Edward Snowden Granted Permanent Residency In Russia (securityweek.com) 178
Fugitive US whistleblower Edward Snowden has been granted permanent residency in Russia, his lawyer said on Thursday. wiredmikey writes: Snowden, the former US intelligence contractor who revealed in 2013 that the US government was spying on its citizens, has been living in exile in Russia since the revelations. The 37-year-old has said he would like to return to the United States. His lawyer Anatoly Kucherena told AFP on Thursday that his residency permit was extended and is now indefinite, a situation made possible by recent changes to Russia's immigration law. Kucherena said the application was filed in April but the process was delayed by the coronavirus pandemic. Snowden is wanted in the United States on espionage charges after he leaked information showing that agents from the National Security Agency (NSA) were collecting telephone records of millions of US citizens. When asked whether Snowden planned to apply for Russian citizenship, Kucherena said: "He will make the decision himself." Kucherena said it was "natural" that Snowden wanted to return to the United States but will only do so when the case against him is closed.
Free Speech moves overseas (Score:5, Insightful)
It's sad that our greatest gift to democracy, free speech, has been so trampled on to the point where people need to flee the United States in order to speak openly.
Re: (Score:2)
Secrecy is usually a sign of shenanigans going on. Even for protection against foreign powers, it is usually true that classified documents hide illegitimate activity, under the guise of national security.
In chess, if you must rely on stealth to win, you are not a good player. A good chess player can beat you despite your full knowledge of his tactics.
Similarly, in network security, if you must rely on undocumented tactics for security, you aren't secure at all. Real security is gained by using well-establi
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Trump can join him in 4 months.... (Score:2, Interesting)
...since Russia has no extradition and he can then hide from the American legal system, and all of his creditors.
Re:Trump can join him in 4 months.... (Score:4, Funny)
At least until Putin invites him for a cup of tea.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Hillary lost. It's time for you to get over it, my friend.
How is Hillary involved in Trump's well-documented obstruction of justice charges?
Snowden (Score:2)
And I shall say it again:
All Snowden, Manning and Assange have proven is that you don't want to whistleblow if it can EVER be traced back to you, unless you wish to spend the rest of your life in jail, at the beck and call of the Russian authorities, or hiding in an embassy.
They've done whistleblowing a total dis-service. And the uproar over the information they whistleblew? Far more tilted towards the stuff that they SHOULD NOT have leaked (e.g. unrelated classified info, personal details of informants,
Re: (Score:2)
nominative determinism (Score:2)
Nominative determinism [wikipedia.org] is the hypothesis that a person's name predisposes them to certain careers and/or lifestyle choices.
I suggest that Ms Reality Winner [wikipedia.org] is the counter example that disproves the hypothesis.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Ah, yes, someone who is incarcerated in Ft Worth for leaking classified information.
Yes, that's a total counter-example in contrast to the above, obviously... (confused look).
Re: (Score:2)
I understand your sentiment, but you have to make sure that you're not confusing whistleblowing with high treason.
You may not see it as high treason, but you can't just call it "whistleblowing".
Re: Snowden (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
All Snowden, Manning and Assange have proven is that you don't want to whistleblow if it can EVER be traced back to you,
None of them were "traced". Assange operated openly, Snowden collected data secretly, but did not hide his identity after releasing it.
And Manning, with a history of mental illness, was successfully hidden until he confessed to a journalist (Lamo).
Re: (Score:2)
I think we have to understand that every country needs what might be called "secret services". Not everything can be in plain sight. Revealing secrets might cause great harm. For example, police investigators need to engage in covert operations, while investigating criminal gangs, frauds, or whatever. If someone blows the whistle on that kind of thing, bad people could go free. This is not to say that the police can do whatever they like, when investigating serious crimes. There are plenty of laws to preven
Problem solved (Score:2)
The 37-year-old has said he would like to return to the United States.
Russia makes him an Ambassador and he has Diplomatic Immunity.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Hmm, this may not work. I saw an 80' LAPD documentary that revolves around revoking diplomatic immunity on the spot.
Ya, but I think that guy was from South Africa, not Russia.
