Slashdot Mirror
Snowden Granted 3 More Years of Russian Residency
SiggyRadiation writes Edward Snowden is allowed to stay in Russia for three more years. According to the NYPost:"His lawyer, Analtoly Kucherena, was quoted by Russian news agencies on Thursday as saying Snowden now has been granted residency for three more years, but that he had not been granted political asylum. That status, which would allow him to stay in Russia permanently, must be decided by a separate procedure, Kucherena said, but didn't say whether Snowden is seeking it." The question that remains, of course, is did the Russians use this as leverage over him to get to more information or influence him? Or is the positive PR in itself enough for the Russians in the current climate of tensions and economic sanctions relating to the Ukraine crisis?"
He should be able to live wherever he wants!
Anyone who thinks that Russia would deport Edward Snowden does not know much about the long history of Russian spycraft.
Your matters weren't private before Snowden since the govt. was violating the 4th amendment without your knowledge. Just because the revealing of an illegal practice modifies the behavior of others does not make that illegal practice legitimate.
Russia isn't using this to leverage information or to influence Snowden. Russia is using this to stick it to the US. And if, every once in a while, they can trot him out like a useful puppet (like they did during Putin's televised Q&A), then all the better
My postings are informational and does not constitute legal advice. Act on it at your risk.
The Russians are never letting him go - at least not for free. They'll have to get something to give him up. Snowden probably couldn't leave Russia even if he wanted to.
But the Russians will treat him well - to make an example of him: "Leak classified US data and the Russians will take care of you."
At least until the US offers Russia something substantial for him - then the Russians will ship him back.
Since I prefer freedom over safety, it looks to me like you have no valid point, even if what that article is saying is true. Snowden releasing the information was morally right. It is not wrong to tell people about the immoral/unconstitutional activities of the government, even if they're doing it to keep us 'safe.' And that's a big "if."
We are supposed to be 'the land of the free and the home of the brave,' after all. We can't be free or brave if we trade away our freedoms for security and allow the government to violate the constitution. Snowden released the information, and now it's up to all of us to stop the government's activities.
The question that remains, of course, is did the Russians use this as leverage over him to get to more information or influence him?
Why is that a question? Has there been any indication that anything like that has happened? No? Well then why does that question come up for you? I believe it is because you know that if you said what you are implying outright, the unanimous response would be, "Citation Needed!"
Don't propagate bullshit suggestive questions that try to make a point you don't have the balls (or the evidence) to present in a forthright manner. Leave that kind of rhetorical crap to the downward spiral that is major media news. Here, you will be held to a higher standard.
Stop-Prism.org: Opt Out of Surveillance
AFAICT, Snowden didn't reveal anything that wasn't plain as the noses on our faces already.
-uso.
What you hear in the ear, preach from the rooftop Matthew 10.27b
He's not in Russia, simply put.
Post hoc ergo propter hoc
...Russia hasn't finished getting inside information from him yet...
Nice typo, Anatoly Kucherena will be pleased :D.
Apparently the original source, among other sites, added the extra L, so poster has an excuse :D
This is obviously a first post from an NSA working group. Notice the low-level dig against us for discussing Snowden, and on top of that this is a blatant attempt to steer the conversation away from the main points.
Remember, there is a rather active disinformation campaign in place right now. And this is an example of it.
nt
Ah, I see the NSA is here :)
No colour or religion ever stopped the bullet from a gun
The question that remains, of course, is did the Russians use this as leverage over him to get to more information or influence him? Or is the positive PR in itself enough for the Russians in the current climate of tensions and economic sanctions relating to the Ukraine crisis?"
Why does every issue have to have one reason?
If I were a leader of a foreign power that has a history of hostility towards the US and someone like Snowden fell into my lap, I'd be milking him every which way I could.
Stick it to the US. Find out NSA operations. Propaganda. Leverage. And I'm sure they're more that I can't think of.
Just because the revealing of an illegal practice modifies the behavior of others does not make that illegal practice legitimate.
Of course not, however it means Snowden has reveal much more than necessary to make his point and has grabbed an insane quantity of data to make it leaking this data to external sources.
This being said, I am not convince you can link the change in encryption software from Al-Qaida and the likes to Snowden's stunt. In the meantime there were also cryptography courses that were made available through MOOC offerings and one thing these courses emphasize on is: don't do your own crypto software use commercial or open source crypto software which will happen to be much more secure than anything you can develop unless you are an expert within a team of experts with considerable means. It is perfectly plausible they switched to open source crypto after someone of them enrolled into such a course instead of listening at Snowden's leaked stuff.
Circumstancial proofs must be taken with caution.
Achille Talon
Hop!
The difference is, before the leaks, people who made that claim were dismissed and ostracized as conspiracy nuts.
Now that it is fact, the public is a whole lot more paranoid.
The Patriot Act was Al Qaeda's greatest achievement.
while(1) attack(People.Sandy);
Snowden didn't need to leak that much information to make his point. That is where the leak become much less morally right.
Don't be naive, knowing the government will be after him after such a leak, he probably got much more than needed to have something to trade in exchange of his own security. And it seems as well Snowden is prefering safety over freedom.
Achille Talon
Hop!
Why do government bootlickers like yourself always show up in every article about Snowden?
There are many _questions_ that remain. How much additional information does Snowden have squirreled away in dead drops, that will be revealed if he is killed or imprisoned? How much information can Russian personnel gather about subtle policies of NSA, by indirect deduction of what Snowden says to press or to his handlers? What has, or can, the NSA do to protect its revealed policies and assets? What inspiration do minor details about NSA monitoring provide for Russian surveillance?
The concept that there is "the only remaining question", and posing the question to cast the Russians as aggressive victims, is a straw man. It's a side issue distracting debate from much more important issues.
i agree. Regardless of ones *feelings* about what he did, the fact remains that he **broke the law** and needs to be in court. Not doing that makes a mockery of our laws.
Sentencing is where you can take into account 'intent', but not his guilt or innocence..
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Snowden didn't need to leak that much information to make his point.
