Slashdot Mirror

Re Why would anyone believe they are on the publics side?
Globally you would want the servers in the US or near US/UK friendly sites/telco loops.
The fear is a network of French, Germany, Russian, Spanish, Chinese, Portuguese ect. of local quality domestic ad/seaching brands.
They would only respond to their govs interests and demands for bulk raw sharing be just to regionally politically tempting.
http://rt.com/news/prime-time/icq-panic-russia-us/
"It all went smoothly – until the recent announcement by US law enforcement bodies who claimed that homeland security could be jeopardized if the service is located in Russia."
http://rt.com/usa/russian-company-buys-icq/

Re Why would anyone believe they are on the publics side?
Globally you would want the servers in the US or near US/UK friendly sites/telco loops.
The fear is a network of French, Germany, Russian, Spanish, Chinese, Portuguese ect. of local quality domestic ad/seaching brands.
They would only respond to their govs interests and demands for bulk raw sharing be just to regionally politically tempting.
http://rt.com/news/prime-time/icq-panic-russia-us/
"It all went smoothly – until the recent announcement by US law enforcement bodies who claimed that homeland security could be jeopardized if the service is located in Russia."
http://rt.com/usa/russian-company-buys-icq/

> As far as I know, they have vehemently denied it. Which doesn't mean much, but then again
> the rebels seem a pretty nasty bunch as well

There is now even another report: http://rt.com/news/chemical-weapons-rebels-captives-632/?utm_source=browser&utm_medium=aplication_chrome&utm_campaign=chrome

Recently released hostages (reportedly) of the rebels claim to have overheard skype conversations where rebels talk about the attacks as a false flag provocation tactic.

Is it true? Dunno, did they really overhear conversations? If so, were they really held by the rebels or is this some sort of disinfo aimed at creating the perception of a false flag?

Beats me, anything is possible. The regime did it is a very simple answer but, we have no way yet to know if it is the right one.

... all the "Obama is a Muslim born in Kenya!" you want, but censor things like Occupy Wall Street. Got it.

"And I'm proud to be an American, where at least I know I'm free."

So supposedly the US and British found evidence that Syria had used sarin, but refused to divulge the details.

Conversely, Russian officials are claiming that they've found evidence that the rebels had used sarin, but instead of keeping it on the D/L, they're passing the info along to the UN inspectors.

FWIW.

That whole article is the Syrian ambassador saying "nobody knows who did it". It doesn't say Russian officials... ANYTHING. Are you LYING to us?
I'm also confused how all of these attacks are still "alleged".

"Following the alleged chemical weapons attack on March 19 ..."
"The diplomat said that, even though “everyone agreed” that the March 19 attack involved chemical weapons, the UK, the US and France did not submit any draft resolutions to the UN Security Council then."

So... it happened... with chemical weapons... in Syria, according to the Syrian ambassador. Who is still claiming it is alleged, RT?

So supposedly the US and British found evidence that Syria had used sarin, but refused to divulge the details.

Conversely, Russian officials are claiming that they've found evidence that the rebels had used sarin, but instead of keeping it on the D/L, they're passing the info along to the UN inspectors.

FWIW.

Who is al Qaida to you? ...Who do you think they are? Friend? Enemy? No idea? Don't want to take sides?

You should take that question to Obama, congress. As this post above, so graciously points out:

"Al Qaeda" is a term of convenience. The Libyan "rebels" were 70+ % Jihadi "Al Qaeda".

The Syrian "opposition" is 80+ % "Al Qaeda" - funded by Qatar and Saudi, for the same regional purposes, with a generous assist from these CIA heroes, that you rush to defend.

http://syriareport.net/fsa-al-qaeda-fighting-under-the-one-flag/
http://www.cfr.org/syria/al-qaedas-specter-syria/p28782
http://rt.com/news/qaeda-militants-kill-fsa-commander-979/ [rt.com]

They laugh at your ignorance, and they count on it.

"Al Qaeda" is a term of convenience. The Libyan "rebels" were 70+ % Jihadi "Al Qaeda".

