Slashdot Mirror
Snowden Says He Took No Secret Files To Russia
mspohr writes "There's an interesting interview with Edward Snowden in the NY Times. He talks freely about his decision to start collecting documents. His experience in reporting problems and abuse convinced him he would be discredited. He also states he didn't take any of the documents to Russia and that the Chinese don't have them either. 'What would be the unique value of personally carrying another copy of the materials onward? There's a zero percent chance the Russians or Chinese have received any documents,' he said. Snowden turned them all over to the journalists. He also corrects last week's NY Times story about the derogatory comment in his personnel file; it was due to him discovering and trying to report a vulnerability in the CIA's internal software."
Once again our heroic leakers foil the bumbling Russkies!
The cow says "Moo." The dog says "Woof." The Timothy says "Thanks, valued customer. We appreciate your input."
Turning documents over to journalists, or anybody employed in any other profession, does not make them magically uninterceptable, unreadable, or unposessable by Russians, Chinese, or anybody else. He has no control over the distribution after he hands it off to anybody, and the people who have the stuff might not even know if someone else is reading it.
Time Bomber the Book coming soon.
I call BULL SHIT!
Stabbing who in the back, exactly?
He's blown a whole lot of trust as it is, by stabbing his country in the back so spectacularly.
What makes him think that everyone should believe him now?
The Russians have taken in traitors/defectors from the West; but they know that traitors are the scum of the Earth, and can never, ever be fully trusted.
If he would have gone to Cuba he could get a tan working in the sugar cane fields.
Time Bomber the Book coming soon.
He's blown a whole lot of trust as it is, by stabbing his country in the back so spectacularly.
Precisely. Nonsensical things such as freedom and the constitution are overshadowed by the threat of the bogeymen who are out to get us.
Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
Yes, fuck the people, the government agencies illegally spying on them are all that count.
He'd better have something he can dole out to keep himself relevant. His life will (soon?) reach a point where any information he has will be less valuable that his death. No matter how he dies, the U.S. will get the blame - and THAT can have a value to some.
1. He has done the US a great service in the long run.
2. He is personally more trustworthy than the people in the US government and the intelligence community who have been caught lying already.
My 2 cents.
The important thing to remember is that if it was so easy for him to get these documents, then that also means that there are about a million other people with the same clearance level as him who would find it equally easy. What's the betting that none of those are Chinese agents? Especially given how many Russian agents we've learned were working for the NSA and CIA during the cold war.
People focus on Snowden's disclosure as if it's possibly giving information to America's enemies (or, at least, not-so-friendly friends), but any of them that doesn't have a completely inept intelligence agency of their own will already have the information he's released. It was only secret from the people to whom these agencies should be accountable.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Let's rewind 30 years or so to put it into perspective.
"He's blown a whole lot of trust as it is, by stabbing his country in the back so spectacularly.
What makes him think that everyone should believe him now?
The Americans have taken in traitors/defectors from the Soviet; but they know that traitors are the scum of the Earth, and can never, ever be fully trusted."
I dunno....I'd say he stabbed his country's _government_ in the back. I wouldn't say he stabbed his country in the back though. So far I haven't heard anything that would indicate that Snowden hates America.
He's blown a whole lot of trust as it is, by stabbing his country in the back so spectacularly.
Well, while I do think that anyone working for the NSA is a backstabber and possibly a traitor to the country I would say that Snowden have made up for his past mistakes and clearly shown that he is willing to go to great lengths to protect the country, even from a corrupt government.
There has been various accusations that Snowden leaked the documents to Russia, willingly or unwillingly. This should (in a perfect world) make those accusations less valid. Also, this shows against that Snowden is damn brave and clever - it must have been very tempting to hold on to the documents, which he paid so dearly for.
http://www.thenation.com/blog/174983/did-russia-china-harvest-snowdens-secrets#
He's only "stabbed you in the back" if you're a bootlicker. Not all of us piss ourselves over "teh terrists" and need Big Brother to monitor our lives 24/7 "for our safety". He's no more stabbed anyone in the back than the persons who leaked the Pentagon Papers and the information on the Watergate scandal. Stop being a compliant ninny.
