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.

(Time)   Add "refugee" to the list of the things Edward Snowden isn't, a list that also includes "innocent," "hero," and "going to survive the week"   (swampland.time.com) divider line 144
    More: Followup, innocent, High Commissioner for Refugees, refugees, valid claim, fair hearing, surveillance state, civil disobedience, Colombians  
•       •       •

5201 clicks; posted to Main » on 24 Jun 2013 at 8:45 AM (42 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-06-24 08:43:52 AM
So, did TIME use the same damn picture of the guy from every article ever posted since this whole thing broke?

*clicks link*

Yep.

You'd think there'd be more pictures of this guy.  Is there a reason why they don't use other pictures?  Is it just laziness?  Or is Snowden just camera-shy?
 
2013-06-24 08:48:52 AM
Ummmm wait a second

owing to well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality and is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country ... or is unwilling to return to it.


I am pretty sure that the possibility of the death penalty at the end, or the torture session that the US is known for, secret prisons, etc... yeah I'm pretty sure that counts and he is a refugee in the strictest sense.
 
2013-06-24 08:49:10 AM

xanadian: So, did TIME use the same damn picture of the guy from every article ever posted since this whole thing broke?

*clicks link*

Yep.

You'd think there'd be more pictures of this guy.  Is there a reason why they don't use other pictures?  Is it just laziness?  Or is Snowden just camera-shy?


It's probably the only picture they have rights to and they don't want to spend the $10k for a more up-to-date picture.
 
2013-06-24 08:50:25 AM
Please. It's not like Vladimir Putin's the type of guy who'd have a known snitch killed once he no longer served any real purpose. I think Snowden's in for a long, religiously fulfilling life.
 
2013-06-24 08:51:01 AM
Come on Subby, I would bet the dude survives the week.
 
2013-06-24 08:51:38 AM

xanadian: So, did TIME use the same damn picture of the guy from every article ever posted since this whole thing broke?

*clicks link*

Yep.

You'd think there'd be more pictures of this guy.  Is there a reason why they don't use other pictures?  Is it just laziness?  Or is Snowden just camera-shy?


They're probably looking very hard for something more nefarious but haven't had any luck. I'm sure they're in the process of adding some important details to this picture, though, like a scar or two, maybe an evil glint in one eye.
 
2013-06-24 08:52:52 AM
If a news reporter was able to take a picture of his empty seat on the Russian flight....he sucks at this.
 
2013-06-24 08:54:24 AM
Because the US institutionalized tourture he might have refugee status on humanitarian grounds.
 
2013-06-24 08:54:40 AM
Right now Putin's telling Obama "We shoot Snowden execution style and you get blame unless you back out of Syria business".

Backing out of Syria business in 3...2...1..
 
2013-06-24 08:56:00 AM

IdBeCrazyIf: I am pretty sure that the possibility of the death penalty at the end, or the torture session that the US is known for, secret prisons, etc... yeah I'm pretty sure that counts and he is a refugee in the strictest sense.


You know the best way to avoid all that?  Stay within the jurisdiction f the Constitution and get a lawyer.  Run off to some dictatorship while selling secrets for protection. . .yea.  Bad idea.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-06-24 08:57:47 AM
I don't think he will end up dead, it would look bad.

He might spend the rest of his life as an English teacher in Quito though.
 
2013-06-24 08:57:52 AM
He loves his country so much he's willing to commit treason to protect its freedoms, then fly to China, Russia, Cuba, and Ecuador, all countries known for their love of freedoms and open societies.
 
2013-06-24 08:59:27 AM

DarnoKonrad: You know the best way to avoid all that? Stay within the jurisdiction f the Constitution and get a lawyer. Run off to some dictatorship while selling secrets for protection. . .yea. Bad idea.


He sold them?

To the Guardian, for free.

Not a very good salesperson I guess.
 
2013-06-24 09:00:21 AM

WTF Indeed: He loves his country so much he's willing to commit treason to protect its freedoms, then fly to China, Russia, Cuba, and Ecuador, all countries known for their love of freedoms and open societies.


Countries without extradition treaties.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-06-24 09:00:55 AM

Headso: Because the US institutionalized torture he might have refugee status on humanitarian grounds.


Nah.  Not unless there is evidence that it was more than just during the Bush administration.
If he was going to get status as a refuge, if would have been from China and it would be in retaliation for the US criticizing China on human rights.
 
