Edward Snowden & The N.S.A Revelations

dignin

Guitar92player wrote:

Byrnzie wrote:

Jason P wrote:

I'm glad that Snowden chose to stay in a country that is a beacon of freedom and privacy. Plus, he is going to help our economy by restarting the cold war.

I just hope he isn't gay.

Well, considering the U.S has over 2 million of it's citizens locked up, and is spying on the rest of them, I don't see how it can claim to be a beacon of freedom and privacy either.

Do you think no one should be jailed? Where do we put the criminals? Should they walk free?

You should check out this movie http://www.thehouseilivein.org/

I think it should be required viewing.

Byrnzie

http://www.democracynow.org/blog/2013/8 ... up_actions

Glenn Greenwald on How Secretive DEA Unit Illegally Spies On Americans, Covers Up Actions
August 05, 2013

GLENN GREENWALD: So this should be a huge scandal for the following reason. The essence of the Constitution is that the government cannot obtain evidence or information about you unless it has probable cause to believe that you’ve engaged in a crime and then goes to a court and gets a warrant. And only then is that evidence usable in a prosecution against you. What this secret agency is doing, according to Reuters, it is circumventing that process by gathering all kinds of information without any court supervision, without any oversight at all, using surveillance technologies and other forms of domestic spying. And then, when it gets this information that it believes it can be used in a criminal prosecution, it knows that that information can’t be used in a criminal prosecution because it’s been acquired outside of the legal and constitutional process, so they cover up how they really got it, and they pretend—they make it seem as though they really got it through legal and normal means, by then going back and retracing the investigation, once they already have it, and re-acquiring it so that it looks to defense counsel and even to judges and prosecutors like it really was done in the constitutionally permissible way. So they’re prosecuting people and putting people in prison for using evidence that they’ve acquired illegally, which they’re then covering up and lying about and deceiving courts into believing was actually acquired constitutionally. It’s a full-frontal assault on the Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Amendments and on the integrity of the judicial process, because they’re deceiving everyone involved in criminal prosecutions about how this information has been obtained.

Jason P

Byrnzie wrote:

Jason P wrote:

I'm glad that Snowden chose to stay in a country that is a beacon of freedom and privacy. Plus, he is going to help our economy by restarting the cold war.

I just hope he isn't gay.

Well, considering the U.S has over 2 million of it's citizens locked up, and is spying on the rest of them, I don't see how it can claim to be a beacon of freedom and privacy either.

Whether you agree with them or not, there is an established set of rules for our society. If you follow the rules, it is the land of the free.

dignin

Jason P wrote:

Byrnzie wrote:

Jason P wrote:

I'm glad that Snowden chose to stay in a country that is a beacon of freedom and privacy. Plus, he is going to help our economy by restarting the cold war.

I just hope he isn't gay.

Well, considering the U.S has over 2 million of it's citizens locked up, and is spying on the rest of them, I don't see how it can claim to be a beacon of freedom and privacy either.

Whether you agree with them or not, there is an established set of rules for our society. If you follow the rules, it is the land of the free.

That could be said about anywhere....including Russia.

Jason P

dignin wrote:

That could be said about anywhere....including Russia.

I'm not the one claiming he is a hero for calling out America and then staying silent on him moving to China and then Russia for good. (i don't know what camp you fall into).

Why didn't he go to Iceland in the first place? This guy is either super naive or a flat out spy.

Byrnzie

Jason P wrote:

dignin wrote:

That could be said about anywhere....including Russia.

I'm not the one claiming he is a hero for calling out America and then staying silent on him moving to China and then Russia for good. (i don't know what camp you fall into).

Why didn't he go to Iceland in the first place? This guy is either super naive or a flat out spy.

He's already explained his reasons for going to HK instead of to Iceland. Have you not been paying attention?

Byrnzie

Jason P wrote:

Byrnzie wrote:

Jason P wrote:

I'm glad that Snowden chose to stay in a country that is a beacon of freedom and privacy. Plus, he is going to help our economy by restarting the cold war.

I just hope he isn't gay.

