9 ms·

What's the ouch? > Barack Obama will strengthen whistleblower laws 2012: President Signs Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act[1] > Obama will ensure that

by mortehu 13y ago

What's the ouch? > Barack Obama will strengthen whistleblower laws 2012: President Signs Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act[1] > Obama will ensure that federal agencies expedite the process for reviewing whistleblower claims and whistleblowers have full access to courts and due process. 2013: Whistleblower Edward Snowden is charged by federal prosecutors[2] Has something happened to Snowden that I'm not aware of? As far as I understand, he fled to avoid a trial, not because there was some imminent threat to his life. 1. http://www.whistleblower.org/blog/42-2012/2380-president-signs-whistleblower-protection-enhancement-act-wpea- http://www.whistleblower.org/blog/42-2012/2380-president-sig... 2. http://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/documents/world/us-vs-edward-j-snowden-criminal-complaint/496/ http://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/documents/world/us-vs-edwar...

joering2 13y ago
> As far as I understand, he fled to avoid a trial, not because there was some imminent threat to his life. Would you write your comment again after knowing this: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/15/opinion/15tue3.html?_r=0 http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/15/opinion/15tue3.html?_r=0 http://www.bradleymanning.org/news/bradley-on-abuse http://www.bradleymanning.org/news/bradley-on-abuse http://www.cnn.com/2012/11/29/justice/manning-wikileaks http://www.cnn.com/2012/11/29/justice/manning-wikileaks Enough?
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
- mortehu 13y ago
  Have civilians ever been tried in US military courts?
  - wooster 13y ago
    Not since Ex parte Milligan (1866), AFAIK: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex_parte_Milligan http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex_parte_Milligan
  - glesica 13y ago
    Have military prisoners ever been subjected to torture while awaiting trial? http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/apr/10/bradley-manning-legal-scholars-letter http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/apr/10/bradley-manning-... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradley_Manning#Detention https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradley_Manning#Detention It doesn't matter if he's tried in a civilian or military court, if he's tortured or otherwise subjected to inhumane treatment and if he is not likely to receive a fair trial then he should flee. Edit: typo
  - ry0ohki 13y ago
    No, but they have been targeted by drones without a trial...
    - jasonlotito 13y ago
      Once. Al Awlaki. I'll refer to https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6107997 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6107997 for the rest.
      - CWuestefeld 13y ago
        Once. Al Awlaki. As far as we know. Remember, we are now in an age where we do not know what our government is doing. In fact, we're not allowed to know what it's doing, or even why we're not allowed to know. Smart money shouldn't bet that this is the only actual occurrence.
        StevenRayOrr 13y ago
        We _know_ of one instance and that instance alone is bad enough that we should be alarmed, but "smart money" doesn't legitimize the claim that it has happened on multiple occasions.
        jasonlotito 13y ago
        > As far as we know. Yes, anything else is pure speculation. Wars have started because of speculation like that. > Remember, we are now in an age where we do not know what our government is doing. That's naive. We are not now in such an age, it has always been like this. We are now in an age where it's far easier to know what is going on. Things aren't getting worse. They aren't getting less transparent. Read your history if you think the government was more transparent in decades past. It wasn't. We've done far, far worse than target Al Awlaki. Hell, if that's our biggest concern, we are doing well.
jussij 13y ago
> not because there was some imminent threat to his life. Treason does actually carry the potential of a death penalty. Based on poor state of the current US legal system, I too would have run. The last decade has seen the US legal system turned into nothing but a rubber stamp and puppet for the government. The founding fathers would be turning in their graves.
- rtpg 13y ago
  He isn't going to be charged with treason.
  - jussij 13y ago
    Ok, let’s say they charged him with of "aiding the enemy". That also carries the death penalty. Who knows what kind of trumped up charges the government where planning to throw at him. But there's no way he'd be getting a fair trial, so why on earth would he be offering himself up for trial.
    - ahmad777x 13y ago
      Fbcf
  - muuh-gnu 13y ago
    How is he supposed to know in advance that they will not try to kill him if that legal option is on the table and they are known to be willing to make examples out of previous whistleblowers like Bradley Manning? And even if he is not threatened with outright execution, even slightly less radical but more likely punishments, like that of Manning, are sufficiently radical to justify defecting to the Soviet Union. Even a simple life in some far away Siberian village will be more endurable than a US 24/7 waterboarding & force-feeding facility.
    - sampo 13y ago
      > defecting to the Soviet Union Soviet Union ceased to exist in 1991. 1991 was 22 years ago. You must be a real old-timer?
Demiurge 13y ago
Has Obama even called Snowden a whistle-blower? He called him a hacker, and his tone of voice has always been dismissive and implying treason.
- mortehu 13y ago
  If I'm not mistaken, he was responding to the question of whether he would put pressure on China to extradite Snowden, and he basically said that he wouldn't scramble jets or start wheeling and dealing for a single case of a 29-year-old hacker suspect. Reading this in the context of what his actual powers and responsibilities are in this case, it seems to me like he was diminishing the crime, rather than rallying for a witch-hunt.
  - Demiurge 13y ago
    Besides not rallying for a witch-hunt, which is of course extremely commendable, he could acknowledge Snowden as a whistle-blower who sacrificed comfort and freedom for protecting constitution. Even while pursuing him for prosecution.
adventured 13y ago
The ouch is that the Obama Administration has been hyper aggressive in attacking whistle blowers and leaks of all kinds. "The Obama administration has already charged more people — six — under the Espionage Act for alleged mishandling of classified information than all past presidencies combined. (Prior to Obama, there were only three such cases in American history.)" http://www.salon.com/2012/02/09/obamas_unprecedented_war_on_whistleblowers/ http://www.salon.com/2012/02/09/obamas_unprecedented_war_on_... http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/16/obama-whistleblower-prosecutions-press_n_3091137.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/16/obama-whistleblower...
Buzaga 13y ago
The ouch to me is how much this that's written relates to what's happening today, I just imagine the shame he ought to feel if he reread this today, or someone read this to him... Obama is great at keeping a straight face(he's a lawyer, after all), but sometimes it makes me wonder how far can he handle since there's so much dirt with all that stuff... I mean, the "The programs are transparent" is a Bush-like statement from 'the great talker', and really, he is, but he's now completely demoralized in many eyes, people from the world rooted for him, I watched the fucking debate and shared a pic of 'debate drinking game' with my friends, we all wanted that seemingly enlighted dude at this position... it's just a very ugly story, even considering that arriving there it was inevitable that he would have to give in to a shit or two or three, but it went overboard, this is a disaster in my 'very-far-away' eyes... what will it be of his name in history? What will this do for future 'enlighted-hopeful' candidates? What about the next black person running for it? It just makes you go 'ouch'.

