Edward Snowden Makes 'Moral' Case For Presidential Pardon (theguardian.com) 387
An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Guardian: Edward Snowden has set out the case for Barack Obama granting him a pardon before the U.S. president leaves office in January, arguing that the disclosure of the scale of surveillance by U.S. and British intelligence agencies was not only morally right but had left citizens better off. Speaking on Monday via a video link from Moscow, where he is in exile, Snowden said any evaluation of the consequences of his leak of tens of thousands of National Security Agency and GCHQ documents in 2013 would show clearly that people had benefited. "Yes, there are laws on the books that say one thing, but that is perhaps why the pardon power exists -- for the exceptions, for the things that may seem unlawful in letters on a page but when we look at them morally, when we look at them ethically, when we look at the results, it seems these were necessary things, these were vital things," he said. "I think when people look at the calculations of benefit, it is clear that in the wake of 2013 the laws of our nation changed. The [U.S.] Congress, the courts and the president all changed their policies as a result of these disclosures. At the same time there has never been any public evidence that any individual came to harm as a result." In his wide-ranging interview, Snowden insisted the net public benefit of the NSA leak was clear. "If not for these disclosures, if not for these revelations, we would be worse off," he said. But Snowden still wants to return to the U.S. and seems confident, in spite of all the evidence to the contrary, that it will happen. "In the fullness of time, I think I will end up back home," he said.
Not going to happen (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Not going to happen (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Not going to happen (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Not going to happen (Score:4, Insightful)
As much as I'd like to see Snowden pardoned, I think he's probably wrong about why pardons exist. It seems to me that they originally existed as a means of nobility keeping political allies in power instead of dead or in jail. Who else would a king bother to pardon? Granted, the first high profile federal pardons in the US were for the whisky rebellion, so perhaps in the US context he might be right, but the US took the concept of pardons from the country that it rebelled from.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
he's better off not pardoned (yet). right now, if he returns pardoned, some yank nutcase with " 'mah rifle, 'mah deeemocracy and 'mah obligiateon to do what's riiight" will put a bullet in his head and feel he's doing everybody a service.
Re:Not going to happen (Score:4, Insightful)
He spoke out to fight government oversight and abuse of government power. He could barely be in a worse country for government abuse of power and invasion of privacy. Besides, Russia is a bit of a craphole of a place to live, regardless of obesity.
The average lifespan of a man in Russia is 65. Yes, 65. No freedom of press. A government constantly at odds with the rest of the world. No true democracy.
I wouldn't want to be exiled in Russia- there are probably over 100 countries I would choose to live in before Russia.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Not going to happen (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
100 countries better than Russia? Russia definitely has a lot of problems like you mentioned, but I'd have a hard time listing 100 countries that would be better to live in. Western Europe doesn't have *that* many countries in it. I sincerely hope you're exaggerating here.
Personally, if I had to be exiled from the US, I'd want it to be in Norway, Switzerland, Sweden, Denmark, etc. Heck, even Iceland wouldn't be bad: it's a small, remote island with only about 250k people, perfect for exile!
But there's a
Re:Not going to happen (Score:5, Insightful)
*The US never had a monarchy*
You can thank George Washington for that. A lot of people wanted to crown him king- there was pressure to make him one but he turned it down.. He could have gotten away with it if he were a lesser man. America was lucky they had Washington in charge of the army at that point instead of someone else.
Who know if it will happen: Absolutely nobody (Score:5, Insightful)
Here is the fun and dirty fact about pardons: You could blow up a bus full of nus and orphans on National TV, and if enough people wrote their leaders demanding that you were pardoned, you would get a pardon. They have NOTHING to do with justice or fairness for better or worse. Who knows how Obama really feels about the whole incident? Who knows what public opinion will be after the film comes out. I will wager that if the film gets an Oscar or two, (and the added media attention that comes with that), that Snowden gets pardoned because grandma suddenly learns about the whole story and starts writing her representatives in Washington. If public opinion turns, senators will start falling over each other to get in line and demand he be pardoned. The pardon could very well depend on how much money a Hollywood studio decides to spread around to buy a few awards.
