Jump to content
Login with your Gmail HERE and start posting in seconds! ×
Don't just read! Be part of the Community! Join the conversation ×

Nsa Contractor Identifies Himself As Source

News_Editor

By News_Editor
in World News

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Posted Images

lannarebirth Star Member

lannarebirth

Posted
Posted (edited)

Mandella is a hero. Snowden is not, but Snowden gets people'spolitical dander in an uproar and no one says crap about Mandella.

I'd rather not talk about Snowden at all. He is a but a bit player in the larger story, but he is what the thread is about and if you don't include him in your post you're off topic. I'd rather talk about the founding principles of the USA and why, if those aren't protected, why have a USA at all?

"To exclude foreign intrigues and foreign partialities, so degrading to all countries and so baneful to free ones; to foster a spirit of independence too just to invade the rights of others, too proud to surrender our own, too liberal to indulge unworthy prejudices ourselves and too elevated not to look down upon them in others; to hold the union of the States on the basis of their peace and happiness; to support the Constitution, which is the cement of the Union, as well in its limitations as in its authorities; to respect the rights and authorities reserved to the States and to the people as equally incorporated with and essential to the success of the general... as far as sentiments and intentions such as these can aid the fulfillment of my duty, they will be a resource which can not fail me."

James Madison

ps: I'm sure lots of nice things will be said about Mandela at his funeral.
Edited by lannarebirth
Scott Star Member

Scott

Posted
Posted

A large number of off-topic posts and replies have been deleted. Please don't respond to troll posts, it results in your post getting deleted as well.

lomatopo Star Member

lomatopo

Posted
Posted

Most reports indicate he is bound for Ecuador.

I think he might be safer in Iceland?

Our (the U.S.A.) CIA have been mucking about in Ecuador since at least 1960, maybe earlier, assassinating leaders, sponsoring terrorists (who blew up churches), destabilizing governments. There were rumblings late last year that the CIA was trying to "get rid of" President Rafael Correa. Easy to imagine there are more than a few rogue elements there who might think that the U.S. would prefer if Mr. Snowden had an accident.

Credo Ruby Member

Credo

Posted
Posted

I've got to agree with Lomotopo, Ecuador is not a safe country to begin with and there are a lot of people who would be able or willing to do this guy harm.

Iceland would have been a better alternative, unless he really isn't a refugee, but just a criminal.

Time will tell.

geriatrickid Star Member

geriatrickid

Posted
Posted

Ok, so Russia appears to have had a hand in Snowden's travel plans. The NYT reported that Mr. Snowden boarded an Aeroflot plane bound for Moscow I find this hypocritical on the part of the Russians if the justification for allowing him entry is because of their respect for "Free Speech".

Recently, Putin resorting to his KGB persona sent two mothers of young children to the gulag workshops where they are to be incarcerated for 2 years. Their horrible crime? Lip synching a protest song against Putin in a Church. It speaks volumes that wikileaks claims to be a champion of free speech has no problem with the mistreatment of the two women from pussy riot.Here are Snowden and wikileaks relying on the Russians.

Nice.

JDGRUEN Platinum Member

JDGRUEN

Posted
Posted

If Ruusia not involved then why not go directly from Hong Kong to Ecuador? Doesn't a G650 or a Global Express have range? On cell phone at gym so no way to look up. If so, why go through Moscow? To get to Ecuador? May be a legitimate reason, but I have not heard one.

The Hong Kong government likely said ... 'go while going is good... now! ... Russia has long established flights to Cuba - a distant stopover on a long transatlantic flight. Snowden getts out of mounting problem in Hong Kong - stops over in the terminals in Moscow - flies to Cuba on a Russian Airliner - one that the USA is NOT GOING TO MOLEST in any way ... Safe in Cuba and then on to Ecuador or a nearby country then hop to Ecuador with Ecuadorian Diplomats in tow all along the way ... that is the way I see it. Like Assange - Snowden wants a platform - in Snowden's case for telling the world all he knows about NSA abuses and more.. There will always be a cricket in the woodpile ready to chirp ... obama should not have pushed the NSA to do his bidding of spying on Americans ...

Credo Ruby Member

Credo

Posted
Posted

Snowden is simply getting his 15 minutes of fame. He might rate a Hollywood movie, but it won't be very good unless they jazz it up a bit.

Snowden doesn't really have information. He seems to know what information the US has, but it doesn't seem that he has it.

