Ecuador 'analysing' Snowden asylum request: FM

[wealth]

Two , it's shown up the hypocrisy of the US publicly complaining about Chinese hackers (both government & non-government) when the US does the same to China.

China is stealing US industrial secrets on a large scale. The US is not guilty of that.

Most of it was voluntarily outsourced by the corporate gangs in the hope to get a market on the silver plate for themselves. it was also part of the big capital shift. Nothing left for Americans or America.

England outsourced everything to the last screw, including flagship industries, why?

[wealth]

Ecuador considering Edward Snowden's asylum request - interview from the Telegraph

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Lww0qKeNnB0

quite a strong message from Alex 2 weeks ago which is gaining momentum

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y1BNUAxpoUE

[geriatrickid]

Two , it's shown up the hypocrisy of the US publicly complaining about Chinese hackers (both government & non-government) when the US does the same to China.

China is stealing US industrial secrets on a large scale. The US is not guilty of that.

Accused of by the US and not the Chinese government (so far). Proof has not yet emerged.

Are you serious? In 2010 and 2011 massive hacking activities of Canadian government were identified as originating in China. There is no doubt, that the Chinese state has undertaken hostile acts of electronic espionage.

In respect to Ecuador providing sanctuary for Snowden on the premise of respecting freedom etc., this is hypocritical BS.

On June 14, 2013 Ecuador passed its draconian Communications Law which independent human rights groups describe as "seriously undermining free speech". The law includes overly broad language that will limit the free expression of journalists and media outlets.

"This law is yet another effort by President Correa to go after the independent media, The provisions for censorship and criminal prosecutions of journalists are clear attempts to silence criticism.”

http://www.hrw.org/news/2013/06/17/ecuador-end-assault-free-speech

If Snowden had done what he did in Ecuador, he would be in serious legal trouble.

Isn't it hypocritical that those applauding Ecuador in this matter remain silent on President Correa's actions that have crushed dissent and that have sought to silence his regime's critics?

[Jingthing]

If Snowden had done what he did in Ecuador, he would be in serious legal trouble.

Isn't it hypocritical that those applauding Ecuador in this matter remain silent on President Correa's actions that have crushed dissent and that have sought to silence his regime's critics?

http://www.cuencahighlife.com/post/2013/06/23/Ecuadore28099-new-communications-law-draws-international-criticism-will-it-muzzle-a-free-press-or-democratize-it.aspx

Indeed. Hypocrisy on steroids.

But several private media outlets in Ecuador and freedom of expression advocates have sharply criticize it, believe its effects will be exactly the opposite to the ones it touts, and are already calling it a "gag law.” The Inter-American Press Association said the law represents a "grave setback for freedom of the press and expression," the Colombian Association of Newspapers and Informative Media (Andiarios) called the document "the final stab” against freedom of expression in the country, and, on Wednesday, Frank La Rue, the United Nations' Special Rapporteur on freedom of expression, described some of the law's provisions as "unacceptable."

[Secondmouse]

If his USA passport has been revoke as American media claim, how would he be able to travel so freely?

Here is how:

Snowden’s ability to board an Aeroflot flight Sunday to Moscow, despite the revocation of his passport and the warrant for his arrest, was one more move in a series of artful legal and diplomatic maneuvers that have involved China, the Kremlin, WikiLeaks and the Ecuadoran government and kept the 30-year-old outside the grasp of the normally long arm of U.S. justice.

The Obama administration and politicians on Capitol Hill are likely to be infuriated if Snowden makes it to Ecuador, where he has requested asylum. But the former contractor who had worked at an NSA facility in Hawaii until he fled to Hong Kong skillfully placed his fate in the hands of WikiLeaks and countries that nurse animosities toward the United States. And Snowden’s odyssey is likely to exacerbate the United States’ strained relations with China and Russia

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/legal-political-maneuvering-let-snowden-flee/2013/06/23/5643e0b6-dc36-11e2-bd83-e99e43c336ed_story.html

I wasn't sure before, but NOW I kind of think Snowden is a ... traitor.

