Verizon required to give ALL call data to NSA (1 Viewer)

[MikeIke]

Let's present this issue to the Supreme Court, and see what they think about it. Whatever they decide is fine with me.

The thing is, no one CAN take it to the Supreme Court to challenge it because of all the secrecy. It's been tried, twice I believe, but the SC declined to hear the arguments on the grounds that the plaintiff couldn't prove they were harmed. In other words, the government won't admit to spying on you so you can't argue that their spying on you is unconstitutional.

 

[Slapdash]

"Due process is a pillar of our American justice system," the Star Trek star told Daily Intelligencer last night at the Eighth Annual Stella by Starlight Benefit Gala. "We were rounded up simply because we happened to look like the people who bombed Pearl Harbor. And we were put in prison camps with barbed wire and machine guns pointed at us. It was a horrific violation of our Constitution."

Because of that experience, Takei is particularly wary of the government's powers being abused. "We know where this can go," he said. "We have to be ever vigilant against overstepping of the fundamental ideals of our democracy."

 

[timschochet]

"Due process is a pillar of our American justice system," the Star Trek star told Daily Intelligencer last night at the Eighth Annual Stella by Starlight Benefit Gala. "We were rounded up simply because we happened to look like the people who bombed Pearl Harbor. And we were put in prison camps with barbed wire and machine guns pointed at us. It was a horrific violation of our Constitution."Because of that experience, Takei is particularly wary of the government's powers being abused. "We know where this can go," he said. "We have to be ever vigilant against overstepping of the fundamental ideals of our democracy."

I spent two years studying the story of the Nisei before writing my novel. I've always believed that bigotry and fear is caused by ignorance, and everything I learned confirmed this. The American public, specifically those living in California and other west coast states, didn't know Japanese-Americans, and believed the worst stereotypes about them (mostly spread by the Hearst papers.) Contrast that with Hawaii, where the Nisei had been allowed to interact with the rest of the population, mostly thanks to sports- the Japanese in Hawaii were not interned.

I bring this up because I believe strongly that if we had the sort of information access society we have today back in the early 1940s, the internment never would have taken place. The technology, far from being more threatening, is actually liberating. Rather than enabling government to perpetrate these sorts of crimes, it prevents them from taking place. (For instance, the actual internment of the NIsei in Los Angles took place in the middle of the night- the internees were rounded up and sent to the Santa Anita Race track which had been closed down for the war, and held in horse stalls before being sent by train to desolate areas where the camps were. Like Nazi Germany, all of this was done in secret. If the government tried it today it would be all over the internet within a few hours.)

 

[shader]

"Due process is a pillar of our American justice system," the Star Trek star told Daily Intelligencer last night at the Eighth Annual Stella by Starlight Benefit Gala. "We were rounded up simply because we happened to look like the people who bombed Pearl Harbor. And we were put in prison camps with barbed wire and machine guns pointed at us. It was a horrific violation of our Constitution."Because of that experience, Takei is particularly wary of the government's powers being abused. "We know where this can go," he said. "We have to be ever vigilant against overstepping of the fundamental ideals of our democracy."

I spent two years studying the story of the Nisei before writing my novel. I've always believed that bigotry and fear is caused by ignorance, and everything I learned confirmed this. The American public, specifically those living in California and other west coast states, didn't know Japanese-Americans, and believed the worst stereotypes about them (mostly spread by the Hearst papers.) Contrast that with Hawaii, where the Nisei had been allowed to interact with the rest of the population, mostly thanks to sports- the Japanese in Hawaii were not interned.

I bring this up because I believe strongly that if we had the sort of information access society we have today back in the early 1940s, the internment never would have taken place. The technology, far from being more threatening, is actually liberating. Rather than enabling government to perpetrate these sorts of crimes, it prevents them from taking place. (For instance, the actual internment of the NIsei in Los Angles took place in the middle of the night- the internees were rounded up and sent to the Santa Anita Race track which had been closed down for the war, and held in horse stalls before being sent by train to desolate areas where the camps were. Like Nazi Germany, all of this was done in secret. If the government tried it today it would be all over the internet within a few hours.)