2013-06-24 09:03:30 AM

This text is now purple: Countries without extradition treaties.


Hong Kong and Russia have extradition treaties to the US. Educate yourself before riding the cock of a traitor.
 
2013-06-24 09:03:50 AM
Somehow I don't think the countries he's going to gives much of a shiat about this author's definition of "refugee."
 
2013-06-24 09:03:51 AM
I don't get this guy.  Living in Hawaii ... 6 figure job .... stripper girlfriend .....  What more is needed?
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-06-24 09:05:38 AM

This text is now purple: WTF Indeed: He loves his country so much he's willing to commit treason to protect its freedoms, then fly to China, Russia, Cuba, and Ecuador, all countries known for their love of freedoms and open societies.

Countries without extradition treaties.


For a good reason in the first three cases.  And Ecuador does have an extradition treaty with the US, so does Hong Kong.
 
2013-06-24 09:05:55 AM

WTF Indeed: Hong Kong and Russia have extradition treaties to the US. Educate yourself before riding the cock of a traitor.


They also have narrow definitions for that extradition and are subject to the country origin's interpretation.
 
2013-06-24 09:06:32 AM

dBeCrazyIf: Ummmm wait a second

owing to well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality and is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country ... or is unwilling to return to it.


I am pretty sure that the possibility of the death penalty at the end, or the torture session that the US is known for, secret prisons, etc... yeah I'm pretty sure that counts and he is a refugee in the strictest sense.


I'm not sure the opinion that it's ok for him to violate local laws against disclosing embarrassing information counts as a political belief.

But speaking as an outsider, what exactly did he do wrong? Via Wikipedia:

On June 5, The Guardian released a top secret order of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) that ordered a business division of Verizon Communications to provide "on an ongoing daily basis" metadata for all telephone calls "wholly within the United States, including local telephone calls" and all calls made "between the United States and abroad."

On the one side, holy crap, but on the other side, surveillance like this demands some kind of advance notice. Constitutional rights to freedom from unreasonable searches, and all that.

On June 6, The Guardian and the Washington Post revealed PRISM, a clandestine electronic surveillance program that allegedly allows the NSA to access e-mail, web searches, and other Internet traffic in realtime.

Allegedly. If everything leaving an airport is searched, why shouldn't everything leaving a router? It's not like the Internet is the USPS, anyone who knows who this thing works also knows there's no expectation of privacy and that it's trivially easy for someone on your segment to read what you're doing. You don't expect an intelligence agency to watch this traffic?

On June 9, The Guardian revealed Boundless Informant, a system that "details and even maps by country the voluminous amount of information [the NSA] collects from computer and telephone networks."

So they have a surveillance database. They're a surveillance agency. Big deal.

On June 12, the South China Morning Post disclosed that the NSA has been hacking into computers in China and Hong Kong since 2009.

On June 23, the Sunday Morning Post reported that Snowden had said the US hacks Chinese mobile-phone companies to collect millions of text messages and has also hacked Tsinghua University in Beijing and the Asian fibre-optic network operator Pacnet. The newspaper said Snowden provided documents that listed details of specific episodes during a four-year period.


Because nobody does counter-int. The tit-for-tat hacking that goes on between state-funded agencies isn't exactly breaking news.

On June 17, The Guardian reported that the Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ), a British intelligence agency, had intercepted foreign politicians' communications at the 2009 G-20 London Summit.[47]

Again. Surveillance agency doing surveillance. There's a reason ambassadors bring crypto gear to embassies in friendly countries and it's not because they need to make weight on one side of the aircraft. If you talk state business in the clear on someone else's phone you're a fool.

On June 20, The Guardian revealed two secret documents, signed by Attorney General Eric Holder, describing the rules by which the NSA determines whether targets of investigations are foreign or domestic.[48]

Do the American people have no right to know what their own government calls them? Either you have freedom from unreasonable search or you don't.

On June 22, further disclosures were made about 18-month-old operation 'Tempora' - and capabilities to make massive interception of fiber-optic traffic by GCHQ.

I don't understand what this means.
 
2013-06-24 09:06:38 AM

IdBeCrazyIf: DarnoKonrad: You know the best way to avoid all that? Stay within the jurisdiction f the Constitution and get a lawyer. Run off to some dictatorship while selling secrets for protection. . .yea. Bad idea.

He sold them?

To the Guardian, for free.

Not a very good salesperson I guess.