What makes him think that everyone should believe him now?
Because he's been telling the truth and the NSA definitely haven't?
The cow says "Moo." The dog says "Woof." The Timothy says "Thanks, valued customer. We appreciate your input."
He's at least as trustworthy as the agencies for whom he has done work.
In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
Yes, but only traitors and "terrists" tell the truth, Citizen. Telling the truth about our deeds only seeks to help Eurasia who we have always been at war with. Now please return to watching American Idol before you must face punishment.
Yeah I don't get this. The NSA has broken some of the most basic principals as outlined in the constitution. 10's of thousands of Americans going against the entire spirit of our constitution as their daily job, and Snowden is the traitor? I don't think so.
snowdens got balls man, i dont even have the courage to stand up and ask why we use "apollo vcl" at work
“So long as there’s broad support amongst a people, it can be argued there’s a level of legitimacy even to the most invasive and morally wrong program, as it was an informed and willing decision”
He's basically claiming that the problem with all this spying isn't so much it's going on, but that it's going on in secret, without oversight. Fascinating, and it makes sense: take CCTV in the UK--far reaching, nearly ubiquitous, yet everyone knows it's there, and while there are privacy hawks who are against it, there's not nearly the level of outrage as there has been in the US over NSA's spying.
He's blown a whole lot of trust as it is, by stabbing his country in the back so spectacularly.
The government and the NSA are NOT the Country. The PEOPLE are the Country.
What makes him think that everyone should believe him now?
Wrong question.
The correct question is- WHO should we believe MORE, Snowden or the NSA? We know Snowden scooped up docs and turned them over to journalists in a responsible fashion. We also know the NSA has been lying to Congress and the Courts as well as the American People, violating their own policies and violating Court orders.
Given their respective track records, only a complete fool would take the side of the NSA in this.
The Russians have taken in traitors/defectors from the West;
He's neither a traitor nor is he a defector. He has made absolutely no efforts or claims to renounce his citizenship, he has not taken up arms or given aid or succor to an Enemy of the State. Thus, he is also not a Traitor.
If you have evidence otherwise, I'm sure the NSA in particular would love to hear about it.
everyone else has...
if you where to think otherwise would be a strategic error...
huawei own too much of the interconnect to not have the majority of the same information as NSA...
signing authorities are compromised...
move on and self sign
thanks
John Jones
Thanks for verifying the statement "some nerds are idiots", though I already knew it was true.
And how large are those "body counts"? Are we to ignore that more people in the US die from falling in their homes than have been killed by terrorists? Just so you know, 21000 adults died in 2010 of unintentional falls. That's 7 times the amount of people who died in 9/11. Sorry, but the "dirty Mooslems" hiding behind every corner trying to "kill us for our freedoms" just don't rate as much of a threat.
Funny, as one of his countrymen, I don't feel stabbed in the back at all, at least, not by him. I feel more like....I thought there was a knife in myback, I wasn't sure exactly how big or how far it was in, or what it looked like, but I felt it was likely there.
What I see him having done is tell me about that knife, exactly whose hand was on it, and how deep it was into my back.
"I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
It is just like Bill Clinton saying "I did not have sex with that woman". We all know what turned out to mean.
Damn, I have become a cynic. I sea new-speak everywhere. I wonder why.
I hope you are right, I hope there is more details that MI5 and GCHQ are so afraid of. Because I want to hear as much detail of what my government (UK) has been doing against British wishes. To me it's every simple, Russia is a nothing threat, Al Qaida is a minor threat (and CIA trained one at that), Iran is a minor threat and potential co-operative supplied of oil, in fact the biggest threat to democracy in the UK now is the NSA & CIA.
So I want to know what causes Andrew Parker to attack the free press, reporting facts. As though facts can only be reported if he approves of them. [To put it more bluntly who does the little sh*t think he is?? Who put him in charge of what can and cannot be reported, it wasn't Parliament and there's no legal power above them so he should f**ing resign, who dare he attack the press for reporting the truth about major crimes committed by him and his office!].
I also like that Snowden told me about GCHQ. Parliament would never grant GCHQ the right to spy for the Americans against the British, so I'm very grateful to Snowden for revealing how far off the rails they got. More than that, I see comments from shocked Lords and MPs who are on the committees that monitor GCHQ and were never told about Tempora. So I realize how close we are to dictatorship by a foreign power. We're like a year away from NSA via MI5 and GCHQ taking over.
And he warned us, and I'm grateful. And no "red menace" 50's propaganda will remove that gratitude.
I think the balance to "collect it all" is "reveal it all".
This is gonna sound like a troll but I'm genuinely curious since your constitution is not my constitution and I'm not well versed in US jurisprudence.
Which parts of the US constitution has the NSA broken? What would the NSA reply if they were confronted with these claims? Cynicism aside, why are the responsible parties at the NSA not prosecuted for breaking the law?
My point is, if these illegal acts are so manifestly illegal... why is no-one prosecuting? We prosecute our own secret services from time to time where I live. They even lose some times as well.
That's pushing it a bit far, because I think he left me wondering how much further the knife would be pressed in, in coming years...
NOTHING that Snowden revealed was a "secret." His revelations are simply not confined to the realm of conspiracy theory, anymore.
So, if they do have them they got them from the Guardian?
Which parts of the US constitution has the NSA broken? What would the NSA reply if they were confronted with these claims? Cynicism aside, why are the responsible parties at the NSA not prosecuted for breaking the law?
I can only hope this is supposed to be a parody post. Otherwise one can only assume you're being intentionally dense and naïve.
I never said I was British (I'm American, like you, actually). Nor did I say whether I agree with Snowden's argument. But getting past all your Brit-hate and vitriol, your core argument that it's cultural differences, not levels of secrecy, that color the two countries' responses to ubiquitous surveillance, seems a good one.
Ah, so now he's George Washington and cannot tell a lie?
Much like Assange, Obama, Bush, Kennedy, Churchill & everyone else, Snowden will and does lie & bend his tale to justify his acts. Pretending otherwise just exposes you as a zealot.
Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue
When you claim the US should operate more like Russia, and claim the constitution should be ignored, and when you claim torture and murder are perfectly OK as long as the public doesn't get to know about it - You have lost all rights to talk about being stabbed in the back, you traitor.
If you really believe what you say, then come here and let us all murder you. I promise to not tell anyone, just like you want!
If you want to live in that world so much, just MOVE to fucking Russia dumbass! Stop trying to change other countries into the fucked up hell you desire so badly.
Yes, but they didn't fall all at the same time, thus not a threat . In one sense we are paying not for the lose of 3000+ people, but for the towers. The spectacle of the towers coming down is what is sealed in peoples minds. That made the event larger then it really was and shaped our actions since.
I think it is the "Mass" in mass hysteria that drives the security machine and the spending of Billions on a very low probability act. More people die from shootings in this country then 9/11 and again, in such small numbers, spread out that the attitude is, wont happen to me. People don't like random acts of violence that they can't control, so they turn to the Government and say, control it please. Government does not do small thus the TSA and HLS when all we really needed was just better communication. Until I fall, I believe I am safe in my house. Walking down a street in I have no control over what will happen. Personally, I don't care or I just adjust where I go, but most people....they accept the false security of Government oversight and die any way (Boston).
Life is a great ride, the vehicle doesn't matter
Chandra :HAL was told to lie... by people who find it easy to lie. HAL doesn't know how, so he couldn't function. He became paranoid.
Dr. Heywood Floyd : Those sons of bitches. I didn't know. I didn't know!
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
Which parts of the US constitution has the NSA broken?
Fourth, Tenth, Fourteenth Amendments.
My point is, if these illegal acts are so manifestly illegal... why is no-one prosecuting?
"Treason doth never prosper: whatâ(TM)s the reason? Why, if it prosper, none dare call it treason."
Heard it before. Terrorists are largely little more than bogeymen as far as I'm concerned.
Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
By that logic we can eliminate all secrets by simply employing an infinate amount of typewriting monkeys...
