Polish Leppy 22
Well-known member
- Messages
- 6,594
- Reaction score
- 2,009
The Obama admin definitely has me and Irishpat on a list of some sort lol
Polish Leppy 22
Well-known member
- Messages
- 6,594
- Reaction score
- 2,009
1) I remember dozens on the left crying "fascist" when Bush had wiretaps going on. But now it isn't a big deal?
2) I want the proper authorities going after and monitoring those who wish to do us harm (Fort Hood, Boston bombing, etc) but gathering data on innocent Americans is unacceptable.
3) The NSA can gather all this data but we can't deport illegal immigrants who are convicted felons in our country? Weird.
4) Fourth Amendment: 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.
BobD
Can't get no satisfaction
- Messages
- 7,918
- Reaction score
- 1,034
Nobody cares what the average person is doing on the phone or internet. If they weren't taking advantage of the surveillance abilities they have, people would be all up in arms when something terrible happened and it was discovered we could have prevented it by monitoring. Then we'd be hearing how negligent the government is.
Polish Leppy 22
Well-known member
- Messages
- 6,594
- Reaction score
- 2,009
I agree with you on that. The tone on this subject from the left wing, however, has taken a 360 degree turn since the last administration. Double standard but that's nothing new.
phork
Raining On Your Parade
- Messages
- 9,863
- Reaction score
- 1,019
Bush/Obama is that you?
In Lou I Trust
Offseason gon' be long
- Messages
- 1,108
- Reaction score
- 188
No... Bob's just a Californian. Lol
Yep, The Guardian is just another of those racist conservative rags trying to stifle progressive change.
C
Cackalacky
Guest
I could not agree more. The apathy is deafening.
WaveDomer
Well-known member
- Messages
- 1,356
- Reaction score
- 307
I don't get it either except that maybe people just take it for granted. Things move fast and the government rarely gives up something once it sinks its teeth into it, they mostly chew more. So it wouldn't shock me to see checkpoints, random home searches, etc in the future in America. But why would you care if you have nothing to hide?
BobD
Can't get no satisfaction
- Messages
- 7,918
- Reaction score
- 1,034
I prefer to come to my own opinions rather than have them given to me. Creating fear where there is nothing to fear isn't journalism, but it pays well.
Can someone tell me how their life might be changed or effected in any way by the NSA screening for terrorist? Please share.
Paranoia big destroyer.
(Song added for fun)
<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/_WJ6FbcWYRU?rel=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
WaveDomer
Well-known member
- Messages
- 1,356
- Reaction score
- 307
Ask Gen. Petraeus how his affair was leaked. An NSA whistleblower says is was probably from his emails being screened illegally. Do I have a lot of sympathy for him? No. But it was probably leaked because for political reasons.
There are a few larger points here. Maybe my life will never be hampered by the NSA looking into my phone records, emails, etc. Or maybe in 6 years some politicians will want to abuse the system (HOLY COW COULD THAT ACTUALLY HAPPEN?) and use the tools of the government to check into people or organizations that don't agree with their agenda. Abuse happens.
Look at how many innocent people are disrupted trying to catch an airplane. How many stories of people being embarrassed, their bags being gone through etc. do we have to hear? Don't we have the right to operate simple conversations, photo exchanges, etc. without people looking at everything we do? What about the football coach, I forget where, who took a video of his kids dancing naked after a bath? The school found that video and he went to trial and was fired from his job. Sports Illustrated did a story on it. The judge couldn't believe they tried to prosecute him. People abuse power all the time.
What if this program grows? It already has in the past decade. What if it grows to include random personal searches while you walk down the street? Or your home? Would that be okay with you?
Also, in instances where they have had information, it hasn't helped. Boston Bombers. Fort Hood. 9/11. I am innocent until proven guilty, not the other way around.
BobD
Can't get no satisfaction
- Messages
- 7,918
- Reaction score
- 1,034
If it did come down to checkpoints and random home searches, would you rather the person performing the search to be conservative or a liberal?
