Edward Snowden Q&A

[cody8200]

I don't care about Snowden. Who is going to lead the charge to repeal the 'Patriot' Act? Paul?

[Young Drachma]

Originally Posted by kcchief19

Initial reports say Snowden missed his flight from Moscow to Havana because the flight plan required the plane to fly over US air space. What kind of international incident would this have been if the US used fighter jets to order an Aeroflot plane to land in the US?

ATC would've just ordered the pilot to land in NYC. No fighter jets needed.

[panerd]

Originally Posted by cody8200

I don't care about Snowden. Who is going to lead the charge to repeal the 'Patriot' Act? Paul?

The impression I get (admittedly anecdotal) is the "Who cares about the NSA looking at my phone records? I have nothing to hide!" crowd is the same group that supports the Patriot Act. "I'm not a terrorist! I'm a patriot like the name of the law!" Maybe I am wrong but it seems like the minute Obama took office the opposition that did exist grinded down considerably. There seems to be still opposition from both the far left and some conservative wings of the right but mostly people in the middle who think oppressive regimes can only take over governments outside of "USA!"

[kcchief19]

Originally Posted by cody8200

I don't care about Snowden. Who is going to lead the charge to repeal the 'Patriot' Act? Paul?

Not Paul. No member of the Paul family could get consensus in Congress that the sky is blue.

I'm generally sensing what panerd said. I don't really see a massive shift in anyone's view so far. Supporters of the Patriot Act don't seem to be bailing en masse. If anything, the rank and file supporters of the Patriot Act generally seem to think this is appropriate, and if there was any overreaching it's Obama's fault, not the law.

I'm not sure even the majority of opponents of the Patriot Act are motivated because they already knew this was happening.

It seems most of the attention is a media frenzy on the very small minority for whom this is a major issue. Wait a few more weeks an no one will care. Won't even be a 2016 campaign issue.

[cody8200]

kcchief, I hope that isn't the case. I certainly do care as do many of my 30-something friends (none of us are really part of the Reddit crowd either). There was a thread a while back about having a 'Privacy' candidate and wondered if they could win on the platform of privacy. I'm not sure nationally but in the right district/state, I think it is certainly possible. I am bothered that the media was able to shift the focus entirely away from the Patriot Act and squarely on a single individually but single individuals are so much easier for the average person to label. Meanwhile the Patriot Act is extremely large, complicated and its pro's and con's can't be distilled into a 15 second quote which makes writing about it difficult for the modern journalist and their audience.

If what the NSA did isn't an over-reach of the PA (and I really don't know the answer), then it certainly needs repealed in my opinion. No amount of 'safety from terrorism' is worth the breach of privacy.

[cody8200]

Originally Posted by panerd

The impression I get (admittedly anecdotal) is the "Who cares about the NSA looking at my phone records? I have nothing to hide!" crowd is the same group that supports the Patriot Act. "I'm not a terrorist! I'm a patriot like the name of the law!" Maybe I am wrong but it seems like the minute Obama took office the opposition that did exist grinded down considerably. There seems to be still opposition from both the far left and some conservative wings of the right but mostly people in the middle who think oppressive regimes can only take over governments outside of "USA!"

On the people who say, "Who cares?" - I have seen this from both older and younger people I have spoken to (on both sides of the aisle). It is worrying to me. However, I have noticed (certainly anecdotal) that people from 25-45 (perhaps the largest set of original 'net users) are much more interested in protecting their privacy.

So many people are up in arms about their guns but the pen is mightier than the sword and the private info that doesn't hurt you today could hurt you later in life if laws change/policies change/etc.

[panerd]

Originally Posted by kcchief19

Not Paul. No member of the Paul family could get consensus in Congress that the sky is blue.

I'm generally sensing what panerd said. I don't really see a massive shift in anyone's view so far. Supporters of the Patriot Act don't seem to be bailing en masse. If anything, the rank and file supporters of the Patriot Act generally seem to think this is appropriate, and if there was any overreaching it's Obama's fault, not the law.

I'm not sure even the majority of opponents of the Patriot Act are motivated because they already knew this was happening.