Like Julian Assange, he will soon be relegated to the backburner and probably little will be heard from him.

Publicus Diamond Member

Publicus

Posted
Posted

This is not the central question or matter before us, but many have discussed the vehicle by which Snowden committed his presumed acts of espionage, the press/media.

David Gregory, host of a highly respected weekly Sunday morning news and discussion program, asked the Guardian writer who received and first published the Edward Snowden espionage materials, why he too should not be charged with violating the Espionage Act or other crimes against national and global security.

Remember that the Supreme Court ruled long ago that the First Amendment does not apply to journalists in matters of criminal law. The Supreme Court ruling as it stands says a journalist cannot protect sources in a criminal case or is not exempted from legal obligations if s/he witnesses a crime.

A new question may be evolving here, i.e., whether a journalist can be prosecuted for participating in a criminal act, publishing in print or on air classified national security documents or information. This may become a pivotal legal case for both the US and the UK relating to journalists and criminal law in instances of national security.

DAVID GREGORY TO GLENN GREENWALD: 'Why Shouldn't You Be Charged With A Crime?'

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/david-gregory-glenn-greenwald-edward-snowden-crime-2013-6#ixzz2X4n6bGXE

Actually, it was a highly respected weekly Sunday morning news and discussion program prior to David Gregory becoming the host. Not so much anymore.

Confronting Guardian reporter Greenwald on this question is one of the two or three issues in the forefront of public affairs journalism today. Gregory has asked an important question in a face to face interview with Greenwald, a question that resonates and reverberates.

Someone has missed the boat on this one.

The question of journalistic freedom and the right to protect sources is asked everytime a big story of government wrongdoing takes place. What's different in this instance is they want to kill the messenger. Gregory is a "useful idiot".

No, this is an extraordinary moment in time for public affairs journalism. Several reporters are wearing the collar put on them by the Justice Department, something that never would have been suggested ten years ago, even by Darth, er, Dick Cheney. Spiro Agnew while vice president was Nixon's attack dog against the press/media but even Republican party big wigs, many of them WASPs who owned newspapers and magazines, objected. Agnew's attacks never caught on.

This is different because the public is not concerned. The attitude of the broad middle of the body politic seems to be let the justice system work this out. As I'd said, this is new legal ground in public affairs journalism, i.e., reporters being hauled away by the authorities for participating in the dissemination of classified national security information, perhaps documents, hand-in-hand with the leakers themselves from inside the US national security apparatus. If an Edward Snowden can be and is criminally charged, then why not his accomplices in public affairs journalism?

The media are objecting, but the public is not paying attention to the concerns of the mass media. Just as there's little sympathy for Snowden, there is little sympathy in this for the journalists involved, or for their news organizations. The AP got raided but no one outside of mass media cares. That's significant. The public needle has to move on this, but it's barley ticked.

wealth Silver Member

wealth

Posted
Posted (edited)

Before the next big thing come lets make a short summery.

Edward Snowden worked for the CIA/NSA

He exposed massive data collections, which in no way has anything to do with National Security.

He exposed the British GCHQ with Tempora which is even considered worse with mad data collecting activities (was this the reason to outsource all and anything, to the last screw, 'cause spying is more lucrative?)

If Snowden would be the OP, we should honor his will to talk about the issues at hand and not about him personally. This is not a movie trailer.

We all must examine the background of these issues in detail.

We don't want to see a tail pinned on every American or British people, but it is exactly that what could happen. Being humbled, like The USA and England are now, gives us all a chance to make a thorough impartial soul search.

By joining the 0.01% in their attempt to enslave mankind is nothing else than buying time. There're no problems --- only solutions.

Don't let it become a manhunt. It's not a one man show.

a Magna Carta(1215) sort of things must apply to all world citizen.

Magna Carta was the first document forced onto a King of England by a group of his subjects, the feudal barons, in an attempt to limit his powers by law and protect their privileges.

History

Magna Carta from 1215 onwards

Magna Carta, also called Magna Carta Libertatum (Great Charter of Freedom), is an English legal charter, originally issued in the year 1215 and was written in Latin.

Magna Carta required King John of England to proclaim certain rights (pertaining to nobles and barons), respect certain legal procedures, and accept that his will could be bound by the law. It explicitly protected certain rights of the King's subjects - whether free or fettered - most notably the writ of habeas corpus*), allowing appeal against unlawful imprisonment.

*) The writ of ‘Habeas Corpus ad subjiciendum’ is a legal action through which a person can seek relief from the unlawful detention of him or herself, or of another person.