Snowden will and does lie & bend his tale to justify his acts
That's why we look at evidence and not just make up shit. The Obama administration has vast resources at its disposal with which to disprove Snowden assertions. It hasn't chosen to do so for some reason. I wager it is because Snowden's assertions and accompanying evidence are close enough to truth.
He's blown a whole lot of trust as it is, by stabbing his country in the back so spectacularly.
Trust that we see was poorly placed in the federal government.
Wait until the Russians tell him his Visa will expire and they're planning to send him off back to his old friends at the CIA. He'll give them his dropbox address in an instant. :-)
This unique sig is intended to make this user more recognisable.
Ah, so now he's George Washington and cannot tell a lie?
Much like Assange, Obama, Bush, Kennedy, Churchill & everyone else, Snowden will and does lie & bend his tale to justify his acts. Pretending otherwise just exposes you as a zealot.
Prove it. That is the thing. What he has said has been repeatedly verifiable and not one thing yet has been proven false. Those that chose to discredit him have been proven to be liars with verifiable facts over and over again. Just because many people lie does not mean we should assume everyone is lying about everything all the time lest we become 'zealots'.
Given the choice between known repeated unabashed liars and someone that has yet to be proven wrong and often has objective proof of his honesty I will chose the latter.
The US constitution is sort of the top law of the land. No other orders, laws, letters, findings, color of laws, the allies asked us, a thinktank said it was ok, the bad guys.... just obeying orders.. can escape the US constitution.
The US constitution does not like the gov looking into domestic papers without a real US court been involved. One gov letter to make it legal for the entire nation is good enough. All staff know this.
The press around http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Andrews_Drake was really the first good hint: Trailblazer, ThinThread in 2000.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
So what about Hurricane Katrina. It's not like that was a one time occurance.
Yup. squirrels bite people every year and spread rabies. Their body counts and picnic massacres are a unimaginable threat to our American populace. I propose locking down all natural habitats to prevent these types of attacks from ocurring again. They are as much if not a greater threat than terroists and the response should be as sensical and massive.
It also means that we do not attempt to whitewash Snowden or attempt to paint him into being some kind of idol that is only here to do good & has never done any wrong. The word of Snowden is no more gospel than the word of Assange, Obama or Bush & those of his allegations which are unsupported and self serving are no more credible.
Because you do believe that Snowden has his own agenda and are not blindly following it right?
Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue
The state is the nation, citizen.
> NOTHING that Snowden revealed was a "secret."
> His revelations are simply not confined to the realm of conspiracy theory, anymore.
I think I take issue with both of these statements.
The truth was indeed secret. What we had were not conspiracy theories, but speculation. We all knew the NSA existed, we all knew some minor details about their operation. People had good reason to suspect some of their capabilities and how they would or could really spy on people if they wanted to.
What he did was expose the secret truth, which happened to be not far off from the speculation and rumors that were the result of many educated people making guesses based on what they saw as possible.
It was widely speculated that massive internet monitoring was possible and even feasible if you had the ability to be inserted at the right places on the network backbone. It was widely speculated that if anybody could be inserted in enough of the right places, it was the NSA.
However, being that it was possible and that they had the resources to do it, doesn't mean we knew they did it. Now we know they did.
Conspiracy theory is when you assert unproven connections to explain events. Like when you posit that a conspiracy of people working together prepared the towers to come down. That is conspiracy theory. Not all speculation is conspiracy theory.
"I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
Yeah truly, who actually trusts the government? I wouldn't trust them to make sure my toilet paper was safe, let alone any other part of my life.
1. He has done the US a great service in the long run.
2. He is personally more trustworthy than the people in the US government and the intelligence community who have been caught lying already.
My 2 cents.
You forgot
3. He is not a current threat. The people in the US government and the intelligence community who have been caught lying are. They have picked up Bin Laden's fight against democracy and freedom and are blowing it to insane proportions while people haggle over Snowden, an inconsequential distraction and pawn.
Because you do believe that Snowden has his own agenda and are not blindly following it right?
Snowden's own agenda is immaterial compared to Obama's and the NSA's own agenda. The latter are capable and willing of doing a lot more damage to the U.S.A.