He'll never be able to return without penalty (Score:2)
I may be pessimistic, but even if the United States were to remove all existing charges against Snowden, the moment he returned, he would have a non-stop blizzard of charges laid against him for everything from jaywalking to breathing wrong. Anything and everything in the book would be thrown at him He would have non-stop surveillance and attempts at entrapment, with the intent to get him into prison as soon as possible.
I'm not saying that the fight to clear his name isn't useless, but what I am saying is t
Not to be a dick but... (Score:2)
The Resident was the Chief Spy in the Russian embassy in 'The Americans'.
Very torn when it comes to ES (Score:2)
I could never have done it. I do consider it a breach of oath. But in most ways I consider him a Hero. The US Government was overreaching it's legal powers. They were violating rights. The government was doing wrong. He was only the latest in a string of people trying to expose and get the government to stop doing what it knew it shouldn't be doing and abide by the rules it's suppose to follow. When your government is breaking it's obligations and doing wrong are you loyal if you sit on your hands? He did b
Re: (Score:2)
I find this all very interesting, with respect to proposed legislation in the UK. It is proposed that undercover agents should be allowed to commit crimes, in the performance of their duties. I guess the need for this could arise when an agent infiltrates a criminal gang. I am opposed to this move. I think a crime is still a crime, even if committed by an officer of the law. I would hope that a court of law might not be too hard on an undercover police officer taking part in a crime, if it were obviously no
A Kremlin propaganda ploy for the election (Score:2)
It has nothing to do with any of the particulars of Snowden's actions, it's all about causing trouble.
Looking at the comments, it seems to have worked perfectly on Slashdot. You are all Putin's "useful idiots." Congratulations.
Re: (Score:3)
So late 2024 then?
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Pardon expected... (Score:5, Interesting)
We heard the same thing in 2016.
After Trump loses to Hilary, the republican party will never be relevant again and will never recover.
I recently rewatched the 2016 election night coverage from CNN. It was amazing watching how smug everyone reporter was commentator was for the first few hours.
Re: (Score:2)
I recently rewatched the 2016 election night coverage from CNN.
That's just sad. But yes, there are a lot of Democrats who refuse to learn the lessons of 2016.
Re:Pardon expected... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: Pardon expected... (Score:5, Insightful)
I always said the NeverHillaries out voted the NeverTrumps. What had NOT been learned from 2016 is just how fucking much the media tried to manipulate an election. People reward these assholes with record viewing hours. Starve them out. When they are fucking penniless maybe some new blood will take over and stop playing games. Its bad enough we have PACs, we dont need the goddamn media creating fucking SPIN too.
Re: (Score:2)
Where are the mod points when I need them? This post is spot-on.
The media is less "Fourth Estate" than "Lawn Jockey" anymore, and that's just sickening.
Re: (Score:3)
. What had NOT been learned from 2016 is just how fucking much the media tried to manipulate an election.
That's why the media is so angry lately. Their manipulation attempts didn't work.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: Pardon expected... (Score:4, Insightful)
2024 Harris/AOC
2028 - Harris/AOC
2042 - AOC/Sanders (because they're not going to get rid of him that easily - it's hard to keep a good man down).
tl/dr - I said I hoped Trump would win and destroy the Republican Party from the inside. - mission accomplished! And the Republicans have only themselves to blame. [Nelson]HaHa[/Nelson]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Pardon expected... (Score:2)
Is there a law in the constitution that the VP must be an actual live human? As opposed to a cremated ash heap?
Re: Pardon expected... (Score:2)
Why would Harris make Clinton her VP in the event she becomes president? That's not how this works. She would pick a sitting senator, in all likelihood. She would likely pick someone younger or of the same age, but not as well known as she is, because whomever that is would likely be interested in running for president in 2028.Clinton's not even in office anymore. Some people have no grasp on reality.
Re:Pardon expected... (Score:5, Insightful)
Restore order? Maybe turn off cable news and the internet and walk outside for a bit.
Re: (Score:3)
Restore order? Maybe turn off cable news and the internet and walk outside for a bit.
Outside? No if 2020 has taught us anything it's that there's stupid people outside.