The Syrian "opposition" is 80+ % "Al Qaeda" - funded by Qatar and Saudi, for the same regional purposes, with a generous assist from these CIA heroes, that you rush to defend.

http://syriareport.net/fsa-al-qaeda-fighting-under-the-one-flag/
http://www.cfr.org/syria/al-qaedas-specter-syria/p28782
http://rt.com/news/qaeda-militants-kill-fsa-commander-979/

They laugh at your ignorance, and they count on it.

Try reading any news source that isn't American based.

Just today Putin was calling your Foreign Sec a liar because he claimed Al Qaeda are definitely not in Syria - http://rt.com/news/putin-syria-interview-ap-387/

The French have apparently contributed to the "rebel cause" in a rather unplanned way

And the recent (5 days ago) claims that the sarin gas attack was a rebel mistake and the weapons were provided by the Saudis, also mentioned numerous Saudi fighters in the region. No link here, as there isn't a single source that I would actually subject my browser (or eyes) to - but a quick google has a seemingly endless list of conspiracy sites touting the story.

"Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Turkey have received covert support from Washington in the funneling of arms to the most virulent Islamist elements of the rebel movement, while Russia and Iran have supplied arms to Assad." -- http://www.theguardian.com/environment/earth-insight/2013/may/13/1

"In May 2007, a presidential finding revealed that Bush had authorised CIA operations against Iran. Anti-Syria operations were also in full swing around this time as part of this covert programme, according to Seymour Hersh in the New Yorker. A range of US government and intelligence sources told him that the Bush administration had "cooperated with Saudi Arabia's government, which is Sunni, in clandestine operations" intended to weaken the Shi'ite Hezbollah in Lebanon. "The US has also taken part in clandestine operations aimed at Iran and its ally Syria," wrote Hersh, "a byproduct" of which is "the bolstering of Sunni extremist groups" hostile to the United States and "sympathetic to al-Qaeda." He noted that "the Saudi government, with Washington's approval, would provide funds and logistical aid to weaken the government of President Bashir Assad, of Syria," with a view to pressure him to be "more conciliatory and open to negotiations" with Israel. One faction receiving covert US "political and financial support" through the Saudis was the exiled Syrian Muslim Brotherhood.

According to former French foreign minister Roland Dumas, Britain had planned covert action in Syria as early as 2009: "I was in England two years before the violence in Syria on other business", he told French television:

"I met with top British officials, who confessed to me that they were preparing something in Syria. This was in Britain not in America. Britain was preparing gunmen to invade Syria."" -- http://www.theguardian.com/environment/earth-insight/2013/aug/30/syria-chemical-attack-war-intervention-oil-gas-energy-pipelines

"Politicians enraged that Britain gave export licenses to sell Syria 'nerve gas chemicals'" -- http://rt.com/news/britain-sold-nerve-chemicals-283/

And then there's this... Politicians enraged that Britain gave export licenses to sell Syria 'nerve gas chemicals'

The rebels in Syria have been covertly funded by U.S. and NATO for the past four years via Turkey, Israel, and Saudi Arabia. So, no, I wouldn't put it past them either.

Sigh.

It's really disheartening when you know so much yet so little about geopolitics that you're able to predict the next move from the Elites. Just like Bush, Sr. said, "I don't need to read the news, I already know what's going to happen."

http://rt.com/news/facebook-profile-picture-recognition-208/
http://www.ibtimes.com/facebook-create-facial-recognition-database-profile-photos-1401665
Welcome to a wonderful facial recognition database for US users (vs privacy issues in Europe).
Try and forget the US government electronic surveillance program.

heh.
Should I be watching the BBC or PBS?

We're left with trying to news from multiple sources and trying to piece together the truth. Yes, Russia Today is a propaganda outfit. Do they do propagandize any more than Fox News, MSNBC, and CNN? The BBC? PBS?