Until I fall, I believe I am safe in my house. Walking down a street in I have no control over what will happen. Personally, I don't care or I just adjust where I go, but most people....they accept the false security of Government oversight and die any way (Boston).
Hahahaha, talking about a false sense of security. Safe in your house and not on the street?? How long will you feel that save when you have a SWAT team breaking down your door for just a suspicion. I think a lot more people die in their own home then walking down the street.
You have no control, any control you think you have can be taken away at any time.
What he did was expose the secret truth, which happened to be not far off from the speculation and rumors that were the result of many educated people making guesses based on what they saw as possible.
Which is why he didn't do any "harm" to the actual intelligence gathering. Pretty much anyone with something to hide and 1/10 of a brain assumed the NSA could snoop like this already and took measures to thwart them.
He's neither a traitor nor is he a defector.
Indeed. He is a refugee.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
If 'stabbing in the back' means opening eyes to all of the security cameras all over the damn place that shouldn't be there, then sure... I'd consider it more of a 'tap on the shoulder' than a 'stab in the back' but if you are spineless, than I guess a little tap on the shoulder might cause your vertebrae to all collapse... which appears to be the case here based on your comment...
Which state? There are about 50 or so of them in the US.
Snowden is a Hero.
The propagandists want us to think him a traitor, to kill the messenger and hide the message.
Well, if true....this = Patriot
"Never trust a traitor, not even one you create." -- Baron Vladimir Harkonnen.
In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
Which parts of the US constitution has the NSA broken? What would the NSA reply if they were confronted with these claims? Cynicism aside, why are the responsible parties at the NSA not prosecuted for breaking the law?
I can only hope this is supposed to be a parody post. Otherwise one can only assume you're being intentionally dense and naïve.
That's not an answer.
No, it means we look at evidence. For example, Snowden's release of information forced the powers that be to change their story. That's evidence not merely taking the words of someone as "gospel".
Quite a few people trust them. For example, entitlement advocates do since the government is the ones writing the checks and accessing the information needed to comply with the conditions of the entitlement.
U.S. CONSTITUTION : AMENDMENTS TO THE CONSTITUTION : ARTICLE IV
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
He stabbed a rogue government agency acting outside the bounds of law and morality in the back, and did so to protect millions of his fellow citizens.
Is the people...
But, we suspected it all. But here is the issue, we had ZERO legal proof. And that's all that matters. When my mom's house was broken into and her laptop stolen. We knew exactly who did it. But we had no legal proof to prosecute. That was the state the American people were in.
Now we have legal proof, and it's acknowledged in part just by how many FOIA requests have been submitted and processed.
The real sad part is dumb !@#$% like Senator McCain rant and rail against Snowden rather than against the NSA's Constitutional violations. I really can't wait till McCain's neck just explodes. And we can be done with him in DC.
He has a death contingency. If he was smart, he has given three people copies of all the materials with explicit instructions to do NOTHING with it, unless he is killed. In which case they are to dump the entire unaltered files out for public consumption.
There is an analogy here somewhere. Pot, Kettle / Zealot, ??? I just can't find it. I'll try this: Who is the zealot here?
Whatever. I knew for damn sure this was going on. Been telling people for years. You can call it speculation, or you can call it conspiracy theory, I don't care. I call it recognizing human nature. Far as I can tell, you idiots are all 12 years old, with no real understanding of yourselves, or other humans. That is who Snowden did this for, all you 12 year olds, still believing your mommy when she says America is good, and you are special.
Then, while not strictly speaking an issue of Constitutional jurisdiction, there is the whole issue of perjury in front of congress.
So we can not trust the US Government then? you know because they were the ones who because traitors when they failed to uphold the Constitution of The United States and in turn the People of the United States, are those the traitors you are talking about?
you cant for get our Territories either. Some of them are soon to become states if they ever get around to it.
Dr. Chandra, will I dream?
why is no-one prosecuting?
Because the founders made the US Constitution the supreme law of the land, but forgot to put anything in there about what happens if you break it, so we've basically been making that part up as you go along. So far, the only thing we've come up with is along the lines of "if you're arrested by someone violating the constitution you get a get out of jail free card".