Yes, that is a benefit of technology. How does this have anything to do with the govt having access to everyone's personal information.

 

[timschochet]

"Due process is a pillar of our American justice system," the Star Trek star told Daily Intelligencer last night at the Eighth Annual Stella by Starlight Benefit Gala. "We were rounded up simply because we happened to look like the people who bombed Pearl Harbor. And we were put in prison camps with barbed wire and machine guns pointed at us. It was a horrific violation of our Constitution."Because of that experience, Takei is particularly wary of the government's powers being abused. "We know where this can go," he said. "We have to be ever vigilant against overstepping of the fundamental ideals of our democracy."

I spent two years studying the story of the Nisei before writing my novel. I've always believed that bigotry and fear is caused by ignorance, and everything I learned confirmed this. The American public, specifically those living in California and other west coast states, didn't know Japanese-Americans, and believed the worst stereotypes about them (mostly spread by the Hearst papers.) Contrast that with Hawaii, where the Nisei had been allowed to interact with the rest of the population, mostly thanks to sports- the Japanese in Hawaii were not interned.

I bring this up because I believe strongly that if we had the sort of information access society we have today back in the early 1940s, the internment never would have taken place. The technology, far from being more threatening, is actually liberating. Rather than enabling government to perpetrate these sorts of crimes, it prevents them from taking place. (For instance, the actual internment of the NIsei in Los Angles took place in the middle of the night- the internees were rounded up and sent to the Santa Anita Race track which had been closed down for the war, and held in horse stalls before being sent by train to desolate areas where the camps were. Like Nazi Germany, all of this was done in secret. If the government tried it today it would be all over the internet within a few hours.)

Yes, that is a benefit of technology. How does this have anything to do with the govt having access to everyone's personal information.

Because one of the main assertions being made in this thread is that the government having this access will make it both easier and more likely for them to impose tyranny and dictatorship. It is my contention that not only is this not true, but the same technology that makes the access possible in the first place makes it less likely. And furthermore that there is no connection between the government having access to this information and their likelihood or willingness to perform evil.

 

[Politician Spock]

"Due process is a pillar of our American justice system," the Star Trek star told Daily Intelligencer last night at the Eighth Annual Stella by Starlight Benefit Gala. "We were rounded up simply because we happened to look like the people who bombed Pearl Harbor. And we were put in prison camps with barbed wire and machine guns pointed at us. It was a horrific violation of our Constitution."Because of that experience, Takei is particularly wary of the government's powers being abused. "We know where this can go," he said. "We have to be ever vigilant against overstepping of the fundamental ideals of our democracy."

I spent two years studying the story of the Nisei before writing my novel. I've always believed that bigotry and fear is caused by ignorance, and everything I learned confirmed this. The American public, specifically those living in California and other west coast states, didn't know Japanese-Americans, and believed the worst stereotypes about them (mostly spread by the Hearst papers.) Contrast that with Hawaii, where the Nisei had been allowed to interact with the rest of the population, mostly thanks to sports- the Japanese in Hawaii were not interned. I bring this up because I believe strongly that if we had the sort of information access society we have today back in the early 1940s, the internment never would have taken place. The technology, far from being more threatening, is actually liberating. Rather than enabling government to perpetrate these sorts of crimes, it prevents them from taking place. (For instance, the actual internment of the NIsei in Los Angles took place in the middle of the night- the internees were rounded up and sent to the Santa Anita Race track which had been closed down for the war, and held in horse stalls before being sent by train to desolate areas where the camps were. Like Nazi Germany, all of this was done in secret. If the government tried it today it would be all over the internet within a few hours... After a whistleblower leaked it.)

Edited that for you.

 

[Slapdash]

"Due process is a pillar of our American justice system," the Star Trek star told Daily Intelligencer last night at the Eighth Annual Stella by Starlight Benefit Gala. "We were rounded up simply because we happened to look like the people who bombed Pearl Harbor. And we were put in prison camps with barbed wire and machine guns pointed at us. It was a horrific violation of our Constitution."Because of that experience, Takei is particularly wary of the government's powers being abused. "We know where this can go," he said. "We have to be ever vigilant against overstepping of the fundamental ideals of our democracy."

