In 2009, Ed Snowden said leakers "should be shot." Then he became one

Originally posted by coastlinekid
reply to post by neo96

 

The magnitude of the crimes he exposed far outweigh any nefarious motives he may or may not have...he is a hero with a small "h".

Not everyone will agree people are free to disagree as I disagree.

Originally posted by masqua
reply to post by neo96

 

Sure there is.

Don't use cellphones or the internet. Just go back to writing sealed letters and packages through the US mail.

You know... snail mail.

I hate to be the party pooper on this one .. Err.. Well, I sorta do. Given the work it took to find the story again through the sea of trash cluttering the internet on this topic? Whew... Anyway, Who said Snail Mail was safe?

Ricin Suspect Was Tracked Via Mail Scanners

That's just a functional example. The original story I cannot find now had said it was an enormously expensive program which saves and sorts all the images into their appropriate database for long term connections later. Isn't technology just something else?

Spying is wrong.
NO country (and yes, that includes USA) should allow it, nor support it, nor do it in anyway... And NO country is forgiveable if it has done so (and yes, I include USA once again here)

yes, other countries does it, many if not all of them. Does that justificate the fact it has been done ? No.

All Snowden did was inform people about a reallity. He only ringed the alarm... So people can know what happen in the background in their countries.

Was it the good thing to say it so openly and prove it ? I think so, but only time will tell...
Instead of bashing on Snowden and / or defending a spying or spyed country, you should accept it. Agree with Snowden or not, he said what he said to whom he said, now people and govts officially know this sad reallity.
Best case Scenario: All countries stop spying, appologies to others about it, and setup more protections to prevent foreign spying
Worst case scenario: WW3, many collateral damages, but a after that, a great possibility to start over on more sane base, and maybe a real start of unification of humanity, which would make such lame spying obsolete.

Of course there are countless other possibility, however, you can't go back to the past, so move on. Time will tell if it was a good thing, anyway, in the long term, I hardly see how this could be a so bad thing. Some will be more carefull after what happened.

There's absolutely no excuse for intel spying. and that applies to every country.

Originally posted by BrokenCircles
reply to post by neo96

 

In 2009, Ed Snowden said leakers "should be shot." Then he became one

Opinions change. It happens all the time.

Yeah, I mean, does this information really matter? The fact is, the government is spying on us and I am thankful to know about it now. I attribute that gratitude to the man who informed me. Thanks Edward. Youve done me a great service.

First of all, if Snowden had really stated that in 2009, it is highly likely that his opinions had changed before the acquirement, and subsequent leaks during May/June of this year.

As for his apparent collaboration with Chinese and Russian intelligence officials; it is highly possible that Snowden himself did not actually willingly provide them with the material. It is possible that intelligence officials may have confiscated the material off of him as he travelled...no one knows. Furthermore, no one has heard directly from him, or affiliated sources in a fair while. Therefore we are only going off what we are hearing from US government concerns...in other words, a one sided, unreliable perspective.

According to Assange, "Mr. Snowden's material has been secured by journalistic organizations prior to travel." If he is to be believed, than Snowden has not, at all provided foreign agencies with sensitive material.

Originally posted by daaskapital
First of all, if Snowden had really stated that in 2009, it is highly likely that his opinions had changed before the acquirement, and subsequent leaks during May/June of this year.

As for his apparent collaboration with Chinese and Russian intelligence officials; it is highly possible that Snowden himself did not actually willingly provide them with the material. It is possible that intelligence officials may have confiscated the material off of him as he travelled...no one knows. Furthermore, no one has heard directly from him, or affiliated sources in a fair while. Therefore we are only going off what we are hearing from US government concerns...in other words, a one sided, unreliable perspective.

According to Assange, "Mr. Snowden's material has been secured by journalistic organizations prior to travel." If he is to be believed, than Snowden has not, at all provided foreign agencies with sensitive material.

