# NSA considering an amnesty for Edward Snowden ... **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [December 15, 2013, 7:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nsa-considering-an-amnesty-for-edward-snowden/676401 "2013-12-15T19:02:09Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![Pjen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Pjen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pjen)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2013, 6:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nsa-considering-an-amnesty-for-edward-snowden/676401/141 "2013-12-17T18:06:45Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > You misspelled “criminals”. I refer you to the case of a certain Nelson Mandela- yesterday’s terrorist and today’s international hero. I thought you were a lawyer- your criminology should tell you that the status of ‘criminal’ is flexible and changes from time to time and place to place! ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2013, 6:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nsa-considering-an-amnesty-for-edward-snowden/676401/142 "2013-12-17T18:12:35Z")
> [@Pjen](#): > > I refer you to the case of a certain Nelson Mandela- yesterday’s terrorist and today’s international hero. I thought you were a lawyer- your criminology should tell you that the status of ‘criminal’ is flexible and changes from time to time and place to place! No, the status of “criminal” is fixed to the time and place where the crime occurred. The fact that Mandela was granted clemency decades later doesn’t change the fact that Mandela undeniably _did_ engage in armed rebellion against the South African government in the '50s and early '60s. Snowden is a criminal, a traitor, a spy, and a coward, and he will remain these things for the rest of his life. ---
**Author:** ![Pjen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Pjen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pjen)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2013, 6:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nsa-considering-an-amnesty-for-edward-snowden/676401/143 "2013-12-17T18:15:04Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > I didn’t say he was a traitor. I said he was a criminal. He broke he law. If he was a hero, he’d stay here, face the music, and get the law changed. That’s what heroes do. Congress can change the law tomorrow if they think it needs changing. As it is, I’m not seeing a lot of movement in that direction. Maybe all those Russian dissidents in the third quarter of the twentieth century should have stayed in the USSR and gone to jail rather than defect and work against the system from abroad! ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2013, 6:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nsa-considering-an-amnesty-for-edward-snowden/676401/144 "2013-12-17T18:16:02Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > No, the status of “criminal” is fixed to the time and place where the crime occurred. What ever happened to those criminals who were hiding Anne Frank? ---
**Author:** ![Pjen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Pjen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pjen)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2013, 6:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nsa-considering-an-amnesty-for-edward-snowden/676401/145 "2013-12-17T18:17:40Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > No, the status of “criminal” is fixed to the time and place where the crime occurred. The fact that Mandela was granted clemency decades later doesn’t change the fact that Mandela undeniably _did_ engage in armed rebellion against the South African government in the '50s and early '60s. > > Snowden is a criminal, a traitor, a spy, and a coward, and he will remain these things for the rest of his life. Certainly the case under US jurisdiction. But he is not under US jurisdiction. Justice does not emanate from the US alone. Your definition would have us all agree that he recent execution in North Korea was that of a convicted criminal, rather than a political act. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2013, 6:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nsa-considering-an-amnesty-for-edward-snowden/676401/146 "2013-12-17T18:18:30Z")
> [@Pjen](#): > > Maybe all those Russian dissidents in the third quarter of the twentieth century should have stayed in the USSR and gone to jail rather than defect and work against the system from abroad! Also, by **Smapti** ’s own argument, if we lived in an alternate universe where Clapper _did_ have to lie to protect security secrets, he should have _insisted_ on going to prison for it. Surely he’s no coward! ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2013, 6:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nsa-considering-an-amnesty-for-edward-snowden/676401/147 "2013-12-17T18:19:53Z")
> [@Pjen](#): > > Certainly the case under US jurisdiction. But he is not under US jurisdiction. Justice does not emanate from the US alone. Your definition would have us all agree that he recent execution in North Korea was that of a convicted criminal, rather than a political act. North Korea doesn’t have a functioning rule of law, nor do its citizens have the right to redress. The US does. The fact that Snowden fled US justice doesn’t mean he ceases to be a criminal - he’s simply a criminal under the protection of a rogue state that wants to embarrass the US. ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2013, 6:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nsa-considering-an-amnesty-for-edward-snowden/676401/148 "2013-12-17T18:20:54Z")
> [@Steve\_MB](#): > > Also, by **Smapti** ’s own argument, if we lived in an alternate universe where Clapper _did_ have to lie to protect security secrets, he should have _insisted_ on going to prison for it. Surely he’s no coward! If Clapper is charged with perjury and he responds by jumping on a flight to Russia, then yes, I’d agree. Are there any charges pending against him yet? ---
