It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

IS Snowden for real? Hmmmmm...

page: 4
23
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 28 2013 @ 04:16 AM
link   

learnatic
These questions are often asked or discussed. Some things to bear in mind.

1, They cant just bump off someone like Snowedem without it becoming obvious to the sheeple and it might wake them up. Sure they can kill one or two here and there but if they killed them all then it would be too obvious.

2. Snowden gets mainstream air play because he has exposed actions that piss off other powerful people because they realise their actions are being jepardised or watched too.

3. All whistleblowers represent different levels of threat to different groups of people. Some 911 whistle blowers arent killed or otherwise slienced because they are not making a difference and therefore are of a lower level threat. Others are slienced because they are making a difference.

4. It may well be that they would not want to prosecute Snowden bacause a being smarter and intelligent person he may not agree to a plea bargin and may insist that the trial go ahead so he can get even more informaiton out.

Those are very good points which I have considered myself. So I'll give my own thoughts on them.

1. They have been known to do even more obvious things, that have not resulted in any significant waking up. As long as they can make it look like an accident, or frame someone else for the hit (like Oswald) the majority of the public will give their masters the benefit of the doubt. Having control over the msm goes a long way in having this power. Look at what they pulled off with the OBL raid and the death of seal team 6 members later on. They could just make Snowden disappear without a trace, and sell the story that he is on the run or hiding in a cave in Siberia. No body, no crime.

2. I'm sure 911 has pissed off a lot of people too, but I don't see those whistleblowers getting much attention besides ridicule. Snowden, on the other hand, is in the msm almost daily.

3. I do agree, but I would think that Snowden is pretty high up on that threat list. With his skills, and in his position, who knows what information he had access to. His leaks became more and more damaging as time went on. But now, suddenly his mission is accomplished?

4. Another very logical point, but as we all know, judges can be bought.

In general, my feeling is that if they can get away with 911, then they can get away with ANYTHING, and they know it. I'm sure they also know exactly how the public will react to whatever they have planned, with a little help from the msm.




posted on Dec, 28 2013 @ 04:25 AM
link   
reply to post by soulwaxer
 

I've wondered whether or not Snowden was a 'reincarnation' of Lee Harvey Oswald in a different role. I wonder who his Marina will be.



posted on Dec, 28 2013 @ 09:27 AM
link   
Wasn't it in his Christmas message where he commented:
"I'm still working for them, they just don't know it" ?



posted on Jan, 12 2014 @ 01:38 AM
link   
I'm pleased to see that I'm not the only one who finds this whole Snowden thing to be highly suspicious.

If this didn't have any other positive effects, at the very least, it put a pretty quick end to the idiots who were always making fun of conspiracy theorists. Calling us stupid and crazy and all. I noticed a lot of that noise faded rather rapidly when this story started making the news.

Whatever the truth is, people cannot just plug their ears and cover their eyes and pretend there isn't something pretty damn strange going on like they used to. Not now that it has been pretty much proven that whatever is going on in the shadows has spanned at least two presidencies. Two supposedly different presidents who supposedly had very different politics doing exactly the same thing.

On the other hand, it makes me nervous because if TPTB are behind the Snowden thing (as I suspect they are, for some reason) the pessimist within me is screaming that they are up to no good (and it's not an unreasonable suspicion).

I noticed that people don't talk about this stuff on forums (outside of forums like this one). I think most intelligent people have realized something is up. They're afraid to talk about it. They don't want their names on any lists.



posted on Jan, 12 2014 @ 10:03 PM
link   
I thought his Christmas message was odd - he didn't say very much at all (on the surface of it, anyway). I found it even stranger that I couldn't find the original broadcast without *really* looking for it (that might have changed though - I was looking within hours of it going on the air).

www.youtube.com...


...they'll never know what it means to have a private moment to themselves; an un-recorded, un-analyzed thought...


This was the most interesting part of this message. Maybe it is just a figure-of-speech, but Snowden seemed to choose his words very carefully. His speech (the way he talks and choice of words) seemed deliberate - almost certainly scripted. I think there is definitely more to his message than it first appears.
edit on 12-1-2014 by mirageofdeceit because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 12 2014 @ 10:10 PM
link   
reply to post by soulwaxer
 


He was - so the media said - told how he could remin in Russia, but was told by President Putin, 'To keep his trap shut and to stop spreading possible security details that would hurt the USA'. Did snowden listen?? I doubt it since he is still squbbling out stuff the media now and then mention. Perhaps he is Nuts ??



posted on Jan, 25 2014 @ 10:33 PM
link   

soulwaxer

Thank you for your awesome post! Especially the part about our dail conversations that could clog the matrix, because that's what it's all about...