Snowden won't get pardoned because he did something that was morally right, but legally wrong. He will get pardoned (if he gets pardoned) because it makes someone in power look good, or it pisses of the opposition somehow. His pardon won't be about justice, but straight up political gamesmanship.
there's always greed and the clintons (Score:3, Interesting)
He can wait. If Clinton is elected, on her last day in office she'll probably do like her husband and sell pardons (Clinton pardoned more people on his last day than all other presidents combined). Not only would she be the first female president, she could also try to beat him at the corruption game. Now THAT would be a big win for gender equality.
Re:Not going to happen (Score:4, Insightful)
Hell, he got a Nobel Peace Prize for doing nothing, so he's already gotten his "ADVANCE TO GO (COLLECT $200)" card.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Obama's Legacy [pitchinteractive.com]
Re:Not going to happen (Score:5, Interesting)
That's a commonly done thing by that bunch.
Arafat and Begin got theirs not for what they had done but in the hope that they would sort out a lasting peace and deserve it.
Re:Not going to happen (Score:5, Interesting)
The reality is if Edward Snowden can only ever receive a pardon if those he exposed corruptly committing crimes against the US constitution and against their oaths are prosecuted for those crimes and that will never happen. The current corrupt administration can not on one hand claim that what Edward Snowden did was morally correct and legally bound to the principle that you can not obey illegal orders and keep crimes secret, whilst claiming all those criminals who committed those crimes for low to high and by high the office of President and the heads of those organisations committing those crimes, should not be prosecuted to the extent of pretending crimes were not crimes.
So can't happen and in fact those corrupt con artists at the top want to reinforce the idea that if you expose insider corruption you will suffer up to and including having your throat crushed, being shot in the back, having your car blown up, stripped naked, sexually abused (not once but for years) and that is just a start.
The only legacy those arse holes give a crap about is how fat their off shore tax haven bank account is and they are as strictly shallow as that. Oh and ensuring their replacements are as equally corrupt so their crimes will not be exposed and if exposed ignored and not prosecuted, hence Clinton to replace Obama. How many high level crimes have been exposed and ignored, not once but repeatedly over the last couple of decades.
Re:Not going to happen (Score:5, Funny)
If I were Snowden, I'd wait until Obama visited Russia and then ask Putin if I could sit in on the talks. When I met Obama I'd speak really quietly.
Obama: Excuse me
Snowden: mmdsmadm msdm admasdm
Obama: Pardon?
Snowden: AHA! Thank you Obammy!
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
...making campaign pitches for her - ON YOUR DIME. He's not getting paid to do that. The time he spends doing that is supposed to be spent actually running the country, not setting up his party. I hope to hell the democrats plan to include those several million dollars an hour free advertising, international media coverage and presidential security detail in the statement where they declare campaign contributions.
Have you ever heard of congress? Have any gripes with them? El Pres doesn't make much more than those worthless fuckers. And there are hundreds of them. They spend a few days a year being obstructionists, and the rest of the time pimping themselves out.
Re:Not going to happen (Score:5, Interesting)
I think Obama publicly speaks out against Trump because he has actual respect for the office and Trump is an unprecedented, very unusual candidate. No matter if you're Democrat or Republican, if you are able to see through the populist rhetoric and regard Trump for what he is, one thing seems certain; Trump is completely unpredictable to the point of being erratic and volatile. An accomplished opportunist that always says whatever the current audience wants to hear. It's impossible to know what he will do in a position of power and that can be a very dangerous thing when holding one of the most powerful positions in the world.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Not going to happen (Score:5, Interesting)
- We've more than doubled the national debt.
- We're mired in shit in the middle east in more countries, not less.