Not so much for the leaks. For what he is doing now. Understandable from a personal self interest point of view but he has made himself a public figure. He is allowing himself to be used as a anti-American propaganda tool by unfriendly countries. Doesn't that fit the definition of traitor?

I'm not so sure I agree with you on this point.....

About 40 years ago Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein broke the Watergate scandal and exposed the Law Breaking committed by the then, U.S. president Nixon.

I really can't see a difference whether the news is leaked by an investigative reporter or an 'employee whistle-blower'........if the surveillance is unauthorised from the agreed procedures laid out by congress (or whoever), and therefore it's not legal, I would not personally care about the source so long as it was credible....

I think with the modern media available these days the impact and speed of the news circulation around the globe is the thing that 'upsets' the administration in comparison to how news travelled 40 years ago....

[Jingthing]

You're assuming what the NSA is doing is illegal.

[lannarebirth]

If Snowden had done what he did in Ecuador, he would be in serious legal trouble.

Isn't it hypocritical that those applauding Ecuador in this matter remain silent on President Correa's actions that have crushed dissent and that have sought to silence his regime's critics?

http://www.cuencahighlife.com/post/2013/06/23/Ecuadore28099-new-communications-law-draws-international-criticism-will-it-muzzle-a-free-press-or-democratize-it.aspx

Indeed. Hypocrisy on steroids.

But several private media outlets in Ecuador and freedom of expression advocates have sharply criticize it, believe its effects will be exactly the opposite to the ones it touts, and are already calling it a "gag law.” The Inter-American Press Association said the law represents a "grave setback for freedom of the press and expression," the Colombian Association of Newspapers and Informative Media (Andiarios) called the document "the final stab” against freedom of expression in the country, and, on Wednesday, Frank La Rue, the United Nations' Special Rapporteur on freedom of expression, described some of the law's provisions as "unacceptable."

I can't speak for others, but I don't give a xxxx about Snowden's motivations or what country he lands in. I only care about the pervasive unconstitutional surveillance he exposed. Why do you care about this guy? Why don't you care all the bureaucrats and politicians are lying to the American people?

Edited June 24, 2013 by metisdead

[wealth]

Today Snowden hit yet more headlines after failing to show up on a flight from moscow to Havana. The whistleblower was expected to take the trip and eventually end up in Ecuador, but seemingly gave journalists the slip as a way of staying undetected.

Immediate fears that Snowden had been seized by Russian authorities at the behest of the US government were somewhat allayed by a statement from Wikileaks founder Julian Assange. According to Assange, himself afforded sanctuary by Ecuador, Snowden is “healthy and safe” and waiting to hear whether he’ll receive asylum in the country.

Assange told reporters that Snowden’s application for asylum was being “carefully considered” by the Prime Minister of Ecuador. and that the whistleblower had “possibly” also submitted requests to other countries. The US State Department has issued a directive to several nations, warning them not to take Snowden in.

“Today we have seen a range of extreme bellicose statements from the U.S. administration attempting to bully Russia and other nations from facilitating Mr. Snowden’s asylum,” Assange said in a phone call from the Embassy in London that he has been unable to leave for a year.

“Every person has the right to seek and receive political asylum…it is counterproductive and unacceptable for the Obama administration to try and interfere with those rights,” he added. “It reflects poorly on the U.S. administration and no self-respecting country would submit to such interference or bullying.”

“This morning the U.S. Secretary of State [John Kerry] called Edward Snowden a traitor,” Assange continued. “Edward Snowden is not a traitor. He is not a spy. He is a whistleblower who has told the public an important truth.”

“The Obama administration was not given a mandate by the people of the United States to hack and spy upon the entire world, to breach the U.S. constitution and the laws of other nations in the manner it has,” he said. “To now attempt to violate the international asylum law by calling for the rendition of Edward Snowden further demonstrates the breakdown of the rule of law by the Obama administration.”