It seems most of the attention is a media frenzy on the very small minority for whom this is a major issue. Wait a few more weeks an no one will care. Won't even be a 2016 campaign issue.

I think you underestimate the power of Rand Paul. He is much more pragmatic and plays the game differently than his dad(IMO a bad thing but in national politics I guess it's good?) He supported Romney for president and seems to get more national attention and attention from his own party. He's actually on the committee for foreign relations! Though the House is obviously a different beast Ron Paul wouldn't have been allowed in the same room as a committee on foreign relations.

With all that being said I could see Rand offering some sort of compromise on the Patriot Act that really does nothing thinking it will help him in a run for president. And in doing so not gaining any mainstream GOP support and losing the Libertarian leaning support he somewhat enjoys. But I think he is much more of a power player than his dad. (They talk shows may mock him more but that's a step up from completely ignoring his father)

[panerd]

Originally Posted by cody8200

On the people who say, "Who cares?" - I have seen this from both older and younger people I have spoken to (on both sides of the aisle). It is worrying to me. However, I have noticed (certainly anecdotal) that people from 25-45 (perhaps the largest set of original 'net users) are much more interested in protecting their privacy.

So many people are up in arms about their guns but the pen is mightier than the sword and the private info that doesn't hurt you today could hurt you later in life if laws change/policies change/etc.

But the younger crowd also carry a double edged sword don't they? They claim they want to protect their privacy but list almost all of their pertinent information on facebook and tweet when they had their last bowel movement. Their heroes are people who live their whole lives in front of cameras. (Again not describing you or your friends necessarily but a more general look at the younger crowd)

[Easy Mac]

So the latest interviews say he specifically took the Booz Allen job to gain access to NSA servers to find information. That's not really a whistleblower.

I was inclined to believe he should get whistleblower protection in the beginning, but the more that comes out, the more it seems he was deliberately acting in his own interests and as a wannabe spy.

[cody8200]

Very true panerd. I think that is especially true of high school/college crowd. I have certainly noticed it for people well into their 30's but I also have noticed far more restraint, if only because they are worried it won't allow them to get a job (a good reason to worry).

[TroyF]

Originally Posted by kcchief19

Not Paul. No member of the Paul family could get consensus in Congress that the sky is blue.

I'm generally sensing what panerd said. I don't really see a massive shift in anyone's view so far. Supporters of the Patriot Act don't seem to be bailing en masse. If anything, the rank and file supporters of the Patriot Act generally seem to think this is appropriate, and if there was any overreaching it's Obama's fault, not the law.

I'm not sure even the majority of opponents of the Patriot Act are motivated because they already knew this was happening.

It seems most of the attention is a media frenzy on the very small minority for whom this is a major issue. Wait a few more weeks an no one will care. Won't even be a 2016 campaign issue.

A lot of it is because of the hive mentality that many people have politically right now. I live getting into political debates with people who look at both sides of an issue. Sadly, many of those folks are gone. It is about "my party is right, yours is wrong"

So this is now multifaceted. There are plenty of Republicans who believed in it from the start. This does nothing to change their mind. There are many Republicans who believed GW was wrongly and unfairly attacked numerous times. Even if they think this goes too far, their message is not that it went too far, it is "see, we told you Bush was not that bad"

Then you have the democrats who believe Obama can do no wrong. They ave to make excuses for this. It does not fit in with his message at all, but they would rather take a kick to the groin than admit that either Obama lied or that Bush was right.

I will admit to being apathetic on the issue. I never have had a feeling that my calls or records were ever safe. Nor do I feel they will be after this outcry is over.

[panerd]

Originally Posted by Easy Mac

So the latest interviews say he specifically took the Booz Allen job to gain access to NSA servers to find information. That's not really a whistleblower.

I was inclined to believe he should get whistleblower protection in the beginning, but the more that comes out, the more it seems he was deliberately acting in his own interests and as a wannabe spy.