Magna Carta has been the most significant early influence on the extensive historical process that led to the rule of constitutional law today in the English speaking world and France.
Magna Carta influenced the development of the common law and many constitutional documents, including the United States Constitution. In the period from 1224 to 1618 many clauses were renewed throughout the Middle Ages and continued to be renewed as late as the 18th century.

The aim of the Magna Carta Institute for Human Rights and Obligations is to constantly review and develop human behaviour. MCI believes that society can only develop as a whole by developing its individual members. When it comes to human rights and obligations it eventually boils down to the right and the obligation to develop oneself.

Total societies, as well as individuals, will not develop as long as they just call for change but are unwilling to change their own habits. Therefore members of the Magna Carta Institute do not just develop themselves, but also confront leaders of society with their obligation to develop, to give the right example and to create and support an environment in which personal development is offered.

“The Magna Carta is the first rung on the ladder to freedom, followed by the great American charters of freedom - the Declaration of Independence, the Bill of Rights and The Gettysburg Address. This document symbolizes mankind’s eternal quest for freedom; it is a talisman of liberty.” - David Redden, Vice Chairman of Sotheby’s -
Edited by wealth
chuckd Diamond Member

chuckd

Posted
Posted

Just to set the record straight about some previous misinformation. The maximum time for in-transit is 24 hours, not the 12 hours previously posted.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Direct airside transit
Passengers travelling through international airports do not need a visa for a transit of less than 24 hours, provided a confirmed onward ticket is held and the traveller remains in the international transit area (without clearing passport control).
That said, most Russian airports do not have an international transit area. The most important exceptions are:
Moscow's Sheremetyevo International Airport (SVO) which has an international transit area common for terminals D, E and F;
Moscow's Domodedovo International Airport (DME) which has an international transit area in its only terminal;
Moscow's Vnukovo International Airport (VKO) which has an international transit area in terminal A;
Yekaterinburg's Koltsovo International Airport (SVX) which has an international transit area in its international terminal.
Flights to or from Belarus are considered domestic, so transit without visa does not apply. Transit to or from Kazakhstan requires customs clearance, which may be unavailable without leaving the international transit area.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jun 23, 9:29 PM EDT
WIKILEAKS: SNOWDEN GOING TO ECUADOR TO SEEK ASYLUM
BY PHILIP ELLIOTT
ASSOCIATED PRESS
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Admitted leaker Edward Snowden took flight Sunday in evasion of U.S. authorities, seeking asylum in Ecuador and leaving the Obama administration scrambling to determine its next step in what became a game of diplomatic cat-and-mouse.

...from the article...

"Upon his arrival, Snowden did not leave Moscow's Sheremetyevo Airport. One explanation could be that he wasn't allowed; a U.S. official said Snowden's passport had been revoked, and special permission from Russian authorities would have been needed."

Article here: http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/N/NSA_SURVEILLANCE_SNOWDEN?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2013-06-23-18-06-14

F430murci Platinum Member

F430murci

Posted
Posted (edited)

Just to set the record straight about some previous misinformation. The maximum time for in-transit is 24 hours, not the 12 hours previously posted.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Direct airside transit
Passengers travelling through international airports do not need a visa for a transit of less than 24 hours, provided a confirmed onward ticket is held and the traveller remains in the international transit area (without clearing passport control).
That said, most Russian airports do not have an international transit area. The most important exceptions are:
Moscow's Sheremetyevo International Airport (SVO) which has an international transit area common for terminals D, E and F;
Moscow's Domodedovo International Airport (DME) which has an international transit area in its only terminal;
Moscow's Vnukovo International Airport (VKO) which has an international transit area in terminal A;
Yekaterinburg's Koltsovo International Airport (SVX) which has an international transit area in its international terminal.
Flights to or from Belarus are considered domestic, so transit without visa does not apply. Transit to or from Kazakhstan requires customs clearance, which may be unavailable without leaving the international transit area.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jun 23, 9:29 PM EDT
WIKILEAKS: SNOWDEN GOING TO ECUADOR TO SEEK ASYLUM
BY PHILIP ELLIOTT
ASSOCIATED PRESS
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Admitted leaker Edward Snowden took flight Sunday in evasion of U.S. authorities, seeking asylum in Ecuador and leaving the Obama administration scrambling to determine its next step in what became a game of diplomatic cat-and-mouse.

...from the article...