I guess the question then is did Turkish police really find 2kg of sarin gas and arrest the Syrian rebels who were transporting it?
We may never really know the truth on that. English-language sources:
http://rt.com/news/sarin-gas-turkey-al-nusra-021/
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-22720647
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/05/30/us-syria-crisis-turkey-idUSBRE94T0YO20130530

Spanish media did pick it up, so if you can read Spanish - http://www.abc.es/internacional/20130531/abci-sarin-siria-201305301816.html
Apparently Fox News also reports on this stuff, but only in Spanish:
http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/espanol/2013/05/30/detienen-en-turquia-con-gas-sarin-doce-islamistas-radicales-segun-la-prensa/

I have to admit, that was the one part of this narrative that almost got me thinking that the Syrian regime was implicated in the chemical attacks. Then I read this: http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2013/08/debunking-u-s-claims-about-un-weapons-inspections.html ...specifically the part about when the request for UN inspectors was officially delivered. As a mere spectator in these events, it's impossible to separate the truth from the utter BS, but thinking logically about these things, it doesn't add up. Also, I dug through my ancient browser history from a backup last summer, and found this thing I was reading at the time: http://rt.com/news/syria-chemical-weapons-plot-532/ Those two articles, and tons of other analysis I've been reading over the last few days have cast serious doubt in my mind...

I did notice your name on several interesting posts during last 2 weeks, but this time I'm not so sure that you are right.

When talking how Iran menaces it's neighbors it reminds me of this picture. If you say that that Iran threatens the world supply of oil by blocking the Persian Gulf - yes, they do. Does that mean that you can force them to give up their right to control their territorial waters? Do you have some god-given right to that oil or what? Yes, it would cause troubles world wide if they did that. So we just march in and take over the oil reserves? If you say they were involved with Beirut bombing - that was 30 years ago. Move on. There is no point in bringing up that stuff again again - apart from learning from past mistakes. If you describe what USSR/Russia did 50 years ago ... the politicians as well as foreign politics of both USSR and USA changed a lot since that time. When the ballistic rockets start flying, they will fly over my head, not yours - because I live in central Europe. If Russia decides to take out the radar control stations that give information to US rockets, they will hit my country, not yours. Americans seem to be keen on going into military actions around the world - because it is happening far away from them. It is easy to order military strikes when you do that with remote control and drones. When all you see is the footage on CNN. Russia isn't positioning military bases outside of their territory - USA does that. And everybody caves in because of USA power. You are becoming a bully.

America may not be the "World Police," but America has interests around the world. Sure. I'm interested in living like a millionaire sipping mojito on a beach. Does not give me right to force someone to give me their stuff and land.

Don't be mistaken. I'm not supporting Russia/Putin and I'm not supporting Iran developing nuclear weapons nor Syria using chemical weapons. I'm just much closer to the scene and I don't see the world powers trying to resolve the situation with minimum required force.

As I just wrote above -- America is an exception when it comes to taxation of citizens living abroad: http://rt.com/usa/americans-refuse-citizenship-tax-317/

(I meant "half" in the usual British sense, i.e. one parent is American.)

If I move to Bermuda I'd pay no tax to the UK.

http://rt.com/usa/americans-refuse-citizenship-tax-317/ "The United States is the only country out of 34 in the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) that continues to tax citizens regardless of where they live around the world."

Sniffing/monitoring WLAN would be traceable maybe even expected where used?
This notes years hidden with options to conserve energy, get more useful life from the sun and radiation detectors with local weather details. Images over low-capacity mesh radio is just fine if its one 'site' and under years of expansion.
Different mission to devices like http://rt.com/news/spy-rock-britain-admit-147/ (2006)
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/9022827/Russian-spy-rock-was-genuine-former-chief-of-staff-admits.html

Can someone give an estimate of how much more or less radiation is being introduced by the Fukushima plant than say... the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs?

This is a very good question and as a nuclear layman, it's difficult for me to get a handle on an exact answer. IANA health physicist, just a guy with Wikipedia and Google. But given that, I'll try to give some baselines from what I can see on the net.

First, in terms of "radiation", it seems like we're mostly talking about release of radioactive isotopes, rather than the initial prompt radiation of a nuclear explosion itself. The Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs ( as, eg, this blog describes) were airbursts, so relatively radiologically "clean" - they did a lot of initial damage from blast, heat and gamma radiation, but didn't leave nearly as many "dirty" isotopes in the way of fallout. This is compared with, eg, a surface shot like Castle Bravo which was a huge dirty contamination event.

