

Father proposes deal for Snowden's voluntary return - fortepianissimo
http://www.cnn.com/2013/06/28/us/snowden-lawyer-offer/index.html?hpt=hp_c2

======
Joakal
The father believe his son is committing treason for revealing government
corruption and to stop exposing it further:
[http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/06/17/exclusive-
father-...](http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/06/17/exclusive-father-
edward-snowden-urges-son-to-stop-leaking-come-home/) The father prejudiced the
public against his son in the hopes of having his son close to him again. The
father even believes Wikileaks is an irresponsible organisation.

It seems that Snowden may have not planned for his family to be used to get
him back. It's eerily similar to dictatorships who warn citizens going abroad
that their family will still be here if they do not return.

In contrast, Julian Assange's family supports him fully in public. That's
pretty powerful support. His mum:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0bn7s10_VZ8](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0bn7s10_VZ8)

It's so sad. I hope he continues for the people of the world, unfortunately
without a father in life.

~~~
wavefunction
Sometimes a parent's sentimentality and love for their child blinds them to
all else. It has been mentioned that a number of his family works for the
government in various capacities, so they could very well be of a slightly
more authoritarian or trusting in authority than Snowden himself.

Snowden seems willing enough to face the statutory punishment for his actual
crimes, just not the trumped up politicised charges the Government seems to
have in mind.

------
beloch
I don't even know papa Snowden and it's pretty obvious to me he's just saying
what some government agent told him to say... or else. It is a sad state of
affairs that the U.S. has fallen so low. Why isn't anyone protesting? Why
aren't people marching on capitol hill? I thought americans wouldn't stand for
this kind of stasi crap. I was wrong.

~~~
nodata
You sure?

The first time the father spoke, it was begging for his son to come home, that
his son had done something terrible. Most people probably (wrongly) agreed
with him. That got peoples' attention.

This time he's changed position, he's a lot more moderate. The people who
agreed with him before will now have to re-evaluate their own position.

Let's see what his next announcement is.

------
philliphaydon
Snowden should agree to go back to america and go on trial on the condition
the NSA and all those related get to go on trial in a publicized court of
Showden's choosing with full, live, and uncensored media coverage.

~~~
anonymfus
What exactly would stop government from breaking such promises? They allowed
to lie at negotiations with "terrorist".

~~~
philliphaydon
Any lawyer would have a field day if it was made completely public with media
coverage of what was happening and then BAM they screwed him the moment he set
foot in the country.

------
doctorpangloss
I hope to lighten the mood:

I learned something vital about democracy from videogames. In _Civilization
II_ and _Alpha Centauri_ , democracy and technological progress were modeled
as being inherently "insecure." Your democratic, free and high-tech government
was more susceptible to espionage and you could not effectively conduct
espionage.

It amazes me how this simple model reflects the real world nature of free
governments.

Leaks happen. The Obama administration's response should not be proactive
prosecution. It should be to dismantle unjust, invasive security programs.
They are plainly incompatible with free government, and they will be rendered
ineffective—either by capitalism, politics, or in this case, whistleblowers.

Edward Snowden is but one of many ways our security apparatus is nullified by
genuine freedom.

~~~
philliphaydon
I don't think people would really have that much of an issue with spying
programs if they were more transparent.

By that I mean they can't spy on ANYONE, they actually have to have
justifiable evidence to suggest a person or group of people is conducting some
form of illegal activities or are involved in potential terrorist
activities/groups. Which they must then get a court order granting them the
ability to spy on these people for a period of time.

During that period of time they don't have to give out the name but once the
warrant expires if nothing shows up then the warrant becomes public domain, or
if it expires and they prove its helping build a case then names can continue
to be suppressed until the time of trial.

No secrecy within the country but enough secrecy that the person being spied
on doesn't know until its too late.

^^ Hope that makes sense... My opinion.

~~~
malandrew
I also think that warrants should detail the crime and only that crime can be
charged with evidence gathered. Anything else for different crimes should be
fruit of the poisonous tree, insofar as criminal proceedings are concerned.
This would help prevent fishing expeditions, and the granting of warrants
until there was reasonable strong suspicion to grant a warrant.

------
Qantourisc
Don't trust a government that has something to hide.

~~~
fallinghawks
You could have left off the last 5 words.

------
malandrew
They should also add provisions for: (1) Trial by jury (2) Public hearing (3)
No solitary confinement (4) No other forms of torture. Name an organization
such as Amnesty International who is responsible for determining what is and
is not cruel and unusual torture.

I would also like to see Obama debate Greenwald live on national TV just like
the Frost Nixon debates, but I know that would never happen.