"Upon his arrival, Snowden did not leave Moscow's Sheremetyevo Airport. One explanation could be that he wasn't allowed; a U.S. official said Snowden's passport had been revoked, and special permission from Russian authorities would have been needed."

Article here: http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/N/NSA_SURVEILLANCE_SNOWDEN?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2013-06-23-18-06-14

Haha, so glad you resolved that one . . . and I did say I think about the 12 hours. I could wikid also I suppose, but I also think certain Visa laws may have changed in September of 2012. This may or may not have been one of them.

Again, we are talking about Russia. No consistentcy in Russia. You take a big chance entering Russia without any tpe of Visa as they kind of make up thier own rules as they go along and may send you packing back to US. (See US embasy warning about this one).

Here is what Russian embassy says:

Transit Visas: Travelers intending to transit through Russia en route to a third country must have a Russian transit visa. Even travelers who are simply changing planes in Moscow or another international airport in Russia for an onward destination will be asked to present a transit visa issued by a Russian Embassy or Consulate. Russian authorities may refuse to allow a U.S. citizen who does not have a transit visa to continue with his or her travel, obliging the person to immediately return to the point of embarkation at the traveler’s own expense.

He is what US embassy says (and note they say Russia inconsistet with rules):

Transit Visas: If you intend to transit through Russia by land en route to a third country, you must have a Russian transit visa issued by a Russian Embassy or Consulate. If you are transiting through one international airport in Russia, and will depart again in 24 hours to an onward international destination, without leaving the customs zone, Russian law does not require you to have a transit visa. However, this law is sometimes misinterpreted by travelers and customs officials alike, and we strongly recommend you obtain a Russian transit visa even if you are transiting in less than 24 hours since unexpected flight delays, rerouting, or other unforeseen travel challenges could cause you to be stranded in an airport for an extended period of time or create other complications if you do not have a transit visa. Even for flights from Russia to Belarus, considered domestic flights by Russian and Belarusian bilateral agreements, American citizens will need a transit visa. Foreigners who arrive in Russia without a valid visa and who do not meet visa-free transit requirements, may be forced to return to the point of origin at their own expense.

Then you get stuff like this from Russia Visa service:

Transit Visa

Question: I am going to stop in Russia on my way to another country; do I need a transit visa?

Answer: There are many factors to determine whether a transit visa is required for Russia. A transit visa is required if remaining in Russia more than 12 hours, if departing the airport terminal to change planes, if passing immigration for any reason or if changing to a domestic carrier including a flight to Belarus or a Russian or Belarus airline. If the airlines change terminals - including Sheremetyevo-1 to Sheremetyevo-2 in Moscow for example - a transit visa is required. It is important to confirm with the airline you are flying on to determine whether a transit visa will be required.

I think I would go Russian version . . .

______________________________________________________________________

Snowden was apparently picked up by cars and shuttled away on the tarmac at the plane. That would be outside of customs area so he would need a Visa of some type if the reports are true.

Wasn't his Passport already cancelled? If so, you cannot enter Russia without a valid Passport. Any reports of him landing in Euador yet? Anyone really know where he is?

Edited by F430murci
F430murci Platinum Member

F430murci

Posted
Posted (edited)

Just to set the record straight about some previous misinformation. The maximum time for in-transit is 24 hours, not the 12 hours previously posted.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Direct airside transit
Passengers travelling through international airports do not need a visa for a transit of less than 24 hours, provided a confirmed onward ticket is held and the traveller remains in the international transit area (without clearing passport control).
That said, most Russian airports do not have an international transit area. The most important exceptions are:
Moscow's Sheremetyevo International Airport (SVO) which has an international transit area common for terminals D, E and F;
Moscow's Domodedovo International Airport (DME) which has an international transit area in its only terminal;
Moscow's Vnukovo International Airport (VKO) which has an international transit area in terminal A;
Yekaterinburg's Koltsovo International Airport (SVX) which has an international transit area in its international terminal.
Flights to or from Belarus are considered domestic, so transit without visa does not apply. Transit to or from Kazakhstan requires customs clearance, which may be unavailable without leaving the international transit area.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jun 23, 9:29 PM EDT
WIKILEAKS: SNOWDEN GOING TO ECUADOR TO SEEK ASYLUM
BY PHILIP ELLIOTT
ASSOCIATED PRESS
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Admitted leaker Edward Snowden took flight Sunday in evasion of U.S. authorities, seeking asylum in Ecuador and leaving the Obama administration scrambling to determine its next step in what became a game of diplomatic cat-and-mouse.