The Obama administration has instituted one of the most extreme under the radar crack-downs on dissenters and whistleblowers in history.

It is a well documented fact that Attorney General Eric Holder, Obama’s top Justice Department official, has prosecuted more whistleblowers under the Espionage Act during his tenure than all of his predecessors combined. The ongoing case of Bradley Manning has provided the exclamation point on this vicious crack down.

excerpt from

“Pardon Edward Snowden” Petition Reaches Threshold for White House Response by Steve Watson

http://www.infowars.com/pardon-edward-snowden-petition-reaches-threshold-for-white-house-response/

... also have a look at, what I call, one of Alex's best performances in his show. The whole clip covers in a very thoughtful and well selected words the theme and especially Edward Snowden.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=kpZs78KUSE8

[Jingthing]

This guy is not a serious person. He's being described as just a big kid whose greatest fear is losing access to his computer. Whatever "principles" he ever had are being exposed as paper thin when faced with the consequences of what he did. I think there are such people as heroic whistle blowers. This character ain't that.

But it’s difficult to escape the irony of these two high-profile activists, who got themselves wanted by the United States for leaks they say expose U.S. abuses, now allying themselves with governments infamous for abuses that are by any reasonable metric far more egregious.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2013/06/24/snowdens-russia-problem-why-a-libertarian-activist-made-friends-with-authoritarian-states/

His old avatar. Plus ça change ...

Edited June 24, 2013 by Jingthing

[lannarebirth]

You're assuming what the NSA is doing is illegal.

I know . . .

As discussed a week ago, I am afraid the legality of this stuff was endorsed in 2002/2003/2004/2005/2006/2007/2008/2009/2010. Everyone here is slow on the uptake and off base legally.

There seem to be three kinds of justifications; policy, law and constittionality. Any policy, even law can be in force, but that doesn't mean it is constitutional. And we're not going to get to constitutional with rubber stamp secret courts . Unlike you, I don't believe it is too late already.

[lannarebirth]

Everyone keeps saying "lying." I am not sure the President, NSA or anyone in National Security should discuss matters of national security with the public or media. Such would not be prudent.

presumably somewhere back in you law school days or maybe in a poli sci class you read about the constitutionally mandated oversight duties of Congress? You may have heard that the NSA's charter precludes all domestic surveillance? Did "contempt of congress" rules and penalties get thrown out the window when I wasn't looking?

[Jingthing]

He seems to still be in Russia but not in Russia. Don't be shocked if the Russians cave and hand him over. They might find a way to hand him over without handing him over which somehow fits with being in Russia but not in Russia.

Yes U.S.-Russian relations have been frosty lately but somehow I doubt Putin really wants them to get a LOT frostier.

Edited June 24, 2013 by Jingthing

[F430murci]

You're assuming what the NSA is doing is illegal.

I know . . .

As discussed a week ago, I am afraid the legality of this stuff was endorsed in 2002/2003/2004/2005/2006/2007/2008/2009/2010. Everyone here is slow on the uptake and off base legally.

There seem to be three kinds of justifications; policy, law and constittionality. Any policy, even law can be in force, but that doesn't mean it is constitutional. And we're not going to get to constitutional with rubber stamp secret courts . Unlike you, I don't believe it is too late already.

Remember the DNA case just a moment ago discussed on here. I went ballistic about implications and then the conservative bunch bashed me for being liberal. My whole concern was the slippery slop and erosion of privacy rights.

If Supremes say Patriot Act, certain wire taps or whatever is constitutional . . . it is neither illegal nor unconstitutional. If Circuit Court says constitutional and Supreme's deny cert, its constitutional.

Secret Courts? What is a secret court? One that reviews matters of national security off public record since Federal Courts are all courts of public record.

National security matters should not be made public record. There are checks and balances in place. I believe the Circuit Court of Appeals and the United States Supremes have the authority to review FISA decisions.

The aclu simply challenges by arguing that the Circuit Court of Appeals and the U.S. Supreme Court failed to address certain fundamental issues. The aclu wants congressional oversight of the judicial system. That is like mixing church and state and has worse implications than the path on which are currently traveling.