No, to Chinese state media.  Stop lionizing this farktard
 
2013-06-24 09:06:47 AM

DarnoKonrad: You know the best way to avoid all that? Stay within the jurisdiction f the Constitution and get a lawyer.


So you'd prefer mass domestic surveillance of the general public remain a state secret instead of being revealed to the public, because that's what would have happened.
 
2013-06-24 09:08:32 AM
...or "traitor"
 
2013-06-24 09:08:37 AM
You know, Edward...

You don't ha-ave to live like a refugee.

Don't have to live like a refugee.
 
2013-06-24 09:09:54 AM

BalugaJoe: I don't get this guy.  Living in Hawaii ... 6 figure job .... stripper girlfriend .....  What more is needed?


Draaaaaaaaaaaaaaammmmmaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!
 
2013-06-24 09:10:05 AM

IdBeCrazyIf: They also have narrow definitions for that extradition and are subject to the country origin's interpretation.


It's amazing that a man reportedly carrying around classified NSA documents would been given free passage through America's rivals causing those countries to magically enforce narrow definitions that they normally don't.
 
2013-06-24 09:11:39 AM

DarnoKonrad: IdBeCrazyIf: DarnoKonrad: You know the best way to avoid all that? Stay within the jurisdiction f the Constitution and get a lawyer. Run off to some dictatorship while selling secrets for protection. . .yea. Bad idea.

He sold them?

To the Guardian, for free.

Not a very good salesperson I guess.


No, to Chinese state media.  Stop lionizing this farktard


You must get off on having all your communications intercepted.  Couldn't you just imagine it instead, and get the same amount of pleasure?
 
2013-06-24 09:11:43 AM

generallyso: DarnoKonrad: You know the best way to avoid all that? Stay within the jurisdiction f the Constitution and get a lawyer.

So you'd prefer mass domestic surveillance of the general public remain a state secret instead of being revealed to the public, because that's what would have happened.



You clearly haven't been paying attention.
 
2013-06-24 09:12:18 AM

WTF Indeed: It's amazing that a man reportedly carrying around classified NSA documents would been given free passage through America's rivals causing those countries to magically enforce narrow definitions that they normally don't.


Hey, welcome to international politics 101

DarnoKonrad: No, to Chinese state media. Stop lionizing this farktard


No he didn't, stop bastardizing him to fit a narrative of character assassination

Flakeloaf: I don't understand what this means.


I don't either, since technically this was leaked back in 2006 and no one really gave much ado about it.

....ohh yeah, we didn't have a black president then
 
2013-06-24 09:14:37 AM
Interesting.  This guy broke some of the biggest (albeit not terribly surprising) news, but since most of the media has been painting him as a dirty liar, public opinion has swung radically against him.

Just because the NSA says he's lying, does that make him a liar?  Wouldn't that be exactly what they should say?  There's no proof anywhere that he has sold any information to anyone, but it's great to point that finger, and follow where it's pointing, instead of taking a good, hard look at what is being done here.

Just look how quickly the Michael Hastings story has moved off of many front pages.  But yeah, that poor Paula Dean.

One moment, someone's at the door ...
 
2013-06-24 09:15:57 AM

IdBeCrazyIf: Ummmm wait a second

owing to well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality and is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country ... or is unwilling to return to it.


I am pretty sure that the possibility of the death penalty at the end, or the torture session that the US is known for, secret prisons, etc... yeah I'm pretty sure that counts and he is a refugee in the strictest sense.


But he doesn't have to live like one.
 
2013-06-24 09:16:46 AM

DarnoKonrad: generallyso: DarnoKonrad: You know the best way to avoid all that? Stay within the jurisdiction f the Constitution and get a lawyer.

So you'd prefer mass domestic surveillance of the general public remain a state secret instead of being revealed to the public, because that's what would have happened.

You clearly haven't been paying attention.


Do you or do you not think this should have been brought to light, because your suggestion would insure it never saw the light of day.
 
2013-06-24 09:16:59 AM

Marcus Aurelius: DarnoKonrad: IdBeCrazyIf: DarnoKonrad: You know the best way to avoid all that? Stay within the jurisdiction f the Constitution and get a lawyer. Run off to some dictatorship while selling secrets for protection. . .yea. Bad idea.

He sold them?

To the Guardian, for free.

Not a very good salesperson I guess.