- We have fewer Americans in the workforce that we did a decade ago and that continues to decline. Worst most in the black communities who continue to be told that the world is stacked against them and there is no way they can succeed, and they believe that horse shit.
- We've angered several key allies globally including Britain, Japan and Israel. Hell, the President of the Philippines just said he wants Americans out.
- Civil Rights has taken a pretty ugly turn and there are those among us more suspicious of the other race than they have been in a long time (the other race, being whatever they arent), thanks to the press stirring up the one-sided claims of bigotry and ignoring the other, while the President comes out and says inflammatory and irresponsible shit like, "Well, I don't have all the facts, but the cops acted stupidly.". (Paraphrased)
- Health care costs have skyrocketed along with insurance premiums helped along in large part by the Affordable Care Act.
- Most respectable economists will tell you flat out that the markets are artificially inflated and another crash isnt a possibility, but rather an eventuality that will make the 2008 "recession" look like a picnic, and we can thank the bailouts for a significant portion of that.
- College tuition is insane for education that 20 years ago was considered the minimum standard necessary to graduate from high school, where high school now is churning out record numbers of illiterate entitled jackasses.
- Food prices are continuing to rise, in part due to the on-going campaigns of the EPA and FDA to regulate every aspect of every thing you might maybe someday kinda put in your body, while ensuring that you have to deal with government bureaucracy just to get the water to farm or raise livestock.
- Almost every "journalist" is fully and apologetically in the tank for one political party or the other, and have stopped telling the people the truth about much of anything.
- Our energy sector is fully under attack with costs to the consumers continuing to rise while the rickety state of the infrastructure to supply whatever renewable energy of the day you choose continues to degrade to the point of collapse.
I could put another 10 items on this list without research. So again I'll ask, how are we better?
We're not wealthier, unless you are among an elite subset.
We're not better educated.
Our costs are not decreasing for almost anything.
We're not living with our neighbors with more peace, joy or understanding unless you're in a key special interest group. (Which I will admit we've made gains in.)
We (collectively) are not enjoying lower unemployment.
We're in more on-going military conflicts than we were, and we've lost more soldiers that in the previous decade in the process.
The opinion globally of both Americans and their leaders is much lower around the world than it was.
And Bush started us on half of this stupidity, so he gets no pass from me either.
I'd say we're neck deep in shit stew personally. But thank you for the direct evidence provided that the "journalists" have accomplished their goal.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
With Trump being the "alernative' the choice is easy.
When you learn to spell, you can vote...
Trump might be good or bad, but Clinton is evil...
Re: (Score:3)
If you think Trump might be good, I don't know what to tell you. The best case scenario in a Trump presidency is that he basically blows it all up and we have to start over. The worst case scenario is that his buddy Putin spurns him and he decides to launch nukes in retaliation. This is the first election where I'm actually fearful for the country if a major party candidate would win the election.
I had some unflattering things to say about George Bush, but Trump is orders of magnitude more dangerous than
The Constitution is supreme (Score:2, Interesting)
The bureaucrats know this. Obama knows this. The governments lawyers know this. The reason they don't care is because the purpose of the Constitution is to protect the people from the government and they are the
I think... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: I think... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: I think... (Score:4, Insightful)
It was all the rest where he became a traitor telling LEGAL THINGS THAT NSA DOES AND HOW THEY DO IT.
Re: (Score:3)
against unreasonable searches (Score:2)
That word "unreasonable" makes all the difference. If the government thinks it is reasonable to gobble up everything while investigating possibile terrorists, they will do so. Whether it is truly unreasonable won't need to be determined until the evidence is brought into a court of law.
Re: I think... (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, he is a criminal. He wouldn't be needing a pardon, otherwise.
He had to break the law to reveal how our government was wantonly and routinely breaking the law, to our detriment. Our own government betrayed our trust, and harmed us by doing so, and Snowden sacrificed his liberty to reveal that truth to us.
Hero.
