Edward Snowden & The N.S.A Revelations

Thanks Julian, you've been a great help.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/ju ... an-assange

The plan to spirit the surveillance whistleblower Edward Snowden to sanctuary in Latin America appeared to be unravelling on Friday, amid tension between Ecuador's government and Julian Assange, the founder of WikiLeaks.

President Rafael Correa halted an effort to help Snowden leave Russia amid concern Assange was usurping the role of the Ecuadoran government, according to leaked diplomatic correspondence published on Friday.

Amid signs Quito was cooling with Snowden and irritated with Assange, Correa declared invalid a temporary travel document which could have helped extract Snowden from his reported location in Moscow.

Correa declared that the safe conduct pass issued by Ecuador's London consul – in collaboration with Assange – was unauthorised, after other Ecuadorean diplomats privately said the WikiLeaks founder could be perceived as "running the show".

According to the correspondence, which was obtained by the Spanish-language broadcaster Univision and shared with the Wall Street Journal, divisions over Assange have roiled Ecuador's government.

Ecuador's ambassador to the US, Nathalie Cely, told presidential spokesman Fernando Alvarado that Quito's role in the drama was being overshadowed by the WikiLeaks founder, who has sheltered in Ecuador's London embassy for the past year to avoid extradition.

"I suggest talking to Assange to better control the communications. From outside, [Assange] appears to be running the show."

Earlier this week a senior foreign diplomat in Quito told the Guardian that some – though not all – factions in the government were annoyed with what they saw as Assange grandstanding.

In a message attributed to Assange sent to Ecuador's foreign minister, Ricardo Patiño, and other top officials, the WikiLeaks founder apologised "if we have unwittingly [caused] Ecuador discomfort in the Snowden matter." The note continued: "There is a fog of war due to the rapid nature of events. If similar events arise you can be assured that they do not originate in any lack of respect or concern for Ecuador or its government."

Assange appears to have had a strong role in obtaining the travel document for Snowden, dated 22 June which bore the printed name, but not signature, of the London consul, Fidel Narvaez, a confidante. By mid-week Narvaez was reportedly in Moscow.

The document could have helped Snowden, whose US passport has been revoked, leave the transit lounge of Moscow's Sheremetyevo airport where he has reportedly holed up since fleeing Hong Kong last weekend.

On Thursday, Correa, who previously has hailed Snowden for exposing US spying, and has earned kudos for defying Washington pressure over the affair, reduced Snowden's chances of making it to Quito.

At a press conference the president declared the travel document invalid and said Ecuador would not consider an asylum request unless Snowden reached Ecuadorean territory, an increasingly remote prospect.

"The situation of Mr Snowden is a complex situation and we don't know how he will solve it."

Correa did however ramp up defiance of the US by waiving preferential trade rights to thwart what officials called Washington "blackmail". Analysts said Correa, an economist who specialised in game theory, had so far skilfully extracted political capital from the saga without drawing US retaliation.

In a TV interview on Friday, Snowden's father said said he was worried about the involvement of WikiLeaks. "I don't want to put him in peril, but I am concerned about those who surround him," Lonnie Snowden told NBC.

"I think WikiLeaks, if you've looked at past history … their focus isn't necessarily the constitution of the United States. It's simply to release as much information as possible."

Snowden said he did not believe his son had betrayed his country. "At this point, I don't feel that he's committed treason. He has broken US law, in a sense that he has released classified information. And if folks want to classify him as a traitor, in fact he has betrayed his government. But I don't believe that he's betrayed the people of the United States."

Snowden said he had told US attorney general Eric Holder through his lawyer that his son might return home if he would not be detained before trial, could choose the location for his trial and would not be subjected to a gag order. It was not clear that Lonnie Snowden was communicating his son's views, as he also said they had not spoken since April.

JimmyV wrote:

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

Guitar92player wrote:

Personally I think the Constitution should be changed to fit modern times (don't worry conservatives I'm not a liberal or a Communist. ).

yes, and we can start with the 2nd amendment...

Agreed. Unfortunately I don't think we are currently capable of amending the Constitution given the
political climate in which we live.

we can't even pass a fucking farm bill that has never failed to pass in 40 years. :fp:

vant0037 wrote:

I think this is where I check out of this thread. If the best we can do toward impuning this program as unconstitutional is cite op-ed stories, then I'll gladly hop off before the credibility train derails any further.