Yes, he did. We deserve to know exactly what how our government is violating the highest law of the land, and that includes details of the program. Both so we can better defend ourselves against this (if only be being aware of it) and so we can see what needs to be done to prevent it from happening again. Knowing all the details lets us make better informed decisions.
You are a coward.
And it seems as well Snowden is prefering safety over freedom.
Alright, what freedoms is Snowden saying that we should sacrifice to the government in exchange for safety? You're a moron.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
damned traitor.
Would you really like to live in an alternate reality where all the Snowden's revelations would never have happened?
This is just payment for all the secrets he has given them we dont know about. Dragging it out this way looks less suspicious.
damned traitor.
The Government of the United States of America is the only traitor in this saga. President Obama should be impeached, face trial in a court of law, and when found guilty sentenced to death by lethal injection. I mean there is a good chance he might survive the botched lethal injection. The remainder of the political class and the bureaucrats should face the same fate minus any trials. "American Revolution - Part II"
Well said
Where did i say i supported the government? Why do you show up to support people that break the law and put this country at risk?
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Yeah. It's supposed to be difficult to surveil people. These days it isn't very difficult, so we're moving in the right direction.
Not doing that makes a mockery of our laws.
Our laws make a mockery of themselves.
This would be a good time to use jury nullification, if the opportunity presents itself.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
Definitely Russia is just using him.
Why do you show up to support people that break the law and put this country at risk?
It's not Snowden that's putting the country at risk, but people who attack those who reveal the government's wrongdoings under the guise of wanting to enforce the law, without even realizing that not all laws are just and our government is horribly corrupt. People like you.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
While it suits your irrational argument to argue the law in black and white terms, you have to know that the law is far from that.
If a criminal breaks into your house, assaults you, you shoot him, and he happens to die, we don't call that murder and give you a more lenient sentence because you were defending yourself. We call that self defence.
Equally so, technically what Snowden did "broke the law". But that's a pretty obtuse way to look at it considering the greater good he achieved by demonstrating that our own government is, and has been, breaking the law.
What he did was in defence of our nation. He has more courage and character in his nail clippings than you have in your whole body. Now turn off Fox news and develop your own opinion.
If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
Your absolute freedom?
Our constitutional and fundamental freedoms. You know, the things that the government is violating.
Then you go on to list a bunch of irrelevancies that have nothing to do with Snowden, other than the fact that he's... currently in Russia, I guess?
You Snowden lovers are finding it tougher and tougher to defend his crimes.
It's as easy as ever, because law does not equate to morality, even assuming he did break laws. The sooner you fools learn that, the better.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
What about Snowdens leaks regarding all the valid activities that the NSA et al were up to?
Beside the name calling thing, it is not true he needs to leak that much information to make his point. He is going far beyond his point with the GB of information he has leaked than just proving the NSA has violated the Constitution.
For the freedom, it seems obvious to me Snowden has given up on his freedom since he is locked in Russia for an undetermined time in exchange of his security. Talking coward here...
Achille Talon
Hop!
...the fact remains that he **broke the law** and needs to be in court.
OK, as long as the following happens FIRST:
1) all the individuals in government who conspired to subvert the Fourth Amendment are tried, convicted and imprisoned
2) secret courts and secret evidence is abolished forever
Would that be OK with you? Or do you simply want Snowden's head and no one else's?
I *never* said the government was innocent, as we know it is not.. I only state that Snowden is a traitor and broke the law, and the legal process MUST be followed. Exceptions can not be made for anyone, or none of us are safe from its abuse.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
And just to make sure you understand the point. Snowden did make his point without leaking ALL the information he got. That's the proof he took much more than necessary to make his point. So far, only a very thin part of what he has taken has been leaked.
Achille Talon
Hop!
Beside the name calling thing, it is not true he needs to leak that much information to make his point.
Yes, it is, and I explained why. Without knowing the full extent of the program, it becomes more difficult to defend oneself until it stops, and it also becomes more difficult to stop it from happening again by having the right protections in the right places. Besides that, The People need to know how, exactly, the government is violating the constitution.
For the freedom, it seems obvious to me Snowden has given up on his freedom since he is locked in Russia for an undetermined time in exchange of his security.
You are confusing surrendering everyone's freedoms to the government with going to Russia because your own government will likely strip you of your freedoms if you do not. There is a difference between someone choosing to go to Russia and the government violating people's freedoms. Try to keep up.
Talking coward here...
You or I have done nothing even close to what Snowden has, and likely never will. He's not the coward here.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
My definition of "valid" differs from yours, government worshiper. For instance, I think everyone has rights, and that we shouldn't spy on allies or spy on people en masse period. There should be standards even when you go to spy on foreigners.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
And it seems as well Snowden is prefering safety over freedom.
Alright, what freedoms is Snowden saying that we should sacrifice to the government in exchange for safety? You're a moron.
He is trying to make the claim that Snowden is hiding out in Russia, sacrificing his freedom for the sake of security from American persecution. Ignoring, of course, that Snowden is much more free in Russia than he would be in the United States.
Since I prefer freedom over safety
That's a false dichotomy that needs to die. The question isn't "freedom VS safety." The question is "freedom AND safety VS tyranny AND danger."
We are less safe because of the mass surveillance and other bull crap we are subject to.
Not doing that makes a mockery of our laws.
Our laws make a mockery of themselves.
This would be a good time to use jury nullification, if the opportunity presents itself.
Which leads to the question, Why doesn't Snowden serve his cause and get his butt home to the USA and willingly stand trial? If his motive is to expose the misdeeds of his employer, this would serve his purpose much better than getting buried in Russia to be used as a pawn by a government with NO boundaries, legal, moral or otherwise.
IMHO, he's not really interested in the "cause" except that it brings him fame and feeds his ego. He's all about Snowden and nobody else and cooked up this media angle to justify his self importance. In reality he is a coward who dropped and ran when the going got tough.
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
Snowden leaked a ton of information on the methods NSA uses to do the job we want them to do. All the exploits Schneier reported are exactly the things we want NSA to be doing. None of those exploits had any effect on your constitutional rights or freedoms. Now due to the leak of these sources and methods, America's abilities have been degraded and that is what makes him a traitor.