So when we're talking about "comparing" Fukushima with Hiroshima, we're talking purely about the isotopes, not the explosive power. Which is not really a straight comparison. But given that, Fukushima (or any other nuclear power station) is and/or has the potential to be much dirtier than a bomb (at least an airburst), because there's more nuclear material stored onsite. You'd want a nuclear engineer to give the precise bequerel ratings of all the isotope mixes in the fuel composition, but for a back-of-the-envelope estimate: Little Boy had 64kg of uranium fuel - Fukushima had 1,760,000 kg of fuel on the entire site.

So all else being equal, which of course it's not because we're not talking weapons-grade uranium and I'm sure power rods have lots of other alloys in them, Daichi has 27,500 times as much raw radioactive fuel as the Hiroshima bomb. Impressive, no?

Now most of that fuel probably won't be released, as not all the reactors were damaged, and the health impact of the various isotopes varies wildly based on the half-life of the isotope, its heaviness (ability to be transported far from the site), whether it can be ingested in air or water, how long it stays in the body, what the affinity is for various body parts, and what kind of radiation it releases - alpha, beta or gamma. Alpha particles are the biggest, so do the most damage, but also the easiest to block - I believe outside the body they're fairly harmless, blocked by cloth or skin. But inside the body, they can do more harm. So you really do need a health physicist to work out all the equations here.

However, the buzz on the net has always centered around three main radioactive isotope families: iodine-131, caesium-134 and -137, and strontium-90.

Iodine has a half-life measured in days to weeks so it was always going to be the initial problem. Theoretically, if all the fission occurred at the first meltdown, there shouldn't be any left. In practice it seems like some short-halflife isotopes are still being detected, which suggests spontaneous fission may still be occurring in the melted cores. Iodine goes for the thyroid and its effect is thyroid cancers, particularly in children. This is starting to show up but there's arguments over what the baseline rate is and how much is due to testing rather than fallout.

In terms of initial (not ongoing) iodine release, Fukushima was 2.5 times bigger than Hiroshima.

Most of the Fukushima-Hiroshima comparisions focus around the caesium isotopes, as these are long-lived (several years) and the body trea

I see you don't have Russia Today on your list. Check it out. If you haven't heard stuff like this direct from the lips of real live (intelligent edcuated) Russians, my guess is that the topic just hasn't come up.

I really doubt any Russians would claim "all" NGO's are penetrated by the CIA, that's something you yourself just made up right now. But some of them? That's reality, not propaganda

See this is exactly what I'm talking about. It sounds crazy if you don't live in their media environment, but they do in fact claim that. Yes, in Russian Universe, every NGO is a state department front for regime change and American takeover of the country. This is why they have been cracking down on seemingly innocuous little NGOs for years; they view them all as a threat. Every single one. Read this Russian article if you don't believe me.

Go ahead and watch online: Two channels in English. Sad that there is a demand for news bent to the side of a human right abuser like Russia. But the Obama administration (like the Bush administration) before has been so corrupt that outside views are needed.

We're tired of inaccurate, bias media so let's go watch other inaccurate, bias media?

It's not like the two somehow even out and you end up with the truth. They're both just making random crap up as they go.

That's why I watch both RT and 700 Club for all my news, to see both sides. /roflmao ;)

Go ahead and watch online: Two channels in English. Sad that there is a demand for news bent to the side of a human right abuser like Russia. But the Obama administration (like the Bush administration) before has been so corrupt that outside views are needed.

We're tired of inaccurate, bias media so let's go watch other inaccurate, bias media?

It's not like the two somehow even out and you end up with the truth. They're both just making random crap up as they go.

Most news media spews propoganda in some respect even if when that respect is apolitical in the form of human laziness, lack of knowledge or button pushing and invocation of hyperbole to attract interest/ratings.

As long as you understand context only real question does SNR of nonsense and propoganda to useful objective information make media x worth yer time 2 parse.

http://rt.com/usa/nsa-review-group-clapper-445/

Go ahead and watch online: Two channels in English. Sad that there is a demand for news bent to the side of a human right abuser like Russia. But the Obama administration (like the Bush administration) before has been so corrupt that outside views are needed.

Well if you can trust the FBI

Oh, of course we can. It's not like they are faking it or anything.

