Is Snowden starting to go too far with Chinese / International disclosures?

I had originally thought it would just be a positive story to share and the initial headline looked it.

EXCLUSIVE: Snowden safe in Hong Kong, more US cyberspying details revealed

Followed by a sub-head of "Snowden is not under police protection but in a "safe place" in Hong Kong"

Then I got to looking at more of what the story was saying he's sharing and this isn't setting real well with me as time goes on. I must admit.

Now, after further scrutiny and clarification of that information, we can reveal more explosive details of the US cyber-spying operation against in Hong Kong, the mainland and the region.

(Above Link)

The US government is hacking Chinese mobile phone companies to steal millions of text messages, Edward Snowden has told the South China Morning Post. And the former National Security Agency contractor claims he has the evidence to prove it.

“There’s far more than this,” Snowden said in an interview on June 12. “The NSA does all kinds of things like hack Chinese cell phone companies to steal all of your SMS data.”

Source

There is a point where it's fair to say, hey, this is what intelligence agencies are SUPPOSED to be doing. The problem I've had here is that the NSA and others are prohibited by charter from operating against domestic targets and US citizens. However, spy agencies are supposed to be...well? Spying.

Tsinghua University in Beijing, widely regarded as the mainland’s top education and research institute, was the target of extensive hacking by US spies this year, according to information leaked by Edward Snowden.

It is not known how many times the prestigious university has been attacked by the NSA but details shown to the Post by Snowden reveal that one of the most recent breaches was this January.

Okay, this is where I really get uneasy about his lines between whistle blower and bonfied debriefing defector.

Snowden said the information he shared on the Tsinghua University attacks provided evidence of NSA hacking because the specific details of external and internal internet protocol addresses could only have been obtained by hacking or with physical access to the computers.

Source

He'd also indicated in an earlier Guardian article around the time he first came out, that he'd seen and known about CIA safe houses around the world. That becomes a more disturbing thing if he isn't showing the restraint or judgement he first indicated he would.

This wouldn't appear to be anything the US side could be doing just to smear him. These are his own words and decisions on what to share and to what extent. Some National Security is critical and necessary. That's where I'm starting to wonder.....

To add and give some balance as well as context to what he's talking about in the first post quotes, this is another article in the same news source about China's side doing pretty much the same thing. Exposing methods and details as I hope he hasn't come to start doing, is what would be damaging to what I'd hoped people knew they were intended to be doing all this time.

Hong Kong writer and political commentator Joe Chung's controversial views have made him a target for mainland hackers. "In China hackers are left alone by the central government as long as they direct their attacks against foreign targets," he said. "In that case, they are allowed much greater freedom than would be the case in Western countries, where hacking is illegal, and the law is more strictly enforced."

Not all cyberwarriors take the home hobbyist route. Some are computer science graduates recruited and trained by the military. One advertisement for the now notorious PLA unit 61398 on a Zhejiang University site read: "The graduate school has received notice that unit 61398 of China's People's Liberation Army (located in Pudong district, Shanghai) seeks to recruit 2003-class computer science graduate students. Students who sign the service contract will receive a 5,000 yuan per year national defence scholarship. After graduation, students will work in the same field within the PLA."

Source

The games they play... Indeed. They all play them though and that's the point here. I've been hoping he'd stick to crimes and violations relating to domestic abuses. Hmmm... I'm not sure that's what is starting to happen here.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


I know Wrabbit.

Im having a hard time wondering too, but..............

For Snowden though, heres what he had to say.

"No. I have had no contact with the Chinese government. Just like with the Guardian and the Washington Post, I only work with journalists," he said in response to a question from The Guardian's Spencer Ackerman.

This is a predictable smear that I anticipated before going public, as the US media has a knee-jerk "RED CHINA!" reaction to anything involving HK or the PRC, and is intended to distract from the issue of US government misconduct. Ask yourself: if I were a Chinese spy, why wouldn't I have flown directly into Beijing? I could be living in a palace petting a phoenix by now.

Edward Snowden: I'm Not A Spy For The Chinese

You have to admit, he does have a point. I just think hes positioned himself so as not to be extradited.

reply to post by sonnny1


The question I have isn't whether he's sitting there talking to a Chinese State Security Officer or a Guardian reporter, to be honest. It's about content of what is leaking at this point. Is it fair outrage or is it what the public has been paying these agencies to have been doing instead of the abuses they have been? They do exist for a reason, of course, and if not gathering intelligence on a nation that is doing the same right back at us with a generally adversarial relationship recognized by both, what would the reason be?

It sounds like his work gave him access to see and know material that, without restraint about what he release, could do serious and meaningful damage beyond anything constructive for it to be known. I hope that level doesn't start coming out. He had access far far above Manning....and so far, seems to have been genuine about discretion. So far.....?