"Legal" activities in terms of a technicality, not "legal" in terms of the spirit of law (which includes the US Constitution). You really should learn the difference, because the former is why we are having such severe problems in the USA.
If there are changes need to the Constitution there is a process for changing it, very clearly defined in fact. Bypassing the law or ignoring the law because someone does not like the Constitution is illegal, period.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
Will he get a fair trial? We both know he wont, so stop talking out of your own arse.
Which leads to the question, Why doesn't Snowden serve his cause and get his butt home to the USA and willingly stand trial? If his motive is to expose the misdeeds of his employer, this would serve his purpose much better than getting buried in Russia to be used as a pawn by a government with NO boundaries, legal, moral or otherwise.
Uh, the point of him staying in Russia IS to stay protected from a government with NO boundaries, legal, moral, or otherwise. Your government has already lied to you and been caught. Why would you assume they wouldn't keep doing it?
Apparently you have never watched Fox News. Your remote stuck on MSNBC?
Which leads to the question, Why doesn't Snowden serve his cause and get his butt home to the USA and willingly stand trial? If his motive is to expose the misdeeds of his employer, this would serve his purpose much better than getting buried in Russia to be used as a pawn by a government with NO boundaries, legal, moral or otherwise.
Because he's not a masochist, a martyr, or any number of other things you might think are righteous. Given the US government's shady activities, there's no reason to think there would be a free trial, that the jury would not turn against him, or that some other horrible outcome wouldn't happen.
IMHO, he's not really interested in the "cause" except that it brings him fame and feeds his ego.
Yeah, because fame and ego is worth having to constantly worry what your future holds because you've pissed off the most powerful government in the world. Right.
In reality he is a coward who dropped and ran when the going got tough.
No one who releases documents that prove the government violated the highest law of the land and basic ethics is a coward. He's done much more good than you, PTA moron.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
The Patriot Act was Al Qaeda's greatest achievement.
Second-greatest achievement.
The TSA comes in at #1, since it got us accustomed to presenting our papers, submitting to arbitrary searches and the like even when travelling within national boundaries. Just like the old Soviet Union.
The Patriot Act is arguably more far-reaching, but less blatantly visible.
Obviously you haven't been to Ukraine in the past 2-3 years.
Snowden leaked a ton of information on the methods NSA uses to do the job we want them to do.
Who is "we"? I know I don't want them to keep exploits in the dark, thereby making everyone less safe (without good reason) just so they can exploit some so-called "terrorists." Fuck that. And to say these things wouldn't be used for other nasty purposes is just naive.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
Will they use him as part of any deal over ukraine?
Russia may use him as part of any deal to end the sanctions and / or war over Ukraine
The Patriot Act was Al Qaeda's greatest achievement.
Over two hundred years of American History, many many thousands of people dead in civil war, world wars, cold war under the threat of mutually assured nuclear destruction and we let the greatest threat to the US Constitution and the future of Liberty in the United States end up being twenty guys with razor blades and the morally vacant people that use their terrible acts of murder as an excuse (and an opportunity).
The idea of punishment is that being punished is more expensive to you than keeping the law. Else, why bother being a law abiding citizen? If all I have to fear when I get caught shoplifting is to pay the price for the item I stole, why bother paying unless you got caught?
Consider the surplus of information revealed the punishment the US got.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Start with his.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Snowden giving up freedom for safety. Now that's rich. I guess anyone who stood up against tyranny gave up his freedom in exchange for the safety of his prison cell in your books, eh?
He gave up his freedom, hoping that we'd be able to reclaim ours.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
What for? Defending the constitution? Has that been turned into a crime while I wasn't watching?
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Last time I checked this is called "collateral damage" today, and if the recent wars are any indicator it's a-ok as long as the goal is important enough.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
I haven't seen anything that Snowden has revealed that hurt our national security in any serious way. Sure, plenty of embarrassment for the administration but that's hardly the same thing. Personally, I'm glad that he did what he did since it's started a very real discussion about intelligence service over-reach and lack of sufficient oversight. The right thing to do would be for the president to grant him a pardon on the condition that he come back to the US and turn over any remaining materials. That way we keep the information out of the hands of our rivals and demonstrate that we protect whistleblowers at the same time.
This is just payment for all the secrets he has given them we dont know about. Dragging it out this way looks less suspicious.
damned traitor.
The Government of the United States of America is the only traitor in this saga.
Not really. Snowden's leaking aside, it's obvious to me he's being used as a willing propaganda tool of the Russians now. Could that be traitorous? One could argue it is.
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
Ignoring, of course, that Snowden is much more free in Russia than he would be in the United States.
Just not free to travel. Just no free to get on TV with Putin and ask unscripted questions. Just not free to run a campaign of anti-Putin editorials, or to run a journalism organization without having that organization torn down by Putin for being contrary to his wishes, and perhaps have its reporters gunned down on their home doorsteps. But plenty free, of course, to conduct economic activity that directly supports a guy who is violently annexing a neighboring country while transparently lying his ass off about what he has his troops (and artillery and anti-aircraft missiles) doing. Free to support the guy that's propping up the Assad regime's deliberate mass slaughter, and free to operate in a country that purposefully, and cooperatively - gleefully, even - harbors some of the worst, most violent organized crime operators in the world. Yay, free!
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
what, you imagine living in Russia less free than living here in this police state?
takes out the (media/fear) drama of the hateful fear & loathing punishment features. are we not each our very own reward? punish as we would wish to be punished? WMD on credit 'weather' is not punishment enough? https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=wmd+weather+media news http://www.globalresearch.ca/weather-warfare-beware-the-us-military-s-experiments-with-climatic-warfare/7561
Due to excessive bad posting from this IP or Subnet, anonymous comment posting has temporarily been disabled. You can still login to post. However, if bad posting continues from your IP or Subnet that privilege could be revoked as well. If it's you, consider this a chance to sit in the timeout corner or login and improve your posting. If it's someone else, this is a chance to hunt them down (&/or demonize them....) based on speculation of ill intent... peace out /. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m39DWVFK-Bw
Enemy?