"Germany sends 'massive amounts' of phone, email data to NSA" http://rt.com/news/germany-nsa-sharing-surveillance-179/

Just wait 1-2 weeks. The next batch of revelations is due to start in about a week.
Source: http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/07/us-usa-security-snowden-brazil-idUSBRE97600L20130807

The documents concerning this are expected to be included in them.

  “The pretext [given by Washington] for the spying is only one thing: terrorism and the need to protect the [American] people. But the reality is that there are many documents which have nothing to do with terrorism or national security, but have to do with competition with other countries, in the business, industrial and economic fields," Greenwald said on Tuesday.

Source: http://rt.com/news/journalist-thousands-snowden-documents-143/

So, no concrete evidence yet; but it is coming soon.

The world's 100 richest people earned a stunning total of $240 billion in 2012 – enough money to end extreme poverty worldwide four times over, Oxfam has revealed, adding that the global economic crisis is further enriching the super-rich.

Less than four years to buy that space station.

The costs of hiring 2x the admins, consultants and experts to clean up after all the cyber action.
The costs of hiring 2x the new vetting staff after http://rt.com/usa/probe-company-cleared-snowden-022/
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2013/06/18/nsa_buddy_system_director_keith_alexander_tells_congress_how_the_nsa_will.html
~a costly new No Contractor Left Behind Act.
With todays fast adsl, adsl2+ modems and some having friends with hybrid fibre coax or even optical, twentysomethings are way more effective than the 56k users of the past.
With a better understanding of Perl on the upgraded Windows Vista and 7 units, todays activists might see more than just the airbrushed NASA PR images - they might ftp out that moon flag fluttering clip this time.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/click_online/4977134.stm

Apple isn't just trying to lock you in to their proprietary formats, they control a large percentage of how the US communicates and are all too willing to work at the edge of censorship without question *

"Apple has patented a piece of technology which would allow government and police to block transmission of information, including video and photographs, from any public gathering"

[*] - http://rt.com/news/apple-patent-transmission-block-408/

yes dark its getting interesting http://rt.com/usa/probe-company-cleared-snowden-022/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Office_of_Personnel_Management
Re so many get access. - seems there was a real rush in the past 10 years.

A protest! There has been a protest!

Not one word in the US "mainstream" media, but according to Russia Times there have been activists demanding a return of the fourth amendment: http://rt.com/usa/1984-protest-us-surveillance-034/.

Maybe you would consider intentionally hosting a child porn site something legal? That happened inside US, after all.

Anyway, lose any hope to find justice in US, you are part of them and then outside law's reach , or you are not, and you can be labeled as terrorist, jailed for decades under any excuse, or eliminated if you cause trouble to their protegees.

You seem to be confusing things that sometimes happen in the US with things that always happen in the US.

I don't recall claiming that any of my points always happen. They do however happen with sufficient frequency that it is a fair criticism of freedom in the US.

1. I've seen a dui roadblock once in the US (another one in Canada). The officer asked a couple questions ("had I been drinking?" "no") then let me on my way. It's not like the Iraqi style checkpoints where the whole vehicle gets searched over.

You were simply lucky and you probably were willing to be interrogated. I am not willing to be interrogated by them when I have done nothing wrong.

2. That's a generalization. Some airports just have metal detectors. If you're flying on a private plane you won't see any of that. Pretty much the same in other countries.

They are fair generalizations. It is true that some of the time you are allowed to simply go through a metal detector, but not all of the time. Many people have been abused due to this insane system that no other country has had. And I wasn't referring to private planes. I was referring to commercial air travel which is what the vast majority of people use to travel long distances.

3. That may be true for some police officers (the ones you see on youtube), but you're not going to read about the millions of friendly interactions that happen.

Again I didn't mean to imply that 100% of police officers are abusive sociopaths, but I do think that in the US the majority of them are.

I bet you could find similar bad apple officers in other countries.

Not nearly as often. At least that has been my experience. I have never actually met a (male) police officer in the US that did not have that sort of angry, aggressive, bully kind of personality. In other countries I have found that such people are the exception rather than the rule. And youtube seems to bear this out. Search for "police brutality" and see how many of the resulting videos took place in the US.

As for an American freedom most countries don't have - out first amendment rights are a great example.

I don't think this is true. You may think you have more free speech rights on paper, but in the real world you do not.