...from the article...

"Upon his arrival, Snowden did not leave Moscow's Sheremetyevo Airport. One explanation could be that he wasn't allowed; a U.S. official said Snowden's passport had been revoked, and special permission from Russian authorities would have been needed."

Article here: http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/N/NSA_SURVEILLANCE_SNOWDEN?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2013-06-23-18-06-14

and then we have the Russian embassy website in Russia saying 12 hours:

Transit Visa

(Valid only for 3 calendar days)

Transit visa is need if you travel via Russia. You would not need the transit visa if you have a layover flight in Russia continuing your journey to another country with the same airline and your layover is no longer than 12 hours. In any other case you more than likely to be required to have one.

Snowden requested Asylum in Ecuador:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/sns-rt-us-usa-security-ecuadorbre95n02y-20130623,0,461079.story

"It's almost hopeless unless we find some ways to lean on them," said Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y.

The Russian media report said Snowden intended to fly to Cuba on Monday and then on to Caracas, Venezuela.

U.S. lawmakers scoffed. "The freedom trail is not exactly China-Russia-Cuba-Venezuela, so I hope we'll chase him to the ends of the earth, bring him to justice and let the Russians know there'll be consequences if they harbor this guy," said Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/23/edward-snowden-ecuador_n_3487546.html

Edited by F430murci
Ulysses G. Star Member

Ulysses G.

Posted
Posted (edited)

"The freedom trail is not exactly China-Russia-Cuba-Venezuela, so I hope we'll chase him to the ends of the earth, bring him to justice and let the Russians know there'll be consequences if they harbor this guy," said Sen. Lindsey Graham...

Yeah, sure, "consequences", the president will apologize to them.

Edited by Ulysses G.
lannarebirth Star Member

lannarebirth

Posted
Posted

"The freedom trail is not exactly China-Russia-Cuba-Venezuela, so I hope we'll chase him to the ends of the earth, bring him to justice and let the Russians know there'll be consequences if they harbor this guy," said Sen. Lindsey Graham...

Ywah, sure, "consequences", the president will apologize to them.

He never gets anything right. He should be apologizing to America.

lannarebirth Star Member

lannarebirth

Posted
Posted
The NSA's metastasised intelligence-industrial complex is ripe for abuse

Where oversight and accountability have failed, Snowden's leaks have opened up a vital public debate on our rights and privacy

Valerie Plame Wilson and Joe Wilson

Sunday 23 June

Let's be absolutely clear about the news that the NSA collects massive amounts of information on US citizens – from emails, to telephone calls, to videos, under the PRISM program and other FISA court orders: this story has nothing to do with Edward Snowden. As interesting as his flight to Hong Kong might be, the pole-dancing girlfriend, and interviews from undisclosed locations, his fate is just a sideshow to the essential issues of national security versus constitutional guarantees of privacy, which his disclosures have surfaced in sharp relief.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jun/23/nsa-intelligence-industrial-complex-abuse

  • Like 1
lomatopo Star Member

lomatopo

Posted
Posted (edited)
Edward Snowden’s security clearance conducted by contractor now under criminal investigation



WASHINGTON—The private company responsible for vetting Edward Snowden for a security clearance is under criminal investigation for systemic failure to adequately conduct background checks.


Nearly 5 million people have been granted security clearances by the U.S government, and 1.4 million have top-secret clearances, Tester said.



McFarland testified that since 2007, at least 18 investigators have been convicted of fabricating background checks, casting doubt on hundreds of security clearances.


In those cases, the background investigators reported interviews that never occurred, recorded answers to questions that were never asked, and documented records checks that were never conducted, he said.


One contractor faked 1,600 credit checks. As it turned out, her own background investigation had been faked by a background investigator in a separate case.








At its peak I think the Stasi only employed 275,000 people. We have 483,000 Government Contractors with top secret security clearance!

Edited by lomatopo
  • Like 2
puck2 Silver Member

puck2

Posted
Posted (edited)

Most of the US politicians and TV commenting members remember me the Thai government, and especially Mr. Chalerm.

  • When avoiding taxes for their luxerious cars the officials blame and arrest the transporters, and not the admimnstrative/government or the questionable law/decrees.

  • When the fraud/leak is detected they try to draw the attention to the leaker not to their own big-brother-is watching-you attitude.