I guess its possible that this guy is the world's biggest narcissist and/or idiot but I personally have a hard time believing he went through all this careful meticulous planning to get the information, then the planning to release it to the public, the careful choice of who to interview with, planning his escape, and now an a short interview happens to say things that do nothing but reverse course 180 degrees to make himself look bad and the United States correct. Its kind of like the Assange rape charges, a bit fishy. I'm not even sure this guy is who he says he is and that there isn't some other side issue at play.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Rare that I have a chance to say anything good about the current administration, but I love what Carney's comments today imply about the U.S. reaction to the Chinese inaction.

"The Chinese have emphasized the importance of building mutual trust," Carney added. "And we think that they have dealt that effort a serious setback. If we cannot count on them to honor their legal extradition obligations, then there is a problem. And that is a point we are making to them very directly."

In the language of diplomacy, that seems like some pretty strong stuff.

[cody8200]

Originally Posted by TroyF

I will admit to being apathetic on the issue. I never have had a feeling that my calls or records were ever safe.

But do you believe you have the right, under the Bill of Rights, to expect that privacy (safety)? I do and my worry (and it gets played out in every argument ever used) is regarding it being a slippery slope. Sure, attack drones aren't currently allowed over American airspace but that is a policy, not a law. And while this may be hyperbole - while the friend you emailed today is a fine, upstanding citizen, maybe he will be convicted of some crime in 20 years and they will come back to a conversation you had via email a generation earlier and begin questioning you. Those kinds of scenarios seem unlikely but not impossible.

[TroyF]

Originally Posted by cody8200

But do you believe you have the right, under the Bill of Rights, to expect that privacy (safety)? I do and my worry (and it gets played out in every argument ever used) is regarding it being a slippery slope. Sure, attack drones aren't currently allowed over American airspace but that is a policy, not a law. And while this may be hyperbole - while the friend you emailed today is a fine, upstanding citizen, maybe he will be convicted of some crime in 20 years and they will come back to a conversation you had via email a generation earlier and begin questioning you. Those kinds of scenarios seem unlikely but not impossible.

Do I have the right? Sure. But have I ever actually had tat right? I do not think I have. If the slippery slope happened, my guess is I would be one of the thousand missing perons each year, rathe than go before a judge.

I just have to hope you idiots never do anything to put me in a bad situation.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by TroyF

I just have to hope you idiots never do anything to put me in a bad situation.

Good luck with that

[cody8200]

Originally Posted by TroyF

I just have to hope you idiots never do anything to put me in a bad situation.

Ha

[molson]

Originally Posted by cody8200

And while this may be hyperbole - while the friend you emailed today is a fine, upstanding citizen, maybe he will be convicted of some crime in 20 years and they will come back to a conversation you had via email a generation earlier and begin questioning you. Those kinds of scenarios seem unlikely but not impossible.

They don't even do that now with information that's publicly available. When someone commits a crime cops aren't breaking down the doors of everyone in the guy's fantasy baseball league. If they really wanted to, they could dig up a lot of friends and associates from the last 20 years without spying on anyone. It's the pretty rare case where that benefits any investigation though.

Edit: But if the worst case scenario is that a federal agent comes to my house in 20 years to ask me if I recall any signs that TroyF (sorry Troy) was going to become the world's most notorious terrorist, then there's definitely more immediate, real-world issues of governance I have a lot more concern about. Hey, maybe this is all a government conspiracy to distract Americans with fantasy slippery slope stuff so we don't notice how much we get screwed by the healthcare industry right now. (sarcasm). I mean, we pay the most amount of money for the western world's worst healthcare system. That bothers me. Not that the fact that I called for kennel reservations yesterday might have been logged in a giant database somewhere. Though even before the news broke last week, and if I was a terrorist and/or drug dealer, I would always assume that the government was listening, I think smart criminals do, they have since at least the 50s. Most times they're not listening, there's just not that many of them, but it's always better to be safe and mix it up or meet in person.

[molson]

Originally Posted by Easy Mac

So the latest interviews say he specifically took the Booz Allen job to gain access to NSA servers to find information. That's not really a whistleblower.

I was inclined to believe he should get whistleblower protection in the beginning, but the more that comes out, the more it seems he was deliberately acting in his own interests and as a wannabe spy.

I think maybe he'll be considered more of a hero if it was all a plan from the start, rather than if he willingly took a job with the evil government without such a plan to screw them.