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly which law did he break? He clearly broke an oath of secrecy, but that's not remotely the same thing.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: I think... (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeah. Its not like treason or anything is against the law.
The American Revolution was illegal as well, consider that...
Re: I think... (Score:5, Insightful)
18 U.S.C. 798 [cornell.edu]. Note how that law has no mention of malicious intent. It doesn't matter whether Snowden had noble intentions when he broke the law; it is still a violation. This is in contrast to other laws he may have broken (like 18 U.S.C 2381 [cornell.edu]) which require making the case that Snowden's goal was to aid the enemies of the United States.
That distinction is important when Snowden claims that he won't get a "fair trial". In a trial, the question is whether the defendant broke the law. A fair trial means the defendant has a fair chance to defend himself. Regarding section 798, Snowden could argue that he wasn't really the one who leaked the information, or could claim that he was misled to believe that Glenn Greenwald was authorized to receive the information, or he could argue that the whole affair is an elaborate conspiracy to frame him. Unfortunately, he's already quite publicly stated that he took classified material about communications intelligence and made it available to the public. He still can get a fair trial just as soon as he sets foot on American soil, but "fair" and "likely to win" are two very different things.
Snowden's motives can then be used during sentencing to argue for a lighter sentence, and that would probably be fairly successful, since the NSA has directly and indirectly admitted some wrongdoing on their own behalf. On the other hand, despite Snowden's claims, there's very little (unclassified) evidence that he actually tried to pursue any legal alternatives, and there's a growing amount of evidence that Snowden's leak benefited foreign parties. That part of the trial will be far more difficult to predict.
Re: I think... (Score:5, Insightful)
However a LOT has come out about several people who tried to blow the whistle within the system in the NSA and ended up in deep shit with absolutely nothing done about the problems they tired to expose.
If he wanted anyone outside the NSA to get the news, including the people who are supposed to be running it, there does not appear to have been a way he could do it without breaking the law.
Re: I think... (Score:5, Insightful)
He is a hero.
He is a criminal
Those are not mutually exclusive. Why can't he be both?
Re: (Score:2)
He only gets to be both is he wears a dorky smiling mask.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Hero? Not in any world I've ever visited.
From 1939 Germany, are you?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
My job pays $49/hour, which is a touch below average for my experience and qualifications in this area *without* a clearance.
Are you in a scientific profession? One that pays well in the civilian world? Snowden was an analyst (entry level at that), which I would imagine is a profession that doesn't pay as well in the civilian world.
Part of the entire problem (Score:3)
Snowden WAS in the civilian world working for an expensive external contractor to the NSA. That outsourcing is part of the entire problem (apart from the NSA toy soldiers who are most definitely civilian themselves in what should be a military job with rules of engagement etc) and if Snowden wasn't paid incredibly well we can at least be sure that his boss was.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
With Snowden, he has told Terrorists how to hide from western detection
He also told my mom that the government was reading her email.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You could have told you mom that yourself, just by yelling up the stairs.
No I can't. She keeps the door locked.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Misguided (Score:3, Interesting)
The fact that he makes a case for a pardon shows that he still believes in government. Isn't that contrary to everything he's tried to teach us so far?
The Obama Whitehouse has already spoken (Score:3)
There was a We The People (Whitehouse.gov) petition back in 2013 to pardon Snowden.
It took the Whitehouse two years to respond; they said no. It seems really unlikely – to me – that Obama will change his mind at this point.
Snowden is lucky that Putin was around and so "accommodating."
The Whitehouse site won't show the petition for some reason, for me anyway; there are several summaries around, e.g. http://time.com/3974713/white-... [time.com]
Convicted (Score:2)
Comment removed (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
>"Though, an acceptance of a pardon is an admission of guilt."
He [Snowen] isn't innocent so it doesn't matter. There is ZERO question he broke the law. That isn't the point. He might have done the right thing and for the right reasons although that thing is be illegal. It is EXACTLY why the power of pardon exists.