Well, considering the U.S has over 2 million of it's citizens locked up, and is spying on the rest of them, I don't see how it can claim to be a beacon of freedom and privacy either.

Whether you agree with them or not, there is an established set of rules for our society. If you follow the rules, it is the land of the free.

Except the government aren't following the rules. See the Greenwald piece I posted above from Democracy Now.

Byrnzie

It's about time the U.N withdrew the U.S's power of automatic veto. They've been abusing it for far too long.


http://rt.com/news/journalist-thousands ... ments-143/
'On Monday, foreign ministers of the South American trade bloc Mercosur raised the issue of alleged NSA surveillance throughout Latin America with UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon.

The ministers discussed with Ban a statement adopted by the bloc on July 12 following a summit in Montevideo, Uruguay. The statement called for UN members to propose ways to halt spying and potentially pursue sanctions against the United States.

But doing so would be impossible under the current framework, as only the Security Council can impose legally binding sanctions and the US holds veto privilege over any such resolution as a permanent member of the council.'

Jason P

Byrnzie wrote:

Jason P wrote:

dignin wrote:

That could be said about anywhere....including Russia.

I'm not the one claiming he is a hero for calling out America and then staying silent on him moving to China and then Russia for good. (i don't know what camp you fall into).

Why didn't he go to Iceland in the first place? This guy is either super naive or a flat out spy.

He's already explained his reasons for going to HK instead of to Iceland. Have you not been paying attention?

Pretty dumb reasons as it turns out. There is no reason to justify his reason or reasoning.

Let's see ... I just stole a bunch of info from the US ... I want to end up in Ecuador or Iceland ... :think: ... now I just need to figure out how to get there ..

:think:

I got it! I'm going to hop on a plane to a city surrounded by China, blow all my cash in a few weeks at a 5 star hotel ... and then I'm going to hop on a aeroplane to the former / current U.S.S.R!!!

Brilliant!

Or how about a plan B? Like saving your money and buying a direct ticket to Ecuador or Iceland? Instead of going to the two main countries in the world that would like to get their hands on the info you stole?

Idris

Lavabit, supposedly Edward Snowden's email service of choice, shuts down


http://www.engadget.com/2013/08/08/lavabit-shuts-down/ (posted already?)

It looks like Edward Snowden is going to have to find a new email service as the one he supposedly used -- Lavabit -- has abruptly closed its doors. The company's owner, Ladar Levison, posted an open letter on the site today, saying, "I have been forced to make a difficult decision: to become complicit in crimes against the American people or walk away from nearly ten years of hard work by shutting down Lavabit." Levison also claimed to be unable to speak to the specifics surrounding the situation, stating that a Congressionally approved gag order prevented him from doing so. While Lavabit's situation seems pretty dire, it might not be curtains just yet. In his message, Levison stated that he would take his fight to reinstate Lavabit to the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals.

Byrnzie

Jason P wrote:

Pretty dumb reasons as it turns out. There is no reason to justify his reason or reasoning.

Let's see ... I just stole a bunch of info from the US ... I want to end up in Ecuador or Iceland ... :think: ... now I just need to figure out how to get there ..

:think:

I got it! I'm going to hop on a plane to a city surrounded by China, blow all my cash in a few weeks at a 5 star hotel ... and then I'm going to hop on a aeroplane to the former / current U.S.S.R!!!

Brilliant!

Or how about a plan B? Like saving your money and buying a direct ticket to Ecuador or Iceland? Instead of going to the two main countries in the world that would like to get their hands on the info you stole?

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/j ... 25b2ebf321
Edward Snowden: NSA whistleblower answers reader questions
theguardian.com, Monday 17 June, 2013



Question:
User avatar: ewenmacaskill
17 June 2013 3:07pm

I should have asked you this when I saw you but never got round to it........Why did you just not fly direct to Iceland if that is your preferred country for asylum?

Answer:

"Leaving the US was an incredible risk, as NSA employees must declare their foreign travel 30 days in advance and are monitored. There was a distinct possibility I would be interdicted en route, so I had to travel with no advance booking to a country with the cultural and legal framework to allow me to work without being immediately detained. Hong Kong provided that. Iceland could be pushed harder, quicker, before the public could have a chance to make their feelings known, and I would not put that past the current US administration."