**Author:** ![Jonathan\_Chance](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jonathan_chance/32/701_2.png) [@Jonathan\_Chance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jonathan_Chance)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2013, 6:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nsa-considering-an-amnesty-for-edward-snowden/676401/149 "2013-12-17T18:24:28Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > It’s quite simple. The director was asked a question where his only options were to say “No”, or to say something other than “no” which would thereby indicate that “no” was not the correct answer. He was therefore being forced to either lie, or expose classified information to the public. Well, obviously I disagree. But the real problem - I feel - with your stance is that it opens up the fact that no intelligence official can ever testify in clear about such operations. You are, in effect, saying that information classification trumps oversight. Not only that, but merely believing such is the case trumps congressional oversight. That we are required to accept that intelligence officials may lie to us and we have to believe it without question. Suppose he’d been asked ‘are you working to overthrow the United States of America’ and he believed that doing so was classified? At that point could he say ‘no’ and go on with his seditionary ways? The corner you seem backed into here, that an intelligence official can lie under oath and not be held accountable on grounds of national security is a terrible one. It is also, frankly, one that undermines your point about Snowden and whether he should have stayed in the country to report his information. In the world you describe - wherein officials can lie under oath and claim (on their own word) national security - what would keep Snowden from being locked away under national security reasons? Then when asked about the information he wanted to disseminate an intelligence official could say ‘oh, nothing to it. Just some routine stuff that was classified. Pay no heed.’ The world you’re defining is one where a subset of the American government - the scary part with spies and weapons - is able to hold themselves above accountability. For a representative democracy if holds no logical sense. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2013, 6:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nsa-considering-an-amnesty-for-edward-snowden/676401/150 "2013-12-17T18:29:47Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > If Clapper is charged with perjury and he responds by jumping on a flight to Russia, then yes, I’d agree. > > Are there any charges pending against him yet? Er, you might want to put [some filler about the United Way](http://dilbert.com/strips/comic/1995-10-02/) or something in between “a criminal is a _criminal_ and that’s all there is to it” and “well… the circumstances in this case make this particular criminal not really a _criminal_ criminal…” ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2013, 6:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nsa-considering-an-amnesty-for-edward-snowden/676401/151 "2013-12-17T18:29:57Z")
> [@Jonathan\_Chance](#): > > But the real problem - I feel - with your stance is that it opens up the fact that no intelligence official can ever testify in clear about such operations. You are, in effect, saying that information classification trumps oversight. He certainly can, in closed session. Unfortunately, the C-SPAN cameras were running and he’d not been provided with an opportunity to request that they be shut off, or to testify in private. As such, any truthful answer he could have given would have resulted in exposing classified information to the entire world. > [@](#): > > Not only that, but merely believing such is the case trumps congressional oversight. That we are required to accept that intelligence officials may lie to us and we have to believe it without question. Of course they are; otherwise, what’s the point of having classified information at all? > [@](#): > > Suppose he’d been asked ‘are you working to overthrow the United States of America’ and he believed that doing so was classified? At that point could he say ‘no’ and go on with his seditionary ways? I wouldn’t expect him to answer such a question with a “yes” even if he weren’t concerned with classifications. > [@](#): > > The corner you seem backed into here, that an intelligence official can lie under oath and not be held accountable on grounds of national security is a terrible one. It is also, frankly, one that undermines your point about Snowden and whether he should have stayed in the country to report his information. In the world you describe - wherein officials can lie under oath and claim (on their own word) national security - what would keep Snowden from being locked away under national security reasons? If the things Snowden wanted to expose were actually illegal, then he’d be protected under federal whistleblower statutes. The problem for him, of course, isn’t that he was exposing illegal acts, but that he was exposing legal acts that he had decided on his own oughtn’t be legal, and placed his own judgment on that matter above the laws of the land. > [@](#): > > The world you’re defining is one where a subset of the American government - the scary part with spies and weapons - is able to hold themselves above accountability. For a representative democracy if holds no logical sense. Classified intelligence is not subject to a vote of the people in this or any representative democracy. It would undermine the entire purpose of having classified intelligence if it were. ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2013, 6:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nsa-considering-an-amnesty-for-edward-snowden/676401/152 "2013-12-17T18:32:16Z")