You must have a gigantic head to fit that much common sense in there. Good job. Also, that was a compliment lol.

Originally posted by Ghostfreak1


There's absolutely no excuse for intel spying. and that applies to every country.

WW2 comes to mind where spying was necessary.

reply to post by StrangeTimez




Thanks man!

Right now ES is being held prisoner by former head of the KGB VPutin and I suspect that as part of an arrangement towards his release he will be forced to surrender the encryption codes.

Originally posted by Guadeloupe
Right now ES is being held prisoner by former head of the KGB VPutin and I suspect that as part of an arrangement towards his release he will be forced to surrender the encryption codes.

While it is true that Snowden is under protection by Russian authorities at the airport, Putin has actually told him to get on his way, meaning that he no longer wants, or needs him in Russia. This may mean one of two things:

- Putin doesn't want to strain the US/Russia relationship any further.

Or:

- The Russian authorities have what they want (US intelligence data) and are willing to let him leave.

Of course, they may not want any of that and just want him to leave, but that seems unlikely.

If we were to factor in what Snowden, as well as Greenwald and Assange have stated; Snowden has not supplied any foreign agency with sensitive material, and has not carried the material during travel. As a result, we cannot come to a solid conclusion as to what is really happening with Snowden and the intelligence.

Maybe Snowden is just waiting there until he finds out how his asylum bid in Ecuador has turned out? i wouldn't travel there until i was certain that they were going to accept me. heck, i would be filing for asylum all over the place if i were Snowden...

Originally posted by daaskapital
reply to post by StrangeTimez

 

Thanks man!

Thanks for what?

Bringing up Fox News as if it somehow 'discredits' the article?

It doesn't, nothing anyone has said does.

Originally posted by neo96

Originally posted by daaskapital
reply to post by StrangeTimez

 

Thanks man!

Thanks for what?

Bringing up Fox News as if it somehow 'discredits' the article?

It doesn't, nothing anyone has said does.

edit on 26-6-2013 by neo96 because: (no reason given)

I was thanking him for his complement...

I never brought up Fox News. I stated that we are only hearing the side of the US government, and as such we should consider it to be one sided and unreliable, because well...we don't have the full story yet. Further, i stated that Snowden may not have been supplying intelligence to foreign agencies as has been widely suggested to by the government and other sources.

Overall, i think you have an agenda here, and it is clearly obvious through the way in which you are willing to accept, and push the one sided story from the government, instead of waiting for the full picture to emerge and making your decisions after careful evaluation.

reply to post by daaskapital

I never brought up Fox News.

Sorry that was about an earlier comment. obviously you didn't,

I stated that we are only hearing the side of the US government, and as such we should consider it to be one sided and unreliable,

Don't think anyone is listening to what Government as they are all so enamoured with Snowden

Overall, i think you have an agenda here, and it is clearly obvious through the way in which you are willing to accept, and push the one sided story from the government, instead of waiting for the full picture to emerge and making your decisions after careful evaluatio

Wrong as no one wants to even contemplate Snowden's has an agenda.

Oh as to that 'one sided' story from the same source as 'Govermment is spying' ridiculous to accept one source and not another one.

Originally posted by Guadeloupe
Right now ES is being held prisoner by former head of the KGB VPutin and I suspect that as part of an arrangement towards his release he will be forced to surrender the encryption codes.

I don't know about rough treatment...but I do think he just learned a VERY HARD lesson about how Americans really aren't the worst people on Earth after all.....and the organization he was a part of (Both of them.. CIA and NSA) went much too far but were built and have existed for very good reasons. He's spending quality time with those reasons now.

There aren't civil suits or attorneys to jump in and scream for his rights where he is now and I hope there are current photos of him soon. I'm curious if he looks the same. I'm sure they'd be careful not to leave anything visible though. The Russian version of our interrogators aren't the least bit interested in American rights..but they aren't dumb either. There is a limit, I'd think.

He's a rat.