Byrnzie

So, if companies refuse to allow the U.S government to use them as platforms to spy on their customers, they'll get shut down - or in this case, the owner will take an ethical stand and close the company down. Shame that Google, MSN, and Facebook didn't stick two fingers up to the government too.


http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2 ... rd-snowden

Lavabit email service abruptly shut down citing government interference

Founder of service reportedly used by Edward Snowden said he would not be complicit in 'crimes against the American people'


Spencer Ackerman in Washington
guardian.com, Friday 9 August 2013


The email service reportedly used by surveillance whistleblower Edward Snowden abruptly shut down on Thursday after its owner cryptically announced his refusal to become "complicit in crimes against the American people."

Lavabit, an email service that boasted of its security features and claimed 350,000 customers, is no more, apparently after rejecting a court order for cooperation with the US government to participate in surveillance on its customers. It is the first such company known to have shuttered rather than comply with government surveillance.

"I have been forced to make a difficult decision: to become complicit in crimes against the American people or walk away from nearly ten years of hard work by shutting down Lavabit," founder Ladar Levison wrote on the company's website, reported by Xeni Jardin the popular news site Boing Boing.

Levison said government-imposed restrictions prevented him from explaining what exactly led to his company's crisis point.

"I feel you deserve to know what's going on – the first amendment is supposed to guarantee me the freedom to speak out in situations like this," Levison wrote. "Unfortunately, Congress has passed laws that say otherwise. As things currently stand, I cannot share my experiences over the last six weeks, even though I have twice made the appropriate requests."

Privacy advocates called the move unprecedented. "I am unaware of any situation in which a service provider chose to shut down rather than comply with a court order they felt violated the Constitution," said Kurt Opsahl, a lawyer with the Electronic Frontier Foundation.

Silent Circle, another provider of secure online services, announced on Thursday night that it would scrap its own encrypted email offering, Silent Mail. In a blogpost the company said that although it had not received any government orders to hand over information, "the writing is on the wall".

Several technology companies that participate in the National Security Agency's surveillance dragnets have filed legal requests to lift the secrecy restrictions that prevent them from explaining to their customers precisely what it is that they provide to the powerful intelligence service – either wittingly or due to a court order. Yahoo has sued for the disclosure of some of those court orders.

The presiding judge of the secret court that issues such orders, known as the Fisa court, has indicated to the Justice Department that he expects declassification in the Yahoo case. The department agreed last week to a review that will last into September about the issues surrounding the release of that information.

There are few internet and telecommunications companies known to have refused compliance with the NSA for its bulk surveillance efforts, which the NSA and the Obama administration assert are vital to protect Americans. One of them is Qwest Communications, whose former CEO Joseph Nacchio – convicted of insider trading – alleged that the government rejected it for lucrative contracts after Qwest became a rare holdout for post-9/11 surveillance.

"Without the companies' participation," former NSA codebreaker William Binney recently told the Guardian, "it would reduce the collection capability of the NSA significantly."

Snowden was allegedly a Lavabit customer. A Lavabit email address believed to come from Snowden invited reporters to a press conference at Moscow's Sheremetyevo Airport in mid-July.

While Levinson did not say much about the shuttering of his company – he notably did not refer to the NSA, for instance – he did say he intended to mount a legal challenge.

"We've already started preparing the paperwork needed to continue to fight for the Constitution in the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals," Levinson wrote. "A favorable decision would allow me resurrect Lavabit as an American company."

He continued: "This experience has taught me one very important lesson: without congressional action or a strong judicial precedent, I would strongly recommend against anyone trusting their private data to a company with physical ties to the United States."

Opsahl noted that the fact that Levinson was appealing a case before the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals indicated the government had a court order for Lavabit's data.

"It's taking a very bold stand, one that I'm sure will have financial ramifications," Opsahl said.

"There should be more transparency around this. There's probably no harm to the national security of the United States to have it publicly revealed what are the legal issues here," Opsahl continued.