I spent two years studying the story of the Nisei before writing my novel. I've always believed that bigotry and fear is caused by ignorance, and everything I learned confirmed this. The American public, specifically those living in California and other west coast states, didn't know Japanese-Americans, and believed the worst stereotypes about them (mostly spread by the Hearst papers.) Contrast that with Hawaii, where the Nisei had been allowed to interact with the rest of the population, mostly thanks to sports- the Japanese in Hawaii were not interned. I bring this up because I believe strongly that if we had the sort of information access society we have today back in the early 1940s, the internment never would have taken place. The technology, far from being more threatening, is actually liberating. Rather than enabling government to perpetrate these sorts of crimes, it prevents them from taking place. (For instance, the actual internment of the NIsei in Los Angles took place in the middle of the night- the internees were rounded up and sent to the Santa Anita Race track which had been closed down for the war, and held in horse stalls before being sent by train to desolate areas where the camps were. Like Nazi Germany, all of this was done in secret. If the government tried it today it would be all over the internet within a few hours.)

Yes, that is a benefit of technology. How does this have anything to do with the govt having access to everyone's personal information.

Tim thinks that because one type of oppression couldn't happen, it means any can't. He also is more of an expert on internment than George Takei..

 

[5 digit know nothing]

I guess Tim is unaware that governments have and can shutdown Internet and cell service to prevent the spread of information. If he is going to preach to us about doom and gloom black helicopter scenarios he better do it right.

 

[Politician Spock]

I would like to announce that the Bill of Rights has been revoked, because it has become antiquated. We have the Internet now, and that is more than enough to limit the power of government. If you have any questions, PM Tim. That is all.

 

[Slapdash]

"Due process is a pillar of our American justice system," the Star Trek star told Daily Intelligencer last night at the Eighth Annual Stella by Starlight Benefit Gala. "We were rounded up simply because we happened to look like the people who bombed Pearl Harbor. And we were put in prison camps with barbed wire and machine guns pointed at us. It was a horrific violation of our Constitution."Because of that experience, Takei is particularly wary of the government's powers being abused. "We know where this can go," he said. "We have to be ever vigilant against overstepping of the fundamental ideals of our democracy."

I spent two years studying the story of the Nisei before writing my novel. I've always believed that bigotry and fear is caused by ignorance, and everything I learned confirmed this. The American public, specifically those living in California and other west coast states, didn't know Japanese-Americans, and believed the worst stereotypes about them (mostly spread by the Hearst papers.) Contrast that with Hawaii, where the Nisei had been allowed to interact with the rest of the population, mostly thanks to sports- the Japanese in Hawaii were not interned. I bring this up because I believe strongly that if we had the sort of information access society we have today back in the early 1940s, the internment never would have taken place. The technology, far from being more threatening, is actually liberating. Rather than enabling government to perpetrate these sorts of crimes, it prevents them from taking place. (For instance, the actual internment of the NIsei in Los Angles took place in the middle of the night- the internees were rounded up and sent to the Santa Anita Race track which had been closed down for the war, and held in horse stalls before being sent by train to desolate areas where the camps were. Like Nazi Germany, all of this was done in secret. If the government tried it today it would be all over the internet within a few hours.)

Yes, that is a benefit of technology. How does this have anything to do with the govt having access to everyone's personal information.

Because one of the main assertions being made in this thread is that the government having this access will make it both easier and more likely for them to impose tyranny and dictatorship. It is my contention that not only is this not true, but the same technology that makes the access possible in the first place makes it less likely. And furthermore that there is no connection between the government having access to this information and their likelihood or willingness to perform evil.

So information is less likely to be abused because it is easier for the government to access it? Brilliant!

