Snowden Says He Took No Secret Files To Russia 220
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."
Only moose and squirrel have them (Score:5, Funny)
Once again our heroic leakers foil the bumbling Russkies!
Re:Only moose and squirrel have them (Score:5, Insightful)
If only there were proof that they did have the documents. Better to spread FUD no matter the case, right?
"Land of the free, home of the brave". Biggest joke of all time. Osama may be dead but he won the war with such success far beyond his wildest dreams.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Oh we know they have at least some of the documents, they can read US and UK TOP SECRET documents in the newspapers just like anybody else
Which is not what you were talking about. Lame equivocation is lame. You said:
At this point the British believe that the Chinese, the Russians, or both, have copies of all the documents that Snowden took.
From your lame backpedaling answer it can only be assumed you have no evidence of your previous claim.
Re:Only moose and squirrel have them (Score:5, Insightful)
Bin Laden's stated goal was not to turn the west to Islam. Why would he want a bunch of white devils screwing up his precious Islam. He hated us remember?
His goal was to destroy Wall St and the US/Saudi economy (He was mad at his rich family and their rich US friends - Like the Bush's and Clintons!). Hence crashing planes into our primary economic hub. Remember that part? Makes much more sense as a tactic for financial ruin opposed to a recruiting strategy wouldn't you say? [forbes.com]
This is why I always laugh at the phrase "Never Forget." Everyone keeps forgetting!
Re:Only moose and squirrel have them (Score:5, Funny)
This is why I always laugh at the phrase "Never Forget." Everyone keeps forgetting!
I hear they even have insiders with the same agenda in the US congress.
Re: (Score:3)
His goal, according to verifiable first-person statements, was the SPECIFIC REMOVAL of US Military air bases from Saudi Arabia. This goal was achieved, and an almost immediate concession, after 9/11/01.
There were other, minor and vague references to Palestinian cause for justice, really related to the Al Aqsa, that did not define specific outcomes.
Any other objective or motivation has been either inserted or "interpreted" by mediating commentator of differing source and agenda.
Re: (Score:2)
"Come to Islam" is rhetorical. It's boilerplate AQ copy that doesn't mean anything. It's PR for his own recruiting strategy. That letter is as much to potential recruits as it is to the American people. I believe he refers to us as "Friends of Satan" a few lines down from there.
Crashing planes into world financial centers is direct cause and effect for a stated military/economic goal. Which of the two goals do you think BL thought he could actually pull off?
Re: (Score:2)
Absolute truth.
Re: (Score:3)
Russia would have wanted him to stay on as they tried to do with their long term gov assets in the GCHQ or NSA. Get the real gov job and move up to planning and policy, the gems of the NSA, well beyond basic contracting admin work. That would take years of effort and more education, clearances. Russia could have seen great results in 10-20 years
Re:Only moose and squirrel have them (Score:5, Interesting)
Do you recall that Mr. Greenwald's lover was carrying electronic copies of many documents with him, as well as a scribbled note with the password?
Yes, I also seem to recall the UK government "probed" Mr Greenwald's lover for 8-9 hour before letting him thru the border. Pretty sure they wouldn't have done that if they had found a "spy". What Snowden did was most certainly illegal. I'm not so sure it was "wrong", but I'm sure as hell that baying for his crucifixion based on what been reported so far is immoral. .
Having said that I think there' more than political "coincidence" to the timing. Just prior to it hitting the news Obama was loudly beating his chest telling the world he was "not going to put up with cyber spying from China". The meeting was supposed to be a big deal, Obama was going to get tough with "cyber-spies", the meeting was blown off the front pages by the Snowden story. Talk about "egg meets face", the US tried to claim the moral high ground by loudly proclaiming it was China who was spying on everyone, it's my contention the Chinese responded by pulling Uncle Sam's pants down in front of the whole world (politically speaking).
When you look at the political powerhouses on the planet, Russia, US, EU and China, it's China (a federation of ancient empires) that shows the most unity at the top and given it's miraculous economic rise from famines to fortunes over the last 40yrs they have very strong support amongst the people. "Good", "evil", "apathetic", doesn't matter what kind of empire/republic it is, unity will win the day when push turns to shove..
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
West is heading towards a demographic death spiral
Immigration? It's what we do in the US to keep our population up.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
There is a difference. The US birth rate is much closer to the replacement rate of 2.1. Some parts of Europe are at or below 1.3, which halves a population in about 45 years. For the US the primary source of immigrants is Catholic Mexico. Although Mexicans have their own distinct culture, they are not fundamentally hostile to the US and its culture. Europe is brining in many immigrants that are fundamentally hostile to its culture and reject it, if not in the generation that immigrates, the one after i
Re: (Score:3)
EU is 1.6, US is 1.8. Sure, Europe is lower but they are in the same general class. Remember that the US has a much larger immigrant population and immigrants have a higher fertility rate. Something like 40 million of the US population is foreign born - that's well over 13%. In contrast, the foreign born population of the EU sits at 4%. Increase that to 13% and watch the birth rate rise.
