Russia: Snowden can stay
Source: CNN
(CNN) -- Edward Snowden may stay in Russia longer than first thought.
Snowden has said the time isn't right for him to return to the United States, where he could face criminal charges for leaking classified information. Russia gave him asylum for a year.
Now Russia says it will continue to extend asylum protections to Snowden and won't send him back home.
That word came Friday from Alexy Pushkov, a legislator who is head of the Foreign Affairs Committee in the Duma, Russia's lower house. He spoke about Snowden at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland.
Read more: http://www.cnn.com/2014/01/24/world/europe/russia-snowden/index.html?hpt=hp_t1
Their loss, our gain.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
former9thward
(31,986 posts)The people that is.
RC
(25,592 posts)Why do some people keep defending what the NSA is doing? Don't they realize that the wholesale, illegally and unconstitutionally gathered information on American citizens, can be used to black mail our government leaders, at any level, to do what these criminals want?
I think those that cannot see are born GOP, actually. Willful Blindness is a characteristic of that class of people.
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)is easy...getting laws changed isn't. I await your posts on the 215 reauthorization.
RC
(25,592 posts)You can't have it both ways. Snowden is the one that dragged the excesses and spying into the light. Otherwise we'd still wouldn't have much of a clue of what certain elements in our government are dong to us, in our name.
We have to know what is going on before we can know what to do to correct the wrongs. Without Snowden, we would not know for sure. Only unsubstantiated, rumors, easily explained away, by their constant lying to us.
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)didn't already know was going on.
As for Section 215, what the hell did Snowden do on that? He's a traitor and a coward, looking to cut and run and make royalties. A brave man would have gotten a lawyer, and whistleblown under the statutes, and stayed and fought.
Eddie ran. Because he is a coward.
RC
(25,592 posts)If Snowden was a coward, he would still be quietly doing his job, afraid to speak up against he excesses he saw. (He did try) Or maybe just as quietly, quit to find other work. It took courage to do what he did, because he knew he was quite possibly putting his life on the line.
If he would have stayed, our government would have covered things up and lied to us about what they are doing. As it is our government is still trying to lie to us about what the NSA is doing. Section 215 is apart of the overall program to subjugate us. One part spies on us, the other intimidates us into compliance. They work hand in glove.
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)the law...that's why you get a lawyer and you whistleblow under the statutes. Eddie chose the cowardly way.
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)is the hallmark of Authoritarianism.
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)cyber addresses in Iraq was of benefit to precisely, whom???
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)Demenace
(213 posts)And if a Republican says this nonsense, we will call them criminals but you advocate people breaking the laws of the land while claiming to defend the same laws they are breaking, how the heck does this make any sense to you, I do not know!
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)of adhering to the law or of breaking it. In the case of Snowden, we have two competing potential benefits:
1. The information regarding the activities of the NSA, now widely regarded as illegal and anti-democratic, being made available to the American people so that they can make educated decisions regarding whether to continue or end such activities. This is of great benefit to the citizens of a democracy, since an informed electorate is necessary to ensure democratic governance.
2. The information regarding the activities of the NSA being kept secret so that the agency can continue to act with no oversight or accountability to the American people. This is of great benefit to the Surveillance State, because if the agency's activities were to be made known to the public then there would be demands to end them.
We can discount any notion that the primary benefit of the NSA's activities is to protect American citizens from terrorism, since even the hand-picked White House panel concluded that no terror attacks were stopped by the NSA's program. (http://investigations.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/12/20/21975158-nsa-program-stopped-no-terror-attacks-says-white-house-panel-member?lite)
So which of the above is of greater benefit to the American people? Most Liberals and Progressives would probably select #1, since they are concerned primarily with civil rights and advancing democratic principles over dubious national security interests. In that context it makes little sense from a Liberal or Progressive point-of-view to concentrate one's efforts toward bringing Snowden to justice for his alleged crimes, since the benefit of prosecuting Snowden is miniscule compared to the benefit of being able to take action based upon the information he made available to us. Indeed, prosecuting Snowden would serve to further suppress other whistleblowers who, in the future, may decline to reveal governmental abuse to the detriment of the citizenry.
The NSA surveillance program unequivocally intrudes upon the American citizens' personal freedom. Howling for Snowden's head on a pike for defying the law, i.e. disobeying authority, when by doing so he was acting in the defense of personal freedom, is textbook Authoritarianism.
adjective: authoritarian
1. favoring or enforcing strict obedience to authority, esp. that of the government, at the expense of personal freedom.
Bodhi BloodWave
(2,346 posts)Maedhros
(10,007 posts)Snowden, as an insider, gained knowledge of programs that he believed to be in contradiction to the Constitution. He made that knowledge public in an effort to put an end to the problematic programs.
The takeaway is that the NSA was involved in illegal, unconstitutional activity. Snowden, acting as whistleblower, may have violated laws designed to keep knowledge of the illegal, unconstitutional activity from the public. Focusing on Snowden's potential lawbreaking serves only to protect the bad actors in the intelligence community.
Bodhi BloodWave
(2,346 posts)I have no problem commending and appreciating some of Snowden's actions and revelations, yet at the same time condemning some of his other revelations and thinking it shouldn't be ignored just because of the former information.
So I'd have no trouble saying that he should be pardoned(or have whatever charges related to domestic matters be reduced to a single misdemeanor if he can't simply be pardoned for it.) and stand trial for the information revealed related to international matters
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)the bad acts of the NSA.
Bodhi BloodWave
(2,346 posts)one can focus on both, most people tend to have enough brains to multitask.