by mortehu 13y ago

joering2 13y ago

> As far as I understand, he fled to avoid a trial, not because there was some imminent threat to his life. Would you write your comment again after knowing this: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/15/opinion/15tue3.html?_r=0 http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/15/opinion/15tue3.html?_r=0 http://www.bradleymanning.org/news/bradley-on-abuse http://www.bradleymanning.org/news/bradley-on-abuse http://www.cnn.com/2012/11/29/justice/manning-wikileaks http://www.cnn.com/2012/11/29/justice/manning-wikileaks Enough?

deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
mortehu 13y ago
Have civilians ever been tried in US military courts?
- wooster 13y ago
  Not since Ex parte Milligan (1866), AFAIK: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex_parte_Milligan http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex_parte_Milligan
- glesica 13y ago
  Have military prisoners ever been subjected to torture while awaiting trial? http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/apr/10/bradley-manning-legal-scholars-letter http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/apr/10/bradley-manning-... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradley_Manning#Detention https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradley_Manning#Detention It doesn't matter if he's tried in a civilian or military court, if he's tortured or otherwise subjected to inhumane treatment and if he is not likely to receive a fair trial then he should flee. Edit: typo
- ry0ohki 13y ago
  No, but they have been targeted by drones without a trial...
  - jasonlotito 13y ago
    Once. Al Awlaki. I'll refer to https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6107997 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6107997 for the rest.
    - CWuestefeld 13y ago
      Once. Al Awlaki. As far as we know. Remember, we are now in an age where we do not know what our government is doing. In fact, we're not allowed to know what it's doing, or even why we're not allowed to know. Smart money shouldn't bet that this is the only actual occurrence.
      - StevenRayOrr 13y ago
        We _know_ of one instance and that instance alone is bad enough that we should be alarmed, but "smart money" doesn't legitimize the claim that it has happened on multiple occasions.
      - jasonlotito 13y ago
        > As far as we know. Yes, anything else is pure speculation. Wars have started because of speculation like that. > Remember, we are now in an age where we do not know what our government is doing. That's naive. We are not now in such an age, it has always been like this. We are now in an age where it's far easier to know what is going on. Things aren't getting worse. They aren't getting less transparent. Read your history if you think the government was more transparent in decades past. It wasn't. We've done far, far worse than target Al Awlaki. Hell, if that's our biggest concern, we are doing well.