 

[Slapdash]

Instead, ire focused on Snowden, the CIA employee-turned-NSA contractor who admitted in an online interview that he exposed the programs in an attempt to safeguard American privacy rights from government snooping."He's a traitor," Boehner said on ABC's "Good Morning America.""The disclosure of this information puts Americans at risk," Boehner said. "It shows our adversaries what our capabilities are. And it's a giant violation of the law."His comments echoed a growing chorus in Congress condemning Snowden's actions."This is treason," Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Fla., said late Monday.Senate Intelligence Committee Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., also chimed in Monday, calling the disclosure "an act of treason," and that Snowden should be prosecuted.

More great American patriots.

 

[Politician Spock]

Instead, ire focused on Snowden, the CIA employee-turned-NSA contractor who admitted in an online interview that he exposed the programs in an attempt to safeguard American privacy rights from government snooping."He's a traitor," Boehner said on ABC's "Good Morning America.""The disclosure of this information puts Americans at risk," Boehner said. "It shows our adversaries what our capabilities are. And it's a giant violation of the law."His comments echoed a growing chorus in Congress condemning Snowden's actions."This is treason," Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Fla., said late Monday.Senate Intelligence Committee Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., also chimed in Monday, calling the disclosure "an act of treason," and that Snowden should be prosecuted.

More great American patriots.

So a guy who went to great lengths to defend the Constitution of the United States is called a traitor by those who are violating it.

 

[timschochet]

Instead, ire focused on Snowden, the CIA employee-turned-NSA contractor who admitted in an online interview that he exposed the programs in an attempt to safeguard American privacy rights from government snooping."He's a traitor," Boehner said on ABC's "Good Morning America.""The disclosure of this information puts Americans at risk," Boehner said. "It shows our adversaries what our capabilities are. And it's a giant violation of the law."His comments echoed a growing chorus in Congress condemning Snowden's actions."This is treason," Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Fla., said late Monday.Senate Intelligence Committee Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., also chimed in Monday, calling the disclosure "an act of treason," and that Snowden should be prosecuted.

More great American patriots.

Yeah I don't understand Boehner's comments in particular. How did Snowden's actions put us more at risk? I'm not one to regard him as a hero, but why is what he did an act of treason? Is there something I'm missing here?

Treason should be limited to helping our enemies kill us. So far as I know, Snowden's actions haven't done this. But perhaps my information is incomplete.

 

[Politician Spock]

Treason should be limited to helping our enemies kill us.

 

[RCon]

I imagine that as public sentiment turns against government access and spying, as I suspect it will over the next couple weeks, Boehner and others are going to wish they could take those statements back. Hell, we might even get to 60% opposed to government spying on its citizens!

 

[timschochet]

I imagine that as public sentiment turns against government access and spying, as I suspect it will over the next couple weeks, Boehner and others are going to wish they could take those statements back. Hell, we might even get to 60% opposed to government spying on its citizens!

I really doubt this. I think as the public learns more they will increase their support of the NSA. We'll see, though.

 

[RCon]

I imagine that as public sentiment turns against government access and spying, as I suspect it will over the next couple weeks, Boehner and others are going to wish they could take those statements back. Hell, we might even get to 60% opposed to government spying on its citizens!

I really doubt this. I think as the public learns more they will increase their support of the NSA. We'll see, though.

Privately, they'll oppose it. They'll just say they support it publicly because, you know, they are listening.

 

[Psychopav]

Instead, ire focused on Snowden, the CIA employee-turned-NSA contractor who admitted in an online interview that he exposed the programs in an attempt to safeguard American privacy rights from government snooping."He's a traitor," Boehner said on ABC's "Good Morning America.""The disclosure of this information puts Americans at risk," Boehner said. "It shows our adversaries what our capabilities are. And it's a giant violation of the law."His comments echoed a growing chorus in Congress condemning Snowden's actions."This is treason," Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Fla., said late Monday.Senate Intelligence Committee Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., also chimed in Monday, calling the disclosure "an act of treason," and that Snowden should be prosecuted.

More great American patriots.

So a guy who went to great lengths to defend the Constitution of the United States is called a traitor by those who are violating it.

It may not be unconstitutional, but it certainly is wrong. And the senators and representatives should be able to see that plainly, just as people from across the political sprectrum in this thread can.