And in my opinion i do not believe that revealing some bad acts/crimes of a organization or person(even the NSA) excuses or absolves the person who reveals the information of their own crimes.
As i said in my previous post i commend him and wouldn't mind him being pardoned for the release of the domestic information as that is on extremely shaky legal grounds(likely not on legal grounds at all except for the 'legal' fig leaf they try to cover it with) which also is what Snowden claimed was his reason for leaking information in the first place.
All the information related to the US spying on other countries(or other countries spying on other countries as that has also been leaked now) is far removed from the domestic issue though and in my eyes none of Snowden's(or his allies) business to leak which is why i disapprove of those releases and think he should face the music related to them.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)see how that works?
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)That would have been ANARCHY.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)because what Snowden did is JUST like what Rosa Parks did...
Yeah its part of the trinity...Snowden is just like "Thomas Jefferson", "Rosa Parks" and "Jesus Christ"...
P.S. Rosa Parks didn't run away to Russia and China at the end of that bus ride did she?
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)Snowden broke the law in an attempt to end the injustice of mass surveillance of innocent Americans.
Let's focus on the injustice - the assault on our personal freedom by the NSA - not on the lawbreaking.
adjective: authoritarian
1. favoring or enforcing strict obedience to authority, esp. that of the government, at the expense of personal freedom.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)but she broke the law and went to jail! That's bravery...that's courage. Snowden is a coward....no comparison.
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)“…Mrs. Parks was tired. She had a long, hard day…Something snapped in Mrs. Parks at that moment…Mrs. Parks didn’t look like a person to challenge the law of Montgomery. She was a quiet looking lady, wearing small steel rimmed spectacles…Much later she was asked if she had planned her protest. “No,” she answered. “I was just plain tired, and my feet hurt.”…Mrs. Parks’ patience had given way, had she but known it, at the best possible moment." [From Martin Luther King Jr.: America’s Great Nonviolent Leader in the Struggle for Human Rights by Valerie Schloredt, Morehouse Publishing, 1990.]
The portrayal of Rosa Parks as a poor, tired and frail woman who “snapped” is not only false; it disregards the years of strategic planning by Civil Rights Movement activists and misrepresents the way in which meaningful social change actually occurs.
Though Rosa Parks became the focal point of the Montgomery Bus Boycott, the idea for a boycott was conceived at least six years before her arrest. In 1949, Jo Ann Gibson Robinson, an English professor and head of the Women’s Political Council (WPC), was ejected from a bus for refusing to move seats and resolved to do something about bus segregation. During the ensuing years, the WPC prepared to stage a bus boycott “when the time was ripe and the people were ready.” In the months prior to Parks’ arrest, at least three other African American people had been arrested for refusing to give up their bus seats to white people. When Rosa Parks was arrested, movement leaders made a strategic decision to launch the boycott because they felt Mrs. Parks had the respect and support of her community as well as the fortitude to withstand the racism and publicity that the boycott would generate.
“To call Rosa Parks a poor, tired seamstress,” notes educator and author Herbert Kohl, “and not talk about her role as a community leader as well is to turn an organized struggle for freedom into a personal act of frustration. It is a thorough misrepresentation of the Civil Rights Movement in Montgomery, Alabama, and an insult to Mrs. Parks as well." [From Should We Burn Babar? Essays on Children's Literature and the Power of Stories by Herbert Kohl, The New Press, July 1996, p. 30–56.]
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)her interest wasn't to become an icon of the civil rights movement...and she allowed herself to be arrested and jailed for that cause.
BIG Difference...
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)Snowden's interest also was not to become an icon of the civil rights movement, but to end an injustice.
Just why are you so obsessed with Edward Snowden? Why are you so obsessed with disparaging him at every opportunity? Shouldn't you be more obsessed with ending an injustice?
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)(She also didn't previously support racism and think other people sitting down on a bus should be shot... when a different administration was in power)
Big Difference...
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)Why are you focusing on the perceived criminality of the action instead of the results of the action? The only reason to do so is to try and invalidate the results of the action by casting aspersions on the character of the person involved.
Why are you trying to give political cover to the NSA?
riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)cowards run...Rosa Parks didn't run...neither did Muhammed Ali...and I don't trust liars and cowards...
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)Why is it your primary objective to sow distrust of Snowden rather than to examine the activities of the NSA?
Our "trust" or "distrust" of Snowden's character is irrelevant. The information he revealed has been vetted as authentic. The NSA itself has not claimed that the leaked documents were faked.
If you think the leaked information is not authentic, please post links to evidence supporting that assertion.
If you accept that the leaked information is authentic, but disagree with the criticisms of the NSA's activities, then say so. Defend your position with facts and logic other than "Snowden is a coward."
Otherwise, it is not possible to take what you post with any degree of seriousness.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)Maedhros
(10,007 posts)VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)I know what courage is...
Ash_F
(5,861 posts)Snooping tools solidly in control of the right wing military will do just that. Do people like Clapper and Alexander seem like the sort who should have this kind of power?
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)then why is he the "traitor and . . . coward"?
In other words, if Snowden merely told us what we already knew, what's the big deal?
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)The NSA violated even the liberal laws that they interpret to allow them to put us under surveillance. That would be a crime in a real democracy.
Ash_F
(5,861 posts)Everybody has it! 
Demenace
(213 posts)... it is called stealing, my dear friend! People have obtained some of these information through the Freedom of information act as such know these issues, your pal, stole from the government but you characterize him as honorable.
In case, your miss the irony of your position, the Government is of you and I and populated by hard working honorable Americans like you and I who see and have access to these information daily, it is not stored in some alien warehouse, protected by some non Americans.