If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
"...you have to report wrongdoing to those most responsible for it.”
*whom
Everyone in his country, obviously.
why are the responsible parties at the NSA not prosecuted for breaking the law?
The real, true, honest-to-god, actual, factual, correct, accurate answer that you seek is also one you discount as cynical.
Imagine why [many] Americans are so furious with our dictators right now.
Slashdot needs to stop with the hero worship. Any time there is a person who does something people on Slashdot deem good and beneficial, it seems they go in to full on hero-worship mode, where said person can do NO WRONG, and whatever they say must be true and so on. We saw it with Hans Reiser. Tons of people whining and bitching about him being arrested and then convicted of murder. How he was set up, how the government was laying, etc, etc. Of course then he confessed and led police to the body.
Look guys, everyone, including heroes, are human, and can have flaws. You can view Snowden as a hero for what we did. However that does not mean he is above reproach, it does not mean that he never lies, it does not mean that he can do no wrong. People can do both right and wrong, even good people.
For example, here's another possibility (not saying it is the truth, or even that likely): Snowden brought classified documents to Russia. That is why they chose to give him asylum and put him under state protection. After all, this is a nation with a pretty poor human rights and transparency record, not a shining bastion of freedom. So he gave them these to buy his way in. However the Russians don't want the US to know that, and Snowden doesn't want to tarnish his reputation admitting he sold out, so he makes these claims.
The parent is very valid is saying that Snowden's statements shouldn't have any relevance to the validity of the claims that he gave data to the Russians. The reason is that a person's claims generally aren't useful. If you are innocent of what you are accused of, you of course say you didn't do it since you in fact didn't. However if you are guilty of what you are accused of, you also very often say you didn't do it since you don't want to be saddled with that.
I mean look at athletes and steroids: How many of the athletes busted doping straight up came out and immediately said "Yep, I doped, I probably shouldn't have but everyone else was doing it, what choice did I have?" and how many said "No, I never doped, these accusations are false, etc, etc."
You can't take Snowden's denial as evidence for or against anything. It is what it is. People need to stop acting as though the guy is above reproach, as though he can do no wrong. That he did something heroic does not mean he doesn't have flaws and couldn't do something else non-heroic.
"He did so by adding some code and text âoein a nonmalicious mannerâ to his evaluation document that showed that the vulnerability existed, he said. His immediate supervisor signed off on it and sent it through the system, but a more senior manager â" the man Mr. Snowden had challenged earlier â" was furious and filed a critical comment in Mr. Snowdenâ(TM)s personnel file, he said."
"But the incident, Mr. Snowden said, convinced him that trying to work through the system would only lead to punishment."
So, once again, we have a petty middle manager who can't stand uppity nerds, and if only he hadn't involved himself, this whole affair wouldn't have happened. I'm sure that that middle manager feels mighty proud of himself now.
Religion is what happens when nature strikes and groupthink goes wrong.
you cannot lump all Government in to good or bad. There are faction to the government. For example I trust our Legal system to do its job if I am taken to court, but I dont trust the department of Homeland Security to actually protect me from terrorist. you cannot make sweeping generalization for such a large entity.
Its like say all trucks are Fords, when it is just not the case.
Traffic accidents alone killed 13x the number of people killed at Pearl Harbor that year, and yet the US still went to war. There must be something you are missing in the way you are analyzing the manner in which deaths influence public policy.
He did make a mistake, but so do you. You don't just compare to random unrelated deaths, you need to compare versus the number of deaths caused by our reaction to decide of this reaction was prudent. If I may extend your traffic accident idea: the TSA has caused so many people to drive instead of fly that more people have died from increased traffic accidents than died in 9/11. Unlike falls at home, these deaths are a direct result of our attempt to fight terrorism and could have easily been prevented.
In the case of going to war, we need to weigh the costs of war versus the costs of not going to war. In WWII we had to either fight or watch the Axis conquer the world. If we expected more Americans to die in the war than would die under fascist rule, then it would have been logical to remain isolationist (until it was too late). But Al-Qaeda never had any chance of conquering the world - they were just completely delusional.