 

[SacramentoBob]

I'd like to go back to the e-mail versus physical mail distinction. How is storing the contents of every e-mail any different than, say, opening and photocopying every piece of physical mail before delivery?

*bump*

I didn't answer because you already know my thoughts on this. Emails by design are not as private as regular mail. How could they be? The email company you use keeps records of all of them. If your email is through Yahoo, then Yahoo is already a third party with access. That doesn't exist in physical mail. The entire email system is nowhere near as private as regular mail.There is no means for the government to search through billions of physical mail- therefore any search they intend has to be more specific, and therefore a warrant is required; if they perform the search without a warrant that would violate the 4th amendment. But with emails the government is able to perform mass searches without needing to focus on specific parties- thus no warrant is required and these searches do not violate the 4th IMO

So if technology comes along that would allow USPS to scan the contents of all mail and store them in a database, then it would be okay for the government to search it without a warrant? It's not the action, but the level of difficulty involved?

 

[Politician Spock]

Instead, ire focused on Snowden, the CIA employee-turned-NSA contractor who admitted in an online interview that he exposed the programs in an attempt to safeguard American privacy rights from government snooping."He's a traitor," Boehner said on ABC's "Good Morning America.""The disclosure of this information puts Americans at risk," Boehner said. "It shows our adversaries what our capabilities are. And it's a giant violation of the law."His comments echoed a growing chorus in Congress condemning Snowden's actions."This is treason," Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Fla., said late Monday.Senate Intelligence Committee Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., also chimed in Monday, calling the disclosure "an act of treason," and that Snowden should be prosecuted.

More great American patriots.

So a guy who went to great lengths to defend the Constitution of the United States is called a traitor by those who are violating it.

It may not be unconstitutional, but it certainly is wrong. And the senators and representatives should be able to see that plainly, just as people from across the political sprectrum in this thread can.

The only argument that it is legal is that the Patriot Act allows for it, which is a law that has never been challenged in court, even though it clearly violates the constitution. It has not been challenged in court because the courts won't accept a case without an argument that someone has been harmed by what the government is doing.So in essecence, the government can violate the constitution over, and over, and over again, ad infinitum.... UNTIL someone gets hurt. Then they get sued, and have to stop violating the constitution.I am hoping and praying that what has recently been leaked is enough to build a case that people have been hurt by the Patriot Act, and the court allows the case to be heard. But even in that I have fear that the courts will do everything they can to avoid deciding that the Patriot Act is unconstitutional. They probably say that yes, it violates the 4th amendment... but see this small little attritbute of the constitution over here... yes that little bit of wording allows the federal government to completely ignore the 4th.

 

[5 digit know nothing]

what are the odds we never hear from Snowden again, that he was erased? cue black helicopters

 

[Politician Spock]

what are the odds we never hear from Snowden again, that he was erased? cue black helicopters

If we don't, it will be due to how well he hides himself.If the Feds catch him, they will want to make an example of him by keeping him locked up and drag out the judicial process as long as possible, as to not appear to be violating his rights at all, but to show those who are considering to be the next whistleblower what a pain in the ###, and life altering, the process of having your rights protected is.Killing him would make him a martyr. That is the last thing the Feds would want.

 

[5 digit know nothing]

what are the odds we never hear from Snowden again, that he was erased? cue black helicopters

If we don't, it will be due to how well he hides himself.If the Feds catch him, they will want to make an example of him by keeping him locked up and drag out the judicial process as long as possible, as to not appear to be violating his rights at all, but to show those who are considering to be the next whistleblower what a pain in the ###, and life altering, the process of having your rights protected is.Killing him would make him a martyr. That is the last thing the Feds would want.

Unless he is just never heard from again. I liken it to the hunt for Dorner, he knows too much. They bring him in and unless they torture/brainwash him/threaten his family what is to keep him from keeping his mouth shut, a plea deal maybe? I guess it would depend on the strength of the charges brought against him, given that we are only allowed to see 4 of the slides would the whole investigation be under wraps?

