If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Al Jazeera)   Snowden continues his tour of freedom loving countries   (aljazeera.com) divider line 454
    More: Followup, Hong Kong, Moscow, political freedom, South China Morning Post, Dmitry Peskov  
•       •       •

9357 clicks; posted to Main » on 23 Jun 2013 at 5:03 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



454 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-06-23 07:52:34 AM
 
2013-06-23 07:53:35 AM

tirob: I suspect that Snowden hopes eventually to get to Ecuador.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/report-ecuador-might-offer-asylu m- edward-snowden_736740.html


He's slowly heading in that direction it seems. It would make sense to me.
 
2013-06-23 07:54:12 AM

letrole: All this privacy fetish rubbish is certainly amusing.

If you leave your front door, walk down the street, get a taxi, so on and so forth, and this chain of events is recorded on CCTV tapes for playback-- it's simply not an invasion of your privacy.

If you communicate on an infrastructure that you neither built, own, nor maintain, then anything you transmit can likewise be stored -- and subject to the same analysis.

Expectations of privacy are very much in line with Rights.

You have the right to do whatever you can conceive and achieve solely through your own efforts. But, if someone is required or compelled or obligated to provide assistance, then that thing you wish to do is not a right. It is rather a *privilege*.

So you do have a right to privacy in a locked room that you actually own, with windows drawn and guests of your own choosing. But not on the telephone or interweb. For those sorts of communications, administrators and technicians and system owners must cooperate with you so that you can achieve what you wish to do. Again, it's a privilege that comes with paying a phone bill.


The constitution and the supreme court disagree with you.  Next time it might be better if you do a little research before spouting off on a topic you clearly haven't thought about all that deeply.
 
2013-06-23 07:54:18 AM

letrole: So you do have a right to privacy in a locked room that you actually own, with windows drawn and guests of your own choosing. But not on the telephone or interweb. For those sorts of communications, administrators and technicians and system owners must cooperate with you so that you can achieve what you wish to do. Again, it's a privilege that comes with paying a phone bill.


I know Trole is your surname, so this isn't directed at you, but whomever might have read your comment and agreed with this.

You are incorrect about the expectation of privacy on a telephone. That's why wiretapping laws exist.  You cannot listen in on or record somebody else's phone conversations. This extends to the government, who cannot do so without a warrant (supposedly). Since internet communications work on a very similar infrastructure to telephone communications (and various laws that originally applied to telephones were ham-handedly applied to the internet early on), it is easy to assume that the internet has the same expectation of privacy as the telephone.

It's actually a big reversal to say that there is no expectation of privacy on these media. This is the argument that many non-Troles are actually making, and it's pretty scary.

I still maintain that Snowden is a hero. He brought an important issue to light (we know it's important because it's the biggest topic in national debate right now) that the government was concealing from us. Obama said that this would be a transparent administration. Meanwhile, he's overseeing a really invasive secretsurveillance system.  The American people had a right to know such a thing exists, even if we didn't get all the details.

Snowden corrected a wrong done by the government at great personal expense. He will never see his home again. His old life is gone. That's a huge sacrifice to give the American people the ability to debate and decide how much privacy we're willing to give up, rather than having the government decide for us.
 
2013-06-23 07:55:20 AM

OgreMagi: Dude!  You're undermining your entire stance!  If you go to North Korea I'm going to have to side with the government.  I don't want to side with the farking government!  So don't do that!


Why? He's acting out of necessity. The countries that have the shakiest diplomatic relationships with the United States are the least likely to extradite him. He would be stupid if he just flew into the UK and tried to seek asylum. In know way is he suggesting that he supports their policies or methods of governing their people.
 
2013-06-23 07:57:23 AM

lokis_mentor: RT/ITASS has him going to Venezuela ultimately after stop in Cuba.


Because Venezuela has no extradition with the United States.

Take your pick:

img.fark.net

or

img.fark.net
 
2013-06-23 07:59:48 AM

numbquil: Why? He's acting out of necessity.


Nothing he has done has been out of necessity.
 
2013-06-23 08:04:46 AM

digistil: I predict after he hands over US intel sources to Russia, Pootie Poot offers him up to the US in exchange for something like staying out of Syria or the re-hiring of Paula Deen on the Food Network.


Putin is a shrewd diplomat.  What he really wants is another mini giraffe.
 
2013-06-23 08:04:51 AM
Americans have the unquestioned right to travel anywhere because America is the freest, best nation ever!!!

Except for anyone we call a traitor. Also Cuba is strictly off-limits. Only traitors go there.

Our freedom is what makes us free not to go to traitor countries.
 