The problem is we have a very conservative court that will continue to erode privacy rights and there is NOTHING NO ONE can do about it until they retire. NOTHING. Changing our checks in balances because we are stuck with a conservative court is more un-American than the wire taps . . .

[Publicus]

No, it doesn't fit the definition of a traitor. If it did Jane Fonda would still be in jail for activities far more damaging to American lives.

She is a traitor too. She just got away with it.

Jane Fonda aided a nation with which we were at war . There is absolutely zero evidence thusfar anyway that Snowden has given any specific intelligence to any foreign nation.

Wrong.

The evidence is everywhere anyone looks. All anyone needs to do in this is to pay a minimal amount of attention.

TRAITOR Snowden's 4 Lap Tops Drained by China

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/06/23/1218300/-TRAITOR-Snowden-s-4-Lap-Tops-Drained-by-China

[FDog]

Well obviously the checks and balances aren't working are they.

The NSA has the authority to do what?

What has the NSA been doing, with the secret court allowing them to do it?

When you find the answers and realise they are 2 different things then you will understand the checks and balances are not there. They use the guise of national interest blah blah blah for anything and everything.

The land of the free.

[FDog]

No, it doesn't fit the definition of a traitor. If it did Jane Fonda would still be in jail for activities far more damaging to American lives.

She is a traitor too. She just got away with it.

Jane Fonda aided a nation with which we were at war . There is absolutely zero evidence thusfar anyway that Snowden has given any specific intelligence to any foreign nation.

Wrong.

The evidence is everywhere anyone looks. All anyone needs to do in this is to pay a minimal amount of attention.

TRAITOR Snowden's 4 Lap Tops Drained by China

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/06/23/1218300/-TRAITOR-Snowden-s-4-Lap-Tops-Drained-by-China

What was in them?

Edit: Nevermind, just read the story and no it is not confirmed that China did this. A couple of people said they 'believed' it had been done.

So again, nothing.

Edited June 24, 2013 by FDog

[F430murci]

Everyone keeps saying "lying." I am not sure the President, NSA or anyone in National Security should discuss matters of national security with the public or media. Such would not be prudent.

presumably somewhere back in you law school days or maybe in a poli sci class you read about the constitutionally mandated oversight duties of Congress? You may have heard that the NSA's charter precludes all domestic surveillance? Did "contempt of congress" rules and penalties get thrown out the window when I wasn't looking?

Not sure what your talking about. Oversight is implied and not enumerated. They can investigate the executive all they want, but that has nothing to do with the fact that matters of national security should not be public record and that Courts have apparently already endorsed or ruled on the legal aspect.

If the searches are bad, the judiciary should be acting on it.

Granted, if the Obama skipped the judiciary and ordered a wire tap without judicial review and authorization by FISA or any judicial body, I would say that is bad and takes the judiciary out of the analysis.

I have heard allegations of Bush ordering or directing many wire taps without judicial or FISA review. Has Obama done this? If so, then please focus on the stuff that matters and makes sense and not all of this partisan and hate driven rhetoric.

[F430murci]

Well obviously the checks and balances aren't working are they.

The NSA has the authority to do what?

What has the NSA been doing, with the secret court allowing them to do it?

When you find the answers and realise they are 2 different things then you will understand the checks and balances are not there. They use the guise of national interest blah blah blah for anything and everything.

The land of the free.

Just because the checks and balances results in an outcome you do not like does not mean the checks and balances is not working.

I did not like the DNA decision, but guess what. That was our judiciary (checks and balances system) at work and there is nothing I can do about it. It is now the law.

[F430murci]

You guys literally cannot see the forest for the trees and it makes it exceedingly difficult to follow.

Who really did not know that Google was being monitored. I have heard that for years 2003/04ish. Your email and everything has been monitored for years.