 

[timschochet]

what are the odds we never hear from Snowden again, that he was erased? cue black helicopters

If we don't, it will be due to how well he hides himself.If the Feds catch him, they will want to make an example of him by keeping him locked up and drag out the judicial process as long as possible, as to not appear to be violating his rights at all, but to show those who are considering to be the next whistleblower what a pain in the ###, and life altering, the process of having your rights protected is.Killing him would make him a martyr. That is the last thing the Feds would want.

Unless he is just never heard from again. I liken it to the hunt for Dorner, he knows too much. They bring him in and unless they torture/brainwash him/threaten his family what is to keep him from keeping his mouth shut, a plea deal maybe? I guess it would depend on the strength of the charges brought against him, given that we are only allowed to see 4 of the slides would the whole investigation be under wraps?

The two of you are such perfect archetypes of your classic conspiracy junkie that you're almost caricatures.

 

[5 digit know nothing]

what are the odds we never hear from Snowden again, that he was erased? cue black helicopters

If we don't, it will be due to how well he hides himself.If the Feds catch him, they will want to make an example of him by keeping him locked up and drag out the judicial process as long as possible, as to not appear to be violating his rights at all, but to show those who are considering to be the next whistleblower what a pain in the ###, and life altering, the process of having your rights protected is.Killing him would make him a martyr. That is the last thing the Feds would want.

Unless he is just never heard from again. I liken it to the hunt for Dorner, he knows too much. They bring him in and unless they torture/brainwash him/threaten his family what is to keep him from keeping his mouth shut, a plea deal maybe? I guess it would depend on the strength of the charges brought against him, given that we are only allowed to see 4 of the slides would the whole investigation be under wraps?

The two of you are such perfect archetypes of your classic conspiracy junkie that you're almost caricatures.

as is your world filled with unicorns and rainbows

 

[Psychopav]

what are the odds we never hear from Snowden again, that he was erased? cue black helicopters

If we don't, it will be due to how well he hides himself.If the Feds catch him, they will want to make an example of him by keeping him locked up and drag out the judicial process as long as possible, as to not appear to be violating his rights at all, but to show those who are considering to be the next whistleblower what a pain in the ###, and life altering, the process of having your rights protected is.Killing him would make him a martyr. That is the last thing the Feds would want.

Unless he is just never heard from again. I liken it to the hunt for Dorner, he knows too much. They bring him in and unless they torture/brainwash him/threaten his family what is to keep him from keeping his mouth shut, a plea deal maybe? I guess it would depend on the strength of the charges brought against him, given that we are only allowed to see 4 of the slides would the whole investigation be under wraps?

If he's never seen nor heard from again, it's at least as likely, if not more likely, that he's in Chinese hands than that he's been extradited and locked away or eliminated here.

 

[5 digit know nothing]

what are the odds we never hear from Snowden again, that he was erased? cue black helicopters

If we don't, it will be due to how well he hides himself.If the Feds catch him, they will want to make an example of him by keeping him locked up and drag out the judicial process as long as possible, as to not appear to be violating his rights at all, but to show those who are considering to be the next whistleblower what a pain in the ###, and life altering, the process of having your rights protected is.Killing him would make him a martyr. That is the last thing the Feds would want.

Unless he is just never heard from again. I liken it to the hunt for Dorner, he knows too much. They bring him in and unless they torture/brainwash him/threaten his family what is to keep him from keeping his mouth shut, a plea deal maybe? I guess it would depend on the strength of the charges brought against him, given that we are only allowed to see 4 of the slides would the whole investigation be under wraps?

If he's never seen nor heard from again, it's at least as likely, if not more likely, that he's in Chinese hands than that he's been extradited and locked away or eliminated here.

Obviously we'll never know if he is never heard from or seen again. We do know this much:

Fuentes said the FBI has an extensive relationship with Hong Kong police, dating to 1966 when the bureau established a presence there.

 

[Slapdash]

what are the odds we never hear from Snowden again, that he was erased? cue black helicopters

If we don't, it will be due to how well he hides himself.If the Feds catch him, they will want to make an example of him by keeping him locked up and drag out the judicial process as long as possible, as to not appear to be violating his rights at all, but to show those who are considering to be the next whistleblower what a pain in the ###, and life altering, the process of having your rights protected is.Killing him would make him a martyr. That is the last thing the Feds would want.

