3 ms·

Publishing what he did is not a crime (under ruling on the Pentagon Papers) however everyone here seems to miss the point that he did so without the normal proc

Publishing what he did is not a crime (under ruling on the Pentagon Papers) however everyone here seems to miss the point that he did so without the normal process a journalist would apply, redacting the names of people that would be put at risk of harm in doing so. That was irresponsible and could be considered criminal. If you read the ruling the judge makes it clear that his actions would be considered a crime in the UK.

TedDoesntTalk 6y ago
So what exactly is his fate if the appeals process which the US is planning fails to change anything? Does he live free in the UK or will he be prosecuted in the UK for something else? I can’t find any information about that.
- myrandomcomment 6y ago
  Honestly, I am going to bet he looses in the end. The US government has unlimited time and will around these things (look at what they did to the mob). Let’s say he steps one foot out of the UK to another country that has an extradition treaty, US issues warrant and it starts all over again. It is likely given the fact that the UK judges only reason for not granting the request was how he would be held that the US government as we speak are drawling up a proposal that would be agreeable to the judge.
  - CyanBird 6y ago
    > The US government has unlimited time and will around these things > ... > Let’s say he steps one foot out of the UK to another country that has an extradition treaty Very much agree with this take, after all the US already forced the landing of the Bolivian presidential plane in Austria when they believed that Snowden could be aboard it in order to capture him and extradite him to the US
    - heavenlyblue 6y ago
      > US already forced the landing of the Bolivian presidential plane in Austria What would they do if Snowden was actually on the plane and the Bolivian president had a reason not to land the plane? I bet they would do nothing. Or do you think they would literally down a plane with a president of another country? The only reason they landed was because they had nothing to hide. I am also pretty certain American politicans are smart enough to realise that the only reason that plane landed was because there was no one there.
  - wsay 6y ago
    Additionally, it probably doesn't matter how the particular judge is placated, if that occurs - once he's in the states the US Government can essentially do as it pleases because who's going to stop them? A sternly worded letter might be sent, which will be filed, and that'll be the end of it is my guess.
  - TedDoesntTalk 6y ago
    > The US government has unlimited time and will around these things So why are Lauri Love and Gary McKinnon still free after the same extradition denial years ago?
jojobas 6y ago
Failure to edit wasn't what he was accused of. US government secrets are not expressly protected by UK law. Consider this absurdity: you could be extradited to South Korea for having some North Korean songs on your phone.
- myrandomcomment 6y ago
  So in the UK you can go to jail for what he did, unlike in the US. The Pentagon Papers ruling gave cover for journalists leaking government secrets. In the UK the official secrets act offers no such protection and is a ticket right to jail.

TedDoesntTalk 6y ago

So what exactly is his fate if the appeals process which the US is planning fails to change anything? Does he live free in the UK or will he be prosecuted in the UK for something else? I can’t find any information about that.

myrandomcomment 6y ago
Honestly, I am going to bet he looses in the end. The US government has unlimited time and will around these things (look at what they did to the mob). Let’s say he steps one foot out of the UK to another country that has an extradition treaty, US issues warrant and it starts all over again. It is likely given the fact that the UK judges only reason for not granting the request was how he would be held that the US government as we speak are drawling up a proposal that would be agreeable to the judge.
- CyanBird 6y ago
  > The US government has unlimited time and will around these things > ... > Let’s say he steps one foot out of the UK to another country that has an extradition treaty Very much agree with this take, after all the US already forced the landing of the Bolivian presidential plane in Austria when they believed that Snowden could be aboard it in order to capture him and extradite him to the US
  - heavenlyblue 6y ago
    > US already forced the landing of the Bolivian presidential plane in Austria What would they do if Snowden was actually on the plane and the Bolivian president had a reason not to land the plane? I bet they would do nothing. Or do you think they would literally down a plane with a president of another country? The only reason they landed was because they had nothing to hide. I am also pretty certain American politicans are smart enough to realise that the only reason that plane landed was because there was no one there.
- wsay 6y ago
  Additionally, it probably doesn't matter how the particular judge is placated, if that occurs - once he's in the states the US Government can essentially do as it pleases because who's going to stop them? A sternly worded letter might be sent, which will be filed, and that'll be the end of it is my guess.
- TedDoesntTalk 6y ago
  > The US government has unlimited time and will around these things So why are Lauri Love and Gary McKinnon still free after the same extradition denial years ago?

jojobas 6y ago

Failure to edit wasn't what he was accused of. US government secrets are not expressly protected by UK law. Consider this absurdity: you could be extradited to South Korea for having some North Korean songs on your phone.

myrandomcomment 6y ago
So in the UK you can go to jail for what he did, unlike in the US. The Pentagon Papers ruling gave cover for journalists leaking government secrets. In the UK the official secrets act offers no such protection and is a ticket right to jail.