WaveDomer
Well-known member
- Messages
- 1,356
- Reaction score
- 307
I'd rather it be neither.
chicago51
Well-known member
- Messages
- 3,658
- Reaction score
- 387
I give John Mccain and Lindsey Graham credit for defending Obama as it is the same things they supported under the Bush administration.
I also give Democrats like Ron Wryden credit being critical even though it is a democrat in the White House. More push back on this as actually come from the left.
Expect this to be an issue in 2016. Expect Ran Paul to break away from the more hawkish Republicans. I also expect at least one long shot Democrat candidate that tries to use this against Hillary and Joe Biden.
I also give Democrats like Ron Wryden credit being critical even though it is a democrat in the White House. More push back on this as actually come from the left.
Expect this to be an issue in 2016. Expect Ran Paul to break away from the more hawkish Republicans. I also expect at least one long shot Democrat candidate that tries to use this against Hillary and Joe Biden.
NDFan4Life
Forum Regular
- Messages
- 1,967
- Reaction score
- 254
Few options for online users to avoid spying, experts say
By Lindsay Wise | McClatchy Washington Bureau
WASHINGTON — What can people do to protect their privacy from massive data-mining efforts by U.S. and other intelligence services? The answer is not much, short of going off the grid completely.
Reports in The Washington Post and the Guardian newspapers this week allege that the government has been secretly accessing the phone records of tens of millions of Verizon customers, as well as online videos, emails, photos and other data collected by nine Internet service providers.
Privacy advocates say most consumers long ago swapped privacy for convenience, but few realize the degree to which their digital activities are being tracked.
The reality is that your personal information isn’t just shared with the government, but also sold to third parties such as online advertisers and app developers, said Jeffrey Chester, the executive director of the nonprofit Center for Digital Democracy in Washington. It’s all there in the privacy policy you probably didn’t read when you signed up for Facebook or Gmail.
“We’ve crossed a digital Rubicon here; there’s no going back,” Chester said. “Big data is ruling our lives, and the big question is whether there will be any kind of limits here, protecting our consumer information and our democratic right to privacy.”
Privacy policies for Google, Yahoo! and other Internet service providers explicitly state that the companies collect users’ data, such as names, email addresses, telephone numbers, credit cards, IP addresses, search queries, purchases, time and date of calls, duration of calls and physical locations.
The policies say that companies may use that information to send you targeted advertising or, if necessary, to comply with requests from government authorities.
Apple, Yahoo!, Microsoft, Google and Facebook denied Friday that they give the government direct access to their servers, saying that the companies provide user data only in accordance with the law.
“Our legal team reviews each and every request, and frequently pushes back when requests are overly broad or don’t follow the correct process,” Google’s statement said. “Press reports that suggest that Google is providing open-ended access to our users’ data are false, period.”
People who are disinclined to believe such reassurances – or who just want to keep anyone from reading or listening to their personal communications – can install specialized “end-to-end” encryption software, which must be used by both parties involved in a conversation. It prevents intermediaries like email or instant messaging providers from reading or understanding those conversations, or giving others access to them.
“Privacy advocates have recommended this for a long time, but it’s seen fairly little adoption as a fraction of online communications because it requires a bit more conscious effort by users,” said Seth Schoen, senior staff technologist for the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a San Francisco-based nonprofit.
“Unfortunately, end-to-end encryption is not a default feature of most communications software, though I believe it should be,” Schoen said. “Software developers have often suggested that they don’t implement it because they believe users mostly prefer convenience to security.”
Tools such as encryption provide limited protection, however. Governments can still try to break into your computer to spy on you, and encryption only protects against someone reading a conversation, not from knowing that the conversation took place, who was involved and their locations, Schoen said.
“This kind of information is now being referred to by the government dismissively as ‘metadata,’ but it’s incredibly significant and has major privacy consequences, including allowing mapping of people’s private activities, beliefs, medical problems and intimate relationships,” he said.
Ultimately, the only sure bet is not to use technology at all. Schoen quoted Robert Morris Sr., a computer security expert who worked at NSA for many years: “The three golden rules to ensure computer security are: do not own a computer; do not power it on; and do not use it.”