2013-06-23 08:05:47 AM
thamike:
Nothing he has done has been out of necessity.

Necessity for his own safety and freedom. Sure, he COULD have just stayed in the US and been tortured like Manning was... but if I were in that position, I'd feel it was a necessity to flee.
 
2013-06-23 08:05:53 AM
flamingboard:
It's the only place this hero will be safe.

But what about Snowden?
 
2013-06-23 08:08:42 AM

digistil: Juc: digistil: I would be extremely reluctant to declare he's trying to make a difference. He lied about PRISM to sex it up; gave the Chinese military US intel and outed US sources of intel within China.

what was the lie about prism?

That the US govt has direct access to corp. servers like Google and Facebook, and that a warrant isn't needed to request private information on a person.


How do you know the government doesn't have direct access to those servers. Because Mark Zuckerberg says so? Facebook has gone public now. It would be a disaster for them if Facebook users believed the government had direct access to their data. Of course Facebook and Google would have to lie about it. A warrant isn't required either. All they need is something called a National Security Letter. It used to be that it could only be used to collect information on someone who was suspected of being a foreign spy. The USA PATRIOT Act changed that. Now they can get anyone's data as long as they can show that it is needed in a terrorism investigation and it seems that they interpret it as loosely as possible. Imagine that the NSA has a created a computer algorithm that can scan thousands of documents automatically and look for language that may lead them to believe one is involved in terrorism. In order to use such a system they would need a lot of data. It wouldn't work if they only had the data of those who were already suspected of terrorism. Does it sound like possible the data of every single American might be "needed in a terrorism investigation".

Unfortunately, I don't know if that is reality because the court that approves these documents is secret and the rulings are secret. We know what is required for a warrant. You need probable cause. There have been years of case law examples we can reference to identify what is or isn't probable cause. This allows we the people to protect ourselves against unreasonable searches. We don't know what the exact criteria for these NSLs or other secret court orders. We don't know what it means that information can be obtained when it is needed in a terrorist investigation. To the NSA an investigation may be something very different from what we see on Law and Order. Investigating could mean running everyone's data through a computer to look for connections to terrorists.

You don't know that he is lying. I don't know that he is not lying. Either way the government is up to something that I don't like. How about we let this whole thing play out before anyone judges this man as a patriot or as a criminal.
 
2013-06-23 08:08:55 AM

jack21221: tortured like Manning was.


uh huh
 
2013-06-23 08:11:19 AM
All he did was tell the public what its own government was doing.

Anyone who thinks this is "treason" is kind of a dumbass.
 
2013-06-23 08:11:49 AM

digistil: austin_millbarge: Juc: digistil: I would be extremely reluctant to declare he's trying to make a difference. He lied about PRISM to sex it up; gave the Chinese military US intel and outed US sources of intel within China.

what was the lie about prism?

Whatever Fox News said.

Faux News didn't say he lied, he said he lied.


Citation needed. I have been following this story very closely and I have not seen one instance where Snowden claimed that he lied about any of this. The only lie he supposedly told was about his salary. He later said he was talking about his career high salary.
 
2013-06-23 08:15:39 AM

jack21221: thamike:
Nothing he has done has been out of necessity.

Necessity for his own safety and freedom. Sure, he COULD have just stayed in the US and been tortured like Manning was... but if I were in that position, I'd feel it was a necessity to flee.


Nothing he has done has been out of necessity, including the stuff he thinks is necessary now.  He committed a crime he thought would make him mini-Julian Assange, and it did.  We won't remember this f*cker's name in six months.  There is no book deal at the end of this, not because of the crime, but because his life story will bore you to tears. Some people have their own lucrative reality shows telling the world how moronic they are, and then there's this bozo.
 
2013-06-23 08:15:51 AM
Snowden has far more to fear from the global intel community then he does from the US government. He isnt safe anywhere. You do not fark people like that over.
 
2013-06-23 08:17:26 AM
he might lose his health care.
 
2013-06-23 08:18:09 AM

positronica: The constitution and the supreme court disagree with you. Next time it might be better if you do a little research before spouting off on a topic you clearly haven't thought about all that deeply.


Just because the government violates a right doesn't mean you don't or should not have those rights. You will find most people disagree with defining rights as simply what freedoms the government determines to afford you. For example, blacks always had the right to sit on a bus where they wanted, even though once the government denied them the right. They didn't obtain the right by changing the law; no reasonable person would say they did not have the right beforehand; they asserted their right and the law was found in error, which means they always had it and that law was always wrong.

And, no, sitting on a bus where you want isn't a liberty. The government still has the power to order bus seating, just not based on race.
 
2013-06-23 08:20:04 AM

doczoidberg: All he did was tell the public what its own government was doing.

Anyone who thinks this is "treason" is kind of a dumbass.


Leaking secrets is technically treason.  Anyone who thinks about this emotionally is kind of a dumbass.  Anyone who wasn't aware that the NSA can look at his phone records is a particularly lost dumbass.
 
2013-06-23 08:20:54 AM

thamike: including the stuff he thinks is necessary now.


So, what are his other options? You seem to have it all figured out. If fleeing to another country seeking political asylum is not a necessity, what else would possibly give him a good outcome?
 
2013-06-23 08:21:45 AM

xkillyourfacex: Just because the government violates a right doesn't mean you don't or should not have those rights.


It does when the SCOTUS says it does.
 
2013-06-23 08:23:16 AM

jack21221: thamike: including the stuff he thinks is necessary now.

So, what are his other options? You seem to have it all figured out. If fleeing to another country seeking political asylum is not a necessity, what else would possibly give him a good outcome?


Nothing.  He's done far too many unnecessarily halfwitted things from the very beginning.  At this point, it's about cutting losses.
 
2013-06-23 08:24:18 AM

thamike: doczoidberg: All he did was tell the public what its own government was doing.

Anyone who thinks this is "treason" is kind of a dumbass.

Leaking secrets is technically treason.  Anyone who thinks about this emotionally is kind of a dumbass.  Anyone who wasn't aware that the NSA can look at his phone records is a particularly lost dumbass.


Were people actually shocked when this news came out?

But he's right. Leaving emotion out of this, technically he's committing treason (the best kind of treason). How can you leak government secrets and not be accused of treason is beyond me.
 
2013-06-23 08:25:00 AM

thamike: Anyone who wasn't aware that the NSA can look at his phone records is a particularly lost dumbass.


This was not public knowledge, which is why it's a big deal that he leaked it in the first place. Additionally, it was a surprise to many that there was a rubber-stamp court (99.96% granted) which would allow anybody's phone and email CONTENT to be collected (not just metadata) on the flimsiest of evidence. Or, that such decisions could be made simply on the whim of an analyst, even without the court (which would have approved it anyway).

If everybody knew that the NSA was collecting everybody's phone records in addition to all of this other stuff, then he didn't leak anything, now did he? And if people didn't know this stuff, how are they "lost dumbasses?"

Either he didn't leak anything important, or people are not dumbasses. You can't have both.
 
2013-06-23 08:26:25 AM

justoneznot: Good job US Government. You've gone so hard after him that the only logical place for him to go is a place we're most at odds with. And I'm sure they'll want to know everything he knows, and since the US government has been so hostile to him, he likely has lost any hesitation he might have had about giving up secret information to them.


Just how hard has the US been going after him?

Whether or not you think he's a hero, he's clearly broken the law.  Do you really think the US is not going to at least make an attempt to arrest him?

It sounds like the US has gone to such great lengths as to issue an arrest warrant and request extradition.  Yeah, that's really going "so hard after him", isn't it?

The only way the US could go less hard after him is to ignore him completely.  Let us know when they send Seal Team 6 to wherever his final country of refuge is.
 
2013-06-23 08:26:25 AM

thamike: Nothing.  He's done far too many unnecessarily halfwitted things from the very beginning.  At this point, it's about cutting losses.


So, he has no other options, so you're agreeing that what he's doing is out of necessity? You must be trolling. I'm done responding to you since it's clear you don't genuinely hold these positions.
 
2013-06-23 08:28:06 AM

jack21221: thamike: including the stuff he thinks is necessary now.

So, what are his other options? You seem to have it all figured out. If fleeing to another country seeking political asylum is not a necessity, what else would possibly give him a good outcome?


He should turn himself in, cooperate with the authorities and hope it mitigates his final sentence.
 
2013-06-23 08:29:56 AM

jack21221: thamike: Anyone who wasn't aware that the NSA can look at his phone records is a particularly lost dumbass.

This was not public knowledge, which is why it's a big deal that he leaked it in the first place. Additionally, it was a surprise to many that there was a rubber-stamp court (99.96% granted) which would allow anybody's phone and email CONTENT to be collected (not just metadata) on the flimsiest of evidence. Or, that such decisions could be made simply on the whim of an analyst, even without the court (which would have approved it anyway).

If everybody knew that the NSA was collecting everybody's phone records in addition to all of this other stuff, then he didn't leak anything, now did he? And if people didn't know this stuff, how are they "lost dumbasses?"

Either he didn't leak anything important, or people are not dumbasses. You can't have both.


You can have both.  He leaked specific procedure.  And people are dumbasses for being shocked an outraged about the dinnerbell media frenzy phone sh*t that I--not being privy to secrets nor particularly feverish in my interest of the topic--have known about for a decade.

You want to know what really scares me about the NSA?  That they give security clearance to high school dropouts who look, act, speak, and think like high school dropouts.
 
2013-06-23 08:31:15 AM

jack21221: thamike: Nothing.  He's done far too many unnecessarily halfwitted things from the very beginning.  At this point, it's about cutting losses.

So, he has no other options, so you're agreeing that what he's doing is out of necessity? You must be trolling. I'm done responding to you since it's clear you don't genuinely hold these positions.


I genuinely hold these positions.  He's doing a media tour before he turns himself in.  None of this was necessary.
 
2013-06-23 08:31:58 AM

thamike: I genuinely hold these positions. He's doing a media tour before he turns himself in or gets caught (worse idea). None of this was necessary.

 
2013-06-23 08:32:58 AM

jack21221: Either he didn't leak anything important, or people are not dumbasses. You can't have both.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_secret
 
2013-06-23 08:35:37 AM

jack21221: letrole: So you do have a right to privacy in a locked room that you actually own, with windows drawn and guests of your own choosing. But not on the telephone or interweb. For those sorts of communications, administrators and technicians and system owners must cooperate with you so that you can achieve what you wish to do. Again, it's a privilege that comes with paying a phone bill.

I know Trole is your surname, so this isn't directed at you, but whomever might have read your comment and agreed with this.

You are incorrect about the expectation of privacy on a telephone. That's why wiretapping laws exist.  You cannot listen in on or record somebody else's phone conversations. This extends to the government, who cannot do so without a warrant (supposedly). Since internet communications work on a very similar infrastructure to telephone communications (and various laws that originally applied to telephones were ham-handedly applied to the internet early on), it is easy to assume that the internet has the same expectation of privacy as the telephone.

It's actually a big reversal to say that there is no expectation of privacy on these media. This is the argument that many non-Troles are actually making, and it's pretty scary.

I still maintain that Snowden is a hero. He brought an important issue to light (we know it's important because it's the biggest topic in national debate right now) that the government was concealing from us. Obama said that this would be a transparent administration. Meanwhile, he's overseeing a really invasive secretsurveillance system.  The American people had a right to know such a thing exists, even if we didn't get all the details.

Snowden corrected a wrong done by the government at great personal expense. He will never see his home again. His old life is gone. That's a huge sacrifice to give the American people the ability to debate and decide how much privacy we're willing to give up, rather than having the government decide for us.


You should really read the USA PATRIOT act. The following summaries are directly from Ethics in Information Technology by George W. Reynolds:

Section 206 FISA roving wiretaps: "Expands FISA to permit "roving wiretap" authority, which allows the FBI to intercept any communications to or by an intelligence target without specifying the telephone line, computer, or other facility to be monitored."

Section 215 FISA access to tangible items: Permits the FBI to compel production of any record or item without showing probable cause; people served with a search warrant issued under FISA rules may not disclose, under penalty of law, the existence of the warrant or the fact that records were provided to the government.

Section 505 Authorizes use of National Security letters: Authorizes the attorney general or delegate to compel holders of your personal records to turn them over to the government simply by writing an NSL, which is not subject to judicial oversight or review. NSLs can be used against anyone, including U.S. citizens, even if they are not suspected of espionage or criminal activity.


Now keep in mind that before this patriotic act your privacy was protected by the 4th amendment, The Right to Financial Privacy Act of 1978, The Communications Act of 1934, The Wiretap Act, The Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986, and others. Almost a century of legislation passed to protect your civil liberties was undone by a single idea: terrorism. It seems as if all the government has to do to be able to justify violating your rights is to mention that word. Because terrorism is so evil, so deadly that we should all just lock ourselves in a prison to protect ourselves from it.
 
2013-06-23 08:36:54 AM

jack21221: thamike: Anyone who wasn't aware that the NSA can look at his phone records is a particularly lost dumbass.

This was not public knowledge, which is why it's a big deal that he leaked it in the first place. Additionally, it was a surprise to many that there was a rubber-stamp court (99.96% granted) which would allow anybody's phone and email CONTENT to be collected (not just metadata) on the flimsiest of evidence. Or, that such decisions could be made simply on the whim of an analyst, even without the court (which would have approved it anyway).

If everybody knew that the NSA was collecting everybody's phone records in addition to all of this other stuff, then he didn't leak anything, now did he? And if people didn't know this stuff, how are they "lost dumbasses?"

Either he didn't leak anything important, or people are not dumbasses. You can't have both.