Once you choose sides, as an oath, you are stuck with that. If you later decide to withdraw your support, you walk away and stfu...not rat out the team who granted you a position of trust and responsibility.

shot... with a camera.

A regular old IT guy eh? ATS IT guy, I'm looking at you now. Eh, ehhh?

Befriending an Estonian rock star eh? There's someone like that on the ATS tech support, with the music industry. Eh, ehhh?

CIA on an Internet chat room eh? ATS has a chatroom, ehhhh?

Oh hey have I ever told ATS about when I was in a chatroom and some guy who was studying bird brains in high school advanced studies talking about his Jewish big brother service, and then I said when I'd be working and then bomb threats were called in at my job? And the young perfectionist freak was friends with a family member and they were into weapons and drugs in socal? Ehh? And then later on weird stuff in another state where some dude went nuts in a movie theater, that freak grew up? Well I told you now. CIA in chatrooms, ehhh?

So CIA operatives fart around in chatrooms all day, looking for others to harass for their friends, furthering the shady operations. Why am I not surprised? It is a conspiracy.

I'm not surprised that young CIA recruits are flippant with their powers and naive about their personal fates, as they probably have never seen the full effects of failure in their lives before the big stories are made about them, as they are the fall guys to their employers.

What if Snowden had the goods on what the anti-gun agenda in the US was? See he was running expecting to get to the other side, and possibly get credit for it on that other side, making a big show of it. That's just it; CIA is pretty low-level compared to other higher powers; all they do is obey. So, who is he obeying?

Originally posted by neo96
Bringing up Fox News as if it somehow 'discredits' the article?

It doesn't, nothing anyone has said does.

After reading your comments in this thread, I do start to wonder if you actually took the time to READ the article, or whether you didnt get past the headline.

It's clearly explained that he was angry about leaks which affected relationships with other countries, specifically during the interactions with Iran.

< TheTrueHOOHA> WTF NYTIMES
< TheTrueHOOHA> Are they TRYING to start a war?
< TheTrueHOOHA> None would speak on the record because of the great secrecy surrounding the intelligence developed on Iran.
< TheTrueHOOHA> Oh you've got to be #ing kidding me. Now the NYTimes is going to determine our foreign policy?

And it is also specifically pointed out that he was NOT talking about leaks relating to the country spying on its own citizens and then lying about it, which is something he hated:

< TheTrueHOOHA> I enjoy it when it's ethical reporting.
< TheTrueHOOHA> political corruption, sure
< TheTrueHOOHA> scandal, yes

So i'd have to say that although this discussion has been painted so far as a man who changed his views 180 degrees, its not quite like that.

reply to post by alfa1


Oh just because someone is 'angry' they get to say whatever they want?

And the excuses keep coming.

reply to post by neo96


People sometimes change their views, it's allowed. Actually, Einstein said "All things that are not expressly forbidden, are compulsory."

Have you ever worked in the intel community? While you ride that wave towards shore, for some the trip can be long and others short. Up on the board you can get all cocky and lose yourself, turn into a complete asshole thinking that your opinion is the ONLY opinion. But the shore is always coming towards you, sharp rocks or soft beach. Then one day, something might happen that triggers a surge of conscience. It may be that one additional body after so much blood on your hands, it could be finding out the people you worked with weren't who you thought they were or maybe you find out that the business your in, isn't what you thought it was and you were there doing your job for all the wrong reasons.

No one wants to be "wrong" or think they were duped or made bad decisions, so you wrestle with your conscience. You try to justify all the wrong you might have done as helping to make a place safer, but you still have to live with what you've done and some things just don't wash off. Some people get worse, some angry, some depressed and some try to equalize their karmic debt.

If Snowden is for real, I can understand his position and he is probably sitting on some "insurance" files. If he's not for real, the government obviously knows a good deal about how the characters in their play should act. When you think about it, how does anyone know that "Snowden" isn't a government actor?

Cheers - Dave