In the US we have may have free speech compared to China or Cuba or Russia, but not compared to most Western European countries. There is a long list of countries with equivalant free speech rights to ours. We are not so special in this regard. As someone has pointed out probably the only freedom we have that is unique to the US is our freedom to own a gun in certain states.

You seem to think that there are all these perfect countries outside of the US, but failed to list a single one of them (aside from the ones with friendly police - Cuba, Laos, Columbia, and Malaysia)

There are no perfect countries and I never claimed there were. It's generally only Americans who think their own country is more or less perfect. Compared to the US, Cuba, Laos, Colombia, and Malaysia all have police who tend to be relatively normal human beings who don't have an aggressive mililtary war-like mentality toward citizens. This is based on my personal experience living in these countries and interacting with actual police officers on occassion compared to my experiences with US police.

You seem to think that there are all these perfect countries outside of the US, but failed to list a single one of them

I haven't listed a single one because I don't think there are any perfect countries. Most countries overall are just as bad as the US when it comes to freedom overall. I wasn't arguing that there existed some great free society that we could all move to. It doesn't exist. Some

Oh, and BTW, insurance premiums under Obamacare are skyrocketing:

http://www.indystar.com/article/20130718/BUSINESS/307180100/State-says-Obamacare-will-force-72-percent-increase-individual-insurance-plan-rates

http://thehill.com/blogs/healthwatch/health-reform-implementation/313885-obamacare-premiums-lower-than-expected-in-maryland

Hell, just Google "obamacare rate increase"

Lord help you if you smoke, or happen to be overweight.

Gotta love their fucked-up rationale: "Your freedom is likely to be someone else's harm" Yea, that sounds like what a Stasi dogfucker would say.

http://rt.com/news/snowden-entry-papers-russia-902/

Although it's almost the same as bbc/reuters .. still. Would think that russian news outlet would be included as an alternative.

Leverage

Kerry vows to put the screws to Venezuela over Snowden – report

Washington will also begin prosecuting prominent Venezuelan politicians on allegations of drug trafficking, money laundering and other criminal actions, Kerry allegedly said, and specifically mentioned some names in his conversation with the Venezuelan FM.

The real value of the NSA data collection is to be able to extort people into doing what the US gov wants. Putting pressure on foreign politicians, business leaders, etc. is not new, but now the US gov can dig up dirt illegally on practically anyone in world. This is why I thought the House vote on defunding the NSA was just a show. Basically, those candidates that needed protection on civil liberties issues in upcoming elections will get it by voting to defund, though I don't really think that there was really any doubt the amendment would be defeated.

Someone already posted that comment and it was an easy retort.
If steel is going to explode, spread steel in a 20KM death radius where no one can live anymore, spread steel all around the globe and have untold effects, while people have lives shortened by steal sickness and increased cancer (We have lots of things that do that already, why add more?), then yes, we should stop using it.
Cities are made of this stuff and would destroy the world many times over.

Especially if steel is going to become invisible and impossible to detect by humans without special equipment, so that you don't even see the hazard, get
sick from it, and start to die.

Like biological warfare. Using engineered viruses to kill your enemy. I'm against that too.
Just say no to resident evil.

http://rt.com/usa/sailors-japan-fukushima-radiation-878/
http://enenews.com/japan-and-iaea-grossly-downplaying-fukushima-cesium-releases-audio

The amount of radiation released by the way, was CHERNOBYL level. Japan keeps trying to hide it, came out years later, guess what, yeah, level 7 reactor meltdown in several reactors.

Good thing they had ocean to dump on it, which another news article says, guess what, leaked into the ocean.
I think one of my biggest problems with radiation, is that you don't even know. You see a fire? You know you get close to it, it will burn you.
You see sharp metal? Or a gun pointed at you? You can see and know the danger.

Radiation? You only know when it's too late.
If you're close to something extremely radioactive, so that your skin starts blistering like a burn. Even if it just starts and you get away, it's too late.
You're dead, not even the best medical equipment currently in use can save you.
You'll die from radiation sickness at much lower dosages that cause instant blistering etc.

On the face of it he did the right thing, but he didn't finish the job. He's holding out on us.

You're referring to Snowden's unreleased documents and his cautiousness in regard to "harming US interests," versus supplying us with the facts we need to accurately identify other crimes and the full extent of those we've learned about? (Assuming I've gotten your meaning,) I agree to a certain extent; as long as the hypocrites in government — and the governed who buy their bullshit — are throwing around labels such as "traitor" and "criminal," perhaps he should go ahead with a complete disclosure of all documents.

On the other hand, a lot of Snowden supports (particularly, prominent public figures) would likely withdraw their support or turn against him for doing so, as the caution he's exercised is frequently brought up in his defense. I don't know how important that support is to Snowden, or how it might affect his ability to remain free/safe/alive. Also, I can't speculate on the gravity of the undisclosed information; that is, if the abuses are serious enough (in contrast to what we've learned so far) to turn the public's attention away from the messenger and back to the message. I have a hard time criticizing his methods, considering what he's already sacrificed (e.g., his home, personal relationships, etc.) and what he has at stake (i.e., his life).

One last thing I'd like to add regarding Snowden's (and Glen Greenwald's) methods: I think the way the leaks have been trickled have been superb, for two reasons: 1) They've helped keep these violations in the consciousness of a public with a very short attention span, and 2) they've given us some opportunities to catch government officials lying in regard to the extent of their abuses.

Yet another tiresome game of charades. It's beginning to sound like another honeypot, like Manning's, or a ploy by mass media for higher ratings and ad rates.

Could you please elaborate (particularly in regard to honeypot(s))? Are you suggesting that Manning's (and possibly Snowden's) leaks are part of a planned disinformation campaign? I'd like to discuss this further if you could please clarify (either here or your journal).

I sure don't expect any change in future elections. All these scandals since Nixon, and republicans and democrats are still running the show for their corporate masters.

I won't argue with you there, but I'll continue to do what I've been doing for most of my life: Voting third-party, donating to ACLU, talking to friends and family, and refuting government/corporate propaganda when and where I see it repeated. What else can I do? My resources are extremely limited, and while the fight I help give may be weak and destined to fail, I can't just roll over and do nothing — the least I can do is not help them, ya know?

Mod parent up.

We need more brave politicians to finally speak their minds about this instead of fearing the surveillance machine.

What are you talking about? There are plenty of politicians speaking their minds about Snowden -- but I don't know if I'd call them "brave." Looking at just the previous administration, George W. Bush:

I think he damaged the security of the country

And Dick Cheney:

I think he's a traitor

Of course, as another poster mentioned, they've got nothing to lose same as Carter.

Yeah, well Bush and Cheney are like two criminals who've never been tried for the scan of engaging the US in Iraq. I can't see them finding a silver lining in any of this. Somewhere along the line the Bush Whitehouse decided to behave like J. Edgar Hoover, sans dresses.

Mod parent up. We need more brave politicians to finally speak their minds about this instead of fearing the surveillance machine.

What are you talking about? There are plenty of politicians speaking their minds about Snowden -- but I don't know if I'd call them "brave." Looking at just the previous administration, George W. Bush:

I think he damaged the security of the country

And Dick Cheney:

I think he's a traitor

Of course, as another poster mentioned, they've got nothing to lose same as Carter.

http://rt.com/usa/aclu-license-plate-surveillance-216/

The American Civil Liberties Union has released documents confirming that police license plate readers capture vast amounts of data on innocent people, and in many instances this intelligence is kept forever.

According to documents obtained through a number of Freedom of Information Act requests filed by ACLU offices across the United States, law enforcement agencies are tracking the whereabouts of innocent persons en masse by utilizing a still up-and-coming technology.

They already tried to use the Fourth Amendment. Problem is you basically have to make the government admit to how they violated the fourth amendment:

"The EFF is demanding that the Justice Department immediately process the records previously requested under FOIA and are asking for the feds to compensate them for any attorney fees incurred in their lawsuit against the government.

'As Congress gears up to reconsider the FAA, the American public needs to know how the law has been misused," EFF Senior Counsel David Sobel says. 'The DOJ should follow the law and release this information to the American public.'" http://rt.com/usa/blanketing-spy-program-information-983/

More...

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/08/court-ruling-that-nsa-spying-violated-4th-amendment-remains-secret/
http://ncjolt.org/eff-seeks-answers-from-secret-court-in-ruling-on-nsa-spying-violations/
https://www.eff.org/document/complaint-19

Take a look at the Guardian (US version);

http://www.guardiannews.com/

Then take a look at RT News:

http://rt.com/

Then take a look at CNN:

http://www.cnn.com/

Or even the New York Times:

http://www.nytimes.com/

Notice a pattern? Apparently, the Zimmerman trial is all we Americans care about. The media is as complicit as Microsoft, et al. I start with the foreign news outlets, then head to CNN and other mainstream US media for comparison--what is missing from mainstream US media is the real news.

I fully expect "Cold Fjord" to be spewing his disinformation--with earnest--after the latest Prism revelations. If Microsoft is fucked, so is the NSA.

A week or two ago, a bunch of countries signed an treaty that allowed for publishing materials for the disabled.

So now various groups like HathiTrust (who won their lawsuit by The Authors Guild) can now share their work with groups from other countries. Unfortunately, the treaty had been modified to exclude audio visual works.

It might be that individual countries still have laws that apply (eg, the US does, but they still might not've been in full compliance), but we don't yet have an international treaty for doing it. My suggestion would be to host the website in Antigua.

Is about dynamics. Add heat to a system and you should think that particles should move faster, and even if some of them move slower, should be very few and not able to be noticed in the big trend. While you have a culture where the ultimate goods are money and power the trends just go in one direction. And the power is accumulated enough to reach the critical mass to avoid any kind of potential threat, with worldwide surveillance and more active methods.

Could be hope in changing the global culture, but the push is too big in the wrong direction. Maybe something big and widespread enough (yellowstone, antarctic ice melting, a big pandemy) could change things, but nothing coming from people in the short/middle term will fix the mess we are into.

For example, there is something called the reasonable time and place restriction.

[citation needed], as from what I see:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

No such distinction is made; or perhaps 'shall make no law' and 'abridging' has a different meaning in the parallel universe you inhabit?

Don't even bother with any of that 'legal precedent' nonsense, either, as any 9th grader who stayed awake in Civics can tell you that the Constitution cannot be superseded by anything short of a Constitutional amendment, which case law does not qualify as (perhaps that's what's wrong with our legislators - too busy having coke & whore parties to actually pay attention in their secondary school governance classes).

The same goes for a courtroom; you cannot act out in court.

... and yet, stripping naked in a public place is considered "protected speech"...

Seems pretty convenient, that 'free speech' only seems to apply when a citizen is not in sight or earshot of a government agent, doesn't it?

Here's an idea: maybe you should go back and read over some of the other writings of the Constitution's signators, and develop for yourself a concept of why we have civil liberties to begin with. I'll give you a hint: the concept and assignment of rights has absolutely nothing to do with how citizens interact with one another.

http://rt.com/usa/fact-nsa-section-wyden-224/
http://tech.slashdot.org/story/13/06/18/2120222/google-files-first-amendment-challenge-against-fisa-gag-order

You make good points but it's hard to know who to believe with FISA looming.

What is this article on about? Who the fuck is SpiderOak, Silent Circle? GPG, pgp, gnuPG are standards of encryption, not some un evaluated service, or new software.
And there are *literally* people taking to the street:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-1009_3-57592368-83/san-francisco-protests-the-nsa-spying-program-in-july-4th-march/
http://rt.com/usa/nsa-protests-july-4-700/
http://mashable.com/2013/07/02/restore-the-fourth/

And these are just the top 3 google news articles. I agree that the software solutions are terrible, and hard to use. And I agree that the news media are doing a good job of shifting the focus to: "Edward Snowden for leaking some of the country's most sensitive intelligence secrets". Which is agonizing to watch, but not half as agonizing as stupid articles like this couched in the voice of the people, but in actually spinning the story away from the truth.

People are angry, there are secure solutions, it has to be open source and on your own computer under your direct control to be secure. Open source software development is notorious for flubbing the user experience, but that is the bad news. We do care about privacy and personal security, we can fix the software to be easier to use, and we are actually fighting for our rights. So STFU with your crap message about our doomed future, and stupid populace. Of course it's not easy, but people like Snowden keep coming along and reminding us to be more vigilant.