Pardon Him

Jason Ditz, June 10, 2013

A new petition at the White House’s portal is calling for President Obama to immediately an unconditionally pardon Edward Snowden for leaking the truth about the NSA’s huge overarching surveillance of everyday Americans.

The US hasn’t charged Snowden yet, of course, but officials have made it clear they intend to, and have been throwing out works like “treason” for an action which, at its core, was simply about informing the American public of something they desperately needed to know.

Of course I’m not so naive as to think that Obama would actually pardon someone who revealed such gross violations of civil liberties under his watch – that’s not how these things work. At the very least, however, the petition would compel President Obama to make a comment on the matter, and would prevent him from passing the buck on the persecution/prosecution of Snowden and dodging responsibility for it.

The petition has already gotten 37,000 signatures in the first day, and a decisive victory for it will make it even harder for the administration to ignore.




42 Responses to “Pardon Him”

  1. I'd post a comment but it might send Raimondo into another unexpected insulting tirade.

  2. How about a petition for the president to resign. Better yet, lets impeach the president …

  3. Note: My intended recipients are antiwar.com and bona fide antiwar activists; no other person or agency on this planet is extended any right to read or record this submission; any violators self-convict themselves and may proceed directly to gaol – or, preferably, go to hell.

    @don nash, does "unexpected insulting tirade" have anything to do with the terminally self-insulting belief that jet-fuel fires can melt steel skyscrapers?

    Re article theme, surely a petition to the White House implies some sort of functional democracy, an implication now so far from reality as to be risible?

    But IF pardon for Snowden THEN kindly add Manning, plus just retribution to be visited upon his tormentors.

    Apropos, three things really amaze me; a) the depth of the deceptions foist upon the entire world, b) the dearth of objections let alone c) the total lack of any effective resistance (actually a violation of Newton's 3rd law!)

    Q: Where are all the decent people; have they meekly collapsed into mute acquiescence and if so why this abject surrender in the face of such horrendous evil?

  4. just for the record you did post a comment.

  5. What? There's nothing to be pardoned for. Pardoning would imply that the guy's somehow done something wrong or criminal.

  6. My remark was a shot and not a comment. For the record.

  7. What? "…terminally self-insulting belief that jet-fuel fires can melt steel skyscrapers?" You goof, I made no mention of jet-fuel fires melting steel skyscrapers. Jet-fuel fires are incapable of melting steel skyscrapers. I took a shot at Raimondo and that's it. No further inference should be drawn. Raimondo had a moment of insulting pissy and rather than defend his doofus adoration of Rand Paul, Raimondo got insulting with me. I was offended by that. I'm still offended by that. Offended by Raimondo. When I toogled on Ditz' 'Pardon Him' column, no one had left any remark and I took the opportunity to poke at Raimondo. I'll more than likely do it again. Raimondo all of sudden seems overly pretentious.
    So ID-man if you'd like to pick a fight, stick to the issues.

  8. Troll — and a bad one at it. Everyone knows raimundo and Libertarians cherish RON Paul's movement and campaigns, non Rand Paul. Actually, Raimundo, et al have been critical and leery toward Sen. Rand Paul.

  9. Holy crap XXX now you're just being dense. Raimondo is rarely "critical" of Rand Paul. As for "troll" I don't think so. I've hung out at Antiwar.com for a very long time. Could be my changing to my real and actual name and ditching the screen name I used to use is causing some confusion. Formerly 'Skulz Fontaine' but after the NSA crap hit the fan, I'm going with my given name so as not to confuse the Stasi. Oh yes and by the by, Rand Paul is NOT even close to being good enough to mention with Rand's father Dr. Ron Paul. Remember that Rand dissed his father and endorsed Mitt Romney in the last presidential. Rand Paul is carrying one staggering credibility deficit.

  10. Yes. Him, the entire senate and house should resign. I'm good with that.

  11. @don nash June 11th, 2013 at 6:21 am

    Since you didn't mention 'jet-fuel fires melting steel skyscrapers' on this thread, and by your "incapable" comment, I expect that you're never likely to have done so (for to do so would surely be to accept the official narrative that "Islamist terrorists wreaked deadly havoc on our two biggest cities," say). Perhaps you could try interpreting my comment in a different light …

    @Phil June 11th, 2013 at 5:30 am

    Agreed, nothing to be pardoned for; better would be to be left in peace; then add Assange to the list of people to live in a world of the free = unmolested, and free from rogue-regime attack, free from WallSt rip-offs etc..

  12. They're working on nailing him to a cross, but I suspect the "investigation" will drag out, because they like using an "ongoing criminal investigation" as an excuse not to comment, they've already been doing it. I suspect they'll be playing that card in the coming days after the petition hits 100,000 tomorrow, in 3 days instead of 30.