The difference here is, there are honest Americans and there is Snowden who is a thief! Today, it is the government's information he has stolen, tomorrow, it will be your credit card information. Come to think of it, who says, he has not stolen your personal information already after all, he has what he claims the government has!
Only fools applaud characters like these and fail to see how just a few steps down the road, their hero will become their worse nightmare!
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)entities. if he really thought he was
uncovering wrongdoing he should have followed the whistleblower statutes. he would have been a mune from prosecution. but it seems like he had a host of other agendas.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)Demenace
(213 posts)The irony of their position is so amazing, they claim others have broken the laws but discount their pal who is claiming to defend the laws of the land he has broken. People, a thief is not your best moral champion when decrying crimes of theft by others. Your thief is the same as the other thieves you want me to pay attention to!
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)An independent commission determined that the NSA spying violates the law and is not useful for fighting terrorism.
It is not illegal to disclose government conduct that is illegal. That is legitimate whistleblowing.
It is illegal for our government to use the secrecy regulations and laws to hide its own wrongdoing and waste.
The independent commission would probably agree with me that the NSA surveillance program is both wrong and wasteful. Therefore, revealing its illegal activities and waste are not a crime. Therefore, Snowden did not commit a crime. He "stole" things that should not have existed in the first place.
George II
(67,782 posts)To other countries? And what about what he's told other countries about spying by yet third countries?
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)If you ever did, it is very likely that you were either ignored or fired -- usually for some phony reason.
Snowden told US the American people that we are being spied on.
I have been assured here on DU (many times) that other countries spy on the internet too. I have been assured that China, Russia, France, Brazil, etc. all do it.
If they all do it, then surely they would know that the US does it. Snowden was not telling them anything new (if they are all doing it).)
It's we, the American people, who believed that our Constitution prevented our government from spying on us. We thought we were safe. We thought we were free.
Sillly us. So Snowden's news was news to us, but probably not to a lot of other countries. Remember that virus that affected Iran's nuclear capacity. It is strongly believed that was either our invention or that of the Israelis. Our capacity to use the internet as a weapon as established although most of us thought that surely our democratic government would not be spying on us.
Silly us. Snowden is a whistleblower. When our government decides to do things that are illegal, a citizen who knows about it has a duty to come forward.
In democracy, the individuals and bureaucratic institutions that happen to be executing power are not the authority. The people are the authority. The individuals and bureaucratic institutions that happen to be executing power form a government that ultimately answers to the people. Therefore those individuals and bureaucratic institutions are not what is to be protected foremost and always. It is the people who are sovereign and who must be protected -- and who have the last say.
The NSA should be a servant of the people. It should not be abusing the people.
George II
(67,782 posts)Correct, Snowden didn't tell those other countries that the US was spying on them that they didn't know already, but he also gave them details on HOW they were being spied upon. Regardless of all the stuff he revealed about the NSA "spying" on Americans (do you really know what information the NSA collected?), telling foreign countries how the US is spying on them, in my mind, is treason.
Ash_F
(5,861 posts)JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)That's kind of crazy in my opinion.
George II
(67,782 posts)Thanks to Snowden they now know how, too.
Ash_F
(5,861 posts)
Titonwan
(785 posts)Funny how people claim to know everything revealed has been common knowledge (for years, I tell ya!). If this story broke during the Bush years, you'd have the same ones ranting and raving about the illegality of it all. (That's the reassuring thing about Glenn Greenwald- he holds ALL politicians to account, regardless of party)
Demenace
(213 posts)When you fail the acknowledge there can be another side to a narrative, you have lost out on a chance to be a step wiser, just saying...
RC
(25,592 posts)VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)RC
(25,592 posts)Snowden did us all a favor by exposing the illegal and unconstitutional excesses of the NSA. They can no longer hide behind their lies.
What is so hard for some people to see, that if no one had done what Snowden did, we'd never know how far along the road we are to be coming a dictatorship. Or even realize we we were in one, until it was way too late to do much of anything. The NSA excesses are still coming out. Why do you defend them?
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)I don't trust cowards and liars...
RC
(25,592 posts)Yeah, sure. You didn't answer my question. Why are you defending what the NSA is doing?
brush
(53,771 posts)covert operations?
The following paragraph is from another post by struggleforprogress:
"Snowden noted matter-of-factly that Standard Form 312, the classified-information nondisclosure
agreement, is a civil contract. He signed it ..."
I myself have contended all along that if Snowden had limited his actions to the domestic sphere I'd also be calling him a hero because the NSA needs to butt out of US citizens' business.
It surprises me that those who call themselves progressives can't see the difference between the good service done by Snowden in revealing the domestic info gathering and the harm done to the country by revealing how and what the country is doing internationally to intercept information that could prevent damage to our country.
There are two entirely different issues here that shouldn't be that hard to differentiate.
IMO, divulging intricacies of our international covert operations is not something that should be left to a somewhat naive 29-year-old who seems to have not thought his actions through. He seemingly was manipulated by Greenwald, who has now parlayed the stolen info into a lucrative deal to start his own media empire, while poor Snowden is now stranded in Russia and pinning to come home. There's a reason why one has to be at least 35-years-old to run for president as you will have hopefully, with more life experience and mature judgement, learned to think things through to the possible consequences of one's actions, something Snowden obviously didn't do or he wouldn't be stuck in "Putin's paradise".
And another thing, what business is it of he and Greenwald to revealed covert operations of Australia in Indonesia? They also released that info. That's a mouth-opening WTF?
riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)as it should, as they are complicit in illegal intelligence gathering on our behalf.
brush
(53,771 posts)Are you saying that Snowden thinks that countries should get together and agree to not spy on each other?
