there would be clear examples?

And how does the proportion of harm stack up against the proportion of good? And if you concede that the good might have any value, how would you propose that Snowden should have pursued it, instead of doing what he did?

Because I'm pretty sure the good he did far does outweigh any harm . . .

[ScottyEss]

31. Yes!

[debunkthis]

23. I'm afraid I could not disagree more

with the statement that Mr Snowden should not receive clemency, he is a hero and true patriot who should receive a ticker tape parade upon his return to the US, imo.

[ScottyEss]

32. Exactly

[Fearless]

24. The world is tinged in shades of gray

And rarely is there something so clear as black or white.

Likewise, the author assumes to understand Snowden's thought processes. No one can but the person themselves. Again, shades of gray.

[Major Hogwash]

25. It doesn't matter, all of our opinions about clemency for Snowden are moot.

Snowden's life is over.

Snowden will never again be able to walk on the face of this planet and be assured his head isn't in the middle of the crosshairs of a rifle scope.

Never again.

[ScottyEss]

33. That statement is sad, but definitely true.

[CFLDem]

42. I'm sure that's something the rat bastard considered.

[Hekate]

26. KnR

[cali]

27. Some of my best friends are.... whistleblowers.

the asshole is trying a wee bit too hard to establish his creds.

fuck him.

[last1standing]

29. Kaplan's a little too pro-MIC for my tastes but he's definitely entitled to his opinion.

I'll continue to put more faith in the opinion of people like Ellsberg on matters of whistleblowing than a pundit who adores figures like Petraeus.

[Puglover]

39. Not to mention Amy Goodman

Last edited Sun Jan 5, 2014, 04:49 PM - Edit history (1)

Bernie Sanders, Thom Hartmann.

[PowerToThePeople]

37. Another propaganda post for "Team totalitarian."

These operations have nothing to do with domestic surveillance or even spying on allies. They are not illegal, improper, or (in the context of 21st-century international politics) immoral.

Whose definition of morality are we using here? For an example, my morality is not the same as GWB's or Condy Rice's or the other mass murderers that still run free in this country.

I would claim ALL spying is immoral, be it internal or external to the entity doing the spying.

[Vattel]

40. Wow, what a poorly reasoned piece by Kaplan.

It appears that Kaplan believes that even though military force can be morally justified even though it requires operations that foreseeably kill loads of innocent bystanders, if there is any chance that Snowden hurt someone his actions are automatically morally unjustified and he deserves punishment no matter how much good he did.

To be fair, there is a real issue about whether Snowden was discriminate enough in this revelations. But that issue is very complicated. Not all international espionage is morally justified (Kaplan seems to disagree with this obvious point) and so one would have to taqke a close look at the nature and rationale for the espionage that Snowden revealed. Moreover, contrary to what Kaplan claims, international espionage typically is illegal in the nations that are spied upon. It can be justified in extreme circumstances, but our government seems to think they should be able to infringe upon any foreign citizen's rights to privacy whenever it might serve their interests.

[randome]

45. Did Snowden 'take a close look' at any of this?

Or did he simply transfer what he had to Greenwald, Der Spiegel, etc.?

If he truly wanted to examine the issues of international spying in context and present a case, that would be one thing. To steal classified documents and give them away then claim he's doing everyone a service is short-sighted at best.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]"If you're bored then you're boring." -Harvey Danger[/center][/font][hr]

[Vattel]

54. I appreciate your point.

If he just turned over everything to others, he sort of passed the buck of responsibility to determine what ought to made public. To be fair to him, he may have been constrained by the worry that if took too much time before transferring the information, he might have risked being stopped from releasing anything. I don't know the details here and the devil is no doubt in the details.

[ProSense]

41. That likely isn't going to happen, but

And yet I firmly disagree with the New York Times’ Jan. 1 editorial (“Edward Snowden, Whistle-Blower”), calling on President Obama to grant Snowden “some form of clemency” for the “great service” he has done for his country.

...the NYT suggestion isn't likely to appeal to Snowden.

<...>

Considering the enormous value of the information he has revealed, and the abuses he has exposed, Mr. Snowden deserves better than a life of permanent exile, fear and flight. He may have committed a crime to do so, but he has done his country a great service. It is time for the United States to offer Mr. Snowden a plea bargain or some form of clemency that would allow him to return home, face at least substantially reduced punishment in light of his role as a whistle-blower, and have the hope of a life advocating for greater privacy and far stronger oversight of the runaway intelligence community.

<...>

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/02/opinion/edward-snowden-whistle-blower.html?_r=1&

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024263422

NYT editor's blog: Snowden’s Questionable New Turn
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023034825

[randome]

43. It's not only these specific items Kaplan mentions.

It's the fact that thousands (hundreds of thousands?) of classified documents are now scattered throughout the world.

We all agree that the NSA's internal security is flawed. How much more flawed are the servers of corporate media offices? How can they possibly guarantee these documents won't fall into the hands of hackers or malicious employees? Are there other 'Snowdens' in any large media conglomeration? You bet there are.

I bet Snowden has, at least on occasion, perused DU. Mr. Snowden, it's time to admit you made a big mistake.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Everything is a satellite to some other thing.[/center][/font][hr]

[L0oniX]

44. The NSA is the problem ...not Snowden.

The crimes against us and the Constitution are being committed by the NSA. It took another "crime?" to expose them and their dirty deeds.

[Broward]

47. This sums it up very succinctly...it's just not that complicated.

[99Forever]

46. Edward Snowden is an America Peoples Patriot.

Fred Kaplan?

Apparently, not so much.

Keep kissing that surveillance state ass, bud.

[mike_c]

51. smoke screen....

This is meant to confuse the issue. It starts from the premise that ONLY domestic surveillance without probable cause is an unwarranted intrusion into personal privacy, so Snowden's revelations about domestic spying are somehow "different" from his revelations about surveillance of foreign citizens. However, the problem isn't so much who is being spied upon as it is why they're being watched. Absent probable cause, NO ONE should be subjected to indiscriminate and universal surveillance.

Wasn't it Locke who proposed that the only way to truly control people's behavior was to establish a panopticon, where every action is monitored all the time? The ultimate prison where the inmates think they are free, but in fact they're watched constantly. The OP suggests that only our domestic panopticon goes too far, but that universal surveillance of everyone else is just fine. By extension, that means that everyone else's universal surveillance of US is equally justifiable. That's absurd.

[ProSense]

56. Rand Paul Suggests Snowden And Clapper Share A Prison Cell

Rand Paul Suggests Snowden And Clapper Share A Prison Cell
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024281235

[ecstatic]

57. "one gasps at the megalomania and delusion in Snowden’s statements"

Petty, perhaps, but this is by far my biggest hangup when it comes to him. Releasing holiday messages, giving ultimatums and what not, as if he's a world leader or something... simply over the top ego!

[mike_c]

58. leaders are defined by their leadership...

...not by their office. Edward Snowden has provided more leadership in revealing the crimes of the surveillance state than anyone else currently in the public discourse. The rest of us are following the path that he blazed as we learn more and more about the security state. So yeah, I'd call him an important world leader for as long as the world is waiting for his next revelations. He is LEADING.