[Ajaxab]

Just a couple of links on how metadata is/could be deployed--one on the broader prospects of metadata for social engineering...

http://www.thenation.com/article/174...#axzz2XAZ75ErY

and one on a sociologist writing up how using metadata could help find someone like Paul Revere...

http://kieranhealy.org/blog/archives...d-paul-revere/

[kcchief19]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Rare that I have a chance to say anything good about the current administration, but I love what Carney's comments today imply about the U.S. reaction to the Chinese inaction.

In the language of diplomacy, that seems like some pretty strong stuff.

Agree completely. The White House has to be ticked beyond belief that China let this go. It sounds like China was hoping they could punt him on a technicality. But they probably hit the double-whammy by not only rejecting the extradition request but then letting him slip out the back door to Russia.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Ajaxab

and one on a sociologist writing up how using metadata could help find someone like Paul Revere...

http://kieranhealy.org/blog/archives...d-paul-revere/

Which might be one of the best sample arguments for having the data on hand one could make.

[kcchief19]

Originally Posted by panerd

I think you underestimate the power of Rand Paul. He is much more pragmatic and plays the game differently than his dad(IMO a bad thing but in national politics I guess it's good?) He supported Romney for president and seems to get more national attention and attention from his own party. He's actually on the committee for foreign relations! Though the House is obviously a different beast Ron Paul wouldn't have been allowed in the same room as a committee on foreign relations.

With all that being said I could see Rand offering some sort of compromise on the Patriot Act that really does nothing thinking it will help him in a run for president. And in doing so not gaining any mainstream GOP support and losing the Libertarian leaning support he somewhat enjoys. But I think he is much more of a power player than his dad. (They talk shows may mock him more but that's a step up from completely ignoring his father)

Actually Ron Paul was a member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, which is the House equivalent of the Senate's Foreign Relations Committee. They are both extremely easy committees to get on to because generally no one wants these assignments -- there's no purse strings, no lobbyists and no fundraisers.

Paul can't get anything done because he can't even build a coalition in his own party. He may talk differently than his dad, but the party faithful don't trust him any more than they do his dad. He's always going to be an outsider.

I think this is largely a only-Nixon-can-go-to-China issue. The only person who will be able to gain traction on this issue is likely a law-and-order Republican-type who says we need a compromise on the issue and is able to bring enough Republicans along to pass it. A Democrat or a Libertarian can't get it done. It's got to be someone who has supported the Patriot Act or FISA in the past and says we need to fix it.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by TroyF

I will admit to being apathetic on the issue. I never have had a feeling that my calls or records were ever safe. Nor do I feel they will be after this outcry is over.

I'm pretty sure the outcry is over unless some more substantial details come to light. We've already spent more of the past week talking about the person as opposed to what was brought to light.

SI

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by Ajaxab

Just a couple of links on how metadata is/could be deployed--one on the broader prospects of metadata for social engineering...

The Meta Question | The Nation

I'm not sure I can buy the implications here as he makes some logical jumps that I'm not sure are fair. However, it certainly paints quite the picture.

"But it was all right, everything was all right, the struggle was finished. He had won the victory over himself. He loved Big Brother."

SI

[Dutch]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Rare that I have a chance to say anything good about the current administration, but I love what Carney's comments today imply about the U.S. reaction to the Chinese inaction.



In the language of diplomacy, that seems like some pretty strong stuff.

That's pretty good and the one thing I would agree with is that the Democrats talked a good "dove" game to win votes but have maintained a very strong American "hawk" stance towards our competitors.

Speaking of China, have they ever reached out to us for better relations or are we doing all the work? And they are blowing us off?

And speaking of Snowden, want to know the damage of spying? Check out this article in the German Newspaper...most likely every word of it is bullshit but who wouldn't believe it in Germany? Pretty much nobody. The affects on German/American relations could take decades (if ever) to correct...

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/...95T04B20130630

As soon as this guy gets back on American soil, he needs to be fully prosecuted under the laws of treason.

[molson]

So he's still just hanging out at the Moscow airport. No valid American passport, no Russian visa, no direct commercial flights to Ecuador, no money for a private jet. This could take a while. I wonder if he'll just crack at some point and allow himself to be sent back to the U.S.

