indeed.
in fact, i think it is the height of ignorance of what technology has been doing in the last 10, no 20 years to NOT be aware that this was going to be happening.
Its basically a technology end-game.
indeed.
in fact, i think it is the height of ignorance of what technology has been doing in the last 10, no 20 years to NOT be aware that this was going to be happening.
Its basically a technology end-game.
Somehow I get this feeling that, like, ya know, the hippies are to blame for all of this. 
Hippies driving Fox bodies. 
Actually, didn't the super secret can'ttell anybody tell the NSA that what they were doing in regards to US intelligence gathering was illegal?
Why yes, yes they did: http://www.dailypaul.com/290257/glenn-greenwald-80-page-decision-from-fisa-court-says-nsa-is-bulk-collecting-phone-calls-of-americans-video . But we never heard about it did we?
So basically, the NSA was told what they were doing was illegal, but they continue to do so. And Snowden is the "traitor"?
In reply to Bobzilla:
Except THAT is not what Snowden revealed they were doing.
Interestingly: It all depends on where you get your info. MANY other sites say this mystery 80 page document and ruling GRANT them rights to do exactly whatthey are accused of doing... and more.
for instance: http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/06/20/secret-fisa-court-allows-nsa-to-collect-and-use-data-without-a-warrant/
Perhaps, using sites dedicated to individuals that have spent the last 4 years being anti Obama is not the best source to cite.
It would be like saying that North Korea is a paradise, and using the North Korean News sites as a source.
welcome to the 21st century where any time you cite a site that is full on one side, the exact opposite can be found that says the exact opposite.
There are several ways he could have revealed this information. He's picked about the worst way possible.
mad_machine wrote: It's the way Snowden did it. If he had blown the whistle and then stood there calmly with his hands out to accept the cuffs.. he would have been lauded as a hero. He probably could have pleaed it down and gotten out of prison in a couple of years.
That would have been seriously bad-ass and heroic. If he'd done that, he would have been unequivocally a hero. Not everybody has the strength of character to say, "I refuse to obey this law - now give me the penalty."
But if he didn't have that sort of courage, he could have contacted a senator who he could expect to be opposed to this, and ask for immunity if he testifies about that.
Even if he didn't do things in a legit way, he could have fled to a country that is a better choice for protecting its citizens' rights and privacy - say, Germany. And then kept his mouth shut about what else he'd learned. That wouldn't be a great option - but it is at least more defensible than what he did.
Going to China, claiming THEY have a good human rights record, and spilling a bunch of other secrets? I have to wonder if he's been a spy for the Chinese all along.
SCARR wrote: In reply to Bobzilla: Except THAT is not what Snowden revealed they were doing. Interestingly: It all depends on where you get your info. MANY other sites say this mystery 80 page document and ruling GRANT them rights to do exactly whatthey are accused of doing... and more. Chosing to attack a source rather than the content is rather telling to me. for instance: http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/06/20/secret-fisa-court-allows-nsa-to-collect-and-use-data-without-a-warrant/ Perhaps, using sites dedicated to individuals that have spent the last 4 years being anti Obama is not the best source to cite. It would be like saying that North Korea is a paradise, and using the North Korean News sites as a source. welcome to the 21st century where any time you cite a site that is full on one side, the exact opposite can be found that says the exact opposite.
It's called "Google". I typed it in, it gave me multiple sites. THat was the one that I selected first. Don't like the source, tough titty. Get over it. There were multiple, that was the easiest to sort through to show what I was reading. I'm sure if you weren't being a douchecanoe, I would go back and post others. But I'm not.
MadScientistMatt wrote: Even if he didn't do things in a legit way, he could have fled to a country that is a better choice for protecting its citizens' rights and privacy - say, Germany. And then kept his mouth shut about what else he'd learned. That wouldn't be a great option - but it is at least more defensible than what he did. Going to China, claiming THEY have a good human rights record, and spilling a bunch of other secrets? I have to wonder if he's been a spy for the Chinese all along.
Germany would have sent him directly back to the US on request, most countries with a respectable human rights record would have because most of them happen to be US allies. China doesn't have a good human rights record, but they wouldn't cave to an extradition request from the US.
And for those saying he wanted to make a buck on this - he was making 6 digits a year at his mansion on a tropical island with his hot wife. Now he's fleeing between 3rd-world countries with no access to his bank accounts. In his position, only a greedy moron would have done this for money.
In reply to GameboyRMH:
Well, he was employed for less than 3 months as of June 10th, and he left for Hong Kong on May 20th, but he left his house on May 1st. His salary was $122,000 a year, according to Booz Allen, where he worked and got ahold of the documents.
Theoretically he made $1,642 a week, for 2 months. About 6-7k before he ran.
Before that he worked at Dell.
So, where did a man with only a GED get get the money for "a mansion on a tropical island"?
122k a year is not really THAT much (way more than me, though).
BTW, here is his "mansion"
You clearly have never looked at real estate in Hawaii. That IS a mansion there!
Two car garage! The opulence!!
His motivation / knowing what he was getting into, is interesting though. It appears he had to be pretty disgusted to turn so quickly.