Rats, a week without C-Span and I miss the reheating of the Cold War...
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
So you DO believe that those who signed the Partiot Act et al are worrthy of prison. Good!
But why start with the prosecution of Snowden? At this point, getting him back to the US to stand trial is pretty problematic. As for the conspirators, we know who they are, they all reside in the US, and they all would be easily arrested. Don't you think we should go after them NOW? We can wait for a more opportune time to snag Snowden, can we not?
Probably for the same reason a lot of dissidents that left North Korea don't wanna go "home" for a fair trial?
Anyone who thinks that this trial could in any way be fair is a moron. It CANNOT be one, for the simple and plain reason that accuser and judge sit on the same side of the bar. That was, btw, the way inquisition trials worked.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
It's clear that it is necessary to show that the NSA violations are widespread and pervasive. And it's clear that what has been exposed so far is NOT enough, as discussion has occurred in the media and various forums but there's no evidence that things do not remain business as usual at the NSA. I only hope there are still some juicy bits in the trove yet to reveal. It looks like it's going to take a drip water torture of secret releases in order to keep attention focused on the problem before it may actually get resolved.
I cannot 100% hate the Russians right now. For all their bullying in the Ukraine, for all the self-serving reasons they are likely accomodating Snowdon, for all the KGB background of Vladimir Putin (and tear inducing shirtless escapades). On this they are doing the right thing. Even if for the wrong reasons!
Snowden is not an immediate threat to the nation. The criminals in the government are.
most security comes at a cost to "freedom". as a US citizen you enjoy an enormous amount of protection, at home and abroad, be it food regulation, foreign diplomacy, etc. all paid with mandatory taxes and the like.
unless you're actively working to reject and give up the protection, or "safety" you already have, that which you hold so low, you're merely posturing to your narcissism.
I bet you play the sims with your eyes closed, too.
The fly in your ointment here is that like it or not our legal system is fair, especially in criminal cases. The bias in our country favors the accused and we let more guilty people walk than convict the innocent. But in this case, there is no real question. He broke the law, everybody knows it.
So this "he won't get a fair trial" is just garbage. Of course he will get a fair trial, especially given the public attention this case would get. Where I think the verdict would be a foregone conclusion that doesn't mean the trial wouldn't be fair, although folks like you would wrongly claim it was.
So I'm saying Snowden needs to come home and face the music for his actions, if for no other reason than it would advance "the cause" he claims was his motivation. He knew when he did this that his actions where criminal and could lead to punishment up to death, yet he decided to take the risk for what he thought was right. Well, has he changed his mind now or is he just a coward?
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
The article says that "He reportedly spent a month in the airport before receiving the temporary asylum..." Where did he sleep? Take a shower? How did he have money to eat expensive airport food? How did he call home to talk to his friends and family in the United States? I don't think Russia would be accommodating to me; they would put me on the next plane back to the U.S. Just asking.
Someone mod parent up.
Time to offend someone
The fly in your ointment here is that like it or not our legal system is fair, especially in criminal cases.
Oh, really? And that's just one example.
Then there's also the fact that our laws themselves are not necessarily just. Most people don't know about jury nullification, which is what might be needed to stop Snowden from being convicted, assuming that he'd get a fair trial at all.
He broke the law, everybody knows it.
You just said that everyone is innocent unless proven guilty. What the hell is wrong with you?
So this "he won't get a fair trial" is just garbage.
Only if you ignore history.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
Snowden knew before he did it what penalty was possible.
Now you want to claim "No fair!" if he is convicted? Sorry, no sale. Clearly he broke the law, he did it knowingly. Now you can judge his motives or the morality of what he did differently than I do, but if his cause really is just and his actions really are moral the problem is that the law is wrong. Real rebels are willing to accept the consequences to bring to light their cause and argue for the law to be changed. People who run away and start complaining about how it isn't fair are not really rebels, but hooligans and criminals.
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
So you define a fair trial how? He gets found not guilty? I don't think so.
A fair trial would result in his conviction. Snowden knew what he was doing and what the punishments could be for it. Yet, you want to start by claiming he wouldn't have a fair trial because you don't think the outcome is fair? I think you are the one trying to pervert the legal system....
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
Of course Snowden behaved immorally by revealing state secrets regarding our foreign spying, and you're a naive fool jellomizer, not the reality-based people you criticize.
It's funny how you government hating nutjobs call people who aren't hopeless square pegs like you government worshippers for being part of western civilization.
You're part of it, you paranoid fool. People who are smart enough to recognize Snowden for the criminal he is don't become bad people or part of a government agancy just because delusional derps like you hate the government.
Of course Snowden behaved immorally by revealing state secrets regarding our foreign spying
No, he didn't. Foreigners have rights too, and spying on them haphazardly is wrong.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
It's funny how you government hating nutjobs
Did you know that our entire system of government is based around the idea that the government shouldn't have too much power, and that everyone should be cautious of the government? Do you know that that's what it takes in order to truly be 'the land of the free and the home of the brave'?
call people who aren't hopeless square pegs like you government worshippers for being part of western civilization.
I'm calling them government worshipers for defending egregious violations of people's fundamental liberties and the US constitution, and for mindlessly appealing to laws in search of morality.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
He was not free to travel, due to his legal status and the fact that his passport had been revoked. But that has changed with this update in his legal status. He is free to travel abroad now - though considering the affair with the downing of the Bolivian president's plane, it's unlikely he'll risk it.
Oh, I'm pretty sure everyone fleeing from North Korea knows exactly what the penalty is for his "crime", too.
I think you're working from the (presumably incorrect) assumption that he WANTS to get back to the US in the first place.
Besides, "real rebels" want change. Usually for "their" country. And that is something he can by some margin accomplish better by being free and medially available than imprisoned and gagged.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
He wouldn't have those freedoms from a US prison either. The point you're trying to make here is ludicrous.