Edward Snowden Stars In ‘The Terminal 2: This Time For Real’ « Above the Law: A Legal Web Site – News, Commentary, and Opinions on Law Firms, Lawyers, Law Schools, Law Suits, Judges and Courts + Career Resources

[Dutch]

As far as I'm concerned he can rot right where he is. His only value now is information and if the Russians can't find anything worthwhile to extract from him, he'll rot there or be sent back. The reality is that the Russians are probably thinking, "Really? This is all you got?"

The Russians are probably the one nation that is bigger on loyalty than we are. In the end they have ZERO respect for this "American" that is trying to fuck America. They will extract what they can and then dispose of him how they see fit.

[MIJB#19]

Originally Posted by Mike D

That's pretty good and the one thing I would agree with is that the Democrats talked a good "dove" game to win votes but have maintained a very strong American "hawk" stance towards our competitors.

Speaking of China, have they ever reached out to us for better relations or are we doing all the work? And they are blowing us off?

And speaking of Snowden, want to know the damage of spying? Check out this article in the German Newspaper...most likely every word of it is bullshit but who wouldn't believe it in Germany? Pretty much nobody. The affects on German/American relations could take decades (if ever) to correct...

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/...95T04B20130630

As soon as this guy gets back on American soil, he needs to be fully prosecuted under the laws of treason.

You can safely replace "Germany" with "European Union" here.

[Dutch]

Originally Posted by MIJB#19

You can safely replace "Germany" with "European Union" here.

Yeah, I read another article about the EU President basically saying that America is GUILTY until proven INNOCENT because of this moron.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Mike D

and then dispose of him how they see fit.

If they'd like some suggestions, they could give me a call.

[Dutch]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

If they'd like some suggestions, they could give me a call.

If I had my way, I'd send him to middle Georgia in a fucking heartbeat.

[Dutch]

Originally Posted by Mike D

The Russians are probably the one nation that is bigger on loyalty than we are. In the end they have ZERO respect for this "American" that is trying to fuck America. They will extract what they can and then dispose of him how they see fit.

Well, there ya go....here's Putin on the subject...

"If he wants to go somewhere and there are those who would take him, he is welcome to do so," Putin said. "If he wants to stay here, there is one condition: He must stop his activities aimed at inflicting damage on our American partners, no matter how strange it may sound coming from my lips."

Read more: Snowden breaks silence amid request for asylum in Russia, reportedly vows to continue leaking | Fox News]

[JonInMiddleGA]

The phrase "for thou art crunchy & goeth well with ketchup" just popped into my head.

[kcchief19]

His latest "statement" goes to the Hamlet complex this guy has. It's not about him, it's about silencing and scaring all the people that come after him. No, it's about taking your treasonous ass and hanging it from the nearest yardarm.

I still see a huge gap between Snowden and Manning versus leakers such as Ellsberg or Mark Felt. Maybe there is no difference. If he thinks he is innocent and that America is a great country, he should avail himself of the justice system. If he thinks justice is better in Hong Kong, Russia or Ecuador, he's might confused.

[Young Drachma]

Glad I was right about him. He's so fucked though. He ran his mouth, he's losing friends fast and his pals at wikileaks aren't going to be able to save his tail. Wonder how long he'll last in Russia before they get tired of him and boot him out. I doubt they'd extradite him, but..they can basically make him take a hike.

[Young Drachma]

Rafael Correa not considering Snowden asylum: helping him was a 'mistake' | World news | guardian.co.uk

[sterlingice]

It's odd to me: I would have thought the story that would have legs would have been the news about the NSA not about the leaker himself. Then again, I should have known better. I don't think there's a nefarious government plot to hush it up. I don't think they needed to - we just don't have the attention span for a complicated debate, sadly. And this story was told in 2006 tho without the "yeah, we're doing it" from the President. Similarly our news attention span is driven by celebrity so everything has been able this guy rather than and his "daring" escape from the law, hiding in a damn airport.

SI

[Desnudo]

I think there's a difference between loving your country and loving your government and people are confusing that.