You can't prove a Fourth Amendment violation without facts or details about the alleged searches and you can't have any viable remedy without a forum to challenge. A program run in secret doesn't lend itself to giving out facts or details. I must have said this a hundred times.

Like I've also said about a hundred times, I desperately want to believe this program is unconstitutional. But I also refuse to let my own biases get in the way of dispassionate reason and scrutiny. I refuse to label a program something I can't prove it to be. Op-ed pieces are not facts. My own suspicions are not facts. Links or long quotes or someone else's words are not facts. What I want to believe is not license to dispense with doing my homework.

Until we have facts that can prove the full use of this program, we cannot prove a Fourth Amendment violation. Because the very secrecy of the program gets in the way of obtaining those facts, the use of this program is a transparency issue first, (and thus a legislative or electoral issue), and a Constitutional issue second. The requirement of facts to prove a Constitutional violation necessitates it so.

Persisting in a dead-end campaign, whether because it's fun to throw around excerpts from the Constitution or because it's easier to level charges we can't prove, is counterproductive to the cause (whatever that is these days) and only allows this program to continue further.

I've spent enough time on the merry-go-round with this one. Hopefully those that are truly appalled and concerned about this program will stop attacking it from the top-down, and instead work on the issues that allow programs like this, constitutional or not, to exist in the first place.

:thumbup:

Exactly!!!

So now he can stay in Russia, but only if he stops leaking secrets. I am sure the Russians are going to set him up in a comfy apartment with plenty of fine food and drink and never expect him to reveal to them any classified information he may have. Sounds completely plausible.

Jason P wrote:

JimmyV wrote:

So now he can stay in Russia, but only if he stops leaking secrets. I am sure the Russians are going to set him up in a comfy apartment with plenty of fine food and drink and never expect him to reveal to them any classified information he may have. Sounds completely plausible.

Putin, being a spy himself, is loving this. He is like, this is the guy that cracked your system??? HA!

Which leads me to believe that whatever data a 29 year old can get within three months of taking a job means that every country with half a reasonable intelligence network has to have everything that Snowden has. There is no way in hell that the KGB or whatever they call themselves hasn't been plugged into this for years, right?

Pure gamesmanship and pouring salt in the wounds by Putin, and based on his smile he is loving every second of it.

An entire planet to explore and he chooses China and Russia as his first ports of call. :fp:

I do agree that learning of this surveillance was probably no surprise to many intelligence agencies around the world. But as for what he might have...I do worry that a 29 year old who took his job specifically to collect and release classified information may have been able to get access to much more than your average employee who just went to work everyday.

The world is a scary place. We have many terrorists out there who are more willing to hurt the U.S. than before (or possibly just the same, except now they are more well-organized in a way).

This program, although intrudes on us, to me is no big deal. Yeah it sucks it happens, but if it protects us, WHO CARES. If I am doing nothing wrong, WHO CARES! What they gonna do, find out I have a free pizza waiting from Papa Johns? ( i dont at the moment, but hopefully soon! lol)

This program has not harmed anyone. It was set up for good intentions. Today I saw a new interview with George W. Bush supporting Obama saying how this program is the best for the country, which obviously it is. If they know about Americans, who cares! Maybe now they know my Bday by heart and can send me a gift.

It was kept secret so it could capture criminals and find out the truth about their intentions. It covers all Americans because any one of us can be a terrorist or criminal.

Sorry I am not one of those paranoid Americans who thinks everything the government does is an effort to take away our rights and make us all slaves (not saying you are Byrnzie. I applaud and praise you for making known an issue and trying to have a discussion on an issue you believe is worth talking about )

Snowden's opinion is that this program is bad because it intrudes on civil liberties. In the world today, we need a balance. In some cases our liberties would have to be intruded on to make sure we are safe. That is the world today. So I applaud him for trying to do what's right, but I'm sorry, he is living in 1788. It is 2013, the world is different. Like I said earlier, the Constitution needs to be updated a little bit.

I'm not a government lover and I don't always try to defend them, by the way. In this case I get what they did and why they did it, but I also understand I can be wrong and don't have all the details.

To make another point, we are not obedient sheep. You act like no one in America protests or gets mad at the government, or react with violence. You need to get out of China more. :roll: