Do you have adblock enabled?
 
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
    More: Followup, Hong Kong, Moscow, political freedom, South China Morning Post, Dmitry Peskov  
•       •       •

9379 clicks; posted to Main » on 23 Jun 2013 at 5:03 AM (3 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



453 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 02:18:31 PM  

Mrtraveler01: sendtodave: Dwight_Yeast: I'm reminded of Dorothy Parker's use of the word "horticulture": You can lead a whore to culture,but you can't make her think. Likewise, you can tell the American people that the government is monitoring their phone calls and internet usage, but until it interrupts Dancing with the Stars, it's not actually news.

But isn't it a good thing that it is new now?

That they are paying attention, and are a bit upset over it?

Is  the problem that they are finally upset over it when it is politically inconvenient?

I think the problem is that nothing is being done to push any reforms concerning the actions of the NSA.

I mean it's fine to get people outraged about this but if nothing is going to be done to change what is going on, then this is all just a waste of time.


But "our guys" are in charge!  And "our guys" are civil libertarians, at least compared to the GOP.

So, why are "our guys" doing nothing to Change this?  I still have some Hope!

If this is a waste of time, it is because we wasted our votes.
 
2013-06-23 02:19:40 PM  

StoPPeRmobile: I've been hearing that argument for a long time.


Well, the claims that Obama is personally listening in to random phone calls is usually fairly retarded and unlikely.  Not defending the programs, but just for a sheer logistics standpoint, the odds of any persons phone call being listened in to, ever, are about the same as me getting hit by a falling satellite while getting a blowjob from Scarlett Johansson, Natalie Portman, Jessica Alba, and Emma Watson.
 
2013-06-23 02:19:52 PM  

sendtodave: So, why are "our guys" doing nothing to Change this? I still have some Hope!


Your guess is as good as mine.
 
2013-06-23 02:20:19 PM  

gfid: 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.


With a significant part of the country - a significant VOTING part of the country - thinking that Snowden is a hero, do you
honestly think for even a microsecond that the U.S. gov't would publicly take any aggressive action against him? Hell no.
That's all going to be done behind the scenes. Then one day, buried on the back page will be a two inch column about
how Snowden fell in with Ecuadorian drug runners and was arrested after being caught using kittens and puppies as
mules.

Ok, so maybe not that last part, but my point is that when the U.S. gov't does make their final move against him, it won't
even be a blip on the public's radar.
 
2013-06-23 02:20:27 PM  
static.tvtome.com
img408.imageshack.us
 
2013-06-23 02:21:18 PM  

Mrtraveler01: sendtodave: So, why are "our guys" doing nothing to Change this? I still have some Hope!

Your guess is as good as mine.


Apparently because it's a non-issue.  Overzealous contractor,
 
2013-06-23 02:24:16 PM  

sprgrss: WorldCitizen: sprgrss

We don't have to play the "what might've happened" game.  We know what happened.  There was no hot war between the Soviets and the United States.  Terrorists have attacked and will continue to attack.  That's why terrorism is a real existential threat.


Terrorism is not a threat to the existence of the United States.
 
2013-06-23 02:29:03 PM  

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


What're you talking about? I keep seeing people call him a hero/patriot.
 
2013-06-23 02:30:00 PM  

sendtodave: But isn't it a good thing that it is new now?


A day late and a dollar short. I don't have much sympathy for the American public, as the time to have address this was 13 years ago, not today.

Also, as has been pointed out, no one on any side is proposing any reforms or changes to what the NSA is doing. At the very least, we could stop pulling classified infomation into the hand of contract employees!

sendtodave: But "our guys" are in charge! And "our guys" are civil libertarians, at least compared to the GOP.


Obama is politically to the RIght of Richard Nixon.
 
2013-06-23 02:31:48 PM  

sprgrss: WorldCitizen: sprgrss

We don't have to play the "what might've happened" game.  We know what happened.  There was no hot war between the Soviets and the United States.  Terrorists have attacked and will continue to attack.  That's why terrorism is a real existential threat.


Not to put too fine a point on it, but the fear of, and over-reaction to, terrorism are about as close as the US gets to an existential threat right now.  Terrorism itself, not so much.

Cheers.
 
2013-06-23 02:32:34 PM  

Dwight_Yeast: sendtodave: But isn't it a good thing that it is new now?

A day late and a dollar short. I don't have much sympathy for the American public, as the time to have address this was 13 years ago, not today.

Also, as has been pointed out, no one on any side is proposing any reforms or changes to what the NSA is doing. At the very least, we could stop pulling classified infomation into the hand of contract employees!

sendtodave: But "our guys" are in charge! And "our guys" are civil libertarians, at least compared to the GOP.

Obama is politically to the RIght of Richard Nixon.


Well, "can't win, don't try" is a valid political stance.

Beats "Can't try, my team is in office."
 
2013-06-23 02:34:46 PM  

BitwiseShift: He reminds me of a younger, nerdier Oliver North.

If only Reagan were here, he'd know what to do.


Nah. He'd go before Congress and tell them that he can't recall or remember.
 
2013-06-23 02:35:56 PM  
Snowden sure went from "probably a misguided idealist" to "straight up traitor" pretty quick.
 
2013-06-23 02:37:55 PM  

Aldon: Snowden sure went from "probably a misguided idealist" to "straight up traitor" pretty quick.


I keep seeing people calling him a hero. I've been saying "traitor" since minute one, and I'm getting tired of the shear stupidity of the people around me.
 
2013-06-23 02:40:35 PM  

Biological Ali: The serious media outlets have more or less let it go and are just focusing on stories about Snowden himself, but even that's just a pointless distraction; the sooner his little story gets resolved, the better.


Are these the same "serious media outlets" who helped shrub lie us into a war with Iraq? Yeah, I totally trust their opinion on authoritarian issues.

Personally, I think more attention on this issue is good for the country. Regardless of the messenger.
 
2013-06-23 02:41:17 PM  

WorldCitizen: Terrorism is not a threat to the existence of the United States.


Politicians wetting their pants over terrorism is a different matter, of course.
 
2013-06-23 02:44:46 PM  
Anyone trying to make sense of the guy's actions needs to always look at ALL of the following:
1. The Patriot Act in all of its forms
2. Case history of SCOTUS and on the Federal level
3. The telecom companies specific terms as far as client privacy protection goes.

Remember that you are clients of companies knowingly aware of the government's security and surveillance measures and that these companies comply rather than take it to the courts or SCOTUS because "give us your money" and nothing's unconstitutional unless SCOTUS rules it so.

All this posturing about the Constitution and Bill of Rights and ignorance of case history and laws in effect is just stupid.
One has to understand the systen before they can effectively change it.

Snowden is either playing you all for his own elevaion (including Messiah or martyr conplex), or being played himself. If he really wanted to crack the whip, Wikileaks could've saved him a lot of trouble and money. The fact he ended up on TV news right away made me question his motives fron day one. The daily attention has only confirned that.
Most dangerous attention whore ever.
 
2013-06-23 02:46:59 PM  

AndreMA: WorldCitizen: Terrorism is not a threat to the existence of the United States.

Politicians wetting their pants over terrorism is a different matter, of course.


Well, and the fearful Americans who vote in politicians who wet their pants in fear (or at least get their votes by encouraging fear withing voters).
 
2013-06-23 02:47:13 PM  

Unhip1: Snowden is either playing you all for his own elevaion (including Messiah or martyr conplex), or being played himself. If he really wanted to crack the whip, Wikileaks could've saved him a lot of trouble and money. The fact he ended up on TV news right away made me question his motives fron day one. The daily attention has only confirned that.
Most dangerous attention whore ever.


I dunno, Patrick Henry with his "Give me liberty or give me death" so let's cast off our government and put me in charge might be a contender.

He's considered a hero, too.
 
2013-06-23 02:48:01 PM  

sendtodave: Well, "can't win, don't try" is a valid political stance.


More like: saw this coming, fought against it, lost, and therefore no longer care.  The American people have exactly the government they deserve, as they're always willing to rally around what they want to hear, no matter how little relationship it has to reality.

And all I see from those who have just found out about this and are upset is a bunch of chickrens running round, sans heads.

Question: what do you think we should actually do at this point to "fix" things, in your eyes?
 
2013-06-23 02:51:13 PM  
He be knocking on heavens door
 
2013-06-23 02:52:31 PM  

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.


You are a boot licking fool. It is not about 'privacy', it is about limitations on the governments ability to search and seize you or your possessions or papers. It's about due process. Your idiotic formulation of rights vs privileges is meaningless. I don't need the gov't to help me get 'privacy', I need the gov't to farking follow the laws we have established.
 
2013-06-23 02:53:15 PM  

Serious Post on Serious Thread: 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.

You are a boot licking fool. It is not about 'privacy', it is about limitations on the governments ability to search and seize you or your possessions or papers. It's about due process. Your idiotic formulation of rights vs privileges is meaningless. I don't need the gov't to help me get 'privacy', I need the gov't to farking follow the laws we have established.


Oh, just saw your user name. Nevermind.
 
2013-06-23 02:55:59 PM  

WorldCitizen: AndreMA: WorldCitizen: Terrorism is not a threat to the existence of the United States.

Politicians wetting their pants over terrorism is a different matter, of course.

Well, and the fearful Americans who vote in politicians who wet their pants in fear (or at least get their votes by encouraging fear withing voters).


True, although both major parties (and the candidates they put forth, with rare exceptions) are complicit and most people have been convinced that voting for a third party is a "waste" of their vote.
 
2013-06-23 02:56:53 PM  

Dwight_Yeast: More like: saw this coming, fought against it, lost, and therefore no longer care. The American people have exactly the government they deserve, as they're always willing to rally around what they want to hear, no matter how little relationship it has to reality.


Hm.  So you accept that it is the government that you deserve, as well?

Or are you just smugly superior?

Dwight_Yeast: Question: what do you think we should actually do at this point to "fix" things, in your eyes?


What should we, as people, do?  fark if I know.  I don't think that the people have power anymore.  So, I don't go with this "we ge t what we deserve" line, because I don't believe in a Just World.

We get what we get.  Kinda like the weather.

For tens of thousands of years, that's how politics has worked.

i live in China.  they have no power to change the government.  And neither do we.

If you don't believe that, I urge you to get riled up and try to change things.  If you realize that we're all subjects of authoritarians now, I invite you to have a beer.  We can play xbox or something.
 
2013-06-23 02:58:17 PM  

Serious Post on Serious Thread: You are a boot licking fool. It is not about 'privacy', it is about limitations on the governments ability to search and seize you or your possessions or papers. It's about due process. Your idiotic formulation of rights vs privileges is meaningless. I don't need the gov't to help me get 'privacy', I need the gov't to farking follow the laws we have established.


They are. The Patriot Act gives them the power do do exactly what they're doing, and it protects the telecoms from any liability.
 
2013-06-23 03:01:36 PM  

sendtodave: What should we, as people, do? fark if I know. I don't think that the people have power anymore. So, I don't go with this "we ge t what we deserve" line, because I don't believe in a Just World.


We don't have it because we've happily given it up.

sendtodave: i live in China. they have no power to change the government. And neither do we.


That's not true at all.

sendtodave: If you don't believe that, I urge you to get riled up and try to change things.


I'm too old for that shiat. I burned out on trying to make a difference a decade ago.  Now I pick my battles and keep them small.  Yes, I may be part of the problem, but this way I'm not as angry as I was as a younger man.
 
2013-06-23 03:02:02 PM  

Lsherm: I hope they kill him.  He's not a hero, he's a narcissist with an overinflated sense of self-worth who has deluded himself into thinking he's done something good.  He hasn't.  He's just been giving away US intelligence secrets because he's too stupid to do anything else.

When he dies, and it will be soon, I hope it is painful.


Everything you said above is raw  pejorative idle speculation and conjecture, except for the fact he released info. You don't like the guy based on a couple interviews and speculation and gut feeling (apparently based mainly on his choice of glasses, haircut, facial hair stylings and tone of voice)? Fine. It matters not even in the least. I'm pretty sure he didn't ask you or anyone else to like him or be his besty. It's not about him except in the abstract of using him as a nominal icon for possible punishment, either legal or, in your case,cultural, for not just not shutting up being a good little slave. Nothing needs to be forgiven. Nothing needs to be justified to you. Except the farking disgusting gov't programs he (re)-brought to light.

Now there are some boots that need licking somewhere, go do what you do best.
 
2013-06-23 03:04:39 PM  

Dwight_Yeast: They are. The Patriot Act gives them the power do do exactly what they're doing, and it protects the telecoms from any liability.


I've always wondered why the telecom immunity wasn't successfully challenged as an ex post facto law, which I always thought was forbidden.
 
2013-06-23 03:05:40 PM  

Dwight_Yeast: Serious Post on Serious Thread: You are a boot licking fool. It is not about 'privacy', it is about limitations on the governments ability to search and seize you or your possessions or papers. It's about due process. Your idiotic formulation of rights vs privileges is meaningless. I don't need the gov't to help me get 'privacy', I need the gov't to farking follow the laws we have established.

They are. The Patriot Act gives them the power do do exactly what they're doing, and it protects the telecoms from any liability.


The PATRIOT Act authorizes the collection of the contents of all US electronic communications in giant data centers in Colorado and Utah that can then be retroactively searched based on alleged non-terror related crimes committed at a later date?

Can you provide that section number please?
 
2013-06-23 03:05:42 PM  

Dwight_Yeast: sendtodave: i live in China. they have no power to change the government. And neither do we.

That's not true at all.

sendtodave: If you don't believe that, I urge you to get riled up and try to change things.

I'm too old for that shiat. I burned out on trying to make a difference a decade ago. Now I pick my battles and keep them small. Yes, I may be part of the problem, but this way I'm not as angry as I was as a younger man.


Kinda confused by that.  Is it not true that we cannot change our government (although you gave up on trying in any big way,) or not true that they cannot change theirs?
 
2013-06-23 03:13:02 PM  

Satanic_Hamster: StoPPeRmobile: I've been hearing that argument for a long time.

Well, the claims that Obama is personally listening in to random phone calls is usually fairly retarded and unlikely.  Not defending the programs, but just for a sheer logistics standpoint, the odds of any persons phone call being listened in to, ever, are about the same as me getting hit by a falling satellite while getting a blowjob from Scarlett Johansson, Natalie Portman, Jessica Alba, and Emma Watson.




Then why bother with searching?
 
2013-06-23 03:16:15 PM  
I'm still confused as to why the US wants to prosecute Snowden for spreading lies.
 
2013-06-23 03:31:48 PM  

Biological Ali: The serious media outlets have more or less let it go and are just focusing on stories about Snowden himself, but even that's just a pointless distraction; the sooner his little story gets resolved, the better.


The serious media outlets have been aggressively threatened with criminal prosecution if they re-disclose the contents of the purported DOJ memorandum and FISA court order, re: minimization procedures on data-collections involving US persons.  That's why they are reporting on things like where Snowden may be going instead.  He's not the real story, the memo/order is.

The information in the memo is not mere confirmation of what was known publicly before. The nightmare scenarios, such as the Twatwaffle campaign (would-be politician can't oppose incumbent because incumbent's wife or best friend has access), or to get revenge on an ex, or to satisfy curiosity about a celebrity, will happen because people are flawed, sometimes they make bad decisions, knowledge is power, total knowledge is absolute power and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

A federal court approved it.  Normally, when a judge or judges acting in their official capacity make a wrong decision, it can be appealed to a higher court, and up to the Supreme Court if they decide to review it.  In theory, it is impossible to set up a federal court in the US without its decisions being subject to review by the Supreme Court.  In practice, however, as far as is publicly known the decisions of the FISA court have not been subject to review; it has been tried but proved impossible to challenge the constitutionality of the decisions of the FISA court because of the state secrets privilege.  No plaintiff, no evidence, no case.  The rule of law cannot operate under a cloak of secrecy.  It is possible that by enabling the publication of the  memo, Snowden has done something that will get the issue of the constitutionality of the general warrants to the Supreme Court.  The case wouldn't be decided until years in the future, long after all the players have left office, but still.  Hero.
 
2013-06-23 03:55:05 PM  

AndreMA: Also careful that his flights don't have a chance of passing through airspace (US or international) controlled by US ATC.


SU 150, the SVO-HAV flight, is definitely passing through US airspace today.

For some time now, the US has to receive and approve the passenger list of overflights even if the flight does not stop in the US, so the questions become:

1 - Will SU fly a different route tomorrow to avoid US airspace, perhaps a southerly routing using the Azores and Bermuda as alternates? Who is paying for it and ordering it?

2 - If SU did not alter its route, would the US approve an overflight with Snowden on board?

3 - If the flight were to enter US airspace with Snowden on board, would the US have the legal authority to detain him, and how would it be done?

The only related thing I can find with a quick Google is a flight in May 2010 that was refused entry to US airspace, landed at Montreal, had the "problem" passenger arrested by our Canadian friends, then continued on to Mexico City.
 
2013-06-23 04:01:35 PM  

The First Four Black Sabbath Albums: I'm still confused as to why the US wants to prosecute Snowden for spreading lies.


"He doesn't know what he's talking about, we don't do that at all....but we need to hunt him down for leaking information." They keep trying to have it both ways. They'd like to discredit him and the information he leaked, but by going after him so hard they're showing that what he has leaked is true.

They then try to put him down by saying he dropped out of highschool, but in doing so, they're dissing themselves for hiring someone that dropped out of high school to manage secret intelligence information. Who's more stupid in that equation, the dropout taking the 6 figure job or the government that outsources intelligence to dropouts?
 
2013-06-23 04:15:45 PM  

digitalrain: gfid: 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.

With a significant part of the country - a significant VOTING part of the country - thinking that Snowden is a hero, do you
honestly think for even a microsecond that the U.S. gov't would publicly take any aggressive action against him? Hell no.
That's all going to be done behind the scenes. Then one day, buried on the back page will be a two inch column about
how Snowden fell in with Ecuadorian drug runners and was arrested after being caught using kittens and puppies as
mules.

Ok, so maybe not that last part, but my point is that when the U.S. gov't does make their final move against him, it won't
even be a blip on the public's radar.


Drat, I just misclicked and erased a well written reply, but I'll try to recreate my main points.

1:  Snowden has blown his load.  He has nothing else to reveal.  The US gov't. still wants to arrest him but there's nothing to be gained by killing him.  Even if he dies in an actual accident, people will think the worst.

2:  Sysadmins have access to a lot of information.  I've been one myself and I could look at everyone's e-mails and see what websites people visited.  I probably could have blackmailed executives with some of the information I just ran across during the normal course of my job.  I wasn't even looking for dirt.  I stumbled across it.  But I didn't act on it.    Granted, I didn't work for the government and it wasn't a matter of national security and it's not really my business who's hiring hookers so I knew just to let it go.

3.  I really wonder if Snowden has thought his cunning plan through.  It doesn't seem that he has.  First he hides out in Hong Kong and now he's en route to Venezuela via Moscow and Cuba - who the hell is his travel agent, anyway?  And what's he going to do now?  He can't return to the US without facing arrest.  He does't appear to have any really valuable job skills.  He's stuck.

It sort of makes me wonder about Assange.  He must be sick of hanging out in an embassy in London.  I would have expected him to make a break for it by now, but I guess he assumes British agents are constantly watching and waiting for him to set foot outside the embassy.  I bet he's thinking "We're going to need a bigger diplomatic pouch".

Snowden will eventually fade into obscurity.  Maybe he'll write a book or something, but he won't be assassinated and he won't ever return to the US.  The NSA will keep increasing their surveillance on US citizens and of course foreigners as well and we'll all forget about it and elect some other asshole to the White House in 2016 and it won't matter if it's a Democrat or Republican because the NSA will keep spying on us.
 
2013-06-23 04:35:45 PM  

4tehsnowflakes: The serious media outlets have been aggressively threatened with criminal prosecution


Really?
 
2013-06-23 04:37:46 PM  

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

Because Venezuela has no extradition with the United States.


WRONG AGAIN!

http://www.oas.org/juridico/mla/en/traites/en_traites-ext-usa-ecu.pdf ">http://www.oas.org/juridico/mla/en/traites/en_traites-ext-usa-ecu.p df

http://internationalextraditionblog.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/ecuad o r.pdf">http://internationalextraditionblog.files.wordpress.com/2011/0 3/ecuado r.pdf
 
2013-06-23 04:48:34 PM  

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

Because Venezuela has no extradition with the United States.

WRONG AGAIN!

http://www.oas.org/juridico/mla/en/traites/en_traites-ext-usa-ecu.pdf ">http://www.oas.org/juridico/mla/en/traites/en_traites-ext-usa-ecu.p df

http://internationalextraditionblog.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/ecuad o r.pdf">http://internationalextraditionblog.files.wordpress.com/2011/0 3/ecuado r.pdf


You understand Ecuador and Venezuela are different countries, right?
 
2013-06-23 04:53:21 PM  

The First Four Black Sabbath Albums: I'm still confused as to why the US wants to prosecute Snowden for spreading lies.


He did release some Top Secret documents.  They don't really support his claims, but they're still TS.
 
2013-06-23 05:35:13 PM  

Biological Ali: sendtodave: I cannot see any excuse for what the government is doing in the name of security. My bias, actually, says that this would make sense if it happened under Bush, that it is happening now shakes my faith in Democrats holding the moral high ground.

I mean, I'll probably still vote for them due to social wedge issues. But that's the only difference I'm seeing at this point.

As someone said in the earlier threads - with Bush the controversy was over warrantless wiretaps, while under Obama the "controversy" is over warrantful non-wiretaps. There's plenty of difference even on this issue if you're curious enough to look for it.



they are casting a dragnet across anything and everything, and then have given themselves permission to keep and study all those *inadvertent* communications of Americans they come across (say when querying google for everything record they have for the past 3 months  -fark, who would have thought americans used google?) that can be described as evidence of criminality or even information about a threat of harm or property. And this is the farking Army doing it.

/the issue with bush was the trolling of our private communications (just like obama is doing) with noin contravention of the 4th amendment (just like obama is doing).
if you can't see the problem here you are so blinded by your partisanship you are a threat to everything good this country ever stood for.

The top secret rules that allow NSA to use US data without a warrantFisa court submissions show broad scope of procedures governing NSA's surveillance of Americans' communication
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/20/fisa-court-nsa-without-w ar rant
 
2013-06-23 05:55:18 PM  
whats the big deal with the NSA and government anyways?  They collecting data on us right
if they ain't got nothing to hide than they shouldn't be worried

thats what the poster says doesn't it.
 
2013-06-23 06:10:58 PM  
Surely even people who are wholly against the stuff he originally 'revealed', and who therefore initially thought of him as some kind of hero will have no sympathy for him now?

Since he began giving out details of your country's espionage against foreign nations, something that IS a legitimate and universal national security activity, he is simply a traitorous former intelligence operative.
 