I wonder how many NSA analysts have used their powers simply to snoop on ex-girlfriends.
 
2013-06-23 08:39:22 AM

digistil: Also, has anyone ever gone from patriot, to liar, to traitor as quickly as Snowden?


Oliver North?

Or was it that he was all three at once, depending on who you asked?
 
2013-06-23 08:39:37 AM

doczoidberg: I wonder how many NSA analysts have used their powers simply to snoop on ex-girlfriends.


Funny, I used to be in a serious relationship with someone in a high level intelligence family.  Maybe that's why I'm so aloof about surveillance.  It's a foregone conclusion.
 
2013-06-23 08:40:58 AM
Deal with it.
 
2013-06-23 08:41:36 AM

SurfaceTension: digistil: Also, has anyone ever gone from patriot, to liar, to traitor as quickly as Snowden?

Oliver North?

Or was it that he was all three at once, depending on who you asked?


The fact he's a commentator on Fox News instead of rotting in a prison somewhere is one of the greatest injustices to befall our criminal system.
 
2013-06-23 08:41:42 AM

thamike: It does when the SCOTUS says it does.


Well then we'll just use a different word than "right" so you can cling to your shiatty definitions.
 
2013-06-23 08:44:48 AM
I'm more upset we give NSA several billion dollars a year and they let a high school drlop-out do this type of damage.  What I'm worried about are all the analysts working for foreign countries who keep their mouths shut about what they're up to.
 
2013-06-23 08:45:31 AM
img.fark.net
 
2013-06-23 08:46:16 AM

OgreMagi: Dude!  You're undermining your entire stance!  If you go to North Korea I'm going to have to side with the government.  I don't want to side with the farking government!  So don't do that!


If you read the article, you'll see that the only reason he's in Russia is to catch a connecting flight. The article says he'll be heading to Cuba, but the Wikileaks people interviewed for it also said they'd arranged for his transit to a democratic country, and Cuba isn't very democratic. Iceland and Venezuela are still options at this point.
 
2013-06-23 08:47:02 AM

xkillyourfacex: thamike: It does when the SCOTUS says it does.

Well then we'll just use a different word than "right" so you can cling to your shiatty definitions.


Ok.
 
2013-06-23 08:49:47 AM

OgreMagi: digistil: Also, has anyone ever gone from patriot, to liar, to traitor as quickly as Snowden?

Benedict Arnold?

/he was a better general than Washington


Great generals don't piss off their peers, and general staff.  They also don't turn traitor and plot to overthrow their command.

/or if you're a southern civil war apologist that likes to point out that Washington was a traitor, you could say Benedict Arnold stopped being a traitor and went back to being a loyal subject of the crown.
 
2013-06-23 08:54:08 AM

BalugaJoe: he might lose his health care.


He has little to loose. He can thank Illbama for that
 
2013-06-23 08:54:27 AM

digistil: Also, has anyone ever gone from patriot, to liar, to traitor as quickly as Snowden?


Not to draw a comparison, but MLK Jr. got called a traitor and a liar all the damn time by people in authority. Pretty much anybody that takes a moral stand against what folks with power and money are doing gets labelled a liar and a traitor, usually not 5 minutes after calling them out. And besides, nothing he said was a lie. Regardless of what government officials -who want to keep what they're doing secret and criminalize revealing it- say, once they have the data covered by one of those court-orders, there isn't anything to stop them from looking at any of the data on it. As they say, possession is 9/10th of the law, and once someone has access to information it's foolish to believe they'll be hampered by rules no one is around to enforce.
 
2013-06-23 08:56:23 AM

Heron: Cuba isn't very democratic. Iceland and Venezuela are still options at this point.


Sounds facinating
 
2013-06-23 08:59:16 AM

Heron: Cuba isn't very democratic. Iceland and Venezuela are still options at this point.


If by that you mean Venezuela appears to be democratic.
 
2013-06-23 08:59:25 AM

Heron: nothing he said was a lie.


You say that with authority. How do you know that's true?
 
2013-06-23 09:00:40 AM

Heron: OgreMagi: Dude!  You're undermining your entire stance!  If you go to North Korea I'm going to have to side with the government.  I don't want to side with the farking government!  So don't do that!

If you read the article, you'll see that the only reason he's in Russia is to catch a connecting flight. The article says he'll be heading to Cuba, but the Wikileaks people interviewed for it also said they'd arranged for his transit to a democratic country, and Cuba isn't very democratic. Iceland and Venezuela are still options at this point.


I hope we don't lose to Venezuela. That would be embarrassing.
 
Displayed 50 of 454 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report