But 21st century consumers aren’t likely to toss their mobile devices or swear off Internet access in order to preserve their privacy. One in three consumers would rather give up TV than their smart phones, according to a 2012 survey by Google/Ipsos OTX MediaCT.
People should be able to use new technologies without giving up their rights, said Chris Calabrese, legislative counsel for American Civil Liberties Union in Washington.
“These tools are the way we live our lives now, and we shouldn’t have to give up our electronic rights in order to enjoy them,” Calabrese said.
Even if consumers do take the time to read the fine print in Internet companies’ privacy policies, most don’t expect that spies will be peering at their every move when they sign on, he said.
“Most of us understand that to be the police come with a warrant or a subpoena,” he said. “It’s a particular person, a particular order, a particular investigation, not that everything in the system is an open book.”
The problem is that electronic communication privacy laws are woefully out of date, he said. They haven’t been updated since 1986.
The ACLU also supports a bill to create a “Do Not Track” option online that would require consumers to give explicit permission before their personal information could be collected by websites or apps. Such legislation has stalled in Congress for years.
Rather than retreating to a cabin in the wilderness, swearing off smart phones and saving up for encryption software, consumers can protect their privacy through old-fashioned political action, Calabrese said.
“Sometimes the simple and the old answer is the best one: Call your congressman,” he said. “You’re a citizen, not just a consumer. If you think what the government is doing is wrong, let the government know.”
Few options for online users to avoid spying, experts say | McClatchy
By Lindsay Wise | McClatchy Washington Bureau
WASHINGTON — What can people do to protect their privacy from massive data-mining efforts by U.S. and other intelligence services? The answer is not much, short of going off the grid completely.
Reports in The Washington Post and the Guardian newspapers this week allege that the government has been secretly accessing the phone records of tens of millions of Verizon customers, as well as online videos, emails, photos and other data collected by nine Internet service providers.
Privacy advocates say most consumers long ago swapped privacy for convenience, but few realize the degree to which their digital activities are being tracked.
The reality is that your personal information isn’t just shared with the government, but also sold to third parties such as online advertisers and app developers, said Jeffrey Chester, the executive director of the nonprofit Center for Digital Democracy in Washington. It’s all there in the privacy policy you probably didn’t read when you signed up for Facebook or Gmail.
“We’ve crossed a digital Rubicon here; there’s no going back,” Chester said. “Big data is ruling our lives, and the big question is whether there will be any kind of limits here, protecting our consumer information and our democratic right to privacy.”
Privacy policies for Google, Yahoo! and other Internet service providers explicitly state that the companies collect users’ data, such as names, email addresses, telephone numbers, credit cards, IP addresses, search queries, purchases, time and date of calls, duration of calls and physical locations.
The policies say that companies may use that information to send you targeted advertising or, if necessary, to comply with requests from government authorities.
Apple, Yahoo!, Microsoft, Google and Facebook denied Friday that they give the government direct access to their servers, saying that the companies provide user data only in accordance with the law.
“Our legal team reviews each and every request, and frequently pushes back when requests are overly broad or don’t follow the correct process,” Google’s statement said. “Press reports that suggest that Google is providing open-ended access to our users’ data are false, period.”
People who are disinclined to believe such reassurances – or who just want to keep anyone from reading or listening to their personal communications – can install specialized “end-to-end” encryption software, which must be used by both parties involved in a conversation. It prevents intermediaries like email or instant messaging providers from reading or understanding those conversations, or giving others access to them.
“Privacy advocates have recommended this for a long time, but it’s seen fairly little adoption as a fraction of online communications because it requires a bit more conscious effort by users,” said Seth Schoen, senior staff technologist for the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a San Francisco-based nonprofit.
“Unfortunately, end-to-end encryption is not a default feature of most communications software, though I believe it should be,” Schoen said. “Software developers have often suggested that they don’t implement it because they believe users mostly prefer convenience to security.”