  13. Simply astounding that so many have quickly jumped to Snowdens defense and yet Manning languished and suffered for so very long before his present kangaroo court came into session. Could it be that Manning touched upon this nations twisted militaristic mind-set and that was "verboten", even though he showed how corrupt the military and government was, but now that an NSA insider has done something similar that touches everyone it's now OK to be incensed? I'm somewhat puzzled.

  14. Edward Snowden is brave. No one could this except extra ordinary people regardless of what the background behind his action. I want to know what will happen in the couples next days. Let's watching.

  15. Not sure if anyone mentioned it in other comments but there is also a page on the White House portal to free Bradley Manning, https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/free-br… . Both Snowden and Manning deserve our full support.

  16. You know, if the US government was so competent as to pull off 9/11 (yet somehow cannot keep PRISM a secret) why did they go to all the trouble of having planes fly into buildings when they could have just used "thermite" to begin with and blown the buildings up ala a truck bomb? I mean you nu…I mean professors are really smart and already figured out the whole conspiracy so there was no point in making an elaborate overly complicated plan.

    Really, George W. Bush's administration is the mastermind behind 9/11….really?? Oh and by the way your "jet fuel fires don't melt steel" argument is a red herring.

  17. Could it be that Manning touched upon this nations twisted militaristic mind-set and that was "verboten", even though he showed how corrupt the military and government was, but now that an NSA insider has done something similar that touches everyone it's now OK to be incensed?

    I think you've nailed it, MoT. It's just amazing to hear people who CLAIM to distrust and despise everything about "our" current government belch forth praises for all things military out of the opposite corner of their mouth at the same time. They somehow just never make the obvious connection that their beloved military IS A MAJOR ENFORCEMENT ARM OF THAT SAME CORRUPT, TYRANNICAL GOVERNMENT.

    Maybe, just maybe, once their Beloved Military takes to the streets and starts arresting their loved ones and shoving them into FEMA Camps they'll change their minds. I doubt it, but we can always hope for sanity to reassert itself.

  18. Not sure if anyone mentioned it in other comments but there is also a page on the White House portal to free Bradley Manning

    A cynical piece of window dressing, and an insulting one at that. If the White House (or more accurately, the powers behind it), the primary force behind Manning's current Stalinist show trial, had any interest in "freeing Bradley Manning," he'd be free now.

  19. You're right about Raimondo, Don. He went way over the top with me too when I had the audacity to voice my opinion that disagreed with his received wisdom. The man definitely has problems, "Internet Dictator Syndrome' being one of them. The hell with him and this pathetic website.

  20. Ah, well; I did not mention any govt., nor the alleged war-criminal Bush ('invasion of Iraq illegal' – UN-Sec-Gen Annan).

    «Straw man. This is the fallacy of refuting a caricatured or extreme version of somebody's argument, rather than the actual argument they've made. Often this fallacy involves putting words into somebody's mouth by saying they've made arguments they haven't actually made, in which case the straw man argument is a veiled version of argumentum ad logicam

    John: “Oh and by the way your "jet fuel fires don't melt steel" argument is a red herring.”

    My full text in context is “the terminally self-insulting belief that jet-fuel fires can melt steel skyscrapers?” – Which is neither red herring nor argument.

    *Alleged* Arab/Muslim hijackers crashing planes into buildings serve at least three purposes; 1st they provide a purported mechanism for the spectacular, partly free-fall collapse of WTC1&2 (but not WTC7), 2nd they increase the fear&loathing being deliberately engendered in the 'West' against Arab/Muslims, and 3rd they aid the Zs in their continuing supreme international crimes against the same Arab/Muslims in general and the hapless, improperly dispossessed Palestinians in particular. 9/11 is the gift that keeps on giving; hard to imagine how it could have been better engineered.

    I'll leave it to any audience to interpret: «I mean you nu…I mean»

  21. Hi Guest:
    There certainly is an air of pretense that has settled over the domain of Antiwar.com and Raimondo is not the only 'ego' suffering a case of 'I'm self-important'. It's offensive and demeaning. Hell, I can get that kind of abuse on Buzzflash. Considering I don't have to put up with it, I don't and won't. Same applies to Antiwar.com.
    Eric Garris might want to remind the staff and crew about offending contributors. Contributing during the Antiwar.com beg-a-thons.

  22. My full text in context is “the terminally self-insulting belief that jet-fuel fires can melt steel skyscrapers?” – Which is neither red herring nor argument.

    The implication is there that you question the veracity of the official explanation of 9/11, or at least really really bugged that Raimondo does not question 9/11. No one in this thread mentioned skyscrapers or jet fuel until you brought it up. Arguments are statements or questions that can be true or false. You posted an irrelevant (to the topic) question in the hope of throwing any argumentation on the thread into your topic, hence a red herring.

  23. *Alleged* Arab/Muslim hijackers crashing planes into buildings serve at least three purposes; 1st they provide a purported mechanism for the spectacular, partly free-fall collapse of WTC1&2 (but not WTC7), 2nd they increase the fear&loathing being deliberately engendered in the 'West' against Arab/Muslims, and 3rd they aid the Zs in their continuing supreme international crimes against the same Arab/Muslims in general and the hapless, improperly dispossessed Palestinians in particular. 9/11 is the gift that keeps on giving; hard to imagine how it could have been better engineered

    I take it you've never been to the Middle East then. Oh and my argument was not a strawman it was an inference by omission. I assume that the US government would have had to have at least some foreknowledge even if the "Zionists" were completely behind the attack. They had a lot of intel so either the US government is correct about 9/11 or someone is covering up. In my experience the more involved the "conspiracy" is the less likely it actually is a "conspiracy"

  24. "I take it you've never been to the Middle East then."

    Haw. Risibly off-topic, not to mention totally irrelevant.

    "either the US government is correct about 9/11 or someone is covering up."

    Haw again.

    “In my experience the more involved the "conspiracy" is the less likely it actually is a "conspiracy"”

    Just what is your experience with conspiracies?

    POD: conspiracy n. (pl. -ies) 1 secret plan to commit a crime; plot. 2 conspiring. [Latin: related to *conspire]

    As "the official explanation of 9/11" would have it, planes crashed into WTC 1 & 2 (by now, most have seen the movies – err, TV videos), so that bit is generally accepted. Then there were jet-fuel (plus office-furniture) fires, and WTC 1, 2 *and* 7 fell down, all rather neatly if not dramatically – hence the jet-fuel mention does implies a question as to veracity, and so the "red herring" accusation/hop. (The original dialogue was completed after don nash's "incapable" and then his moving on.)

    The standard narrative accuses ObL (@cave, Afghanistan), Atta (@Hamburg then FL etc.) and altogether 20 mostly Saudis (@various flight schools, USA), and since the event was neither notified nor halted beforehand, the conclusion is that the perpetrators of the crime prepared in secrecy. QED; the official explanation *implies* conspiracy.

    The official explanation *implies* that's all there is to it, then the speed with which they published a list of alleged hijackers' names *does* imply some sort of foreknowledge, but a pristine alleged hijacker's passport fluttering down out of the towering infernos really does make many go "Hmmm." Note: I personally cannot for the smallest part of a pico-sec second-guess the FBI, CIA and/or Mossad etc., so for the record, I'm *not* commenting on any fore-knowledge – merely relating my personal observations (but see my last para.).

    The official explanation *implies* that's all there is to it, namely that jet-fuel fires *can* melt skyscrapers, and that's what the world is asked to accept (believe it or not?) Sooo, anyone care to *lucidly* comment on "the terminally self-insulting belief that jet-fuel fires can melt steel skyscrapers?"

    Now, for only one (shuddering) moment, let's assume that the *3* towers were pre-loaded with explosives. Since we already have the allegation that the 19 hijackers were involved (call this 'conspiracy A/M'), THEN pre-loading would require access – unlikely to be granted to some suspicious, explosive-laden A/Ms, nor anyone *outside* the US(Z) framework, so that would be a supposed 'conspiracy US/Z.' (Yes, Virginia, there is a theory, and two can live as cheaply as one.) It's pretty simple logic along the lines of the IF a THEN b model. IMHO, the key lies in the answer to the jet-fuel fires Q. Hmmm?

  25. "Haw. Risibly off-topic, not to mention totally irrelevant."

    Not really, you mentioned Muslims, "Zionists" (in racist code) and the 9/11 terrorist attack. All that has to do with the Middle East where there are many Muslims, "Zionists" and terrorist attacks, converging one might say. It is complex but suffice to say as someone who has spent time in the ME (and I take it by your non-answer that you have not) Al Qaeda as sole perpetrators of 9/11 is logical.

    "Just what is your experience with conspiracies?"

    My experience is with history, actual history, and explaining Big Historical Events (BHE) by way of overarching government conspiracies is lazy, pseudo-intellectualism. Historical events sometimes have an inertia all their own and are propelled more by incompetence than some overarching nefarious plot. 9/11 happened more as a result of human error, an intelligence failure of the worst kind.

    As someone who works in that field I can tell you it is filled with rank incompetents. This is the real danger and the main reason why libertarians are (or should be) anti-government. Not because government bureaucracy has some evil designs (that would denote intelligence in our government) but because it is incapable of such design i.e., it is incompetent.