Silly to think people are actually reading or listening in on your stuff. No way that can happen. I have always heard certain key words get pegged so start typing a bunch of terrorist types phrases and you can be in that special data base.

I have also known for years that Feds can triangulate on any cell phone and find out exactly where you are at any time. Facebook should be monitored with all of the cyber stalking, cartel pages and lunacy going on. Facebook is the worst offender to me as once you sig up nothing is private. They get into your phone, know everything about you and everything. Thank the greedy little nerd owner with an inferiority complex for this.

[F430murci]

He seems to still be in Russia but not in Russia. Don't be shocked if the Russians cave and hand him over. They might find a way to hand him over without handing him over which somehow fits with being in Russia but not in Russia.

Yes U.S.-Russian relations have been frosty lately but somehow I doubt Putin really wants them to get a LOT frostier.

Yep!

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/25/world/edward-snowden-nsa-surveillance-leak.html?_r=0

If he is still in Russia, it is only because Russia is taking a hard look at those 4 lap tops and asking a lot of questions. I doubt any of those questions relate to US's use of Google to spy on people in the US.

Russia is hard core. Snowden and the Harrison girl are in over their heads. Snowden better hope he does not have something the Russian want to keep quiet on his 4 lap tops along with a head full of knowledge.

Haha, I can hear Putin's guys now. "Yeah, come to Russia. We will take care of you and put you on the first place out of here to wherever you want to go."

I still cannot believe that you guys are so desperate to have a hero against Obama that you refuse to accept that Snowden took classified stuff that can comprise US.

I guarantee you he took everything he could put his hands on just in case he needed something to exchange for help. US knows what he downloaded or took by now. I believe the allegations against him based, in part, on the individuals now levying such allegations. Hard core conservatives that were ready to call him hero are now saying he is a traitor and has deeply comprised our National security.

[Publicus]

So some here think he is a traitor because he gave all the secrets to China, who then discarded him and then Russia which did the same.

Has it occurred to you that perhaps he has nothing more to tell? Perhaps he has told the newspapers what he knows and the Chinese thought it wasn't worth the hassle of having him. Russia thought they could get more info and offered a stopover but have since realised he has nothing so off he goes on his merry way.

Snowden's travels raise concerns of foreign involvement

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2013/06/23/snowden-hongkong-russia-ecuador-leak-security-cuba/2450577/

"It is pretty clear that someone has helped him engineer his escape from Hong Kong," said Bruce Riedel of the Brookings Institution, a former CIA, Pentagon and National Security Council official. "The Snowden affair has gone from a question of being a leaker to a question of high politics among the world's major powers."

"This kid is a pawn in a global power play," said former congresswoman Jane Harman, head of the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. "He's being used to embarrass us and to send messages to us."

Snowden was expected to leave Moscow on Monday after arriving on a government Aeroflot flight without a visa. But his first two stops left U.S. experts worried that China and Russia now have the data Snowden stole from the National Security Agency.

The United States has Russian Victor Bout in prison for 25 years as the biggest illegal individual armaments dealer of the world (extradited from having been arrested in Thailand, with vital direction from the CIA). Bout was the central figure behind Hollywood's idea to make the movie Lord of War. Bout is connected to the top in Russia, which means he has a lot of clout behind him, even tho it's done him little good so far.

What if Bout's great pal Vladimir Putin decides to keep Snowden in Russia to use against the US as leverage to get Bout back to Russia? SECSTATE John Kerry today mentioned that the US recently returned seven convicted Russian citizens to Russia as part of a series of developments designed to improve US-Russian relations, which are pretty bad generally and presently grim because Russia's many actions to aid Assad and his murderous outlaw regime. Clearly, Kerry was indicating some kind of deal could be agreed to get Snowden back to the US before he might continue his flight to refuge, supposedly in Equador.