If that's what Snowden allegedly wants, please refer back to my post — the part about the "somewhat naive 29-year-old". That is not going to happen and to think it will because he wants it to because he disclosed information of his own countries international covert operations (and other countries operations as well) is narcissistic naivete of the highest order.
He did a good think in calling attention the domestic info gathering, which I believe must stop, but c'mon, international covert operations will continue because there are bad actors out there that we need to keep tabs on.
I certainly don't want train bombings, car bombings, bus bombings and building bombings to become routine here as in other parts of the world.
We have enough almost daily shooting here by crazies.
riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)For our government to say "we don't spy on Americans!111!!" but instead our allies like the Australians spy on us FOR our government (and vice versa) so the PTB can whitewash their hands ("no way, 'we're' not spying on Americans!!111!). Our 5 spy countries do it for us and report back.
There's no way we're tapping Angela Merkel's private cell phone because she's a terrorist threat. We're doing it because we want global economic imperialism and we think we can gain an economic advantage from listening in on her conversations.
This is an important conversation. Way overdue.
Denigrate it all you like because you are an authoritarian more concerned about security over liberty but the facts remain that we have a serious problem with NSA overreach - both here and abroad.
brush
(53,771 posts)That's not going to stop. It's the world's second, maybe first, oldest profession.
Call me an authoritarian if you like (don't get that at all since I agree with Snowden's calls for domestic info gathering to stop) but do you know how you sound? Because a naive 29-year-old thinks his divulging of international covert operations is going to, or should stop spying, is, and I have to say it, laughable, and you agree with it?
Perhaps you haven't heard but there are now stirring to try to get Jonathan Pollard released by his supporters. He's the one who spied on us in the '80s for Israel, that's right Israel, our biggest ally in the Middle East.
Countries that can afford it will continue to do it for strategic advantage and it's not going to stop, I don't care how much Snowden calls for it. It's almost silly to think it will.
Realpolitik anyone?
riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)Masking as "realpolitick".
The US has not been the "good guy" in global economic affairs (and in many cases global politics) for many years. Our covert and overt actions trying to manipulate events has had serious and terrible blowback that's more harmful than helpful.
I think any exposure of that is a good thing. Clearly you believe otherwise. Good luck with that but I don't think I'm the " naive" one thinking that continuing our hyperaggressive activities on every front is really helping us at all.
brush
(53,771 posts)Don't get me wrong, I am not in favor of the coups, assasinations, occupations and wars we've been CONTINUOSLY involved in since we sent gunboats to back ex-pat Americans overthrow of the Hawaiian Monarchy in the 1890s. We have been a predator nation for sure.
But that's still another issue, stopping our own imperialism, versus gathering info to stop possible terrorist attacks on our country.
Would you rather we stop covert operations to fend off attacks against us and everyone else continue?
We would be at such a huge disadvantage we'd be having 911s constantly.
I know the two issues are somewhat intertwined but they are two separate issues. Call me selfish even but I don't want car bombings, bus bombings, train bombings and all that stuff her. Wouldn't you agree?
riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)If not economic imperialism?
We're spending billions on the NSA which is really being used to enrich the 1% and corporations, not to "save" us from terrorism.
Our economic imperialism (Central American interventions *cough*, mid-east interventions *cough* etc. etc. etc) is a major cause of why we are a target for terrorism in the first place now.
They are DIRECTLY intertwined. Snowden has proven it once and for all. We, as a citizenry - as the 99% - should be grateful its finally demonstrably out in the open.
RC
(25,592 posts)They still collecting data on any and everyone, in cooperation of sister agencies in other countries, namely the United Kingdom.
brush
(53,771 posts)You have to know that's not going to happen. And imo, it shouldn't.
He did a good think in calling attention the domestic info gathering, which I believe must stop, but c'mon, international covert operations will continue because there are bad actors out there that we need to keep tabs on.
I certainly don't want train bombings, car bombings, bus bombings and building bombings to become routine here as in other parts of the world.
To think covert operations will stop because Snowden wants it to because he disclosed information of his own countries international covert operations (and other countries operations as well) is narcissistic naivete of the highest order. That kind of thinking is why 29-year-olds can't run for president — their judgement in thinking things through to the possible consequences is obviously something he didn't do — for example, Snowden ditching everything, including his girlfriend, and running off to Russia, leaving a trail of international covert secrets behind. Now he's stuck in Russia and pinning to come home.
Bet he'd just stick to the domestic revelations if he had to do all over again. Then the whistle blower laws would offer him some protection.
RC
(25,592 posts)How much shit do we stir up so we have to get involved to fix it?
brush
(53,771 posts)We are as bad as anybody but it's still not gonna stop because everyone else is not gonna stop.
You'd rather we we stopped gathering info and everyone else continue?
We be at such a huge disadvantage we'd be having 911s contantly. Not an option.
And don't get me wrong, I am not in favor of the coups, assasinations, occupations and wars we've been continuously involved in since we sent gunboats to back ex-pat Americans overthrow of the Hawaiin Monarchy in the 1890s.
But that's another issue than gather info to stop possible attacks on our country.
RC
(25,592 posts)And there were plenty. Then when the attack did happen, we refused all offers of help to track down those responsible, in favor of attacking a country that had nothing to do with it. Also Iraq did not have any terrorists at the time. We turned Iraq into a terrorist strong hold. So we have more 'enemies' to fight now.