Re: Pardon expected... (Score:2)
And slashdot taught me more than a decade ago that there are stupid people inside. So what's your point?
Seriously, take your phone and go outside and get some fresh air. Viruses build up indoors in the winter months as people close windows and turn out the heat.
30 below outside? Throw an extra blanket on the bed and sleep with the window open a bit.
Re: (Score:2)
And slashdot taught me more than a decade ago that there are stupid people inside. So what's your point?
How many people do you have in your house? I hope you're not living by yourself :-)
Also don't read scientifically into my little quip. I'm not talking about viruses, and even if I were, no there's no virus building up in my house, and yes I open the windows to get some fresh air, because ... ewww it's gross going into buildings which aren't ventilated.
I'm happy sitting here without riots, protests, maskless people coughing and sneezing, people trying to sell me shit, beggars, uah people are the worst. #intr
Re: (Score:2)
I would, if I could find one. There have been zero riots in my Democratically controlled city. No burned buildings, nobody shot, no crime spikes, nothing.
Re:Pardon expected... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
Standing outside my house in Berkeley, Ca. No riot here. No burning buildings. Drove though Oakland, Ca. on my way home, didn't see a single riot or burning building. OK, OK. I did see and hear a drum circle down in South Berkeley. At least everyone was in time. Maybe you should start thinking for yourself instead of listing to Goebbels TV AKA Fox
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Pardon expected... (Score:2)
Whose yard d is he SUPPOSED to piss in?
Re: (Score:2)
Sure, and that is why the Senate republicans refused to review any evidence and kept their heads in the sand, whatever ivan
Re: (Score:2)
As soon as we get a two term president.
As soon as we get a three term president . . . who is neither Democrat nor Republican.
In other words, it ain't going to happen. A Snowden pardon would royally piss off America's Secret Squirrels . . . and they have all the poop on every politician. They will leak stuff that will make Clinton / Lewinsky shenanigans look like playful innocent teen kiddie sex.
Pardoning Snowden would be political suicide for any politician.
Or the politician will end up drugged bat shit crazy like Julian Assange.
Re: (Score:2)
Biden on the other hand.... well lets say he forgot to close the closet.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
NSA hasn't leaked anything on Trump. The FBI made up some shit based on Clinton's fake Steele dossier, and the Ukraine call guy was CIA, but the intel community hasn't really gone after Trump much.
When the intelligence community wants you gone you get shot by a "lone gunman", not fake-impeached by Adam Schiff the weasel.
Re: Pardon expected... (Score:5, Informative)
So what happens if Russia makes him a diplomat?
Won't happen. The sad truth is that even if a foreigner has provided the Russian intelligence with invaluable information, and defected to Russia . . . the Russians will never trust him with an important job.
This happened with an infamous English spy for the Russians, Kim Philby:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
He was a devastating asset for Russia while still in the West, but when he was forced to flee to Russia, the spy services never gave him any real job, because they didn't trust him.
The Russians figured, if a traitor will betray his own country . . . he might betray Russia in the future, as well. So he was just given a desktop title job. Snowden will be in the same program.
Re: Pardon expected... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The Russians figured, if a traitor will betray his own country . . . he might betray Russia in the future, as well. So he was just given a desktop title job. Snowden will be in the same program.
I hope Mr Snowden likes his new life, in a country that probably engages in far more spook activity than any agency in the USA could even imagine, let alone justify according to rule of law.
Re: (Score:3)
So what happens if Russia makes him a diplomat?
The US would refuse. Diplomatic credentials are issued by the nation being visited, and the State Department would just refuse to accredit him. Russia would either have to find someone else who is acceptable to the US, or else leave the post unfilled.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm thinking after the next Civil War and the re-creation of the Confederate States of America, along with the Christian People's Democratic Republic of America.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, but he also understands the concept of "no extradition treaty."
Re:So the great saviour of freedom and democracy (Score:5, Interesting)
Will take up permanent residence in a dictatorship that assassinates pro democracy campaigners abroad and supports brutal repression of protestors. Does he understand the concept of stinking hypocrisy do you think?
Do you understand the concept of wanting to stay alive?