USA Today quoted National Security Council spokesperson Caitlin Hayden who referred to the returned Russian criminals: In a statement on Russia issued early Monday, National Security Council spokesperson Caitlin Hayden cited "our intensified cooperation after the Boston Marathon bombings and our history of working with Russia on law enforcement matters, including returning numerous high level criminals back to Russia at the request of the Russian government." Kerry himself specifically referred to the return of the convicted Russian criminals, suggesting Washington strongly suspects Snowden is still in Russia and that a deal would be possible, i.e., it seems to me, Bout for Snowden.

Since fleeing the US, Snowden has placed his person in the trust of other handlers. The handlers Snowden must trust are complete strangers to him. First were his lawyers in Hong Kong. Next was Wikileaks and Julian Assange. Then with the government of Ecuador, with the government of Cuba as a touchpoint between Moscow Quito. Snowden presently has placed his person in the hands and in the fate of Russia and the snake Vladimir Putin.

ASSANGE: We Know Where Edward Snowden Is, But We're Not Saying Yet

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/wikileaks-edward-snowden-location-russia-julian-assange-cuba-ecuador-asylum-2013-6#ixzz2XALhF6qf

Edited June 24, 2013 by Publicus

[lannarebirth]

.

presumably somewhere back in you law school days or maybe in a poli sci class you read about the constitutionally mandated oversight duties of Congress? You may have heard that the NSA's charter precludes all domestic surveillance? Did "contempt of congress" rules and penalties get thrown out the window when I wasn't looking?

Not sure what your talking about. Oversight is implied and not enumerated. They can investigate the executive all they want, but that has nothing to do with the fact that matters of national security should not be public record and that Courts have apparently already endorsed or ruled on the legal aspect.

If the searches are bad, the judiciary should be acting on it.

Granted, if the Obama skipped the judiciary and ordered a wire tap without judicial review and authorization by FISA or any judicial body, I would say that is bad and takes the judiciary out of the analysis.

I have heard allegations of Bush ordering or directing many wire taps without judicial or FISA review. Has Obama done this? If so, then please focus on the stuff that matters and makes sense and not all of this partisan and hate driven rhetoric.

When a congressman or a senator is questioning one of these security agency directors before one of their oversight panels and asks him a direct question they have one of several options. They can answer the question truthfully. They can answer the question with an outright lie, or in a deceptive manner, OR they can they can state that due to the sensitive nature of the information they would prefer to answer it in a more secure setting, which I have seen them do. What the directors of the NSA, CIA, FBI and the President have done is opt for option two. They have lied to Congress, or in the President's case the press, regarding the extent of domestic surveillance programs.

I understand some things are secret, but can you understand that it raises serious questions among the populace when every figure in charge of every program chooses to lie, rather than answer in another manner?

[lannarebirth]

The United States has Russian Victor Bout in prison for 25 years as the biggest illegal individual armaments dealer of the world (extradited from having been arrested in Thailand, with vital direction from the CIA). Bout was the central figure behind Hollywood's idea to make the movie Lord of War.

Did you see that movie? Worst movie EVER!

[F430murci]

.

presumably somewhere back in you law school days or maybe in a poli sci class you read about the constitutionally mandated oversight duties of Congress? You may have heard that the NSA's charter precludes all domestic surveillance? Did "contempt of congress" rules and penalties get thrown out the window when I wasn't looking?

Not sure what your talking about. Oversight is implied and not enumerated. They can investigate the executive all they want, but that has nothing to do with the fact that matters of national security should not be public record and that Courts have apparently already endorsed or ruled on the legal aspect.

If the searches are bad, the judiciary should be acting on it.

Granted, if the Obama skipped the judiciary and ordered a wire tap without judicial review and authorization by FISA or any judicial body, I would say that is bad and takes the judiciary out of the analysis.

I have heard allegations of Bush ordering or directing many wire taps without judicial or FISA review. Has Obama done this? If so, then please focus on the stuff that matters and makes sense and not all of this partisan and hate driven rhetoric.