No, to Chinese state media.  Stop lionizing this farktard

You must get off on having all your communications intercepted.  Couldn't you just imagine it instead, and get the same amount of pleasure?


Hey, whatever dishonest argument makes you feel good I guess.  I'm just not stupid enough to think any information I had over to a third party like Google or Verizon is private, because it's not -- and it never has been, right along with the garbage you hand over to the trashman.
 
2013-06-24 09:17:07 AM

WTF Indeed: IdBeCrazyIf: They also have narrow definitions for that extradition and are subject to the country origin's interpretation.

It's amazing that a man reportedly carrying around classified NSA documents would been given free passage through America's rivals causing those countries to magically enforce narrow definitions that they normally don't.


The only information he has was collected from us via the NSA.  If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to worry about.

You haven't been sharing state secrets via e-mail again, have you?
 
2013-06-24 09:17:30 AM

Fern Crest: This guy broke some of the biggest (albeit not terribly surprising) news, but since most of the media has been painting him as a dirty liar, public opinion has swung radically against him.


What news did he break? That our government is hacking China? That doesn't sound like very big news.

What else did he break? The surveillance news was old news--it has to be new to "break," I think.
 
2013-06-24 09:18:19 AM

Tyrone Slothrop: But he doesn't have to live like one.


Well I've heard a dollar goes a long way in Ecuador
 
2013-06-24 09:19:09 AM

generallyso: DarnoKonrad: generallyso: DarnoKonrad: You know the best way to avoid all that? Stay within the jurisdiction f the Constitution and get a lawyer.

So you'd prefer mass domestic surveillance of the general public remain a state secret instead of being revealed to the public, because that's what would have happened.

You clearly haven't been paying attention.

Do you or do you not think this should have been brought to light, because your suggestion would insure it never saw the light of day.



what bringing to light?!  Anyone who actually follows the issue has known about the extent of domestic surveillance since 2007 -- though legitimate journalism and not being a propaganda tool for Russia and China.
 
2013-06-24 09:19:31 AM
derp derp derp derp derp TIME Magazine derp derp derp derp
 
2013-06-24 09:22:27 AM

WTF Indeed: Russia have extradition treaties to the US


Really ? I know the US rejected it in 2009 and the Russkies brought it up last year .....
 
2013-06-24 09:23:52 AM
 
2013-06-24 09:24:34 AM
http://www.popehat.com/">http://www.popehat.com/

lifted from popehat verbatim:

I don't find any published cases articulating the elements of Section 798(a)(3). Based on the plain language of the statute, it seems to require the government to prove that the defendant (1) knowingly and willfully [that is, not accidentally] (2) communicated or made available to an unauthorized person, (3) in any manner prejudicial to the United States or for the benefit of any foreign government to the detriment of the United States, (4) classified information concerning communication intelligence activities of the U.S. or any foreign government. (Some might disagree that element (3) modifies all the possible ways to violate the statute.)
Note that the second and third charges both require the feds to prove that Snowden's release of information to the press was harmful to the United States. This puts our government in the position of attempting to prove that it is harmful to release accurate information about how it is spying on us, and how it is http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/20/fisa-court-nsa-without-war rant" target="_blank">misleading us about spying on us.
 
2013-06-24 09:25:57 AM

DarnoKonrad: generallyso: DarnoKonrad: generallyso: DarnoKonrad: You know the best way to avoid all that? Stay within the jurisdiction f the Constitution and get a lawyer.

So you'd prefer mass domestic surveillance of the general public remain a state secret instead of being revealed to the public, because that's what would have happened.

You clearly haven't been paying attention.

Do you or do you not think this should have been brought to light, because your suggestion would insure it never saw the light of day.


what bringing to light?!  Anyone who actually follows the issue has known about the extent of domestic surveillance since 2007 -- though legitimate journalism and not being a propaganda tool for Russia and China.


many people didn't know till this story was broken, so good on him.
 
2013-06-24 09:27:11 AM

vpb: This text is now purple: WTF Indeed: He loves his country so much he's willing to commit treason to protect its freedoms, then fly to China, Russia, Cuba, and Ecuador, all countries known for their love of freedoms and open societies.

Countries without extradition treaties.

For a good reason in the first three cases.  And Ecuador does have an extradition treaty with the US, so does Hong Kong.


Umm, AFAIK, Ecuador's treaty has a political exception clause, and with Hong Kong, the treaty is actually with China, and not directly with Hong Kong, and there is some technicality between China and Hong Kong that does not make it as straight forward as you think.