Re: (Score:2)
Re:So the great saviour of freedom and democracy (Score:5, Informative)
Remember when in 2013, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper told Congress that intel officials were not collecting mass data on tens of millions of Americans? Edward Snowden soon revealed material that proved Clapper's testimony false: The government had been gathering and storing data from ordinary Americans' phone records, email and Internet use.
https://wikileaks.org/gifiles/docs/12/1210665_obama-leak-investigations-internal-use-only-pls-do-not.html [wikileaks.org]
Clapper lied to Congress, to their faces, and still isn't in prison. In 2009, professional baseball player Miguel Tejada pleaded guilty to lying to Congress after giving false testimony about performance-enhancing drug use in Major League Baseball. "He admitted to lying to Congress and was unremorseful and flippant about it," Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) told the Washington Examiner. "The integrity of our federal government is at stake because his behavior sets the standard for the entire intelligence community." Massie was referring to Clapper, not the baseball player. Just to be clear.
Let's see what Politifact has to say. [politifact.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Only if you're a clueless gimp. Fleeing one country claiming its violating human rights then settling into a country thats even worse is just hypocrisy. But then I wouldn't expect fanboys like you to understand.
Re: (Score:2)
Uncle Sam likes to make examples of people. He would be kept in a supermax jail for life.
Re: (Score:2)
What, Like Bradley "I'm a girl" Manning? Oh, wait...
Re:So the great saviour of freedom and democracy (Score:4, Interesting)
Not by choice. He was headed for Iceland before he got stuck in Russia.
Re: (Score:2)
As I recall, his first choice was Hong Kong, where was pursuing aslyum, but then this presumably fell through and they allowed him to leave for Moscow. In terms of the violent repression of protestors, I'm not sure that the US is in any position to claim the moral high ground. That being said, the fact he still wants to return to the US suggests he's realized that his new reality in Russia is perhaps not what he was hoping for, and given that he doesn't have anything new to offer, is unlikely to improve.
Re: (Score:2)
Realize that with all the bad things you say about Russia, there is still more justice there than in the US
Re: So the great saviour of freedom and democracy (Score:2)
Re:So the great saviour of freedom and democracy (Score:5, Insightful)
Does he understand the concept of stinking hypocrisy do you think?
Do you mean the kind of hypocrisy displayed by those immune-to-prosecution folks whose ongoing betrayals of their countrymen he revealed? Or are you talking about the hypocrisy you might also engage in if it was your life on the line?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: "Permanent Guest", haha (Score:3)
imagine him returning to the US as Russia's Ambassador Snowden. Because disruption is what Putin does.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
How much do you think he actually remembers? He was clearly concerned about this one issue, and likely treated everything else as disposable from short term memory.
And if he is dispatched as soon as he's useless, are you saying that this many years later he somehow still has new information to offer?
Or is it maybe possible that immigration law has changed and he's allowed to stay as a result?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Can a new leaker really expect an escape route via Hong Kong as he used, or would they be denied asylum?
He probably made it worth their while, too.
Seemingly random missile strikes and preemptive aggression will cause any thinking person to question our motives. Something that Bush Sr. and his team understood that Jr. and the neocons on both sides of the aisle have never grokked.
Obama bombed more countries than any president since FDR. Just sayin'.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Truth be told, the neocons are returning to their Democrat roots nowadays
What does that mean? I don't understand what you are trying to say.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Not a Hero (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
from about 15 or so years ago probably remember all the rumors, conspiracies, and chat
Only 15 years? A lot of it, including ECHELON, was in James Bamford's book from 1982! In the earliest days of the internet, long pre-web, it was assumed the NSA monitored everything.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:3)
I know slashdot users worship this dude, but Russia wouldn't be keeping him safe if he wasn't making it worth while for them...
Don't be naive - they're keeping him safe because it pisses of the Americans. As long as Snowden is alive and getting a bit of publicity every once in a while he's rubbing the American government's nose in its own shit. His well of secrets dried up long ago.
Re:Probably better over there (Score:5, Informative)
1. Blew the whistle on an absolutely massive overreach on a domestic spying issue. The NSA had been granted a license to build a doghouse and they used it to construct a Mall-Of-America-size building. The American people deserved to know.