When a congressman or a senator is questioning one of these security agency directors before one of their oversight panels and asks him a direct question they have one of several options. They can answer the question truthfully. They can answer the question with an outright lie, or in a deceptive manner, OR they can they can state that due to the sensitive nature of the information they would prefer to answer it in a more secure setting, which I have seen them do. What the directors of the NSA, CIA, FBI and the President have done is opt for option two. They have lied to Congress, or in the President's case the press, regarding the extent of domestic surveillance programs.

I understand some things are secret, but can you understand that it raises serious questions among the populace when every figure in charge of every program chooses to lie, rather than answer in another manner?

I agree that lying to Congress is a bad thing. I would have to see testimony and understand all facts to make such a call. Perhaps there was wiggle room or it was based on their personal knowledge. I dunno, but Congress should step up and do the right thing if there was true perjury.

[F430murci]

The United States has Russian Victor Bout in prison for 25 years as the biggest illegal individual armaments dealer of the world (extradited from having been arrested in Thailand, with vital direction from the CIA). Bout was the central figure behind Hollywood's idea to make the movie Lord of War.

Did you see that movie? Worst movie EVER!

Yes, great concept. Bad execution. I like Nick Cage though and have a car he owned in late 90s.

[metisdead]

Off topic posts and replies have been removed.

[F430murci]

I get what you guys are saying, some of you at least. Snowden's crossing line and divulging damaging national security information should not detract from Obama administration intrusion into our lives. I agree so start an Obama sux thread.

This thread is about Snowden who is a little worm, but I do feel sorry for him cuz he f'ed up his life pretty bad now. There has to be more to this story than we are getting or he is a very dumb and naive dude.

[lannarebirth]

I get what you guys are saying, some of you at least. Snowden's crossing line and divulging damaging national security information should not detract from Obama administration intrusion into our lives. I agree so start an Obama sux thread.

This thread is about Snowden who is a little worm, but I do feel sorry for him cuz he f'ed up his life pretty bad now. There has to be more to this story than we are getting or he is a very dumb and naive dude.

I'm guessing that if you've prepped witnesses before that it would be the dumb and naive you have to be the most careful with. They have a bad habit of blurting out the truth without getting the preferred "color" on it.

[F430murci]

I get what you guys are saying, some of you at least. Snowden's crossing line and divulging damaging national security information should not detract from Obama administration intrusion into our lives. I agree so start an Obama sux thread.

This thread is about Snowden who is a little worm, but I do feel sorry for him cuz he f'ed up his life pretty bad now. There has to be more to this story than we are getting or he is a very dumb and naive dude.

I'm guessing that if you've prepped witnesses before that it would be the dumb and naive you have to be the most careful with. They have a bad habit of blurting out the truth without getting the preferred "color" on it.

I represent doctors and they are the worst. They think they know everything and love to hear themselves talk. Too smart in a depo can be more dangerous than too dumb. I don't know and I cannot recall can be great answers.

I just sure he thought this through. He had a hottie, lived in paradise and had a decent paying job.

Edited June 24, 2013 by F430murci

[mania]

I wasn't sure before, but NOW I kind of think Snowden is a ... traitor.

Not so much for the leaks. For what he is doing now. Understandable from a personal self interest point of view but he has made himself a public figure. He is allowing himself to be used as a anti-American propaganda tool by unfriendly countries. Doesn't that fit the definition of traitor?

I do not see him as a traitor.

A traitor would have sold or tried to use this info to better his life quietly not openly offer it

free to the US citizens & others who have been wrongfully targeted.

As to being used by anti American propaganda unfriendly countries?

That is an interesting term in many ways because

1- If the info leaked is true it is not what I consider propaganda

2- If these acts were not committed there would be no blow-back

3- A country that would expose such illegal acts is Anti-American? Or Pro-Americans?

4- Where would he go if not these places? Tahiti & then release the info in the hope of stopping

injustice against American citizens & others? Do you think this info would have been released if given in a

US obedient spot?

No I don't think a US citizen that has exposed such injustices & basically forfeited his free life

is a traitor. He has not gained only loss in an attempt to show fellow citizens what is being done

by their employees behind their backs.

Edited June 25, 2013 by mania