Tools such as encryption provide limited protection, however. Governments can still try to break into your computer to spy on you, and encryption only protects against someone reading a conversation, not from knowing that the conversation took place, who was involved and their locations, Schoen said.
“This kind of information is now being referred to by the government dismissively as ‘metadata,’ but it’s incredibly significant and has major privacy consequences, including allowing mapping of people’s private activities, beliefs, medical problems and intimate relationships,” he said.
Ultimately, the only sure bet is not to use technology at all. Schoen quoted Robert Morris Sr., a computer security expert who worked at NSA for many years: “The three golden rules to ensure computer security are: do not own a computer; do not power it on; and do not use it.”
But 21st century consumers aren’t likely to toss their mobile devices or swear off Internet access in order to preserve their privacy. One in three consumers would rather give up TV than their smart phones, according to a 2012 survey by Google/Ipsos OTX MediaCT.
People should be able to use new technologies without giving up their rights, said Chris Calabrese, legislative counsel for American Civil Liberties Union in Washington.
“These tools are the way we live our lives now, and we shouldn’t have to give up our electronic rights in order to enjoy them,” Calabrese said.
Even if consumers do take the time to read the fine print in Internet companies’ privacy policies, most don’t expect that spies will be peering at their every move when they sign on, he said.
“Most of us understand that to be the police come with a warrant or a subpoena,” he said. “It’s a particular person, a particular order, a particular investigation, not that everything in the system is an open book.”
The problem is that electronic communication privacy laws are woefully out of date, he said. They haven’t been updated since 1986.
The ACLU also supports a bill to create a “Do Not Track” option online that would require consumers to give explicit permission before their personal information could be collected by websites or apps. Such legislation has stalled in Congress for years.
Rather than retreating to a cabin in the wilderness, swearing off smart phones and saving up for encryption software, consumers can protect their privacy through old-fashioned political action, Calabrese said.
“Sometimes the simple and the old answer is the best one: Call your congressman,” he said. “You’re a citizen, not just a consumer. If you think what the government is doing is wrong, let the government know.”
Few options for online users to avoid spying, experts say | McClatchy
BobD
Can't get no satisfaction
- Messages
- 7,918
- Reaction score
- 1,034
This has been going on before Verizon or the internet ever existed. They can monitor EVERYTHING......not some things, EVERYTHING , but only when we need to , only with a warrant (in most cases) and if you're a law abiding citizen, they don't give a sh!t what you're talking about or who's boobs you're looking at on the internet. Geez some of you are more paranoid than I would have thought.
Chillax dudes. Sorry, but there is no giant conspiracy.....well there is, but most likely you aren't part of it.
Chillax dudes. Sorry, but there is no giant conspiracy.....well there is, but most likely you aren't part of it.
B
Buster Bluth
Guest
Last edited:
B
Bogtrotter07
Guest
Haha if there was ever a time to reread a sentence before posting, this is it.
Where does it stop?
B
Bogtrotter07
Guest
Ex-CIA man says exposed spy scheme to protect world
Reuters
By Mark Hosenball and Richard Cowan
U.S. National Security Agency whistleblower Edward Snowden, an analyst with a U.S. defence contractor, is pictured during an interview with the Guardian in his hotel room in Hong Kong June 9, 2013. ...
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - An ex-CIA employee working as a contractor at the U.S. National Security Agency said he was the source who leaked details of a top secret U.S. surveillance program, acting out of conscience to protect "basic liberties for people around the world."
Holed up in a hotel room in Hong Kong, Edward Snowden, 29, said he had thought long and hard before publicizing details of an NSA program code-named PRISM, saying he had done so because he felt the United States was building an unaccountable and secret espionage machine that spied on every American.
His whereabouts were not immediately known on Monday, but staff at a luxury hotel in Hong Kong told Reuters that Snowden had checked out at noon.
Snowden, a former technical assistant at the CIA, said he had been working at the super-secret NSA as an employee of contractor Booz Allen. He said he decided to leak information after becoming disenchanted with President Barack Obama, who he said had continued the policies of predecessor George W. Bush.