2. He downloaded terabytes of secret government information that had absolutely nothing to do with the whistleblower thing, and basically handed it over, for free, to our adversaries. He took every file he could get his hands on, and didn't bother to check them for content at all. From what I've read, people died because of the information those files revealed. There's blood on his hands. I've never been able to figure out how he can justify this to himself.
You are extremely confused. Edward Snowden and Chelsea Manning are two different people. Your #2 complaint is about Chelsea Manning. Edward Snowden took no data with him after he went into exile. He turned it all over to a reporter formerly at The Guardian, who has been very careful about what was released to be sure not to endanger American lives. Chelsea Manning was the one who dumped data indiscriminately.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
And Snowden bears responsibility for this. Handing data to a random reporter and thinking that it'll stay out of the hands of Russia? That's too naive. Snowden's a smart guy.
Re: (Score:2)
Again, do you have sources on other intelligence agencies getting the data or are you merely speculating?
Re: (Score:2)
https://www.theguardian.com/us... [theguardian.com]
I've already been modded down to flamebait. I forgot that you can't say anything nega
Re:Probably better over there (Score:4, Informative)
There's anecdotal evidence that spy agencies had to move people around, suggesting that the data had been decrypted.
Anecdotal "evidence"... isn't.
First, the spy agencies move agents around all the time. Every time a cover story wears thin, an agent moves on, and for that matter cover stories can and are designed to last for short periods. Decades long sleeper agents are the exception, not the rule. They're known to be prone to assimilation and divided loyalties.
Second, the spy agencies may well have moved agents around in response to the Snowden leaks. They claim not to know what he copied, and maybe that's true, but I doubt it. They knew. Any agent even remotely tangential to what he accessed could have been moved out of an abundance of caution. Or not, also out of an abundance of caution. And agents who were in no way related to anything he accessed were also moved. Disinformation is a thing, even of metadata, and the spy agencies pay attention to every kind of data. Spy agencies don't throw away assets casually, despite Hollywood's depictions. They did not have to know or even suspect that foreign governments had any access to the material to consider and possibly act on moving agents. The fact that the material was exposed to anyone at all was more than sufficient.
And finally, no, Glenn Greenwald was not sloppy about storing the Snowden data. Most importantly, he kept it offline. I expect it still is. Hacking Bear didn't just push some buttons in St. Petersberg and download the data. Any government who got a hold of it had to breach physical security to do it. Possible, but far less likely than copying online data. If I were to put money on it, I'd bet foreign governments found out what Snowden copied from their own sources inside American spy agencies, who got their hands on a copy of the list of accessed files. That list undoubtedly got copied farther and wider than it should have been since Congress was taking an interest, despite being highly classified. Easier by far to get it that way than to try to breach physical security of a reporter who had every reason to be paranoid at the time. He was the hard target. Random congressional staffers are far more likely to leak. We have historical proof of that trend.
Either way, you should stop putting stock in rumors.
Re: (Score:2)
Aka China and Russia easily got and decrypted the info.
Cite?
Re: (Score:2)
From what I read, the Guardian guy was sloppy with how he stored the Snowden data.
Not nearly as sloppy as the NSA.
Re: (Score:2)
Do you think they didn't already have all that data and more? If Snowden, a contractor, could do easily get it you can be sure their spies could as well.
Re: (Score:2)
Can you list some sources of deaths that have been attributed to Snowden?
Re: (Score:2)
I'm of the same mind, I think he should be pardoned for blowing the whistle on illegal activity, but should still face prison time for the other stuff. Assange was no better. Putting other people's lives at risk to stroke your own ego is about as reprehensible as you can get.
Re: Probably better over there (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Notice, how the adoration of Snowden has a near-perfect overlap with the disgust for "Russian Collusion", however disproved...
1. I don't think that is true. 2. Nothing was disproved. You just have Mueller on record as saying that he could not charge Trump with collusion. That does not mean that collusion did not occur.
It also doesn't mean that collusion did occur. Why are you assuming that it did?