It is very difficult for me to let one man decide what is National Security.

Also, it is difficult to believe China is just letting him walk around.

I also don't like the drip of information.

If he has some evidence of 'Violation of the Constitution".

It's time to present the evidence.

I thought it was illegal to cyper attack international civilian targets unless well at war. I mean its theft right?

Ok china do it so do russia ect

But does that make it right for the west?

I actaully dunno....its a confusing moral queation.

What about this:

What should one do if they find the government going too far in this country? What should he have done?

Why is it, to be sure the people knew about what he found, he had to go to another country to stop from being locked up and the key thrown away?

At what point does a person who feels that their government is doing wrong, come forward with information, so much so that they must flee for their lives?


Doesn't anyone see the problem here? If you find something that the whole country should know... some kind of criminal activity that our government is involved in.. how do you respond? Would you rather that person keep us all in the dark of the crimes commited by government? Or would you rather him say so..? And if he does say so, knowing that he'll be thrown in the deepest darkest dungeon, should he stick around and chance never beaing heard from again and the story just get burried like everything else? If he's out there, out of reach, he can talk and say what he believes... if he's here.. He's captured, the story burried, and we never hear another word. Some how people who have a story to tell tend to get burried under some media red tape and nothing comes of it, once captured. Remember, the details of his case is hush hush by our own country...


I dont know... I think if the guy sees something wrong, his voice should count for something and he should be able to tell his story, and tell the people and let the people decide.

Right now... with all that's happening, I believe this guy more than I believe TPTB in this country. Hell, the only one I trust today is Ron Paul and he's no longer a factor.. crazy or not, he's more trustworthy than anyone I know related to any athority what so ever...


Added:

I should make one more point.. Because of what we know today, what's in the news, what we KNOW our government is actively doing...

How many people here on ATS is afraid to star, flag or even respond to this thread? Funny... It took me a good 10 minutes to hit respond because of the fear and awareness of what's taking place... Then I realised... What's it truely worth?

Just knowing how I reacted scares me simply because I understand how many people WOULDN'T react to a forceful government takeover out of fear of being killed, pulled away from loved ones, or just the unknown...

So you believe Snowden is doing this???
Its the NSA making him look bad !

Originally posted by theRhenn





I should make one more point.. Because of what we know today, what's in the news, what we KNOW our government is actively doing...

How many people here on ATS is afraid to star, flag or even respond to this thread? Funny... It took me a good 10 minutes to hit respond because of the fear and awareness of what's taking place... Then I realised... What's it truely worth?

Just knowing how I reacted scares me simply because I understand how many people WOULDN'T react to a forceful government takeover out of fear of being killed, pulled away from loved ones, or just the unknown...

You know you bring up some very interesting points.

I am sure there are those "afraid" to post their thoughts, in fear of reprisals or being added to some watch list, down the road.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


"Others, as most legislators, politicians, lawyers, ministers, and office-holders, serve the state chiefly with their heads; and, as they rarely make any moral distinctions, they are as likely to serve the devil, without intending it, as God. A very few, as heroes, patriots, martyrs, reformers in the great sense, and men, serve the state with their consciences also, and so necessarily resist it for the most part; and they are commonly treated as enemies by it."
- Thoreau's 'Civil Disobedience'

Like most defectors, he has found himself in a strange land and with severely diminished prospects for financial security. He has two ways to make himself valuable: He can sell information to his hosts, or he can serve them as a propaganda voice. We cannot know what he has sold them in private, but it stands to reason his public disclosures are either managed by the PRC or he hopes they will earn him some goodwill with the same. The exact arrangements were probably drawn up in advance, and the defection scheduled to coincide with the recent China-US summit.

Here is an update and the latest on the saga and it's interesting to see. The US is making what I'd take to be very subtle threats, though nothing that can't be backed away from yet.

US TO HONG KONG: DON'T DELAY SNOWDEN EXTRADITION

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Obama administration on Saturday sharply warned Hong Kong against slow-walking the extradition of Edward Snowden, reflecting concerns over a prolonged legal battle before the government contractor ever appears in a U.S. courtroom to answer espionage charges for revealing two highly classified surveillance programs.

It seems these things can take a really really long time sometimes... lol...

Hong Kong lawyer Mark Sutherland said that the filing of a refugee, torture or inhuman punishment claim acts as an automatic bar on any extradition proceedings until those claims can be assessed.

"Some asylum seekers came to Hong Kong 10 years ago and still haven't had their protection claims assessed," Sutherland said.