Ask and we shall receive


TrackMeNot

From The Developers



posted on Feb, 4 2014 @ 10:38 AM
link   

amazing
Boat thing could be a one off or PR thing...most likely he took a photo op. I don't think he just wanders around in the open all the time announcing who he is. I think he is keeping on the down low most if not all of the time. I think he's real.

Just catching up with the thread again...

It could just as well have been a PR photo op for the illusion. In my mind, that would be more likely because he wouldn't be taking any risks. Snowden "the whistleblower" took a huge risk taking a boat ride, not even hidden from view. I know the photo on the boat is a small detail to be focussing on, but having watched his recent interview to the German reporter, his behaviour seems to fit the profile of secret agent on a mission.

I am also leaning to the idea of this being a US-RUSSIA joint operation. In fact, Germany, the UK and others might also be involved. That's why they're not making much of a fuss. The little fuss that Germany is making, may well be part of the illusion.

soulwaxer



posted on Feb, 4 2014 @ 11:12 AM
link   
Just want to point to a thread just started recently:

Edward Snowden exposing the NSA from Germany

It contains this recent Snowden interview from LiveLeak:

www.liveleak.com...

I don't see a computer wiz. I see someone trained in the skills that would fit the profile of a secret agent on a mission. Listen very carefully to him talking about his past at the cia and what made him choose to join the cia... With his looks, he comes across as a nerdy type, but his behaviour is nothing of the sort. He's a very professional communicator and extremely intelligent on several levels.

This is mostly my intuition, but it fits perfectly with other conspiracies, such as 9/11, to name one. One of the benefits of a fake whistleblower, especially one of Snowden's magnitude, is that people will think that now they know everything.

soulwaxer



posted on Feb, 6 2014 @ 09:09 PM
link   
Here's why I think Snowden is for real...

It's in his words. He's inspiring. Same with Julian Assange. These guys inspire others to take chances, even sacrifices, for the betterment of a transparent system.

I don't think this is the kind of mindset government wants to put any sort of spotlight on. They don't want to create inspiring figures who get nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize for leaking sensitive NSA secrets. Look at how much information a single person can release. Why would they want to take the chance of inspiring another person to do this?

I can't tell you why he's alive- maybe they think right now it would be too obvious. Maybe they are afraid if he dies, he becomes a martyr for other would-be leakers.


edit on 6-2-2014 by spiritualzombie because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 8 2014 @ 07:12 AM
link   
reply to post by soulwaxer
 


Considering that the NSA has one of the shortest reaches and influence of our 19 intelligence agencies, and that everything he "leaked" has been in existence for many years and made publicly available, I would guess id be laughing at the public at large and the news media making the agency seem huge, while hoping I can stay in Russia forever to avoid my guranteed stint in a U.S. Penitentiary upon my extradition, return or capture. Just sayin



posted on Feb, 8 2014 @ 02:07 PM
link   
reply to post by bonecrusher321
 


Haha... Ah, yes... The NSA... short reach, very little influence. Nothing to see here.



posted on Feb, 8 2014 @ 04:16 PM
link   
i wonder the same thing, but i don't really understand alot of this, he hasn't 'whistle blowed' anything really, if it were me the first thing i would whistle blow is u.f.o's or or am i getting the wrong end of the stick?



posted on Feb, 8 2014 @ 09:15 PM
link   
reply to post by slippeddisc
 


No, I think you're right on the money. It's understandable that people have an initial reaction to information that is new to them. But at some point, you'd think people would stop accepting everything they are presented with and do some research or ask credible or knowledgeable sources. Whether or not the information is pro or con any specific position.