The justice department said it had no comment to make. Representatives from the NSA, White House and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence did not immediately reply to a request for comment.

Byrnzie

Edward Snowden
17 June 2013

'They are legally compelled to comply and maintain their silence in regard to specifics of the program, but that does not comply them from ethical obligation. If for example Facebook, Google, Microsoft, and Apple refused to provide this cooperation with the Intelligence Community, what do you think the government would do? Shut them down?'

Martin Luther King
April 16, 1963

'One who breaks an unjust law that conscience tells him is unjust, and who willingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment in order to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in reality expressing the highest respect for law.'

Smellyman

wow. who is complicit with crimes against the American people?

certainly not Lavabit, but the US government. the crime is forcing legit business' to shut down and all their customers can get bent. They throw a gag order on you and break you.

America Fuck Yeah

Guitar92player

Byrnzie wrote:

Martin Luther King
April 16, 1963

'One who breaks an unjust law that conscience tells him is unjust, and who willingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment in order to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in reality expressing the highest respect for law.'

Then doesn't this mean Snowden should come back and face imprisonment, expressing the highest respect for the law?

By the way, Obama said today that Snowden can come back and face trial if he [Snowden] believes what he did was right, or something along those lines.

mickeyrat

hes getting his 15 minutes. it was HE himself who outed him. Did he reasonably expect he could travel freely from then on with his GOVERNMENT issued passport? He should have kept his fucking mouth shut and went where he felt he wanted to end up.

Byrnzie

Guitar92player wrote:

Then doesn't this mean Snowden should come back and face imprisonment, expressing the highest respect for the law?

No, it doesn't. Why would he choose imprisonment over freedom? And he's already explained his position on this. Have you not been paying attention?

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/j ... 25b2ebf321
Edward Snowden: '...the US Government, just as they did with other whistleblowers, immediately and predictably destroyed any possibility of a fair trial at home, openly declaring me guilty of treason and that the disclosure of secret, criminal, and even unconstitutional acts is an unforgivable crime. That's not justice, and it would be foolish to volunteer yourself to it if you can do more good outside of prison than in it.'

Guitar92player wrote:

By the way, Obama said today that Snowden can come back and face trial if he [Snowden] believes what he did was right, or something along those lines.

That's generous of him.

Byrnzie

mickeyrat wrote:

hes getting his 15 minutes.

Sure. He sacrificed a comfortable life in Hawaii with his girlfriend, and a well-paid job, just to get his face in the newspapers.

mickeyrat wrote:

He should have kept his fucking mouth shut

Why? So that your government could continue lying to you, and spying on you, in breach of the Constitution? You think everyone should keep their fucking mouths shut in the face of government lies and criminality, including Wikileaks, Daniel Ellsberg, and Woodward & Bernstein, e.t.c.? What about when Ed Vedder criticizes your government? Should he keep his fucking mouth shut too?

Guitar92player

Byrnzie wrote:

Guitar92player wrote:

Then doesn't this mean Snowden should come back and face imprisonment, expressing the highest respect for the law?

No, it doesn't. Why would he choose imprisonment over freedom? And he's already explained his position on this. Have you not been paying attention?

Yes.

But you used MLKJr's quote, which would mean that in this situation Snowden should follow that same philosophy as well. Because if he believes he did the right thing, then going to jail wouldn't mean anything because he knows he was right; he did the right thing; he is not in the wrong; Let him be a martyr or hero.

Byrnzie

Guitar92player wrote:

Byrnzie wrote:

Guitar92player wrote:

Then doesn't this mean Snowden should come back and face imprisonment, expressing the highest respect for the law?

No, it doesn't. Why would he choose imprisonment over freedom? And he's already explained his position on this. Have you not been paying attention?

Yes.

But you used MLKJr's quote, which would mean that in this situation Snowden should follow that same philosophy as well. Because if he believes he did the right thing, then going to jail wouldn't mean anything because he knows he was right; he did the right thing; he is not in the wrong; Let him be a martyr or hero.

Because at it stands, he's sacrificed nothing, right?