If you were more intelligent, you would realize you are saying it right now. Reading (or writing) comprehension must not be your strong suit.
technically what Snowden did "broke the law"
Thus why we need a trial. Quite simple really, even you should understand that.
He has more courage and character in his nail clippings than you have in your whole body
Big words from a small man that has NO clue what courage actually is, or anything about me.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
This is obviously a first post from an NSA working group. Notice the low-level dig against us for discussing Snowden, and on top of that this is a blatant attempt to steer the conversation away from the main points.
Remember, there is a rather active disinformation campaign in place right now. And this is an example of it.
Does an ad hominem trump a post hoc ergo propter hoc?
See the US legal system, especially in criminal law is not at all fair.
Or how do you explain that a nation with 5% of the world's population holds 25% of the world's prisoners, are you guys 500% more criminal?
Another example, your legal system makes the plea bargain possible, you get a sentence without proper judicial oversight, it stinks to high heaven.
Or the fact you can actually rent a cop...Legalised corruption.
Or the violence and rape in your prison system, in a civilised country the prison management would have to stand trial, in the US it's just accepted; once in the pound you'll be Bubba's bride.
Or the number of prisoners in solitary confinement, totally against all scientific wisdom and international treaties.
Get over it, Snowden might have violated parts of your written law but he sure as hell also did the US population and humanity as a whole a service.
"The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."
Al Qa'ida's greatest achievement was the indiscriminate slaughter of almost 3000 civilians in pursuit of their delusional but still very real goal of establishing a califat once more. Give me an example of someone getting killed because of the indiscriminate collection of meta data and I'll start listening to your crazy rants again. Faced with an ever more sophisticated technological world any democracy would do good to have a system in place that can monitor a fascistic undercurrent of backwardness that uses said technology to further their own ends. The only good thing that can be said of snowden at this point is that he introduced a great degree of transparency. His is still a case of treason and not mere whistle blowing by any understanding of law. I'm absolutely positively for the collection of metadata. Access should be tightly regulated though. And this should happen with a far higher degree of public accountability. All you funny Munsters that still rant and rave from the comfort of your smart getlike can and should stick it to Google and Facebook. These guys do whatever they want with your data and instead of getting their arses handed to them eventually get hailed as great Americans like gates and jobs. Despicable.
Somebody is mis-remembering the controversy.
1) Snowden releases a controlled release, which starts the manhunt to collect him for prosecution.
2) NSA, CIA, and pals all BLATANTLY LIE to congress. Congress eats it up like fudge.
3) Snowden releases MORE information, catching NSA, CIA, and pals in their blatant lie.
4) NSA, CIA, and pals whine about how unamerican snowden is, and how cowardly he is to have fled the country where they cant capture him and interrogate/punish him in secret. Lie some more to congress. Congress eats it up like fudge.
5) Snowden releases MORE information...
Rinse, repeat.
This has happened about 4 times now, with the NSA and CIA heads being caught lying EACH AND EVERY TIME.
Without snowden releasing the information he has released, there would have been no proof that the NSA and CIA had been lying to congress in a blatant fashion.
He didnt just release it all at once, bradley/chelsey manning style. He released it as it was NECESSARY to have it released, to prevent the NSA and CIA from continuing to operate as they had been previously.
Your argument is absurd.
From that perspective, any as yet unreleased documents they can get are a bonus and not an end result.
<sarcasm> Yup, I'm positively sure that a single lone rogue simple consultant has unreleased document to bring that are completely unknown to the mighty FSB (a.k.a KGB ( a.k.a tcheka)) and their own information channels~ </sarcasm>
Russia/USSR has been for much more longer time at this spy game and are likely to be damn good at it.
- Snowden is probably of no information-gathering interest to Russia (beyond the fact that he managed to publicly reveal what lot of them already knew but couldn't publicly reveal without bringing suspicion on their own communication channels, and that lots more on the crypto scene suspected but couldn't confirm)
- On the other hand, Snowden has a very good political interest for Russia as a very nice pawn. As you mention, he's a thorn that they can use to frustrate the US. And they can also leverage to look good to the international scene ("Hey look at us! We protect whistle blowers instead of throwing them in solitary at gitmo !")
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
If Russian wants to get more information out of Snowden wouldn't they just, like, read the newspapers?
Or even better, just ask their own secret service which has been longer at this game and have way much more resource than a simple contractor operating alone.
FSB probably knows a lots more than Snowden would even dream being able to intercept. And probably knows it long time ago, some dating back when FSB still went by the name KGB...
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
The Bill of Rights makes clear distinction between a US citizen and "persons". The fact that terrorists all happen to be people (in theory at least) means that the restrictions that are imposed upon the federal government and the NSA by the Constitution in what it can and can't do in it's mandate concerning all people, not just citizens, means that just because they are evil bastards deserving of nothing but contempt and they themselves would like nothing more that to NOT be grouped in with their enemies...just as most of the rest of the "people" they victimize would like as well...it remains that the NSA's unlawful transgressions were committed upon the whole of humanity which is supposed to be shielded from the actions they secretly and illegally violated. The point I'm making being that just because the group they fucked over in violation of their ban happened to ALSO include terrorists should be a distant second afterthought of the revelation, in a perverse inversion of lawful and altruistic intentions of the document's letter and spirit (indeed more like our enemies' rationalization of their own actions) that they made no distinction between their charges and quarry. It really would have been difficult to reveal their vile actions when all persons they fucked over, bad guys or good, all require the use of common methods of communication whether they are evil murdering fucks or paragons of virtue who rescue kittens from trees. Or whatever and shit...
Al Qa'ida's greatest achievement was the indiscriminate slaughter of almost 3000 civilians in pursuit of their delusional but still very real goal of establishing a califat once more. Give me an example of someone getting killed because of the indiscriminate collection of meta data and I'll start listening to your crazy rants again.
If the goal was to prevent Al Qaida from killing another 3k people via airplane hijacking, the US government didn't need to do anything at all. Today if terrorists take over a plane, the passengers aren't just going to sit back and wait until they crash and die. Sure, they can blow up a plane, but they still can do that, or just blow up a bus instead.