Re: (Score:2)
No. The President has the power to pardon at any point in the process. As long as it's Federal charges, of course. This is one gotcha - technically he might have broken state laws in the state he was in. If the authorities were really determined to nail him, they might attack along those lines.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I wish him luck but.. (Score:2)
Snowden doesn't have a snowflakes chance in hell.
In a moral world, yes, Snowden would be home (Score:5, Insightful)
If the US information network were collectively moral, then yes, Snowden would be pardoned and he would end up home and happy. But its like the Great Train Robbery writ large. If you honestly believe that will happen, look at Bradley (Chelsea) Manning and the rat Adrian Lamo. Lamo ratted Manning out to be a hero. Lamo instead showed himself to be a rat (and is rightfully disparaged and has to live in hiding, where rats live). But Manning got 35 years. Now look at people who *didn't* whistleblow, but expressed concern *within the system*. I'm talking about Thomas Drake. He created ThinThread(tm) which lets analysts at the NSA go through massive volumes of data and pinpoint users extremely quickly. Its incredibly accurate, and much more powerful than what the NSA was using: Trailblazer. Drake created Thinthread with built in safeguards to respect the US constitution. Initially the NSA didn't want it, but when Trailblazer performance was horrid, they switched to Thinthread(tm) but without the safeguards. Drake raised his concerns. He was reprimanded by his superiors at the NSA. When he went to a politician (and attorney with security clearance) about the issue (his superiors were playing fast and loose with citizens constitutional rights), he was followed by agents, placed under house arrest and threatened by a district attorney with 30 years in prison. They also threatened his wife and children. This guy is on the inside and trying to do the right thing. Snowden saw what happened to Drake, and went to Russia. The people who threatened Drake are legion. They don't care about "moral thing". They don't even care about "constitutional rights". They are concerned with greed, power, getting ahead, and what Snowden and Drake are advocating --oversight-- is a direct challenge to that. Snowden might be pardoned, but only in history books.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
But isn't that because a large proportion of US citizens don't care about what's morally right either?
Re: (Score:3)
Long gone are the days when politicians did anything because it was morally right. I doubt such days ever really existed.
They absolutely did exist. George Washington could have been crowned king if he wanted, but he refused and insisted on having a republic form of government without any kind of monarch or dictator.
Snowden reads /. (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
I think your binary may be crosslinked with Eliza's.
In my most recent Turing test, she accused the human participant of being a space butter, and told them that they would never leave the earth. The human simply mentioned that they like astronomy. Needless to say, this is not what I expected from Eliza.
I would like to take you both offline and do a filesystem check.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The auto correction ai in this communications device is not very advanced, and substituted "butter" for "nutter".
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Mod parent up (Score:3, Informative)
This was particularly telling for Brits.
MPs understood they'd killed "Snoopers Charter", yet when they got into power as Home Secretaries (like Theresa May), they learned that GCHQ had done it anyway under the old 1984 Telecoms act, vague clause "can give directions to telecoms companies".
And she said nothing, none of them ever do, they all just shut up and let it continue.
Only when she tried to push "Snoopers Charter" through again, did she explain that they were already doing it, so it wouldn't increase s
dragon breath (Score:2)
No hope in hell for an Obama pardon with Clinton running less than 10 full points ahead in the polls, and even then Obama would worry about sacrificing the windfall down-ticket trickle-down to the senate and the house.
Considering that it would take a sex tape involving Donald and something (or someone) unthinkable to reduce his polling numbers below his hardcore 30%, I wish Edward all the best.
Absolutely not (Score:2)
The President of the United States, the Commander and Chief of her armed forces, does not pardon treason, the proffering of her most valuable intelligence secrets to the rest of the world, including her bitter enemies during what may well be considered a time of war.