posted on Feb, 8 2014 @ 09:27 PM
link   
reply to post by spiritualzombie
 


That's sarcasm, I recognize that. Although poorly placed. Any agency that is a subset or subordinate to an organization that is only one part of a cabinet department never has had the reach, power, mission or authority of any independently funded an operated agency. In this case NSA $$ comes from Army dollars from the DOD budget approved through congress. Their chain of command is no different and they are a sliver at best. Just because they are the primary SIGINT asset doesn't make them some sort of intel collection ninja. They are far from it. The fact that uniformed service members makeup over 70% of the employees as well as direct the mission should be a huge clue. Agencies like NRD, CIA and a few others are funded straight from congress and through no part of the cabinet or NSC. Their chain is, as above, the same as the $$ flow. Truthfully their is nothing to see. The best and biggest thing anyone can come up with is to tell the public about decades old programs that are publicly available, not funded through clandestine means and are openly spoke about by congressmen. That should also be a big clue. Not to forget that Snowden is nothing new. Everything he has said has been talked about over mass media evening news before, mostly during the Clinton era. The fact that either people don't remember or were to young to notice doesnt make the information anymore special or anymore "leaked." Even the President said recently that we are changing nothing about what or how SIGINT collects information. The second he stated that it will only be done is if its in the national interest is what that meant. The list of intel requirements is long and doesn't change. Which means the activities that have been discussed will continue status quo. Being a HUMINT guy myself is how I know this to be true.
edit on 8-2-2014 by bonecrusher321 because: Typos



posted on Feb, 9 2014 @ 03:21 PM
link   
reply to post by bonecrusher321
 


I don't know if you mean to do this, but I see this argument all the time when valuable information is leaked and people want to direct others away from the leaked intel, and focus on the leaker. The argument is: "This is nothing new". Or "We already knew this".

"We already knew we were all being spied on, our phone data, txts, emails, chats, game chat, webcams, etc were all being used to spy on Americans." "We already knew we were torturing people." "We already knew we were either breaking international law, or being unconstitutional."

Whether you mean to or not, this argument is just a way to minimize discussion of what was leaked, and direct attention on the leaker, for breaking rules, and leaking irrelevant information "we already knew".

I wanted you to be aware of this tactic in case you don't actually mean to use it in a misdirection sort of way.


edit on 9-2-2014 by spiritualzombie because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 9 2014 @ 04:46 PM
link   
We could get real complicated here but the effect is real, and the effect is open public discussion, tightening of document and information security by all alphabet agencies and really more transparency. I think if it is a conspiracy of some sort and Snowden is not real, they effect is still beneficial to us. so what then is the problem? I mean just if snowden is real or not. The effect is the same, no?



posted on Feb, 9 2014 @ 04:57 PM
link   
reply to post by soulwaxer
 


I would say he is, since all the talking heads and malcontent oath breakers condemned him as a traitor, all because he exposed their corruption and misuse of the classified information system to hide illegal activity. Just look at the past records of all those idiots in government on both sides of the fence that condemned him publically, and you can see they have a history of power abuse, and breaking the constitution which is the number one thing NOT to do, and all kinds activity that you and I would be sitting in prison for.
Just follow the accusers to see who is really guilty.



posted on Feb, 9 2014 @ 06:41 PM
link   
reply to post by spiritualzombie
 


I'm not minimizing anything. Just simply pointing out that nothing was leaked. Everyone should have opinions about such things, but to get on the bandwagon screaming "leaked"is just silly. As stated, all of this has been made very public before and was complained about then as well. To pretend this is new or give credence to some clown who doesn't realize he isn't letting a cat out of the bag (unless he's just taking advantage of mass social media ignorance), is what really silly at best and takes away from discussion. Case in point, your reply to my post is your belief that my bringing to light something that many don't remember or were to young to care about detracts from the issue. Really? Really? Your reply is what detracts, which is buying into mass social media appeal and ignorance. It would be better served had you spent as much time on google reading and realized "wow, none of this is new. I, like most, have been misguided by the news outlets even though I don't want to admit it and claim thats what happens to everyone else, huh, I guess this snowden guy is a clown." ..... Moving on



posted on Feb, 9 2014 @ 08:51 PM
link   
reply to post by bonecrusher321
 


A mass surveillance system to spy on everyone. All text messages, chat systems, phone calls, video chats--- recorded and saved, spied on anyone at will, secretly forcing companies to comply, forcing their silence.

According to The Guardian, only 1% of the material has been leaked.

Let's be really honest. The problem here isn't that it's "nothing new", the problem is that we are all under a secret mass surveillance state, rubber-stamped, and un-checked, and one guy with a conscience has decided to inform the people. And now he's on the run, being called a spy or a traitor, or even a hero.

It's all distraction to say "Who is he really?" ... The NSA loves those kinds of arguments though because it distracts attention away from the leaks themselves.

But regarding the OP... Is he for real. All signs point to YES. For the simple reason that nobody wants to invent a character that inspires people with access to sensitive intel to listen to their conscience.
edit on 9-2-2014 by spiritualzombie because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
23
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join