However, if they wanted to do something prudent, then taking steps to harden cockpit doors would go a long way towards improving things.
The post-9/11 measures did nothing to prevent the Boston Marathon bombing. Indeed, the guy responsible wasn't even caught until after the curfew was lifted, and he was discovered by a local resident.
I *never* said the government was innocent, as we know it is not.. I only state that Snowden is a traitor and broke the law, and the legal process MUST be followed if you're a nobody peon. Exceptions can regularly be made for politicians and other upper echelon superiors, as proven by the history of Presidential pardons for convicted without-a-doubt political criminals.
FTFY, you are very welcome.
You can't argue logic with a government shill. I would honestly be surprised if the poster you're responding to is even a human. More like a chatbot with it's constant disregard for what anyone is saying.
Nice job missing the point, you fucking idiot. We're clearly talking about *fundamental*, *constitutional* liberties being violated in the name of security. Please, tell me, how is food regulation or any of the other things in any way, shape, or form similar to unconstitutional mass surveillance of nearly everyone's communications?
Your intentional disregard of context just to defend the scumbags in our government is certainly nothing new, but it's as dumb as ever.
I can't believe I have to point this out again. If you have mod points, you decide what to mod up. If you don't have mod points, STFU about it. Now the mods will have to burn 3 points to knock your comment down to -1 where it belongs. Thanks for your contribution to the conversation Bob.
How about we start with yours?
You have made it brilliantly clear that you have absolutely no experience in the US Court system. None, whatsoever, except for what you watch on Law and Order possibly.
That's not the point. He is locked in Russia, not just living in Russia. Very different my friend.
Achille Talon
Hop!
He broke the law, everybody knows it.
You just said that everyone is innocent unless proven guilty. What the hell is wrong with you?
I don't figure that either of us will be on the jury, having already formed our opinions. You get removed from the pool by the prosecution, I by the defense. So the system is fair, despite your claims. IMHO I believe your issue is with the law, not the criminal courts, so this whole "He won't get a fair trial" thing is garbage.
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
Very romantic view of the reality. He did not stood against anyone, he picked a lot of information, much more than necessary and leaked that information after escaping. That's not my definition of standing against tyranny. And if tyranny there is, you should have at home a lot of people to protect him against it in a country like the USA.
Achille Talon
Hop!
We'll putin isn't a feminist so there's that. Putincize!
Yes, it is, and I explained why. Without knowing the full extent of the program, it becomes more difficult to defend oneself until it stops, and it also becomes more difficult to stop it from happening again by having the right protections in the right places. Besides that, The People need to know how, exactly, the government is violating the constitution.
You did not explain anything, you are just convinced all this information was necessary even if most of it has not been leaked in public anyway. That is in fact the proof he doesn't need all this information to make his point.
You are confusing surrendering everyone's freedoms to the government with going to Russia because your own government will likely strip you of your freedoms if you do not. There is a difference between someone choosing to go to Russia and the government violating people's freedoms. Try to keep up.
He did not choose to go to Russia, he had no other alternative and was locked in Russia. Now, you already presume he would have been striped from his freedom by the USA government. Do you mean nobody will stand for him in USA? What is that? If it is so obvious he was the good in the story, why do you believe he would not be capable to escape a trial or win it?
You or I have done nothing even close to what Snowden has, and likely never will. He's not the coward here.
Don't mix things. Being foolish doesn't mean you are brave.
Achille Talon
Hop!
There is still a lot of the information that has not been leaked to the public. It wasn't necessary to make his point. Sorry about that, but there is a lot of information which has nothing to do with the violations that was robbed by Snowden.
Achille Talon
Hop!
The point you're trying to make here is ludicrous.
No, the point is that Russia is a fundamentally less free place to live than the US, and getting worse by the day.
And prison only enters into it when, like Snowden, you scam your coworkers out of passwords, and then do something like deliberately steal all sorts of sensitive data and take it right to Russia by way of China.
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
You get removed from the pool by the prosecution
Yes, they try to remove people who could correct their nonsense. That's why you must feign ignorance. That is most certainly not fair.
So the system is fair, despite your claims.
Unfair laws mean that our system is unfair. And I linked to a case where it was demonstrably *not* fair. There are many more.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
He would be locked in a prison cell if he were to return to America. I'd say that's less freedom than he has being locked in Russia.
You did not explain anything, you are just convinced all this information was necessary even if most of it has not been leaked in public anyway. That is in fact the proof he doesn't need all this information to make his point.
No, it's proof that you need to slowly release the information to maintain people's attention. It will get released, and that is good.
He did not choose to go to Russia, he had no other alternative and was locked in Russia.
Which is even worse. If he didn't choose it, then it only undermines your point further.
Do you mean nobody will stand for him in USA?
At trial, they'd attempt to eliminate anyone who has a chance of using jury nullification to stop him from being convicted for breaking unjust laws; that's the sort of thing that usually happens. What would be left (assuming anyone intelligent was there to begin with) are ignorant jurors.
If it is so obvious he was the good in the story, why do you believe he would not be capable to escape a trial or win it?
You think that morality is dependent upon escaping a trial or winning one? That's awfully retarded.
Don't mix things. Being foolish doesn't mean you are brave.
He was neither foolish, nor cowardly. You are both.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
Oh there are SOOOO many ways your comparing Snowden to a defector from North Korea breaks down and you cheapen the plight of the people who have managed it by comparing Snowden to them.
Snowden is no political refugee, he is not being unfairly accused and he was not justified taking the law into his own hand. He's obviously NOT willing to pay the price, but he is willing to be used by a government which is worlds worse in the very area he protests is unfair here in the US. That alone tells me that this is not about being morally right with Snowden. If it was, he'd be turning himself in to the US so as not to lend material support to a government which is much worse about doing warrant-less surveillance of it's population and decrying their practice too. He's a hypocrite of the highest order and/or self deceived.
You want to compare him to a real case of fleeing a country like North Korea? That's disgusting.