> [@Steve\_MB](#): > > Er, you might want to put [some filler about the United Way](http://dilbert.com/strips/comic/1995-10-02/) or something in between “a criminal is a _criminal_ and that’s all there is to it” and “well… the circumstances in this case make this particular criminal not really a _criminal_ criminal…” Edward Snowden is currently wanted on charges of espionage and theft of government documents. To the best of my knowledge, Clapper is not currently wanted for any crime. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2013, 6:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nsa-considering-an-amnesty-for-edward-snowden/676401/153 "2013-12-17T18:36:45Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > He certainly can, in closed session. Unfortunately, the C-SPAN cameras were running and he’d not been provided with an opportunity to request that they be shut off, or to testify in private. As such, any truthful answer he could have given would have resulted in exposing classified information to the entire world. No matter how often you repeat this nonsense, you can’t get away from the obvious fact that there is are clear and obvious answers (“I cannot discuss that matter in open session” or “I can neither affirm nor deny that assertion”) that reveal nothing whatsoever. Continuing with the line of nonsense after this has been pointed out is just digging yourself deeper into the hole. Currently, you’re reaching the “still close enough to hand you my Chinese food order for when you arrive” stage. ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2013, 6:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nsa-considering-an-amnesty-for-edward-snowden/676401/154 "2013-12-17T18:41:11Z")
> [@Steve\_MB](#): > > No matter how often you repeat this nonsense, you can’t get away from the obvious fact that there is are clear and obvious answers (“I cannot discuss that matter in open session” or “I can neither affirm nor deny that assertion”) that reveal nothing whatsoever. Any answer other than “no” reveals that the answer is not “no”. ---
**Author:** ![DrCube](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a3d4f5/32.png) [@DrCube](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrCube)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2013, 6:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nsa-considering-an-amnesty-for-edward-snowden/676401/155 "2013-12-17T18:45:20Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > Any answer other than “no” reveals that the answer is not “no”. And pleading the fifth is an admission of guilt. The framers of the Bill of Rights were fools. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2013, 6:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nsa-considering-an-amnesty-for-edward-snowden/676401/156 "2013-12-17T18:48:20Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > Any answer other than “no” reveals that the answer is not “no”. It’s entertaining to explore the full inanity of this bit of nonsense. For instance, it proves that there was no need to have Clapper present at all; an empty chair could have just as easily failed to give a “no” answer and thus revealed… well, anything. “Are there alien spacecraft at Area 51?” [silence] “Well, I guess that proves it, then…” > [@DrCube](#): > > And pleading the fifth is an admission of guilt. The framers of the Bill of Rights were fools. I point out that _argumentum ad absurdum_ only works when addressed to someone who recognizes that the absurd proposition is, in fact, absurd. For example, you wouldn’t get anywhere by telling John Calhoun that feuding with Andrew Jackson was as foolish as believing that some humans were born to be slaves. ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2013, 6:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nsa-considering-an-amnesty-for-edward-snowden/676401/157 "2013-12-17T18:50:19Z")
> [@Steve\_MB](#): > > It’s entertaining to explore the full inanity of this bit of nonsense. For instance, it proves that there was no need to have Clapper present at all; an empty chair could have just as easily failed to give a “no” answer and thus revealed… well, anything. The whole affair was as much about genuine “oversight” as Issa’s Benghazi hearings have been, so yes. ---
**Author:** ![BrokenBriton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/4bbf92/32.png) [@BrokenBriton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrokenBriton)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2013, 6:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nsa-considering-an-amnesty-for-edward-snowden/676401/158 "2013-12-17T18:51:15Z")
Smapti - do you have a boundary somewhere that questions the validity of a law or is legality the sole determiner; would you, say, have traded slaves back in the day? At what point would you question a criminal charge? ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2013, 7:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nsa-considering-an-amnesty-for-edward-snowden/676401/159 "2013-12-17T19:06:17Z")
> [@BrokenBriton](#): > > Smapti - do you have a boundary somewhere that questions the validity of a law or is legality the sole determiner; would you, say, have traded slaves back in the day? In our society, we have a well-established system that decides the validity of laws as provided by the Constitution. Any law approved by the people through their representatives and duly signed into law (or by referendum as the case may be at the state level) is valid until either repealed or the courts strike it down. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2013, 7:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nsa-considering-an-amnesty-for-edward-snowden/676401/160 "2013-12-17T19:10:04Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > The whole affair was as much about genuine “oversight” as Issa’s Benghazi hearings have been, so yes. Mention of Darrell “Grand Theft Auto” Issa undercuts your case (again) – when he asked for an inappropriate security-compromising disclosure, he got a proper and straightforward [refusal to answer the question](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=710362), not a lie. If Clapper had taken that approach, he would have done his job within the confines the law. Then again, if he and his agency had put some effort into doing their jobs within the confines of the law the whole matter would have been avoided. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nsa-considering-an-amnesty-for-edward-snowden/676401.md?page=7) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nsa-considering-an-amnesty-for-edward-snowden/676401.md?page=9)