I can't comment on your theory about revolution in Europe. Historically it has been a pretty unstable place even without l
Re: (Score:2)
You need to look at the rates for individual countries. Some are higher, some are lower. I believe the US rate has dropped recently, probably due to the economic problems, but it has tended to be closer to 2.
People move to the US and UK for many reasons, including purely economic, or to escape a local war. Life on the dole in the UK beats a firing squad for extremist activity back in the old country.
The trend is simple. 1.3 birth rate for the native population, higher rates for immigrants, more immigrat
Re: (Score:3)
Well, I purposely used the US number from before the recent low, but this is all ballpark anyway. I'm not sure what specific country you are worried about, so I can only speculate. Germany is only at 1.4% and it has a "foreign" population of around 8% - but those seem to include other EU citizens... presumably you are not concerned about those. 4% identify as Islamic. Now granted, that is higher than the US's 1%, but I still don't see evidence to support your fears. How is a 4% minority a threat to the Germ
Re: (Score:2)
"[...] a scribbled note with the password" was what the intelligence agencies reported. Greenwald denied it (on Newsnight the other day).
Re: (Score:2)
So Mr Astroturf, if Mr Greenwald's lover was carrying a scribbled password with the encrypted documents.. why exactly are they not able to decrypt the contents of the thumbdrive, and say exactly what documents he was carrying?
Hint, they were lying, and you're either accepting it all at face value, or trying to promote their agenda..
Re: (Score:3)
Taking your argument at face value, do a "s/white folk/white culture/g" on my previous post.
Seems to me that if everybody who cares about something is dead, it doesn't much matter what happens to it. People have a tendency to preserve that which is important to them, whether that's the traditions of their ancestors or a prototype Commodore64 with all-original hardware.
Also, first-wave immigrants have always "rejected" their new country's culture, causing fears about being "taken over". It is my understandin
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The Russian and Chinese intelligence agencies are far to disciplined to do victory laps. The idea is nonsense.
NSA's sensitive systems are air gapped. That is why you need an insider, like Snowden.
Re: (Score:3)
Prove that they *don't* have something? Yeah.. that'll work.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
To you, maybe. Not to the intelligence agencies. I have no access.
Re: (Score:2)
So there's no proof but yet you keep spreading the claim as if it were true. Almost as if your whole point was the spread FUD instead of truth.
Re:Only moose and squirrel have them (Score:5, Insightful)
Quite the contrary. The Russians and Chinese have access to US & UK top secret documents the same as anyone else that goes to various web sites.
One thing you are discounting is the chain of lies and around Snowden's activities. One very interesting example of which is the birthday party at the Russian embassy in Hong Kong when the Russians later claimed that they had no idea he was coming to Moscow.
The fact that there are no angels in Hell doesn't change the other fact that there is absolutely zero evidence that Snowden directly handed files over to anyone other than Glen Greenwald. "Oh, they can read it in the paper like everyone else!" Big fucking deal - we're not talking about that, we're talking about the claims that he directly and intentionally gave top secret documents to the Chinese and Russian governments; a claim Snowden has denied, and to date not a single fucking soul has managed to prove.
I know this is a bit lofty of an ideal for statists like yourself to understand, but there's this concept called "presumption of innocence" that requires there to be actual evidence of what you claim before you're allowed to nail someone's ass to a tree.
Crazy idea, I know.
Re: (Score:2)
Like Schrödinger's cat, we are all both guilty and innocent at the same time within the box of secret anti-terror laws passed by the government. Unless you can read the law (which most citizens can't), you cannot determine for certain whether you are complying with these laws or not. I suggest we all turn ourselves into the nearest federal law enforcement agency and ask them to prove we are innocent. Otherwise, we must be guilty and should be locked up, right?
Re: (Score:3)
Like Schrödinger's cat, we are all both guilty and innocent at the same time within the box of secret anti-terror laws passed by the government.
That made me laugh... one of those sad laughs. You know, where you start chuckling because it's kinda funny, but end up nearly crying because it's also kinda true?
Re: (Score:2)
You think you're good at deflection, but you're actually terrible at it.
The presumption of innocence applies to a trial, not public discussions
Which is probably why I said
requires there to be actual evidence of what you claim before you're allowed to nail someone's ass to a tree.
Natch.
But Snowden isn't innocent anyway - he has admitted to taking the documents and fleeing with them.