Source

I guess that's why Snowden picked Hong Kong and I have to admire the cleverness in it. My only concern is his own statements not move into the areas that are what all nations do and need to be able to do effectively in gathering intelligence on each other. The statements attributed to him in Chinese media I found for the OP sound a bit out of the park for US agency abuses on US Constitutional grounds, which is what this is supposed to be about. What it'll have to be, to get anything done actually.

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
There is a point where it's fair to say, hey, this is what intelligence agencies are SUPPOSED to be doing. The problem I've had here is that the NSA and others are prohibited by charter from operating against domestic targets and US citizens. However, spy agencies are supposed to be...well? Spying.

I disagree. Spying on other countries sounds dangerously close to an act of war to me. Plus, I don't recall this choice being put to WE THE PEOPLE. The wardogs in Washington are too reckless and must be leashed before this causes a serious international conflict. And if we can't get them under control soon, another country may choose to intervene.

The problem is that the more he reveals about the NSA and China, the less likely that China is going to be willing to let him go so willingly and more inclined to take him for their own purposes and debriefing.

Ultimately, I do find his choice of locations suspect,. He stated in his initial interview, that he was afraid of the Chinese government, so it leads to the question, as to why did he travel to Hong Kong, a place that is technically a part of China, no longer under the control of the United Kingdom. While they are autonomous, they still have to answer to Beijing. And every time he leaks more information, it is bound to gain more and more attention from the Chinese government.

reply to post by circlemaker


Snowden's slow leaks are intentional. He's letting them hang themselves by waiting for them to respond to each new revelation. This is why the desperation to get at him before he leaks more. From what Snowden has stated in Glenn Greenwald's coverage it won't matter if they do find him. It will come out anyhow.

He is revealing all the different countries that are involved. I imagine that soon many more will be exposed.

We've heard the Guardian reporter was with Snowden for a week and that more stories are coming, and some here are not enjoying the "slow drip" of information. Now the local Chinese media are getting (supposedly) new information from him. Any purported leaker must show the "leakee" or journalist enough information to prove or at least substantiate the allegation. In a case as visible as Snowden's, the standard of acceptable proof would have to be exceptional.

I think we may be seeing the local Hong Kong media being much more forthright in disclosing the information they have received. I'm fairly certain the editorial staff of the Guardian and Post sanitized the article to the point they felt there would be no "enquiries" into the legality of their conduct. At this point, I have to wonder if there are more "AP-like" instances of government surveillance for these news outlets.

We all seem to be somewhat "okay" that the disclosure of domestic spying on the citizenry is in the best interests of We the People, considering the debilitating effects on our freedom. But when it's the "other guy" or the "enemy" (however loosely defined) it seems these revelations might pose a risk to national security? I am having a terrible bout of cognitive dissonance here.

If we assume Snowden is definitely not careless nor foolish, then I suggest that by disclosing the spying situation with his "host country" he is also giving us an insight into HOW these same intrusions into our lives are accomplished. Consider that if his intention is that all the disclosures are going to be received globally, it makes no difference about which outlet is used to disseminate the information. If what I read on another thread about the UK government issuing a gag order (Mod-D?) on certain content held by the Guardian - perhaps this is the level of detail that is restricted.

It is no stretch of the imagination to infer that if the intelligence capabilities exist to compromise Chinese networks (because of US components?) then AT LEAST the same level of surveillance capability exists within our own network.

ganjoa
(with respect)

reply to post by circlemaker


Spying on other countries is simply what the job is for any national security service.

All nations have them and it only really varies to how capable they are for how many other nations any given nation's service spies on. Heck, the Southern Pacific Island nations probably have small ones to spy on the harvest and catches of other small island nations.

Some degree of this is the point of having them. It's where that line is, that gets tricky, IMO. The NSA crossed it by a lot, I think we all pretty much agree. That doesn't mean ALL they do is instantly fair to throw into the public domain either....as just my personal thinking.

Originally posted by crazyewok
I thought it was illegal to cyper attack international civilian targets unless well at war. I mean its theft right?

Ok china do it so do russia ect

But does that make it right for the west?

I actaully dunno....its a confusing moral queation.

edit on 22-6-2013 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)

Right or wrong, it's not something he should be airing to the world. It's a complex situation and has notihng to do with violations against Americans.

He's only in HK because your dictator has made whistleblowing a 10 year sentence.
And I have usually held you in high regard as a poster...

reply to post by OccamsRazor04

Right or wrong, it's not something he should be airing to the world. It's a complex situation and has notihng to do with violations against Americans.

Dang right he should be airing it to the world. That is one selfish statement on your behalf. It not only pertains to violations against Americans but of all people of the world.. Me included.! If what they are dolng is illegal they should be held to account for their actions.. They certainly do not need any more puppets to defend them..