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
Seriously. One of the bigger demotivators my shoplifting peers had back in high school wasn't the misdemeanor (as a juvenile); it was getting the shit kicked out of them by the mall cops. Ah, the 80s.
If you were me, you'd be good lookin'. - six string samurai
He's chosen to go to Russia to keep from being jailed by the US. He has a LOT more freedom there.
Not a sentence!
How do you folks sleep at night...
If you intend to lie to get on a jury, I remind you that is illegal, immoral and wrong. But apparently that doesn't matter to you, only the "cause" you support matters. If anything messes up the court system here it is the willingness to do stuff like that.
So it's not the laws which are wrong in this case, but your willingness to subvert them with a lie to support your cause.
In the USA, if you don't like the law, you have the right to petition and lobby to get it changed. I suggest you exercise your RIGHTS to their fullest extent. If you fail to fix the problem you see using your rights, then you can resort to breaking the laws you have moral objections too, but understand that you must do so fully willing to accept the punishment prescribed by the law. If you haven't exercised your RIGHTS first, or you are unwilling to endure the punishment to make your point, I personally don't have much sympathy for you. Which is why I have no sympathy for Snowden. He didn't exhaust his rights, nor was he willing to face trial and accept the punishment.
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
Yes, I agree on that one: You should have a lot of people to protect him against it. But I guess for that to happen, we'll first have to lose a lot more than our freedom.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
What's a political refugee? Someone who broke the law of his own country and now has to seek shelter in some other country where what he did is not a crime.
The main difference between them is that you agree with one law while you reject the other one. But that's already the only difference there is. From a purely juridical point of view, of course.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
If you intend to lie to get on a jury, I remind you that is illegal, immoral and wrong.
Lying to avoid being eliminated from the jury because you're more informed about jury nullification is quite alright. When you make it impossible for anyone with a single brain cell to be on a jury, expect people to take measures to defend their country by using one of the tools available to them (jury nullification). Knowing about jury nullification can be all it takes for them to not let you be on the jury. To suggest that I'm somehow immoral for wanting to exercise one of the final checks on our government available to us simply because the government is making it difficult to do so is completely retarded.
But apparently that doesn't matter to you, only the "cause" you support matters.
Your definition of "immoral" and "wrong" are what is wrong. Yes, the constitution of the US and fundamental liberties are what matters.
So it's not the laws which are wrong in this case, but your willingness to subvert them with a lie to support your cause.
The laws are wrong, and so are government bootlickers like you.
In the USA, if you don't like the law, you have the right to petition and lobby to get it changed.
Jury nullification is another tactic.
He didn't exhaust his rights, nor was he willing to face trial and accept the punishment.
Not everyone is a masochist, a martyr, or a charismatic leader like MLK. Fuck you for this stupid way of thinking that everyone must do everything one way or not at all. We have the information, and now we must stop the government thugs from violating our fundamental liberties. The end. The whines and cries of you government bootlickers to defend the government's evil while pretending that you're not are quite hilarious.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
We do not hate the government as a whole. In fact, we like the government very much as it provides funds for our roads, bridges, and helps to make scientific progress possible in our society (current elected members notwithstanding). What we do hate, my dear AC, are the blatant violations of the constitution that the NSA, FBI, DOJ, etc.have perpetrated behind the veil of "National Security". I would be more than willing to discuss this matter further on a later occasion if you are up for it.
Freedom is simply more important than safety. You seem to only care about physical safety. If that is so, why do you live in a country that's supposed to be 'the land of the free and the home of the brave'? Why do you live in a country that has a constitution that only gives the government the powers that the constitution says it has, a measure that came about because people with power simply cannot be trusted? Why do you speak as if the government is full of perfect angels who could never make mistakes or do any wrong, and have absolute faith that all people who will ever be in the government will be the case, all the while ignoring the hundreds of millions of people throughout history murdered and/or abused by corrupt governments? Why do you not care about the highest law of the land in the US?
You don't want to live in a free country; I understand that. But turning the US into a police state will take a long time, and is a slow, gradual process. Wouldn't it be quicker for you to move to North Korea?
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
If you intend to lie to get on a jury, I remind you that is illegal, immoral and wrong.
Lying to avoid being eliminated from the jury because you're more informed about jury nullification is quite alright. (snip)
You have demonstrated that you are willing to lie and subvert the system though deceit, so I can no longer trust what you say as you are not an honest actor.
We are done here... Or at least I'm done here with you as long as you maintain the above position....
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
Snowden is still a spy for the US, he's just were he should be! Information revealed by him was the sacrifice they have to do to put him just were he is right now. Russians just eat the show yankees did.
You know, it surprises the rest of the world that there are so many Americans, supposedly educated and first world who are against Snowden. Here in India anyone who exposes anything of the Govt is immediately a folk hero and a hit with the public. Even despite losing elections in most seats, the new Indian AAP leader Kejriwal is associated in daily speech with activism, corruption and taking a courageous stand - its common to say to anyone who stands up for principles - "Has a ghost of Kejriwal entered you?" or "Have you been under the influence of Kejriwal?"
We almost worship Wikileaks - and we would Snowden also, if not for his polished English and US being his target. If he had leaked corruption by Indian Govt officials, he would ne an Indian folk hero like Assange.
I wonder how there are so many "patriotic Americans" who hate Snowden. Cognitive dissonance or what it is that you call it ...?
Nice, I have an opinion which differs from yours, so that must make me a "government worshipper".
And that is why its so fucking difficult to have a proper, sane discussion on most topics here on Slashdot.
Tell me which part of the "spirit of the law" or the US Constitution covers conducting espionage against foreign countries and peoples?
Or did you miss the fact that Snowden also exposed a lot of activities which the NSA most certainly should be doing, and was indeed created to do?
So, he flees from the USA to Russia in protest of NSA surveillance? What does Russia do to it's citizens? Tell me how that makes sense? Also tell me how that doesn't cheapen the plight of the North Korean refugee who faces certain death just for leaving without permission and knowing that any family he leaves behind will be dealt with harshly just because they are related? Sorry but I find comparing Snowden's situation to that disgusting.