2013-06-23 06:12:02 PM  

relcec: Biological Ali: sendtodave: I cannot see any excuse for what the government is doing in the name of security. My bias, actually, says that this would make sense if it happened under Bush, that it is happening now shakes my faith in Democrats holding the moral high ground.

I mean, I'll probably still vote for them due to social wedge issues. But that's the only difference I'm seeing at this point.

As someone said in the earlier threads - with Bush the controversy was over warrantless wiretaps, while under Obama the "controversy" is over warrantful non-wiretaps. There's plenty of difference even on this issue if you're curious enough to look for it.


they are casting a dragnet across anything and everything, and then have given themselves permission to keep and study all those *inadvertent* communications of Americans they come across (say when querying google for everything record they have for the past 3 months  -fark, who would have thought americans used google?) that can be described as evidence of criminality or even information about a threat of harm or property. And this is the farking Army doing it.

/the issue with bush was the trolling of our private communications (just like obama is doing) with noin contravention of the 4th amendment (just like obama is doing).
if you can't see the problem here you are so blinded by your partisanship you are a threat to everything good this country ever stood for.

The top secret rules that allow NSA to use US data without a warrantFisa court submissions show broad scope of procedures governing NSA's surveillance of Americans' communication
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/20/fisa-court-nsa-without-w ar rant


everybody's a traitor really

if you're against the NSA you're a traitor because you're threatening the safety of the country

if you support the NSA you're a traitor because you're threatening the freedoms of the country
 
2013-06-23 06:16:56 PM  

slykens1: AndreMA: Also careful that his flights don't have a chance of passing through airspace (US or international) controlled by US ATC.

SU 150, the SVO-HAV flight, is definitely passing through US airspace today.

For some time now, the US has to receive and approve the passenger list of overflights even if the flight does not stop in the US, so the questions become:

1 - Will SU fly a different route tomorrow to avoid US airspace, perhaps a southerly routing using the Azores and Bermuda as alternates? Who is paying for it and ordering it?

2 - If SU did not alter its route, would the US approve an overflight with Snowden on board?

3 - If the flight were to enter US airspace with Snowden on board, would the US have the legal authority to detain him, and how would it be done?

The only related thing I can find with a quick Google is a flight in May 2010 that was refused entry to US airspace, landed at Montreal, had the "problem" passenger arrested by our Canadian friends, then continued on to Mexico City.


I'm surprised at that routing. I'd have thought that the southern, mirror-image great circle route would've been preferred for such a route, especially given the minor additional radiation risk from high-altitude, high-lattitude flight. Emergency landing sites in southern Europe, North Africa and Brazil would seem to allay any potential safety concerns.

Interesting legal issues in any case, though.
 
2013-06-23 06:22:51 PM  
As far as the nations to which he is traveling, he would be stupid to be doing it any other way if he wants to avoid being arrested and sent to the US. If he flew to US allied nations (which consist of most of the "freedom loving nations") then they would likely just arrest him upon landing, so doing so would make absolutely no sense no matter his motivations of originally leaking the scope of US surveillance.
 
2013-06-23 06:32:58 PM  

Bloody William: WE'RE farkING OUTSOURCING INTELLIGENCE.


Yup.  This was the big takeaway for me.

Privitization.  The cause of and solution to all of Government's problems.
 
2013-06-23 06:35:29 PM  
That China let him leave should tell you everything you need to know about Snowden's credibility, if he was really a valid source of info, he would've disappeared on the way to the airport, it would've been risk-free for the Chinese to do so as they would have blamed Obama and all the internet would have bought it like Fry buys phones. That they let him go shows that even the Chinese know he is full of shiat.
 
2013-06-23 07:00:19 PM  
Anyone who doesn't see Snowden as a justified whistle-blower is too stupid to live.

What the NSA is doing is illegal and against the 4th Amendment. Snowden is absolutely right to have exposed the illegal program. I exalt his actions.
 
Displayed 50 of 453 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 »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report