Hey, weren't those goalposts over here a minute ago? As I recall, we are discussing the accusation that he turned documents over to the Chinese and/or Russian governments, not whether he took them in the first place.
Please try and keep up.
Maybe he is telling the truth, maybe not. If he is, it would be the first time in a long time after lying about so many things to get access to the documents, and then having so many lies about his flight to Russia. And the FSB has apparently been involved with him since at least Hong Kong, if not before. At least one former Soviet bloc intelligence general believe that Snowden is a Russian agent.
... and my point is, without actual evidence proving any of these claims, then he should be assumed to be innocent.
Really, it's not like this is some new and novel con
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, he has admitted to his selfless heroic act for the benefit of the people of the Unites States and the rest of the world.
Re: (Score:2)
The presumption of innocence applies to a trial, not public discussions.
What? No it does not! The presumption of innocence is a statement regarding Justice. Justice is not part of the courts or a trial, it's a responsibility for every member of society all of the time. To believe that you should publicly discuss a person by assuming guilt then have the court system have to do the opposite should cause you so much cognitive dissonance your head should explode.
Seriously, stop and think about what you just said really really hard. What you are stating is that you can firmly b
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Um...both the George Bushes are still alive.
Re:Only moose and squirrel have them (Score:4, Insightful)
If only there was proof. At this point the British believe that the Chinese, the Russians, or both, have copies of all the documents that Snowden took.
Hmmm
Who believes that? The security services or the Politicians? I cannot help but remember that prior to the Iraq war the UK's security services produced reports on WMD in Iraq that were full of cautions about the evidence, these cautions were subsequently removed as the report was doctored, or "firmed up" as it was referred to, when the Politicians and their advisor's got involved when trying to make a case for war,
Re: (Score:2)
Saddam considered the Iranians to be a strategic threat to Iraq and discounted the possibility that the West & UN would act against him in a forceful manner. As a result Saddam had his government continue to act as if they still had WMDs to fool the Iranians after they had secretly disposed of their VX nerve gas after previous fooling the inspectors. (It sounds stupid, but that was Saddam.) Saddam's strategic deception was such a success that he was invaded for it.
If it makes you feel any better, ther
Re: (Score:3)
Saddam considered the Iranians to be a strategic threat to Iraq and discounted the possibility that the West & UN would act against him in a forceful manner. As a result Saddam had his government continue to act as if they still had WMDs to fool the Iranians after they had secretly disposed of their VX nerve gas after previous fooling the inspectors. (It sounds stupid, but that was Saddam.) Saddam's strategic deception was such a success that he was invaded for it.
That was not the reason for the invasion, it was a political decision, that was merely the excuse for the decision. That is all beside the point, I was referring to the report that the UK Government revealed to the Members of Parliament and the UK people to justify the war, all the cautions that the security services had about the evidence were removed. Alistair Cambell, Tony Blair's spin doctor was heavily involved in that process, despite having no knowledge of either the security services or WMD.
If it makes you feel any better, there were unfilled chemical warheads found for Iraq's long range missiles. With a native chemical industry that had previous experience making chemical agents they could have been filled in the future. The disarmament agencies also recovered a number of anthrax bombs. I'm sure there is more. And the other causes of action were still true, such as the massacres of the Kurds - a crime against humanity, and Iraq's support for terrorism.
Yes, t
Re: (Score:2)
Considering that Snowden shared those files with journalists on both sides of the pond, I see no reason to doubt that belief - Nor do I consider it particularly meaningful.
The British might as well believe that the Chinese and Russians have copies of NyanCat, for all it matters.
Re: (Score:2)
If only there was proof
You want evidence of absence?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You know what the British DON'T believe in? Toothpaste!
Thank you folks, I'll be here all week. Don't forget to try out our delicious Potato Bar.
I did believe in it, but then the TSA confiscated it.
Re:Only moose and squirrel have them (Score:5, Informative)
Great, Bullwinkle. Watch me pull a rabbit out of MY hat.
RELEVANT EXTRACT:
[Snowden] felt confident that he had kept the documents secure from
Chinese spies, and that the N.S.A. knew he had done so. His last
target while working as an agency contractor was China...
adding that he had had "access to every target, every active
operation mounted by the N.S.A. against the Chinese. Full lists of
them," he said.
"If that was compromised," he went on, "N.S.A. would have set the
table on fire from slamming it so many times in denouncing the damage
it had caused. Yet N.S.A. has not offered a single example of damage
from the leaks. They haven't said boo about it except "we think,"
"maybe", "have to assume" from anonymous and former officials. Not
"China is going dark." Not "the Chinese military has shut us out."