[Dutch]

Originally Posted by Desnudo

I think there's a difference between loving your country and loving your government and people are confusing that.

And there is a difference between questioning your government and premeditating treason without knowing the real truth. The former is expected in the US, the later is criminal.

The way to fix problems in America has always been by way of politics. If you have a problem with America, get voted into office and do something about it. Spying on your nation with the assumption that Russia or Ecuador are better is laughable (at best).

[Blackadar]

Originally Posted by Mike D

And speaking of Snowden, want to know the damage of spying? Check out this article in the German Newspaper...most likely every word of it is bullshit but who wouldn't believe it in Germany? Pretty much nobody. The affects on German/American relations could take decades (if ever) to correct...

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/...95T04B20130630

As soon as this guy gets back on American soil, he needs to be fully prosecuted under the laws of treason.

Why would you think the article is bullshit? Because you don't like the contents?

Germany is a country where a lot of intelligence tends to pass back and forth. It's a gateway to Russia, to the Middle East and has strong ties to Africa. It is a communications, technology and financial hub. It would make sense to focus intelligence-gathering efforts there. Even if the US is just intercepting US-bound traffic, that could account for much or even all of the traffic referred to in the article. And when it says the phones were "tapped", that's a poor (but not 100% inaccurate) headline - the meta data was recorded. And we know that's happening.

For all the outrage on Snowden - and I'm not a fan of the way he's pursued this - I have much bigger issues with the NSA program than him. Shoot the messenger all you want (and yeah, he's a dick), but don't forget about the message. You talk about closing the program down politically, but the public may never have known without him in the first place. How are you going to get the political pressure to shut down the spying program when no one knows about it in the first place? That's why these secret FISA courts and shit like that are so damned dangerous.

[cody8200]

Originally Posted by Blackadar

I have much bigger issues with the NSA program than him. Shoot the messenger all you want (and yeah, he's a dick), but don't forget about the message. You talk about closing the program down politically, but the public may never have known without him in the first place. How are you going to get the political pressure to shut down the spying program when no one knows about it in the first place? That's why these secret FISA courts and shit like that are so damned dangerous.

100% agreed.

[kcchief19]

Originally Posted by Desnudo

I think there's a difference between loving your country and loving your government and people are confusing that.

I don't disagree, but to me turning your back on one is turning your back on both. I don't love everything my government does, but it's the best government on the planet. Snowden may hate the U.S. government, but his anti-government actions are hurting the country.

Snowden thinks he's the next in line of people who are influencing U.S. policy. I keep referring to Ellsberg and The Pentagon Papers because I think it's an apt comparison. The Pentagon Papers revealed that the President and his administration lied, at times under penalty of perjury, about the success of the Vietnam War and our ability to win. I have no doubt that those revelations were part of what led to the U.S. withdrawing from the war and kept the U.S. from fighting losing wars in Iran, Lebanon, Libya and elsewhere in the 1980s.

Snowden has yet to reveal anything illegal, only embarrassing. If Snowden had leaked illegal government activity, it would be different. But now he's damaging our reputation by confirming to the world that we're spying on them. They know we're spying on them, and they are spying on us. But this lets them have the upper hand and appear to be taking the high road.

[kcchief19]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

It's odd to me: I would have thought the story that would have legs would have been the news about the NSA not about the leaker himself. Then again, I should have known better. I don't think there's a nefarious government plot to hush it up. I don't think they needed to - we just don't have the attention span for a complicated debate, sadly. And this story was told in 2006 tho without the "yeah, we're doing it" from the President. Similarly our news attention span is driven by celebrity so everything has been able this guy rather than and his "daring" escape from the law, hiding in a damn airport.

SI

If Snowden had never stepped forward and taken credit, the debate would be on this information and not on the leaker. But as soon as he began craving the spotlight, he overshadowed the debate. Ironic that he's taking the spotlight away from the activity he meant to expose.

If he had never put his name to the leaks, I think there would be a debate about the leaks.

[molson]

Status of current asylum requests according to the BBC. It's kind of like applying for college.

