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?"
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.
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
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);
The traitors are those in power who have operated using unlawful actions. Nothing is more dangerous than a government operating outside of law. Get your priorities straight.
quiquid id est, timeo puellas et oscula dantes.
Snowden broke the law, and must be held accountable for his actions.
Just like Schindler should have been held accountable for illegally saving the lives of all those Jewish factory workers?
The Nazis should have thoroughly put an end to the idea that the law is right and people should always be law abiding. Seriously, I know Goodwin's law is about this cliche, but the thing is the Nazis provided all the best counter arguments to your line of reasoning, because they showed empirically what happens when you follow your reasoning to the letter.
For some reason however when people like you year "Nazi", instead of thinking "oh hey actually my reasoning has some really unfortunate potential consequences", they instead thing "omg you compared me to the nazis get a real argument I'm not listening".
What Snowdon did was absoloutely morally the correct thing to do. He did it for his country and the greater good of its citizens. The only account he should be held to is the one where he gets the medal of congress for putting his life on the line for blowing open large scale illegal activities in the government.
How hard is that to understand?
SJW n. One who posts facts.
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.
Cut the crap. Would you come back if you know all was waiting for you was a puppet trial and living the rest of your in prison?
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).
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.