What people need to understand is, our spying by the NSA and other agencies, is not for our protection, but for power and control over us. Even we US citizens are being spied on with the same intent and intensity as our so-called enemies. Enemies we have gone out of our way to make sure they are our enemies.
There is no way one can be demonetizing Edward Snowden and not be supporting the illegal and unconstitutional NSA spying. That is like being for women's right to be kept barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen. It doesn't compute.
If you are not in favor of the coups, assassinations, occupations and wars we've been continuously involved in since we sent gunboats to back ex-pat Americans overthrow of the Hawaiian Monarchy in the 1890s, then how can you be for the spying the NSA is doing on us, US. That is part of the same issue, spying will not and has not stopped any attacks on or in this country, because that is not the intent of the spying in the first place. It is power and control. The NSA was in existence in 2000. Where were their warnings for 9/11? Where were the warnings about the Boston Bomber, the Oklahoma bombings or any other acts of terrorism, ever? The NSA was formed in 1952!
But that is part of the same issue because they, the NSA does not gather info to stop possible attacks on our country. They gather that info to control us.
brush
(53,771 posts)Last edited Sun Jan 26, 2014, 07:54 PM - Edit history (1)
Snowden's revelations of the NSA domestic information gathering is a good thing and the spying should be STOPPED.
IMO that is a separate issue from the international covert spying. And you don't know anymore than anyone else that the international info gathering "is not for our protection, but for power and control over us". I want someone trying to intercept communications by groups that may be targeting internal targets like trains, bus and cars for bombings like what happens often in other countries.
You sited the Boston bombing and the OKC bombing but you don't know how many attacks have been intercepted. They may not stop all of them but someone has to do it.
Are you advocating that on one should be trying to stop these kinds of things?
And I'll say it again to be clear. Snowden did a good thing with the revelations on domestic spying on American citizens as you seem, from your response, to have not understood my position.
riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)brush
(53,771 posts)riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)Here or abroad?
If they aren't, what do you think the NSA's job is?
I'm genuinely curious
brush
(53,771 posts)riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)brush
(53,771 posts)I've said all alone that monitoring American's communications should stop.
This is from the link:
"Now, Alexander has admitted that he boldly lied in June about the efficacy of bulk surveillance, and that a mere one or two plots were affected by the monitoring of Americans' communications."
Aren't we talking about different things? The domestic monitoring "Americans' communications" versus the international info gathering?
riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)You seem to believe that the NSA is actually working on keeping us safe.
They aren't.
Even Alexander had to admit he lied.
If the NSA isn't stopping terrorist attacks, what exactly do you think their job is?
brush
(53,771 posts)He admitted that the monitoring of AMERICAN citizens hadn't stopped but 1 or 2 incidents.
There was nothing in the link about international monitoring.
Again, we seem to be talking about two different things.
And again, I'm against domestic info gathering.
George II
(67,782 posts)....Australia spying on their neighbors, etc., etc., etc.?
Remember, Eddie exposed those two, so he belied his expressed objective about stealing all those documents.
ronnie624
(5,764 posts)Any Latin American government that doesn't, considering the US history in the region, would be a foolish government indeed.
Old Latin American riddle:
Why has there never been a coup d'etat in the US?
Because there is no US embassy there.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)opportunity...at home or abroad.
ronnie624
(5,764 posts)Most of the other countries in the world do not have a massive surveillance apparatus, with which they threaten my civil liberties and the integrity of my country's political system. My own government does, however, therefore my concerns are limited to its conduct. What Brazilians do in their own country, is their business.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)that makes perfect sense...NOT!
So do you think Russia or China have "massive surveillance apparatus"?
ronnie624
(5,764 posts)Russia and China are not violating the US constitution or the integrity of US politics (unless they are financing US political campaigns, and these days, it seems anything is possible in that regard). The activities of the governments of Russia and China have no bearing on the issue of the illegal surveillance of US citizens by the NSA.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)sorry to disappoint your threadjack.
(You do realize this ultimately is about who is going to control the Internet....)
ronnie624
(5,764 posts)v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
[center]v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v[/center]<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)their country. It is uncomfortable for a country to spy on the leaders of a country with which they are allied. That needs to be done very carefully because it can lead to, shall we say, misunderstandings.
But to place law-abiding people in your own country under surveillance without any reason is utterly beyond the pale.
If Russian agents spy on my e-mails, so what. Russia has no power over my life. The worst they can do is harass me if I go to their country. They can tell me to leave their country if I go there.
But my own government can indict me, impoverish me, kill me, etc.
Besides, the US claims to be a democracy. So why do we allow a small group of people to have so much information and so much reach into the lives of other individual Americans. When we do that, we can't claim to be a democracy.
Those who support the NSA surveillance do not understand what can be discovered from their own electronic communications. They have no idea as to what data about themselves they reveal from their monthly telephone bills to say nothing of Google searches and Facebook pages. Of course, I doubt that the NSA is checking everyone's data all the time. That would be impossible.
But they can pick on the guy who demonstrates against a pipeline. They can check out candidates for office, those for example who promise to rise to national office. They can check out a judge. With whom does that judge play poker on Thursday night? What are the stakes? All kinds of useful stuff. What prescriptions do certain people take?
Demenace
(213 posts).. friends do not spy against friends?
Go check your history on intelligence activities around the world, the friendly agencies are considered the greatest threat among friends. But again that is another story. The point you guys are choosing to ignore is there is a difference between highlighting local issues affecting Americans and exposing global secrets that have far reaching consequences in the global arena.
You keep talking about the NSA as this all knowing organization but ignore the fact that this all knowing organization that follows every move you make, did not catch a common thief inside its house.