    The rest of your diatribe is useless noise.

  26. "The rest of your diatribe is useless noise."

    Entirely your opinion = non-argument = cop-out.

    Your failure to address one of the ultimate arguments, namely were the *3* towers pre-rigged or not, speaks volumes = you just can't hack – what you started, by so rudely butting in.

    More of my so-called 'diatribe:'

    Me (repeat): {Ah, well; I did not mention any govt., nor the alleged war-criminal Bush ('invasion of Iraq illegal' – UN-Sec-Gen Annan).

    «Straw man. This is the fallacy of …}

    John: "Oh and my argument was not a strawman it was an inference by omission. I assume that the US government would have had to have at least some foreknowledge even if the "Zionists" were completely behind the attack. They had a lot of intel so either the US government is correct about 9/11 or someone is covering up."

    Me: Well done; "Covering up" is *precisely* what conspiracy is about.

    Any 'argument' (beginning after John's "You know"), mentions the competency (elsewhere more usually, incompetency) of George W. Bush's administration. Now, consider "inference by omission:"

    wiki: Inference is the act or process of deriving logical conclusions from premises known or assumed to be true.

    POD: omission n. 1 omitting or being omitted. 2 thing omitted.

    Q: What was omitted? How may one infer from some omission? Sounds a bit oxymoronic?

    (Aside: One may 'normally' encounter omission in the phrase "sins of commission or omission" (About 1,850,000 results), but I'm a *non*-believer, so better choice is "lies of commission or omission" (About 12,500,000 results); lies 'win' vs. sins.)

    A: *Perhaps* what was omitted came after "I assume" above?

    (Apropos foreknowledge; perhaps one could query Richard Clarke about John O'Neill.)

    This is a *big* problem with omission – (paraphrasing) you don't know what you've got, til it's gone…

  27. Not a cop-out, I just don't indulge silliness. Anything I say to you never get through. Your mind has been made up a long time ago it appears.

    It is no surprise you are a "non believer" (in truth there are no atheists though, read your Tillich) since consipracy theories are usually a "replacement" for religion. Here you are ranting to a total stranger about 9/11 13 years after it happened on antiwar dot com on a thread for Pardoning Snowden, so methinks you are a "true believer."

    I can sit here and respond to your comments all day, all month, all week, all year until I have the last word (and I will eventually have the last word) but it won't be to indulge in your consipracy talk.

  28. Sorry should read: conspiracy

  29. Seems like I've been gagged – bye.

  30. The US hasn’t charged Snowden yet, of course, but officials have made it clear they intend to, and have been throwing out works like “treason” for an action which, at its core, was simply about informing the American public of something they desperately needed to know.

  31. Sebepsiz bir i? yap?ld???na dair haber ald?m ne derece dogrudur sohbet odalar? varsa i?in içinde bu bence gayet do?ald?r herkes ay?k olsun .

  32. Hi there, everything is going fine here and ofcourse every one is sharing data, that’s genuinely good, keep up writing.

  33. Anna. I can see what your saying… Larry`s article is cool, yesterday I picked up a great Land Rover Range Rover from bringing in $5098 this – 5 weeks past an would you believe $10,000 this past month. with-out any question its the most rewarding I've had. I actually started 7-months ago and pretty much straight away began to bring home minimum $78, per-hr. I follow the details on this straightforward website,, http://alturl.com/9c9xrCHECK IT OUT

  34. I’m not that much of a online reader to be honest
    but your sites really nice, keep it up! I’ll go ahead and bookmark your site to come back later. Cheers

  35. Berepis gurai sarce akrapice hun gura.

  36. Simon, gives thanks. We have updated them on that site too.

  37. Hello there! I know this is kind of off topic but I was wondering roomates blog platform are you using for this site? I’m getting fed up of WordPress Because I’ve had problems with hackers and I’m looking at options for another platform. I would be fantastic if you could point me in the direction of a good platform.

  38. Its a Best Blog. I found it on Bing. I will be back here soon.

  39. We can consider Snowden as a traitor but actually the president can persecute him after all what he have done. He betrayed the country and all of us. Where is his loyalty?? The government have to do further investigation about this matter until he was proven guilty, just to be fair enough. We do't know that it isnot only Snowden but there still culprits smiling behind.

  40. so its okay for the government to keep secrets from the people but not the other way around? hooray US youve reached a new level of stupid

  41. who's bradley? another whistleblower i presume?

  42. Edward Snowden is brave. nobody may this except further normal individuals notwithstanding what the background behind his action. i need to grasp what is going to happen within the couples next days. Let's observe.