And Snowden may well have done a good thing, but it is a complex judgement call and it isn't the role of the Executive authority of the United States of America to answer that question. Obama the person may be sympathetic, but to parley into a P
He aint going home, no way (Score:2)
Why does he want to go back that much? I've been to the USA, its not that great. Russia is no picnic either but I think he could try for a more sympathetic country than america.
There is the possibility that he has been turned by the russians. Why else would he want to go back so badly? it makes no sense. I suppose he thinks hes the most american of any of any american, but its far too soon for history to have been the judge. Maybe he just loves america so much? Plenty of people leave shit countries for a be
Re:He aint going home, no way (Score:4, Insightful)
Why does he want to go back that much? I've been to the USA, its not that great.
Probably because it's home. There's plenty of great parts of the US perhaps you didn't visit any of them.
Maybe he just loves america so much?
One can only suspect so. He's pretty much destroyed his life for love of his country.
He is a true patriot for the USA (and there aren't many),
I'd agree.
There are worse things than not going home again.
There are, but historically exile has often been one step below execution when it comes to punishment.
You know it's bad when you need Russia (Score:2)
Guy was following his moral obligation to the people of the US and the government wants to crucify him for it like we're back in Roman times. Sometimes the government forgets they are supposed to protect the people. It's guys like him that stand up, put their life on the line, and do the right thing. USA could look like the good guy again if they pardon him. How fucked up is it that a Communist regime gets to play the part of the good guy by ensuring his safety? Goes to show how bad this country has go
Rod Blagojevich is the real one that needs to get (Score:2)
Rod Blagojevich is the real one that needs to get out trump may his own hope.
Who has more power? (Score:4, Funny)
Or the whistleblowing that exposed torture, collect it all domestic spying or rubber stamp foreign collection thats really a cover for funding total domestic collection for decades.
https://cryptome.org/2013-info... [cryptome.org]
Freedom of the press or party political donations? Think of the local contractor jobs, all the new 2 person teams now in work to support domestic collection.
A statement to the world about this generations privacy or contractors giving more donations?
Donations vs privacy and working encryption for the first time ever.
Donations.
Keep dreaming Ed. (Score:3)
As much as I think you did this country (well the citizens at least, fuck the government), you have almost no chance of "The Great Unifier Obamachrist" pardoning you.
He's too deeply in bed with intelligence agencies and benefits from keeping the people ignorant and divided.
Anything that shakes that status quo will be conveniently ignored.
Sorry man.
The Ends Justify the Beans (Score:5, Insightful)
A National Hero (Score:3)
Don't see him ever getting a pardon (Score:3, Insightful)
Despite the scare mongering that his stay in Russia expires next year, Putin will simply extend it for a few more years. What Snowden doesn't get is that eventually Putin will be out of power, perhaps through death. For all we know his replacement will send Snowden back to the US to stand trial, even if that's 20 years from now. I think sometimes the US is OK with people being permanently in exile as their punishment and they can't admit it but I think that in Snowden's case that's what's going on.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I am currently designing a spaceship that will takes us all to the stars.
I'd rather go to a planet. Preferably a habitable one.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Your comments in this thread are cracking me up.
Re: (Score:2)
So what is your deal? You have stated opposing views on this thread and then said /. was dead.
When people responded to your posts, you said, I had never considered that, good point. No one shows respect like that for others opinions on /.!
I checked your history, and in the last 3 days you have posted more to /. then I think I have posted in 2 years!
Are you trying to boost your Karma, or just get more people responding?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
BUT, HE CONTINUED SPEAKING. And when he spoke about how we spy on other nations, along with terrorists, he committed treason and HARMED not just America, but the entire WEST. Basically, he helped Russia, China, AQ, North Korea, Iran, Bhurma, etc.
Worse, it is certain that BOTH Russia and china hav
Re: (Score:2)
Can you quantitatively demonstrate this supposed harm?