Based upon info released today, he took the job in order to get the info and disseminate it. Now he is traveling between China and Russia; both are countries that seek to destablize the US. Sounds like espionage at its best. Call him a traitor.
In reply to whenry:
That is what I was about to say.
looking at the info of his life and statements about how he planned this all along, but hoped things would change.. that is why he waited.... this was a deliberate and calculated thing. He joined that contractor JUST to get the info he needed.
Question is: did he do it because he thought what was happening was wrong, or because he figured he could sell the info to other countries?
Remember, we only know about that one document. 2 months is a long time to gather things to sell. If he was JUSt trying to help the people of America... He would turn himself in. he is too public for the Gov't to "try to get him back" (even for tin foil hat wearers.)
I would not be surprised to find out his acceptance into that position was at risk anyway.. He could have fabricated enough to get in.. but knew his time was limited. That is what I would do, if I planned to get in, get as much secret info as I could, and then get out.
While I'm not sure if he's a patriot, or a traitor, I'm glad the country is having this discussion.
If you trust our government to do the right thing and look out for the people, you probably aren't too concerned about this.
If you don't trust your government you are probably a little freaked out.
In any case---- I think more transparency would be a good thing. It isn't like they are just spying on the KGB----- they can spy on all of us now, easily, and quietly. Much easier and quieter than before. Is that a good thing? I suppose it depends which side of the fence you are on.
You trust your govt. or you don't.
whenry wrote: Based upon info released today, he took the job in order to get the info and disseminate it. Now he is traveling between China and Russia; both are countries that seek to destablize the US. Sounds like espionage at its best. Call him a traitor.
The info released today comes from a Chinese newspaper. That doesn't mean it's not accurate but it deserves at least the same amount of skepticism as what comes from any government.
Well, it seems logical. He has had a history of anti gov't and had the job JUST long enough to grab the info.
SCARR wrote: ..He has had a history of anti gov't and had the job JUST long enough to grab the info.
hmmmm.... how did he get a security clearance then?
You would think that would be a pretty big red flag for a Top Secret clearance.
Here is some info on that subject:
oldsaw wrote: The info released today comes from a Chinese newspaper. That doesn't mean it's not accurate but it deserves at least the same amount of skepticism as what comes from any government with an information ministry.
fixed that for you ^_^
Most of this falls under section II of the Patriot Act. Truth is, it has been known since day 1 that this could happen. In fact, my first reaction is that this was old news, why is it coming up again now.
What this new story did was bring it back to the forefront. The most troubling aspect of this is that the data gathering has been escalating beyond what was originally intended, and that we have technology now to use this data that was merely a pipe dream 12 years ago. It is what can and will be done with our information that is the most troublesome.
If you read the Patriot Act, as I suspect many in Congress have not, it is extremely worrying that we have given the FBI, Justice Dept. and other agencies the power they have with no oversight or Constitutional restraints.
I've never been a fan. That said, I still stand by what I said about Snowden. If he wanted to bring this out again, he could have done it differently. He has in fact committed treason, regardless of what we consider heroic actions. Choices have consequences and you have to consider them carefully.
whenry wrote: Based upon info released today, he took the job in order to get the info and disseminate it. Now he is traveling between China and Russia; both are countries that seek to destablize the US. Sounds like espionage at its best. Call him a traitor.
A destabilized America does China no good. Since our Government owes them lots of money as well as our citizens being a source of lots of money.
Russia doesn't give as much of a E36 M3 about us as people seem to think. As much of a E36 M3heel as Putin is, he is trying to get Mother Russia back on its feet.
There is a much more alarming situation going on regarding MrSnowden, and this thread is a perfect example: His actions have drawn out a division within the nation that is bound to be exploited.
Snowdens actions have drawn out the division between those who trust and believe that the government is acting on our behalf, and those that are convinced that the government has its own undeclared agenda.
If I were somebody who caould benefit from faning this flame, you can bet I would. Probably much the same as if I could split the country against itself by polarizing its politics.
E pluribus unum and all that rot!
In reply to NOHOME:
I don't see any great surge (on this thread) to proclaim Snowden as a hero. It may be true elsewhere, where it seems to loudest complainers haven't been paying much attention for the last 12yrs or are capitalizing on a complacent populace's fears.
Racerdave600 mentions a distrust in government a few posts up (^). This is relevant as recent, other events show where government has over-stepped its' bounds in rather flagrant ways. Snowden (even if a traitor) is just the latest example of gummint-gone-wild.
And, really, why is this episode getting more folks riled-up than the IRS' shenanigans? If people want to be pissed-off about something, it hit them in the face weeks before a bespectacled loser dropped his deuce on the USA.
In reply to oldsaw:
The only people I've seen openly calling him a hero are the same brain dead aspies on the internet who call anyone who does crap like this a hero.
My two cents? Calling someone an "aspie" is as bad as saying something is "gay".
Since the people I'm talking about are self diagnosed to explain why they're a bunch of socially awkward berkeleytards and then use it as an excuse to continue acting like socially awkward berkeleytards I'll try to care the next time I call one of them gay.
Hrm, does it seem like we are rolling downhill, or is it just me?
You'll need to log in to post.
