4 ms·
Let's assume this charge is legal and correct for a moment. Why aren't the newspapers (guardian and the post?) and their writers/editors also being charged? Why
by jsmeaton 13y ago
Let's assume this charge is legal and correct for a moment. Why aren't the newspapers (guardian and the post?) and their writers/editors also being charged? Why aren't the newspapers having their paypal and all their bank accounts frozen?
We live in very scary times as far as I'm concerned. The US is prosecuting its own citizens for standing up and saying "what you're doing to the rest of the world is not OK". But if you're a non-US citizen doing the same you just get thrown in Gitmo.
There's outrage about what is being done domestically, but the rest of the world seem to have no way of protesting. As an Australian I should be safe from all of this - but our Government, no doubt, is piggy-backing on everything the US is doing. No one is safe.
- _delirium 13y agoW.r.t. why the Guardian isn't also being charged: While the act of leaking classified information is a crime, publishing classified information leaked to you by someone else isn't a crime. Here's a law-review article discussing that: https://www.law.upenn.edu/institutes/cerl/conferences/ethicsofsecrecy/papers/reading/Stone.pdf https://www.law.upenn.edu/institutes/cerl/conferences/ethics...
- foobarqux 13y agoExcept the government has recently taken the view that journalists are co-conspirators and therefore criminals.
- Jayschwa 13y agoSnowden presumably signed some contract or took some oath when he got his clearance, which he violated when he leaked info. The newspapers never made such promises. I don't think Snowden should be punished, but I can see why there might be a distinction with respect to prosecution.
- Andrew_Quentin 13y agoA private contract can not make you guilty of criminal offences.