"I don't want to live in a society that does these sort of things ... I do not want to live in a world where everything I do and say is recorded. That is not something I am willing to support or live under," he told the Guardian newspaper, which published a video interview with him on its website. The interview was dated June 6.
Both the Guardian and the Washington Post said last week that U.S. security services had monitored data about phone calls from Verizon and Internet data from large companies such as Google and Facebook.
In naming Snowden on Sunday, the newspapers said he had sought to be identified.
"The NSA has built an infrastructure that allows it to intercept almost everything," Snowden said in explaining his actions.
"With this capability, the vast majority of human communications are automatically ingested without targeting. If I wanted to see your emails or your wife's phone, all I have to do is use intercepts. I can get your emails, passwords, phone records, credit cards," he said.
WORKED AT NSA FOR FOUR YEARS
The Guardian said Snowden had been working at the NSA for four years as a contractor for outside companies.
Three weeks ago, he copied the secret documents at the NSA office in Hawaii and told his supervisor he needed "a couple of weeks" off for treatment for epilepsy, the paper said. On May 20 he flew to Hong Kong.
The CIA and the White House declined to comment, while a spokesman for the Director of National Intelligence would not comment directly about Snowden himself but said the intelligence community was reviewing damage done by the recent leaks.
"Any person who has a security clearance knows that he or she has an obligation to protect classified information and abide by the law," said the spokesman, Shawn Turner.
The NSA has requested a criminal probe into the leaked information. On Sunday, the U.S. Justice Department said it was in the initial stages of a criminal investigation following the leaks.
Booz Allen, a U.S. management and technology consultancy, said reports of the leaked information were "shocking and if accurate, this action represents a grave violation" of company policy.
It said Snowden had been employed by the company for less than three months and that it would cooperate with any investigations.
A spokesman for Dell Inc declined to comment on reports that Snowden had been employed at that company. In 2009, Dell acquired Perot Systems, a U.S. government contractor that did work for U.S. intelligence agencies.
Snowden's decision to reveal his identity and whereabouts lifts the lid on one of the biggest security leaks in U.S. history and escalates a story that has placed a bright light on Obama's extensive use of secret surveillance.
The exposure of the secret programs has triggered widespread debate within the United States and abroad about the vast reach of the NSA, which has expanded its surveillance dramatically in since the September 11 attacks on Washington and New York in 2001.
U.S. officials say the agency operates within the law. Some members of Congress have indicated support for the NSA activities, while others pushed for tougher oversight and possible changes to the law authorizing the surveillance.
WHY HONG KONG?
One legal expert was puzzled as to why Snowden fled to Hong Kong, because it has an extradition treaty with the United States while mainland China does not.
In routine criminal cases, unlike this one, Hong Kong had shown a willingness in recent years to extradite people to face charges in the United States, he said.
In the video, Snowden said that "Hong Kong has a strong tradition of free speech."
Hong Kong returned from British to Chinese rule in 1997, but still enjoys some autonomy in business and governmental functions.
However, under Hong Kong's Fugitives Offenders Ordinance, Beijing can issue an "instruction" to the city's leader to take or not take action on extraditions where the interests of China "in matters of defense or foreign affairs would be significantly affected."
Typically, U.S. visitors in Hong Kong are granted a 90-day visa. According to the Guardian, Snowden left Hawaii for Hong Kong on May 20.
Hong Kong's Security Bureau, which is charged with law enforcement and immigration matters, had no immediate response when asked about the case.
Glenn Greenwald, the Guardian newspaper journalist who broke the story and interviewed Snowden last week, told the local South China Morning Post newspaper he was not aware of the former CIA man's current whereabouts.
The U.S. Consulate declined to comment on the case.
Douglas McNabb, a Houston lawyer who specializes in extradition, said it would not be difficult for the United States to provide justification for its request. "This guy came out and said, 'I did it,'" he said. "His best defense would probably be that this is a political case instead of a criminal one."
Snowden, who said he had left his girlfriend in Hawaii without telling her where he was going, said he knew the risk he was taking, but thought the publicity his revelations had garnered in the past few days had made it worth it.
"My primary fear is that they will come after my family, my friends, my partner. Anyone I have a relationship with," he said. "I will have to live with that for the rest of my life. I am not going to be able to communicate with them. They (the authorities) will act aggressively against anyone who has known me. That keeps me up at night."
In the video interview, the bespectacled, lightly bearded Snowden looked relaxed. He said he was ultimately hoping that Iceland, which values internet freedom, might grant him asylum.
(Additional reporting by Andrew Osborn and Peter Graff in London; David Morgan, John Shiffman, David Ingram and Andrea Shalal-Esa in Washington; James Pomfret, Anne-Marie Roantree, Grace Li, Lavinia Mo and Venus Wu in Hong Kong; Jim Finkle in Boston; Editing by Peter Graff, Christopher Wilson and Raju Gopalakrishnan)
Reuters
By Mark Hosenball and Richard Cowan
U.S. National Security Agency whistleblower Edward Snowden, an analyst with a U.S. defence contractor, is pictured during an interview with the Guardian in his hotel room in Hong Kong June 9, 2013. ...
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - An ex-CIA employee working as a contractor at the U.S. National Security Agency said he was the source who leaked details of a top secret U.S. surveillance program, acting out of conscience to protect "basic liberties for people around the world."
Holed up in a hotel room in Hong Kong, Edward Snowden, 29, said he had thought long and hard before publicizing details of an NSA program code-named PRISM, saying he had done so because he felt the United States was building an unaccountable and secret espionage machine that spied on every American.
His whereabouts were not immediately known on Monday, but staff at a luxury hotel in Hong Kong told Reuters that Snowden had checked out at noon.
Snowden, a former technical assistant at the CIA, said he had been working at the super-secret NSA as an employee of contractor Booz Allen. He said he decided to leak information after becoming disenchanted with President Barack Obama, who he said had continued the policies of predecessor George W. Bush.
"I don't want to live in a society that does these sort of things ... I do not want to live in a world where everything I do and say is recorded. That is not something I am willing to support or live under," he told the Guardian newspaper, which published a video interview with him on its website. The interview was dated June 6.
Both the Guardian and the Washington Post said last week that U.S. security services had monitored data about phone calls from Verizon and Internet data from large companies such as Google and Facebook.
In naming Snowden on Sunday, the newspapers said he had sought to be identified.
"The NSA has built an infrastructure that allows it to intercept almost everything," Snowden said in explaining his actions.
"With this capability, the vast majority of human communications are automatically ingested without targeting. If I wanted to see your emails or your wife's phone, all I have to do is use intercepts. I can get your emails, passwords, phone records, credit cards," he said.
WORKED AT NSA FOR FOUR YEARS
The Guardian said Snowden had been working at the NSA for four years as a contractor for outside companies.
Three weeks ago, he copied the secret documents at the NSA office in Hawaii and told his supervisor he needed "a couple of weeks" off for treatment for epilepsy, the paper said. On May 20 he flew to Hong Kong.
The CIA and the White House declined to comment, while a spokesman for the Director of National Intelligence would not comment directly about Snowden himself but said the intelligence community was reviewing damage done by the recent leaks.
"Any person who has a security clearance knows that he or she has an obligation to protect classified information and abide by the law," said the spokesman, Shawn Turner.
The NSA has requested a criminal probe into the leaked information. On Sunday, the U.S. Justice Department said it was in the initial stages of a criminal investigation following the leaks.
Booz Allen, a U.S. management and technology consultancy, said reports of the leaked information were "shocking and if accurate, this action represents a grave violation" of company policy.
It said Snowden had been employed by the company for less than three months and that it would cooperate with any investigations.
A spokesman for Dell Inc declined to comment on reports that Snowden had been employed at that company. In 2009, Dell acquired Perot Systems, a U.S. government contractor that did work for U.S. intelligence agencies.
Snowden's decision to reveal his identity and whereabouts lifts the lid on one of the biggest security leaks in U.S. history and escalates a story that has placed a bright light on Obama's extensive use of secret surveillance.
The exposure of the secret programs has triggered widespread debate within the United States and abroad about the vast reach of the NSA, which has expanded its surveillance dramatically in since the September 11 attacks on Washington and New York in 2001.
U.S. officials say the agency operates within the law. Some members of Congress have indicated support for the NSA activities, while others pushed for tougher oversight and possible changes to the law authorizing the surveillance.
WHY HONG KONG?
One legal expert was puzzled as to why Snowden fled to Hong Kong, because it has an extradition treaty with the United States while mainland China does not.
In routine criminal cases, unlike this one, Hong Kong had shown a willingness in recent years to extradite people to face charges in the United States, he said.
In the video, Snowden said that "Hong Kong has a strong tradition of free speech."
Hong Kong returned from British to Chinese rule in 1997, but still enjoys some autonomy in business and governmental functions.
However, under Hong Kong's Fugitives Offenders Ordinance, Beijing can issue an "instruction" to the city's leader to take or not take action on extraditions where the interests of China "in matters of defense or foreign affairs would be significantly affected."
Typically, U.S. visitors in Hong Kong are granted a 90-day visa. According to the Guardian, Snowden left Hawaii for Hong Kong on May 20.
Hong Kong's Security Bureau, which is charged with law enforcement and immigration matters, had no immediate response when asked about the case.
Glenn Greenwald, the Guardian newspaper journalist who broke the story and interviewed Snowden last week, told the local South China Morning Post newspaper he was not aware of the former CIA man's current whereabouts.
The U.S. Consulate declined to comment on the case.
Douglas McNabb, a Houston lawyer who specializes in extradition, said it would not be difficult for the United States to provide justification for its request. "This guy came out and said, 'I did it,'" he said. "His best defense would probably be that this is a political case instead of a criminal one."
Snowden, who said he had left his girlfriend in Hawaii without telling her where he was going, said he knew the risk he was taking, but thought the publicity his revelations had garnered in the past few days had made it worth it.
"My primary fear is that they will come after my family, my friends, my partner. Anyone I have a relationship with," he said. "I will have to live with that for the rest of my life. I am not going to be able to communicate with them. They (the authorities) will act aggressively against anyone who has known me. That keeps me up at night."
In the video interview, the bespectacled, lightly bearded Snowden looked relaxed. He said he was ultimately hoping that Iceland, which values internet freedom, might grant him asylum.
(Additional reporting by Andrew Osborn and Peter Graff in London; David Morgan, John Shiffman, David Ingram and Andrea Shalal-Esa in Washington; James Pomfret, Anne-Marie Roantree, Grace Li, Lavinia Mo and Venus Wu in Hong Kong; Jim Finkle in Boston; Editing by Peter Graff, Christopher Wilson and Raju Gopalakrishnan)
Last edited:
yankeehater
Well-known member
- Messages
- 2,197
- Reaction score
- 774
This reminds me of a friends daughter who was caught during the Napster download hoopla. All I remainder her telling me was that the FBI showed up with a book the size of the yellow pages on their door steps. It was everything they had ever looked at or downloaded on the internet. How long ago was Napster? Pretty scary to think that your Gov't really knows that much about your life.....oh, and so do the advertisers.
BobD
Can't get no satisfaction
- Messages
- 7,918
- Reaction score
- 1,034
Ex-CIA man says exposed spy scheme to protect world
Reuters
By Mark Hosenball and Richard Cowan
U.S. National Security Agency whistleblower Edward Snowden, an analyst with a U.S. defence contractor, is pictured during an interview with the Guardian in his hotel room in Hong Kong June 9, 2013. ...
He doesn't want to protect people, he wants attention. Sadly, we see this a lot lately.
Like the raid to get OBL. Everyone wants their ten minutes of fame and they seem to be willing to break oaths to get it. He's a traitor not a savoir.
Side note: What should I do with my 5000th post? Suggestions?
Last edited:
kmoose
Banned
- Messages
- 10,298
- Reaction score
- 1,181
Don't look now, Bob, but your bambi is showing.
BobD
Can't get no satisfaction
- Messages
- 7,918
- Reaction score
- 1,034
Last edited:
WaveDomer
Well-known member
- Messages
- 1,356
- Reaction score
- 307
Well, that remains to be seen. Snowden would have been better off going to a member of Congress, who would have followed up, like a Ron Paul or Rand Paul. Even though I think the government is overstepping its bounds, I'm not ready to call him a hero or a traitor. A traitor would probably have leaked this info to the enemy, like Falcon and the Snowman etc. rather than The Guardian.
He is also looking out for self in coming out. One of the issues with this whole deal is that they could look for "patterns" in Greenwald's phone records etc. and probably get his source, along with other press sources. (But hey, maybe Freedom of the Press is lame now too.) So they would get this guy eventually. Now he is going to be "protected" somewhat by the public eye.
And if "outing" this program creates a problem because now terrorists know the NSA can get their records (even though we all have known they have done this for years) then they should probably just shut it down, right?
C
Cackalacky
Guest
A traitor? No way. Hero... meh. Does anyone know why he chose the Guardian over a US outlet? I have a couple of ideas. Our press is no longer as free as we like to think.Well, that remains to be seen. Snowden would have been better off going to a member of Congress, who would have followed up, like a Ron Paul or Rand Paul. Even though I think the government is overstepping its bounds, I'm not ready to call him a hero or a traitor. A traitor would probably have leaked this info to the enemy, like Falcon and the Snowman etc. rather than The Guardian.
He is also looking out for self in coming out. One of the issues with this whole deal is that they could look for "patterns" in Greenwald's phone records etc. and probably get his source, along with other press sources. (But hey, maybe Freedom of the Press is lame now too.) So they would get this guy eventually. Now he is going to be "protected" somewhat by the public eye.
And if "outing" this program creates a problem because now terrorists know the NSA can get their records (even though we all have known they have done this for years) then they should probably just shut it down, right?
If a whistleblower blows the truth, then I have no problems. This is not getting 10 minutes of fame, this is putting in indelible ink what our previous fears only speculated. Wikileaks, Manning,.... I don't consider them heroes or traitors but exposing our government corruption is by all means a fair thing to do. I would hope people would have the gumption to do it more often. That's the reason for the free press (which we consequently lack now).
chicago51
Well-known member
- Messages
- 3,658
- Reaction score
- 387
Couple things:
1 - With all this wristleblowing (if that is a real word) going I think there has been a clear rebellion going in the intelligence, and justice community because this is a whole lot leaks in a short period of time.
2 - I'm almost certain that Congress is going to pass some crappy legistlation in the near future. With all the scandals going on nobody is paying attention to other issues like economic policy anymore (as if few did anyway). So with the cover of darkness in place I expect something really crappy to pass the a majority including fanctions of both parties will hate. My guess we are going to see a really crappy farm bill with more socialist subsidies (not the same as crop insurance) to agriculture companies that are doing really well and don't need them.
3 - Today's news media from all spectrums is awful. For one they don't cover things people typically care about. Secondly they have a short attention span, jump around trying to find the most sexy story yet failing to do that story justice.
1 - With all this wristleblowing (if that is a real word) going I think there has been a clear rebellion going in the intelligence, and justice community because this is a whole lot leaks in a short period of time.
2 - I'm almost certain that Congress is going to pass some crappy legistlation in the near future. With all the scandals going on nobody is paying attention to other issues like economic policy anymore (as if few did anyway). So with the cover of darkness in place I expect something really crappy to pass the a majority including fanctions of both parties will hate. My guess we are going to see a really crappy farm bill with more socialist subsidies (not the same as crop insurance) to agriculture companies that are doing really well and don't need them.
3 - Today's news media from all spectrums is awful. For one they don't cover things people typically care about. Secondly they have a short attention span, jump around trying to find the most sexy story yet failing to do that story justice.