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
...and getting worse by the day.
And you know this how, exactly? Strong opinions require strong evidence, I read somewhere.
Exactly zero, which is the technicality you are trying to argue makes it okay for us to spy on everyone. You can try as many of those as you want to, and my answer will be the same. The spirit of the Constitution is to limit Government powers. Why not go read how many amendments actually refer to "citizens" as opposed to people. After that, go re-read those that do not mention citizens and realize that those amendments cover _ALL_ people including non-citizens.
It's really not a difficult thing to do.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
...like it or not our legal system is fair
So Guantanamo is fair now?
Nice, I have an opinion which differs from yours, so that must make me a "government worshipper".
When you're defending the NSA, it certainly does.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
You have demonstrated that you are willing to lie and subvert the system though deceit, so I can no longer trust what you say as you are not an honest actor.
Trust what I say? How stupid are you? My arguments stand or fall on their own merit, and they're right there for you to debunk. Literally, there's nothing for me to lie about. This is just a lazy excuse to avoid putting forth an actual argument. Nice job being so transparent.
Also, by your logic, everyone in the world is actually a liar, since no one (including you) has never lied. I suppose that means that Hitler was a good person because he probably did at least one good thing. And doing one bad things makes you a bad person. What idiotic 'logic.'
Furthermore, your posts indicate that you expect people to do nothing while they get fucked in the ass by a government that tries to prevent you from using one of the final checks against government abuses: jury nullification. Yeah, good idea, bootlicker. I'd expect nothing less from a censorship-loving moron.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
The issue is still the same. A man does something his country considers a crime and has to leave his country to avoid prosecution, which is possible due to another country not considering the act a crime. That the possible repercussions if said country gets a hold on him are different by some magnitude doesn't change anything about the underlying situation. Just because I don't get killed in my country for killing someone else doesn't mean that the idea of facing 25 to life in prison is more appealing or something that I'd consider a viable alternative.
What remains is that you agree with one "crime" and disagree with the other one. Objectively, there is not as much difference between them as you are trying to make out now.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
A small point, the Patriot Act that authorized all this was passed in 2001. I don't think Obama had much to do with it as he wasn't in Congress back then.
So why are you not calling for George Bush's head? If he had not signed the bill into law none of the stuff you are complaining about would have happened.
I understand your point that Obama should be impeached for not shutting it down. I'm curious what you would say if there was a Republican president - since they implemented it in the first place they would not be likely to shut it down either.
Spying on US citizens, or people in the US, is one thing legally. Spying on non-US citizens in other countries is another. I'd be much happier with him if he'd limited himself to exposing the former.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
Oh trust me, if he had betrayed the intelligence gathering systems of Russia to the USA, he'd be in a whole lot more trouble than he is now. They consider such an act a crime too, only there would be NO trial and they would have likely had him killed just as soon as possible. So no, had the situation been reversed, he'd be dead and nobody would have been talking about him in the media, and even Obama wouldn't have been talking to him on the evening news, even if he wasn't pushing up flowers some place.
Right now, Russia (i.e. Putin) only tolerates Snowden in so far as he proves useful. Once he becomes a liability, you can bet they will cut him loose without delay. How do I know? Because they haven't given him citizenship yet. They are reserving the right to kick him out, so they keep letting him stay for a limited time. If he really was what some claim, they'd be falling all over themselves to issue him citizenship, but as it is they are biding their time and using him as a PR tool when possible. Eventually (I'm thinking sometime after the next presidential election in the USA) he will loose his value and involuntarily find his sorry self on an airplane in handcuffs back to the states, barring that, he's stuck in Russia for the duration or until he turns himself into the US embassy and finds himself in handcuffs on a plane back to the states. My bet is the former, sometime in 2017.
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
Russian and Chinese spies would be incompetent if they didn't already know everything Snowden leaked, judging by how easy it was for him to do so. Same with the Bradley Manning leaks, with tens of thousands of people have that level of security access.
Of course they have used some leverage. It's Russia. There's a reason the world doesn't trust them.
Chewbacon
The Bible is like Wikipedia: written by a bunch of people and verifiable by questionable sources.
Spying on non-US citizens in other countries is another.
Legal != moral. It is immoral to spy on innocent people. The NSA's spying should be targeted at actual enemies and there should be standards just like there are with citizens (Well, like there are supposed to be...).
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
All you funny Munsters that still rant and rave from the comfort of your smart getlike can and should stick it to Google and Facebook. These guys do whatever they want with your data and instead of getting their arses handed to them eventually get hailed as great Americans like gates and jobs. Despicable.
Except, ya know, you don't have to use Facebook or Google. Try opting out of government surveillance.
.. there are so many Americans, supposedly educated and first world ...
The educated don't hang out here.
If the goal was to prevent Al Qaida from killing another 3k people via airplane hijacking, the US government didn't need to do anything at all. Today if terrorists take over a plane, the passengers aren't just going to sit back and wait until they crash and die.
What if the terrorists are dressed as air marshalls or TSA? Being conditioned to obey a different group may create a parallel vulnerability.
...for Snowden then. An apple a day keeps Putin away.
You should not mix drinking and using Internet. Who are you trying to deceive? The proper question is whether he is going to Guantanamo with or without a puppet military trial. Amerika has not been a fair country for too long a time.
All I can say is Wow, you are jaded... If you live here, you need to move. Perhaps you'd have better luck than Snowden getting into Russia?
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
"locked in Russia"....no he has an IT job and private security where he lives. Exactly how is average american's life (who do not leave USA) better than his?
But turning the US into a police state will take a long time, and is a slow, gradual process.
Think you got your verb tenses mixed up, there.
And you know this how, exactly? Strong opinions require strong evidence, I read somewhere.
I know this because I actually read. The Russian government does you the favor of making their clamp-downs on freedom of communication very clear. Of course you know this, which is why you're trolling anonymously and pretending you don't. Here, just from today's /. ...
http://politics.slashdot.org/s...
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
"Never do anything against conscience even if the state demands it." --Einstein
Casteism