The fact that most of you blow the capacities of the NSA and Snowden out of proportion is what alarms some of us. The NSA is not an all knowing agency just as Snowden is no world class computer wizard, both these fantasies are the work of very imaginative minds who will like to play on the fears of the public and just like you decry the Wing-nuts when they use these tactics, we should stop employing them because they are dishonest!
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)"It is uncomfortable for a country to spy on the leaders of a country with which they are allied. That needs to be done very carefully because it can lead to, shall we say, misunderstandings." There is a price to be paid for spying on your friends. Same for your neighbors. Good fences make good neighbors. It's true. When you peer over the fence and start spying on your neighbors, they feel uncomfortable and trouble starts.
If you want to know how your friends feel, ask them, look at them and talk to them. You don't need to sneak around and listen in on your friends' electronic communications. That is crude and destroys trust. Above all, respect the fences between yourself and your neighbors.
I should think the best spy would be one with great social skills. There are people who are good listeners, friendly and kind. They usually know more about what is going on in other people's minds than someone who sneaks around like the NSA did.
As I have posted before, I used to work at the phone company. I was one of many who handled the billing and especially bill collection. It got so that I could identify people's phone numbers just by their voices. And I wasn't doing anything near what the NSA is doing. I remembered which ones ran up long distance charges because they called their mother too often and which ones ran them up calling a far-away boyfriend.
The NSA may not be an all-knowing agency, but it certainly has the budget that it might take to have an all-knowing agency. The question is not whether the NSA is all-knowing. The question is how the NSA decides what it wants to know and not know -- what opinions, values and political viewpoints instruct its choices as to what to find out. Are they conservative, liberal, progressive? A political judgment is necessarily a part of the equation. And to have an agency like the NSA that does not change staff with the political fluctuations is very dangerous in a democracy.
Another question is what NSA really does with what it finds out? We have already learned that it provided information to federal prosecutors who were then advised to hide the source of that information when exchanging discover with the defense. What other kinds of things are they doing with the information. Does it collect the metadata or listen in or review the online legal research of defense attorneys in big cases? It could, you know. The fact that the NSA has lawyers' phones under surveillance is really a problem. It's a very old principle that the confidences between lawyer and client are to be respected. The are not admissible in court in general. But the NSA could have a direct pipeline into the relationship between lawyer and client and know all of the research that a lawyer is doing. That destroys a good part of the Constitution's guarantee of a free trial and freedom from self-incrimination.
Russell Tice suggests that the NSA may have placed Obama under surveillance as early as 2004. Did they? Why? What other politicians has the NSA placed under surveillance?
I lived near Eastern Europe during the beginning of the end of the Cold War. I talked to people who had escaped. Surveillance and propaganda are the tools of repressive governments, and we are seeing both right here. The NSA has us under surveillance. Our media spouts mindless propaganda. These are bad developments.
At least, thanks to Snowden and the other whistleblowers, now we all know just how sneaky the NSA is and that it has us under surveillance.
Am I worried for myself? Hardly. If my life at this time were at all suspicious (or even interesting), I would not post about my objections to the spying.
I am talking about this because I care about the Constitution. I care about our democracy. I want America to remain the flexible, free society that it is. The NSA spying is one of many things pulling us in the wrong direction.
Last year, there were many more deaths due to gun violence, mental illness, drug addiction, preventable disease and other social problems than to terrorism. I would like to see us focus HALF the attention on fighting these more common killers that we do on terrorism. I am not just thinking of the cost of the NSA but also the entire Homeland Security apparatus -- TSA, etc.
We cannot neglect to struggle against terrorism and the bigotry and lack of tolerance that spawns it. But we should spend a lot more of our national resources on the things that are most likely to harm us now. Like mental illness, addiction (not just law enforcement but cures for addiction) including alcoholism, like gun accidents, like child abuse, like crime, like chemical accidents, like environmental deterioration. Terrorism is a big problem, but we pay a disproportionate amount of heed to it, and far too little to a lot of other problems.
George II
(67,782 posts)markpkessinger
(8,395 posts). . . not that those intent on trashing Snowden are interested in honest debate.
You think they are freer in Russia now? Because Snowy is there?
This is levels of hero worship out of control.
RC
(25,592 posts)Were you replying to someone else in another thread?
treestar
(82,383 posts)RC
(25,592 posts)He saw something very wrong with what our government was doing and upheld the oath he took to the uphold and defend the Constitution.
The NSA has a long and worsening record of violating that same Constitution.
TBF
(32,053 posts)it's our loss. I'm not going to champion loss of privacy no matter who is president.
NSA needs to be reigned in.
Titonwan
(785 posts)They should appoint him an Ambassador to one of the South American countries where he's welcome. I'd like to see Uncle Sam try to down a Russian diplomatic jet.
Once he's safely there- Russia can relieve him of his duties.
Really doesn't matter, though- Barton Gellman, Glenn Greenwald and Laura Poitras have the documents and I guarantee you Glenn ain't stopping for nobody.
Drip drip drip!
From a peace activist-
"He who passively accepts evil is as much involved in it as he who helps to perpetuate it." -- Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.
To a warrior
"Our government has kept us in a perpetual state of fear - kept us in a continuous stampede of patriotic fervour - with the cry of grave national emergency. Always, there has been some terrible evil at home, or some monstrous foreign power that was going to gobble us up if we did not blindly rally behind it by furnishing the exorbitant sums demanded. Yet, in retrospect, these disasters seem never to have happened, seem never to have been quite real." -- Gen. Douglas McArthur
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)Titonwan
(785 posts)msanthrope
(37,549 posts)ronnie624
(5,764 posts)He heads the Foreign Affairs Committee, and the article reports the extension as a matter of fact.