BBC News - Edward Snowden's asylum options narrow

Rejected: Austria, Brazil, Finland, India, Ireland, Norway, Poland, Spain, Switzerland

Withdrawn: Russia

Pending: Bolivia, China, Cuba, Ecuador, Germany, Iceland, Italy, Netherlands, Nicaragua

Unconfirmed: France, Venezuela

[panerd]

Why do I picture JiMGa and Dutch leaving the theaters disappointed at the endings of movies like the Bourne Identity and Enemy of the State?

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by molson

Status of current asylum requests according to the BBC. It's kind of like applying for college.

BBC News - Edward Snowden's asylum options narrow

Rejected: Austria, Brazil, Finland, India, Ireland, Norway, Poland, Spain, Switzerland

Withdrawn: Russia

Pending: Bolivia, China, Cuba, Ecuador, Germany, Iceland, Italy, Netherlands, Nicaragua

Unconfirmed: France, Venezuela

"I'm sorry, you didn't score high enough on your CYAs. You'll need to go to a safety school like Ecuador"

SI

[Dutch]

Originally Posted by Blackadar

Why would you think the article is bullshit? Because you don't like the contents?

And what makes you think it's not bullshit? Because you read it on the internet?

Germany is a country where a lot of intelligence tends to pass back and forth. It's a gateway to Russia, to the Middle East and has strong ties to Africa. It is a communications, technology and financial hub. It would make sense to focus intelligence-gathering efforts there. Even if the US is just intercepting US-bound traffic, that could account for much or even all of the traffic referred to in the article. And when it says the phones were "tapped", that's a poor (but not 100% inaccurate) headline - the meta data was recorded. And we know that's happening.

How do you know that's happening? Because you read it on the internet?

For all the outrage on Snowden - and I'm not a fan of the way he's pursued this - I have much bigger issues with the NSA program than him. Shoot the messenger all you want (and yeah, he's a dick), but don't forget about the message. You talk about closing the program down politically, but the public may never have known without him in the first place. How are you going to get the political pressure to shut down the spying program when no one knows about it in the first place? That's why these secret FISA courts and shit like that are so damned dangerous.

Are you sure the NSA program is up to enough no good that you have a bigger problem with it than with Snowden? Why? Because you read it on the internet?

In my time in the military, I worked at a lot of different places in a lot of different organizations. Now, to clarify, I am not a wealth of information on this subject, but one thing I do know is that the government of the USA (including the NSA) is full of Americans from all walks of life. Right-wing, Left-wing, far Right, far Left, White, Black, Asian, Hispanic, capitalist ideologies, socialist ideologies, from EVERY possible background that you can think of...including skeptical FOFC Left-winger types. Man, if we were up to no good, there would be all kinds of activism regarding the corrupt US government. No need to whistle-blow...just a bunch of pissed off retired/ex-Govt left-wingers would be enough. But there isn't. Why? Because the US government has basically forced us to follow rules that NO OTHER COUNTRY follows. US Title 10 authority, US Title 50 authority come to mind. I've also seen SOFA agreements followed strictly. (SOFA = status of forces agreement between the US and it's host nation.) It's the primary reason why we can exist so peacefully in our allies homelands. Those SOFA laws include things like in Germany when they say you simply cannot do something because it's illegal on their soil, the US Government, from my experience, has gone out of it's way to respect those laws....even when there are no Germans around to see it. That's pretty fucking amazing right? So perhaps, in this case, the "information" that this douchebag, who was in the NSA for all of THREE months found wasn't in full context of what is really happening. He's got his own meta data and didn't properly analyze it. And again, I'm no expert on this stuff, so don't think I'm trying to talk about something I really know about, but what if calls were being monitored WITH THE PERMISSION of the German government and what if that was classified information? Should Germany fess up to it because some treasonist 3-month employee douchebag started chirping about something? Did Snowden analyze that? Not a chance, he was only there for THREE months. He's clueless. Of course, that's just a hypothetical. I don't know any more than you do. I just thought about it after reading some shit on the internet.

[cartman]

How do you know that he was only at the NSA for THREE months? Because you read it on the internet?

[Dutch]

Originally Posted by cartman

How do you know that he was only at the NSA for THREE months? Because you read it on the internet?

EXACTLY!