This Text Is Now Purple does have a point.
 
2013-06-24 09:27:58 AM

WTF Indeed: Educate yourself before riding the cock of a traitor.


Exposing that our government is violating the 4th Amendment is traitorous?  Since so many people apparently have no problem with this and trust our government to "do the right thing" with such information,  I shouldn't be surprised that people consider Snowden to be a traitor.
 
2013-06-24 09:28:37 AM
All I know is if the NSA is archiving everything everyone surfs on the internet that server farm must be the largest archive of pRon and music in human history....
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-06-24 09:28:56 AM
Flakeloaf:
But speaking as an outsider, what exactly did he do wrong? Via Wikipedia:

On the one side, holy crap, but on the other side, surveillance like this demands some kind of advance notice. Constitutional rights to freedom from unreasonable searches, and all that.


A federal court has already found that it was not unreasonable.

I don't see much difference from postal mail.  The address and return address and postmark aren't secret or anything and it's the equivalent of the meta-data that the NSA got.  If the (NSA or FBI or whatever) got a warrant to look at mail coming or going to foreign countries it would be the same thing.

The NSA needs a separate warrant to look at the content of phone calls.  They are basically doing the same thing as looking at the postmark and address on mail.  They need a separate warrant to  listen to the call, which would be the equivalent of opening a letter.

If you were to hand carry a note in or out of a country it would be subject to search at the airport.  No warrant or probable cause needed.

In fact, I suspect that Border Search could be applied to international calls.  If it goes to the Supreme Court I suspect that it might.
 
2013-06-24 09:29:56 AM

WTF Indeed: This text is now purple: Countries without extradition treaties.

Hong Kong and Russia have extradition treaties to the US. Educate yourself before riding the cock of a traitor.


The United States maintains diplomatic relations, but does not have extradition treaties with the following countries: Afghanistan, Algeria, Andorra, Angola, Armenia, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belarus, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brunei, Burkina Faso, Burma, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Cape Verde, the Central African Republic, Chad, China, Comoros, Congo (Kinshasa), Congo (Brazzaville), Djibouti, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Gabon, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Indonesia, Ivory Coast, Kazakhstan, Kosovo, Kuwait, Laos, Lebanon, Libya, Macedonia, Madagascar, Maldives, Mali, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Micronesia, Moldova, Mongolia, Montenegro, Morocco, Mozambique, Namibia, Nepal, Niger, Oman, Qatar, Russia, Rwanda, Samoa, São Tomé & Príncipe, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Serbia, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Togo, Tunisia, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu, Vatican, Vietnam and Yemen
 
2013-06-24 09:31:08 AM
Headso:
DarnoKonrad: generallyso: DarnoKonrad: generallyso: DarnoKonrad: You know the best way to avoid all that? Stay within the jurisdiction f the Constitution and get a lawyer.

So you'd prefer mass domestic surveillance of the general public remain a state secret instead of being revealed to the public, because that's what would have happened.

You clearly haven't been paying attention.

Do you or do you not think this should have been brought to light, because your suggestion would insure it never saw the light of day.


what bringing to light?!  Anyone who actually follows the issue has known about the extent of domestic surveillance since 2007 -- though legitimate journalism and not being a propaganda tool for Russia and China.

many people didn't know till this story was broken, so good on him.



No, not good on him.  There is no reason to give publicity to dictatorships in the name of civil libertarianism.  it's like Ron Paul hobnobbing with white nationalists.  In the end it does nothing but undermine whatever legitimate point he might have.

Mark my words, not a damn thing is going to come about from this nonsense other than geting more anti government authoritarian tea party kooks elected in 2014 -- who like Snowden feed off paranoia and publicity, not legitimate dissent.
 
2013-06-24 09:31:41 AM

slayer199: Exposing that our government is violating the 4th Amendment is traitorous? Since so many people apparently have no problem with this and trust our government to "do the right thing" with such information, I shouldn't be surprised that people consider Snowden to be a traitor.


As much as I hate it, on technicality this program is perfectly legal under the Patriot Act laws.

One more reason to strike that piece of shiat down and now thanks to Snowden the court case that the ALCU had brought up that was thrown out without standing, now proves that the ALCU did in fact have standing and will force SCOTUS to hear and rule.
 
Displayed 50 of 144 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report