MADem
(135,425 posts)make him wait out the five year time line....!
And it sounds to me like he's excuse - making, and he's sick of Russia....
Best resolution for HIM, certainly. Baby, it's cold outside....!
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)this is not a great place to be.
bemildred
(90,061 posts)Obama says: "We need to talk about these things ..."
Snowden says: "Oh no I couldn't come home the way things are ..."
The Gov't says: "Oh no clemency is impossible, but we'd be open to a conversation, if ..."
Russia says: "Don't worry, we won't kick him out before you guys are done talking ..."
George II
(67,782 posts)Russia says: "we're still debriefing him, but don't worry, we won't kick him out until we're finished and you guys are done talking....."
bemildred
(90,061 posts)carla
(553 posts)yet you cling to the little RW talking points. How sweet...barf. Mr. Edward Snowden is a greater American and patriot than you or a million like you, G2. Polemic is a deficiency in argumentation. Thank goodness you haven't got a clue...too bad you have a forum.
Tarheel_Dem
(31,233 posts)
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)Tarheel_Dem
(31,233 posts)
Psephos
(8,032 posts)As was said of Newton, "We recognize the lion by his claw."
SoapBox
(18,791 posts)Or try China, Syria, Somalia or other such gems.
They are perfect homes for Traitors.
frylock
(34,825 posts)awoke_in_2003
(34,582 posts) DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)It resonates. It fits. And the MST3K/RiffTrax guys did a voiceover for Red Dawn. I wonder if they can do something similar for his posts.
frylock
(34,825 posts)hit n run references to "Comrade Eddie." that's all they have. zero substance. and i'm gonna have to find that version of Red Dawn, as I'm an avid MSTie.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)I'd suggest Somalia...
Ed Suspicious
(8,879 posts)Good news, Comrade Eddie!
olddad56
(5,732 posts)George II
(67,782 posts)olddad56
(5,732 posts)Titonwan
(785 posts)
Cha
(297,158 posts)when you're so fucking brainwashed with eddie/glenn you think there's no difference. The ignorance is pathetic.
Fucking eddie and his hero putin.. I hope they're very happy.
FarPoint
(12,350 posts)He's no hero... More like an actual traitor. In my opinion....
frylock
(34,825 posts)everyone has one.
FarPoint
(12,350 posts)How unkindly of you. If you wish to debate the issue, please go forward. Name calling in a passive aggressive fashion because you disagree. That's unacceptable.
Cha
(297,158 posts)
Tarheel_Dem
(31,233 posts)
MADem
(135,425 posts)Tarheel_Dem
(31,233 posts) MADem
(135,425 posts)Tarheel_Dem
(31,233 posts)something? I wonder if something similar happened to Snowie?
MADem
(135,425 posts)Now, I'm just sorry.
James Brown had SOUL.
Pootie, not so much!
Warning--Gratuitous religiosity in this thread:
Of course, then he called him "cold-blooded!" Can't make up his damn mind!
Tarheel_Dem
(31,233 posts)
George II
(67,782 posts)It's six months old, but still basically current:
If NSA leaker Edward Snowden is allowed to leave the Moscow airport and enter Russia, as some news reports suggest, he'll join a fairly small group of Americans who have sought refuge there.
So how did it work out for the others?
In short, not so well. Some became disillusioned and left, like Lee Harvey Oswald. Others were sent to Josef Stalin's gulags, where they served long sentences or were executed. Some lived out their days in an alcoholic haze.
"There's little evidence from historical records that [Snowden] has anything good to look forward to," says Peter Savodnik, a journalist and author of the upcoming book, The Interloper: Lee Harvey Oswald Inside the Soviet Union. "Essentially, nobody from the U.S. who has defected to Russia has gone on to think that's a smart decision."
A Long History
In the 1920s and '30s, hundreds of American leftists moved to what was then the Soviet Union, motivated by a desire to build socialism.
Alexander Gelver of Oshkosh, Wis., was taken there by his parents. But when the 24-year-old wanted to return to the U.S., he was stopped by Soviet police outside the U.S. Embassy in Moscow. He was arrested and disappeared. Only in the 1990s did his fate become clear: He was executed in 1938, one of Stalin's many victims.
The Associated Press documented the case of Gelver and 14 other Americans who disappeared in the Soviet Union in the 1930s and '40s. All were either imprisoned or executed. Dozens, perhaps hundreds of other Americans, met a similar fate during the rule of Stalin, who suspected that foreigners were spies.
A famous case in the Cold War era has parallels to Snowden. William Martin and Bernon Mitchell, cryptologists at the NSA, defected in 1960. But they came to regret their decision and became alcoholics. Martin died in Mexico in 1987. Mitchell died in Russia in 2001.
One defector who did return was Oswald. He left for the Soviet Union in 1959, returned to the U.S. three years later, and became infamous as the assassin of President Kennedy in 1963.
Valuable To Russia's Intelligence Service
Peter Earnest, executive director of the International Spy Museum in Washington, D.C., and a 35-year veteran of the CIA, says Snowden is exactly the kind of person Russia's intelligence service would be interested in.
"This is an individual with knowledge about a major national security organization [the NSA], one Russia would love to penetrate," Earnest says. "He's a pretty smart guy. With only a GED, he was able to secure employment with the CIA, the NSA and Booz Allen, and with it a high-level security clearance. So he'd be a very useful resource to them."
But Savodnik, the author and journalist, says it's likely Snowden has served his purpose in Russia.
