Hacker Read top | best | new | newcomments | leaders | about | bookmarklet login

This should be a known fact acknowledged by everyone by now, from his leaks, but I don't think it is, and it's good to have him still being able to speak up about these things, instead of being locked up in solitary confinement without being able to respond to the governments' continuous lies.


sort by: page size:

It is but tell that to NSA and to all those angry Senators and Congress people--and especially to those lobbyists from the military industrial complex. He will be kept "in isolation because he can leak secrets even from jail"

Who did he share secrets with? He isn't charged with that.

he broke the law, but he didn't bring the classified info to those governments. by all accounts he has shielded that info from them, that he did share with journalists. I can't understand why you make these mis-statements.

To be fair, very early on he says, "I was charged with, and a jury convicted me of, leaking classified information to a New York Times reporter."

He doesn't try to protest his innocence.


Even if he had no choice, he certainly didn't have to leak everything without the time to go over it. As I pointed out elsewhere in this thread, he's leaked stuff that were completely legal, i.e. the US spying on other countries.

He's not, but even he acknowledges that Wikileaks is probably the reason he got stopped.

Granted there is a difference between publicly releasing > 1 million secret documents, but he makes a solid point.

except that he didn't leak only specific evidence of war crimes so much as a vast, unfiltered amount of secret (& potentially dangerous) information

You're right that there is a certain paradox in what I wrote.

"If he has leaked something of value to America and the world then he should not be punished. But if he has leaked nothing of value then there was no need for it to be secret, and he should not be punished!"

I dunno. At the very least it would be nice to have the evidence out in full before jumping to conclusions.


Good thing that he came forward before he miraculously 'disappears' or is otherwise arrested of some irrelevant crime. Unlike the Assange or Manning cases however, this guy uncovered an actual abuse of power, so it's hard for people not to sympathize with him and hopefully he won't be prosecuted ruthlessly. If on the other hand the US (and allies) begin a new crusade against him, it is literally a case of a government fighting its own people. Leadership needs to be accountable and that cannot happen without whistleblowers.

He also leaked a lot of documents that he wasn't supposed to. He didn't just criticize the government in isolation either.

If you are rotting in a room in an embassy on made-up false accusations, everything you do to the people who put you there is a fair game. Timing the release of information is the least worrisome thing he could have done.

He didn't have to leak anything. If he thought it was right to leak about domestic spying he certainly didn't have to leak about international spying.

If he'd stood up for US citizens rather than US enemies he could have remained in the US and fought his corner in the courts and the press.


Better for him tbh that he stuck to trolling, with leaking info he might have ended anything from a life in Guantanamo to a secret assassination.

He could have limited the scope of his leaks, or stayed in the US to face trial and persecution. Either would be more admirable than what he has done.

Sure, except for the fact that he didn't, and none of that information is non-public.

Well, he admitted to as much. I think the only reason they don't call him a 'mole' in the U.S. is that he isn't still there and that is identity is known.

Yes, when he was a fugitive potentially in possession of state secrets.

I’m not saying it’s ok - just that now he’s in custody it’s a little different.


He has the capability to leak whatever is in his best interest now.
next

Legal | privacy