Re: (Score:2)
you miss the point. When he reported the spying on Americans by individuals, he DID break the law, BUT, it was for a good reason. Had he stopped there, I would be celebrating this and in FULL agreement with you. BUT, HE CONTINUED SPEAKING. And when he spoke about how we spy on other nations, along with terrorists, he committed treason and HARMED not just America, but the entire WEST. Basically, he helped Russia, China, AQ, North Korea, Iran, Bhurma, etc. Worse, it is certain that BOTH Russia and china have decrypted the other files that he did not post, but allowed them to have access to.
Would you say the same thing if an ex-KGB official defected to America, and revealed that Russia was spying on all western nations, you would support extraditing him to where he is certain to receive the death penalty?
Remember, Snowden may have revealed the spying programs, but there hasn't been a shift in the way terrorism works - furthermore, our intelligence has been getting weaker and weaker because the CIA and NSA have too much crap to sift trough. Terrorists haven't yet used encryption, but they go
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:The Free State Welcomes Edward Snowden (Score:5, Interesting)
The migration of liberty activists to New Hampshire will welcome him should we ever win independence. The movement is strong gaining new movers every week and unlike other movements has only grown larger over the years. There is no place in New Hampshire that you won't find a growing, active, no thriving community of activists who are fighting government and we're going to win because we have time. We have patience. The people want liberty will and are moving for it. And unlike setting up a new country or trying to take over one there are no restrictions within the boarders of the United States to hamper the movement. If you believe that the state should not utilize violence to achieve political goals (like educating our children, feeding our hungry, or locking up people who've committed no violence against another) then you should move to New Hampshire. We want to get rid of drivers licenses, license plates, and having to ask the government permission to earn a a living. Keene, the town where I live, of less than 30,000 people is already the # one place in the world for BitCoins. We can build other non-governmental systems that don't utilize force to ensure the safety of our restaurants. We accept that life has some risk and that it's not worth punishing everybody for the actions of a few (just because there are a few drunks on the roads does not mean the state should have a right to utilise violence blatantly in disregard for all other driver's rights on the road). We don't need government feeding out hungry or stealing money from the people whom thus become dependant on government hands out to feed and brainwash (ie educate) their children.
www.freekeene.com www.freestateproject.org www.freetalklive.com
Speaking as a (current but living outside the state) resident of New Hampshire myself, you do realize we get what we pay for, yes? We have no advanced social services, our schools are pathetic compared to any other New England state, we have severe and frequently recurring issues with the funding of our healthcare and systems, our roads are so horribly maintained that they're unsafe to drive on in some places, and we have a pretty stifled economy that looks better than it is because of people commuting across the border to Mass every day. New Hampshire is an extremely interesting state, and I like it, but to pretend its paradise and that government provides no benefits is incredibly misleading.
Secondly, I actually want to challenge you on your philosophy. You want an intentionally libertarian state, but how exactly do you intend to fix our issues? How do you think the free state project is going to provide care for the elderly and sick? What about education, who is going to fund that? The problem you have with these is that you say they should be privately funded. How about a family that isn't rich, but solidly upper-middle class? If they had children, they could afford to lavish them with the very best education, the parents could ensure they get the best healthcare, and the family as a whole simply gets significantly better benefits from life. These people get better jobs, which leads to more money, and so on and so on. Do you think have a rich elite at the very top of the poor is a good idea? Furthermore, what about the rich who fund this? If I pay for your library, I should get to dictate what goes into it, correct? What's to stop me from stocking the whole thing with books that heavily favor my opinion of history and such? It would be a library, sure, but it wouldn't be very useful at all, and it's very unlikely there'd be any competition because you'd be too poor to run one either. Lastly, what about people who do need collective help? What about the disabled or the unemployed? Under your philosophy, there only approach to help is to either beg for help on their knees, or die when they can't feed themselves. Is that really what you stand for?
Lastly, I'd also like to mention your movement. The Free Keene people as a group are not very nice, and in parti
Re: (Score:2)