"Whatever value he has to the Kremlin has already been drained," he says. "They'll probably try to marginalize him and send him where he's less likely to make noise or attract the attention of the media or others."
(more)
Tarheel_Dem
(31,233 posts)I'll bet his every communication is watched like a hawk. Snowden's problem now is that for all his divulging nobody trusts him. It's the reason countries weren't lining up to take him.
"This is an individual with knowledge about a major national security organization , one Russia would love to penetrate," Earnest says. "He's a pretty smart guy. With only a GED, he was able to secure employment with the CIA, the NSA and Booz Allen, and with it a high-level security clearance. So he'd be a very useful resource to them."
Just WoW! Snowden has some very powerful friends, with some serious anti US feelings, and some of them in this country.
MADem
(135,425 posts)I think he got a high ASVAB score when he entered the Army. This means his ENTNAC, and the follow on NAC, wouldn't focus on his actual educational bona fides, and instead would concentrate on criminal behavior--and he had none of that.
Thus, by the time he broke his legs in Army obstacle course/SF training, he had two "good" agency checks in short succession. These provided the basis for him to subsequently get his secret, and later his TS clearances. Then, the clock starts ticking down, he's got, what, ten years before he needs to renew and recertify?
It was only when he was up for reverification that a problem with his education came to fore--and not just a little problem, either. Mister GED wasn't just asserting he was a HS grad by this point in time, he was claiming to have post-grad education in London...and his story wasn't checking out. He knew that it was only a matter of time before the house of cards fell. And once he got nailed for lying like that--especially a big, long lie (we're not just talking about faking a High School diploma, this guy put himself through college and grad school...ALL in his HEAD!!!), it's unlikely he'd ever work in that business ever again. Ever.
If you're gonna go out, may as well go out with a bang. I think he started grabbing stuff when he was at Dell just because he thought he was smarter than the average bear...but once he got to BHA, he knew his time in the game was short, so he feathered his nest with shit he stole.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)that makes much better sense...his time was running out anyways...he was done! He was going to end up a Walmart greeter!
treestar
(82,383 posts)Totally likely scenario.
I know of a case where someone faked they had a diploma in engineering - back in the day, and nobody questioned him. He worked at a nuclear power plant! That person's character was a lot like Snowy's. Delusional about his greatness. Hiring him was an error on BAH part. That's the breach of security more than Ed's leaking - they hired someone who would leak and intended to - that's the thing they should be trying to fix. As for the NSA overstepping its bounds, we have the whistleblower protection act.
The really bad thing is this outsourcing of government functions started by the Republicans. Actual government workers have more pride in the job they are doing.
randome
(34,845 posts)
[hr][font color="blue"][center]“If you're not committed to anything, you're just taking up space.”
Gregory Peck, Mirage (1965)[/center][/font][hr]
LynneSin
(95,337 posts)Personally I think Putin is a douchebag asshole. Why can't he treat the Russian LGBT community the same way he treats Eric Snowden.
kiawah
(64 posts)The problem he has with his detractors here is that he hurt "the team"....
We do not believe in zero national security or ignoring the whistleblower protections.
Leave that to the right wing - they are the ones claiming we are against the country having security.
Ash_F
(5,861 posts)"loveint"? How cute!
I feel safer already!
randome
(34,845 posts)They reported it to the FISA court and disciplined the analysts involved. This sort of thing happens to every large organization. When it does, processes are put in place to prevent it from happening again.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]“If you're not committed to anything, you're just taking up space.”
Gregory Peck, Mirage (1965)[/center][/font][hr]
Ash_F
(5,861 posts)stevenleser
(32,886 posts)You understand that in basic training, they warn you that military justice is particularly tough and that the Army/Navy/Air Force/Marines is not the place to mess around.
The Military and the CIA and the NSA are different organizations.
Ash_F
(5,861 posts)stevenleser
(32,886 posts)treestar
(82,383 posts)That doesn't mean throw the baby out with the proverbial bathwater.
Some cops are bad and beat people up - so maybe we should have no cops.
Some doctors do a bad job - maybe we should have no doctors.
Ash_F
(5,861 posts)stevenleser
(32,886 posts)treestar
(82,383 posts)There are many purposes intelligence agencies. And they don't have to stop one, just try. That's what people were demanding after 911; claiming they had not connected the dots and should have suspected something. No one said they could necessarily prevent all attacks, just that they should have the ability to do so as best they can.
It's like saying there is no cure for cancer, so no one should ever to to see a doctor for anything.
Ash_F
(5,861 posts)That's pretty rich. I would say they are closer to the cancer.
Ash_F
(5,861 posts)And it turned out those employees didn't even do anything illegal.
It should not be so hard to defund the NSA. They have shown they are eager to cut funds over "a few bad apples".
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)of course you do!
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)and thought someone like him deserved to be shot!
Cha
(297,158 posts)mutual.
nilesobek
(1,423 posts)how would Snowden make a living?
davidpdx
(22,000 posts)Not surprising at all. They'll let him stay as long as he needs to.
Historic NY
(37,449 posts)He wants the US government to change the laws to give him whistle blower protection. What does that tell you? He is conceding the point.
"He pointed out that the U.S. government's Whistleblower Protection Act doesn't cover someone like him, a former government contractor."
dipsydoodle
(42,239 posts)Good.
Harmony Blue
(3,978 posts)and more and more people are seeing the truth. 
Unfortunately some can't admit when they are wrong...oh well that is their loss.
Tippy
(4,610 posts)The Russians can have him for all I care...He is a criminal, deserves no respect from any US citizen