jussij 13y ago

> not because there was some imminent threat to his life. Treason does actually carry the potential of a death penalty. Based on poor state of the current US legal system, I too would have run. The last decade has seen the US legal system turned into nothing but a rubber stamp and puppet for the government. The founding fathers would be turning in their graves.

rtpg 13y ago
He isn't going to be charged with treason.
- jussij 13y ago
  Ok, let’s say they charged him with of "aiding the enemy". That also carries the death penalty. Who knows what kind of trumped up charges the government where planning to throw at him. But there's no way he'd be getting a fair trial, so why on earth would he be offering himself up for trial.
  - ahmad777x 13y ago
    Fbcf
- muuh-gnu 13y ago
  How is he supposed to know in advance that they will not try to kill him if that legal option is on the table and they are known to be willing to make examples out of previous whistleblowers like Bradley Manning? And even if he is not threatened with outright execution, even slightly less radical but more likely punishments, like that of Manning, are sufficiently radical to justify defecting to the Soviet Union. Even a simple life in some far away Siberian village will be more endurable than a US 24/7 waterboarding & force-feeding facility.
  - sampo 13y ago
    > defecting to the Soviet Union Soviet Union ceased to exist in 1991. 1991 was 22 years ago. You must be a real old-timer?

Demiurge 13y ago

Has Obama even called Snowden a whistle-blower? He called him a hacker, and his tone of voice has always been dismissive and implying treason.

mortehu 13y ago
If I'm not mistaken, he was responding to the question of whether he would put pressure on China to extradite Snowden, and he basically said that he wouldn't scramble jets or start wheeling and dealing for a single case of a 29-year-old hacker suspect. Reading this in the context of what his actual powers and responsibilities are in this case, it seems to me like he was diminishing the crime, rather than rallying for a witch-hunt.
- Demiurge 13y ago
  Besides not rallying for a witch-hunt, which is of course extremely commendable, he could acknowledge Snowden as a whistle-blower who sacrificed comfort and freedom for protecting constitution. Even while pursuing him for prosecution.

adventured 13y ago

The ouch is that the Obama Administration has been hyper aggressive in attacking whistle blowers and leaks of all kinds. "The Obama administration has already charged more people — six — under the Espionage Act for alleged mishandling of classified information than all past presidencies combined. (Prior to Obama, there were only three such cases in American history.)" http://www.salon.com/2012/02/09/obamas_unprecedented_war_on_whistleblowers/ http://www.salon.com/2012/02/09/obamas_unprecedented_war_on_... http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/16/obama-whistleblower-prosecutions-press_n_3091137.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/16/obama-whistleblower...

Buzaga 13y ago

The ouch to me is how much this that's written relates to what's happening today, I just imagine the shame he ought to feel if he reread this today, or someone read this to him... Obama is great at keeping a straight face(he's a lawyer, after all), but sometimes it makes me wonder how far can he handle since there's so much dirt with all that stuff... I mean, the "The programs are transparent" is a Bush-like statement from 'the great talker', and really, he is, but he's now completely demoralized in many eyes, people from the world rooted for him, I watched the fucking debate and shared a pic of 'debate drinking game' with my friends, we all wanted that seemingly enlighted dude at this position... it's just a very ugly story, even considering that arriving there it was inevitable that he would have to give in to a shit or two or three, but it went overboard, this is a disaster in my 'very-far-away' eyes... what will it be of his name in history? What will this do for future 'enlighted-hopeful' candidates? What about the next black person running for it? It just makes you go 'ouch'.