  • They try to belittle the leaker by all unfair means.

  • They cover their hidden and stealthy actions with some dubious excuses (danger for the nation, we enforce the law day by day at best for our nation etc. .......

  • They don't give and allow an inside view maybe for some independent experts (under the condition of sevrecy)

  • There is always a hidden agenda, not always legal and controllable.

  • The leaker of unfair practices gets the stamp of a spy, E.Snoden

etc.

Snowden is accused of spying, doing espionage? Translate it vice versa!

Then this means the US and the British admit that their programs are just made for this reason and not "against the terrorists". Embarrassing to admit this. Mr. Chalerm, you are not alone.

I think this spionage is a little bit more serious than avoiding tax.

Edited by puck2
wealth Silver Member

wealth

Posted
Posted

First Lawsuit Over NSA Phone Scandal Targets Obama, Verizon

The suit names Verizon, NSA, Justice Department, President Barack Obama, Attorney General Eric Holder and others. The case comes as the American Civil Liberties Union and others are petitioning the FISA court to explain the legal rationale behind authorizing surveillance of this magnitude.

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2013/06/nsa-phone-lawsuit/

Yes, keep 'em busy. these kids need to lear a thing or two. ...

hence this is from June 5th ...

A top secret federal court order reveals that the FBI and the National Security Agency are collecting the cell phone data of millions of Americans. The document, obtained by The Guardian, compels Verizon to send the NSA information about all telephone calls made on the telecom’s network within the United States. Here are seven quick things to know about the secret directive and its implications:

Read more: http://newsfeed.time.com/2013/06/05/7-things-to-know-about-the-governments-secret-database-of-cellular-data/#ixzz2X7Wfln5U

much more to come ...

wealth Silver Member

wealth

Posted
Posted (edited)

A guy in white shirt going up steps onto the plane.




Visa complications keeping me off plane. Aeroflot staff talking about how Snowden not on plane either. For now at least.




Van still there, just one guy in white shirt, darker pants went up. Too far to see face, glasses, etc.










  2. @niktwick @JNiemelainen Aeroflot agent said they are all Russians. Boarding now over.





Edited by wealth
wealth Silver Member

wealth

Posted
Posted

this is no surprise

Former Facebook security chief is now working for the NSA
  • Max Kelly left his post as Chief Security Officer at Facebook for the NSA in 2010, after having worked with the agency when Facebook joined Prism in 2010
  • The NSA is increasing recruiting from Silicon Valley and investing in start-ups
  • Facebook recently revealed the NSA made between 9,000 and 10,000 requests for information in the latter half of 2012
  • It's unclear whether Kelly is directly involved in the NSA's Prism program


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2347047/Former-Facebook-security-chief-working-NSA.html#ixzz2X8924DXz
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

F430murci Platinum Member

F430murci

Posted
Posted

Human nature, he would be to grab some sensitive stuff to entice interests of other countries if he was going to swipe info and be on the lamb with limited places to run.

There is absolutely zero evidence nor reason to believe thusfar, based on his actions, that Snowden is sharing specific intelligence with foreign governments. What he is clearly doing is exposing unlawful (or at least unconstitutional) practices of his own government.

Common sense is a reason. In addition, other governments likely would not get involved without something to gain.

Not just me, I heard no less than 3 staunch Republicans on Fox this morning saying the same as well as NSA chief. I have a belief that those on capital hill know a lot more about what was taken and what is going on than you or I.

Other governments really haven't gotten involved though have they? Beyond exercising some arbitrary discretion at airport immigration services. Sure, they don't mind embarassing the US by exposing their hypocrisy, but that's hardly indicative of receiving secrets in exchange for asylum.

\

Do you and JDGruen who said basically the same still believe this? Where is Snowden now? I guess he is still in that transit area Chuckd mentioned, but no one ever saw him in after he got into a car and sped off on the tarmac. Republic congressman from Texas just stated that the information Snowden is currently giving Russia and other governments are some of the most damaging acts espionage acts in our history. So you still believe Snowden is only exposing that patriotic stuff now . . .

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.






ASEANNOW

ASEANNOW (formerly Thai Visa) Thailand's oldest and most popular forum for expats and foreigners.

Sign up today and have your say

MORE INFO

POPULAR AREAS

CONTACT US

219/59 Asoke Towers, 15th Floor, Soi Sukhumvit 21, Watthana, Bangkok 10110
(+66) 99 196 1100
[email protected]

×
×
  • Create New...