I know it's difficult and messy to predict the chances that Outside Group X can reproduce an attack, but it's nonetheless very important if you want to rationally decide who to fight. Personally I don't think Al-Qaeda could have repeated 9/11 as easily as Japan could have repeated Pearl Harbor. Japan built their own planes JUST for crashing into ships, but Al-Qaeda's airplane supply was crippled merely by requiring locked cockpits.
But they do care about how he got them.
The information is pretty much useless, the source and means of how he obtained them is worth gold. And only he knows, which to Russia and China (and any other country) is cash.
Actually, yes you can since the "bad" parts have access to the information of the "good" parts. The example you give is from a case where deliberate divisions of power and control were made. Most entitlements don't do that.
Obvious troll is obvious.
He doesn't need to justify his acts, his acts are just per se.
There are going to be claims that NSA broke the 4th amendment to the US Constitution, and maybe some others. That will be the key one though. Unfortunately for those claims the question has gone before the courts before and they have found on more than one occasion that Article II of the US Constitution provides the power for much of the activity in certain contexts. The people making those claims are relying upon a simplistic reading of the text without that understanding and the benefit of the precedents of the courts in dealing with the necessary questions. They mean well, but get it wrong as things stand. It could be that a future court will change the shape of the law, as has happened in other areas of the war against al Qaida, but I wouldn't count on it. NSA surveillance has pretty much had the backing of all three branches of government as long as it stayed in its lane.
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
You misspelled "fugitive".
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
There must be. Because I don't see the threat in the imaginary boogeyman and piss myself like you seem to.
you need to compare versus the number of deaths caused by our reaction to decide of this reaction was prudent.
You don't even need to do that. You just need to ask yourself something to the effect of, "Do these policies the government implemented/is planning to implement violate essential individual liberties?" If the answer to that question is yes, must be scrapped/forbidden from ever becoming law.
Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
That's silly. The government knowing where you are almost all the time and spying on many of your communications is in a whole different league than them merely having enough information about you to grant you entitlements.
Certain powers are simply far more likely to be used to abuse people's fundamental rights than others, and it is silly to pretend as if they're all nearly the same.
You missed my point. When there is no evidence but only Snowden's unsupported allegations, how do we react?
Way to many people around here are abandoning all critical thought as soon as "Snowden reports from Moscow" is in the byline.
Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue
No, you misspelled "refugee" even after the error was pointed out. That makes you an idiot. Or, rather, it proves that you are one, yet again. And by idiot, I mean useful idiot. You are obviously literate, even somewhat intelligent. However, you have no credibility, cold fjord. It's time for you to realize that fact.
The government knowing where you are almost all the time and spying on many of your communications is in a whole different league than them merely having enough information about you to grant you entitlements./quote There's nothing silly about it. The latter is an easy gateway to the former since it builds up the database which a government will need for 24/7 spying on its citizens. That's a big reason I oppose them.
When there is no evidence but only Snowden's unsupported allegations, how do we react?
You miss my point. This isn't the situation we are in! We have evidence supporting Snowden's allegations.
The government knowing where you are almost all the time and spying on many of your communications is in a whole different league than them merely having enough information about you to grant you entitlements.
There's nothing silly about it. The latter is an easy gateway to the former since it builds up the database which a government will need for 24/7 spying on its citizens. That's a big reason I oppose them.
I think people are being very foolish to give a government willing to spy on its own citizens without cause all this extra data just because they want more free bread and circuses.
No, I clearly see that for you, everything that purportedly comes from Snowden is accepted as the one true gospel, without any critical thought whatsoever. You clearly think that Snowden is a modern Washington who cannot tell a lie whereas I believe Snowden when he has supporting documentation but not necessarily when he makes allegations that are unsupported. Your elevation of Snowden into some kind of uncorruptable & infallible prophet is precisely the point I have been criticizing.
Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue
Is not! If that were true, you wouldn't have just called me "citizen". Clearly you have a strong understanding of the difference between a general member of a country, and a member of the government. And anyhow, if you're going to try to sound butch, don't post with a screen name that has the word "Coward" in it. Jerk.