Zero Percent Chance? (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re:Zero Percent Chance? (Score:5, Funny)
God forbid anyone send them by email. They might fall into the hands of the NSA!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Reading comprehension fail? Clearly the statement is that Snowden turned the documents directly over to journalists without some intermediary and not to known Russian or Chinese government agents. Obviously, Snoweden wouldn't know if he's handing over documents to Russian agents embedded in the journalistic field
Re:Zero Percent Chance? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
So how much do you get paid being a bootlicking shill of the US government? A traitor to the people masquerading as "patriot". How pathetic this country has become.
Re: (Score:3)
That is assuming that he is even telling the truth now after spending a long time lying so that he could get access to the documents.
So no different to how the NSA uses the same tactic to get their people into companies to act as spies and to insert backdoors into said company's software and systems?
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Being criticized by cold fjord is a compliment. Look at his past posts [slashdot.org] for an understanding of his moral alignment.
cold fjord, you have no standing on anything of moral consequence to the US or to the world. You support every government abuse against human rights that has occurred in the last 12 years. Go away, you are a bad person.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Zero Percent Chance? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Don't worry. James Clapper says that everything is cool.
Re: (Score:2)
There is always far more going on than most people want to believe. The problem is figuring out what exactly is going on. Governments have become experts and indeed surgeons at obfuscation in general, and they cloud up every issue with so much information that the average person only remembers the vague details like how "people who state that the NSA is recording your every internet stop" as being "tinfoil nutters". This was what people stated before Snowden released the proof that the NSA was doing that
Re: (Score:2)
Not shared by him doesn't mean a thing (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
We require you to have American citizenship to get a clearance so we know none of our cleared people are Russian or Chinese!
The system totally works.
Re: (Score:2)
So the NSA employs "a million" sysadmins who steal their colleagues & bosses credentials so that they can gan access to files they normally wouldn't be able to see? So glad nobody on Snowden's side is using hyperbole...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
TheRaven64 says there are a million people with the same clearance level and asks what are the chances that none are Chinese agents. You counter by making them all sysadmins who are all* stealing other people's credentials. And you think he's using hyperbole?
The opposite of none is at least one, not all of them.
* I know you don't use the word "all" but it is clearly implied in what you wrote. Compare the following: "There are a million people who have cancer." and "There are a million people, some of whom
Re: (Score:2)
any of them that doesn't have a completely inept intelligence agency of their own will already have the information he's released.
But that's not the concern. Anyone with an intelligence agency capable of getting the information directly from the NSA would probably also have the resources to have a custom encryption mechanism that the NSA can't read, anyway, and enough steganography to avoid suspicion.
The enemies that the NSA's mechanism is effective against are the poorly-funded individuals and small groups who don't have their own sophisticated intelligence agency, which means they're also not the big and easy-to-find groups. They're
Some accused him of giving the files to Russia (Score:5, Interesting)
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# [thenation.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Russians already had all the data available to thousands of contractors.
that's the problem with the huge security apparatus with central database.
People this is not flamebait (Score:2, Insightful)
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,
From TFA: Snowden says SECRECY, not spying is prob (Score:2)
“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.
Re: (Score:2)
everything snowden had... (Score:2)
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
Traitor or Patriot (Score:2)
Well, if true....this = Patriot
A pattern emerges (Score:2)
"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 l
Re:Trust (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
"Never trust a traitor, not even one you create." -- Baron Vladimir Harkonnen.
Re:Trust (Score:5, Interesting)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
Heard it before. Terrorists are largely little more than bogeymen as far as I'm concerned.
Re: (Score:3)
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 su
Re: (Score:2)
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."
Re: (Score:2)
Then, while not strictly speaking an issue of Constitutional jurisdiction, there is the whole issue of perjury in front of congress.
Re: (Score:2)
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 [wikipedia.org] was rea
Here is just one major item breached.... (Score:2)
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."
Re: (Score:2)
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".
Re:Trust (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re:Trust (Score:5, Interesting)
The Nation (Score:2)
Is the people...
Re:Trust (Score:4, Interesting)
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.
Re:Trust (Score:5, Interesting)
What makes him think that everyone should believe him now?
Because he's been telling the truth and the NSA definitely haven't?
Re:Trust (Score:5, Interesting)
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.
Re: (Score:3)
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?
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Trust (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re:Trust (Score:4, Informative)
He's neither a traitor nor is he a defector.
Indeed. He is a refugee.
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks for verifying the statement "some nerds are idiots", though I already knew it was true.
Re:Trust (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re: (Score:3)
> 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 t
Everything he revealed was a secret.... (Score:2)
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 Co
Re: (Score:3)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'd say... (Score:2)
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.
Re:He'd better have something..... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
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.
Maybe Putin is starting a US expatriates of conscience theme park, like Houari Boumediene did for the Black Panthers and others [roadsandkingdoms.com]?
I wager... (Score:2)
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.