Unless he is just never heard from again. I liken it to the hunt for Dorner, he knows too much. They bring him in and unless they torture/brainwash him/threaten his family what is to keep him from keeping his mouth shut, a plea deal maybe? I guess it would depend on the strength of the charges brought against him, given that we are only allowed to see 4 of the slides would the whole investigation be under wraps?

If he's never seen nor heard from again, it's at least as likely, if not more likely, that he's in Chinese hands than that he's been extradited and locked away or eliminated here.

Not sure why the Chinese would kill. I'm sure they're pretty grateful he has revealed US spying since our hypocritical government likes to attack them for their programs.

 

[5 digit know nothing]

Snowden is no Edward Lyle (Gene Hackman from Enemy of the State), it took balls to do what he did, but this will not end well for him.

 

[5 digit know nothing]

From the Guardian:

The US whistleblower Edward Snowden should not consider himself safe in Hong Kong, which has co-operated with the CIA before to remove America's enemies, the emergencies director of Human Rights Watch has warned."There's little doubt [reason] to believe that the Hong Kong authorities would not co-operate with the CIA in this case," said Peter Bouckaert, who after the fall of Muammar Gaddafi found faxes in Tripoli indicating that the Hong Kong authorities had co-operated with the CIA in rendering an anti-Gaddafi Islamist to Libya.Snowden said he had chosen Hong Kong as the place from which to reveal his identity as the source of the Guardian's series of stories about US surveillance because "they have a spirited commitment to free speech and the right of political dissent", and because he believed that it was one of the few places in the world that could and would resist the dictates of the US government.Bouckaert, however, said Snowden was mistaken on both points."The rendition of [sami al-]Saadi took place nine years ago in 2004, but I certainly would not consider Hong Kong a safe place for him [snowden] at the moment," he told the Guardian."Certainly the reputation of Hong Kong as a place where free speech is defended has decreased in recent years, [and] there is no reason to believe that the very close relationship which is visible from these faxes between the intelligence agency in Hong Kong and the CIA has changed in a significant way … and that Snowden would not be at risk from extradition from Hong Kong."He added: "It's very clear from the faxes that the Hong Kong authorities at the time co-operated very closely with both the CIA and MI6 in bringing Saadi back to Libya, where he was later tortured and sentenced to death." In the event he was not executed.Snowden is currently in Hong Kong, but he moved to a new hotel in an unknown location on Monday. A landmark legal ruling in Hong Kong could buy him time if he decides to apply for asylum there. Meanwhile activists in Iceland are making preparations should the whistleblower try to head there, as he has indicated he might. "My predisposition is to seek asylum in a country with shared values. The nation that most encompasses this is Iceland. They stood up for people over internet freedom," he told the Guardian.On Tuesday, a spokesman for Vladimir Putin said that if Snowden applied for asylum in Russia, the request would be considered."If such an appeal is given, it will be considered. We'll act according to facts," said Dmitry Peskov.The move seems to have more to do with Russia's support for anti-western dissidents than any commitment to freedom of speech of whistleblowing.At the end of last year British ministers agreed to pay more than £2m to the family of Saadi by way of compensation and without admitting any liability in the case.

More on Saadi

 

[dickey moe]

Let's present this issue to the Supreme Court, and see what they think about it. Whatever they decide is fine with me.

The thing is, no one CAN take it to the Supreme Court to challenge it because of all the secrecy. It's been tried, twice I believe, but the SC declined to hear the arguments on the grounds that the plaintiff couldn't prove they were harmed. In other words, the government won't admit to spying on you so you can't argue that their spying on you is unconstitutional.

If that's the case, that's definitely a major flaw in our system.

 

[Nikki2200]

Snowden is no Edward Lyle (Gene Hackman from Enemy of the State), it took balls to do what he did, but this will not end well for him.

He may never be able to come back to the US. But I've read there are at least a couple of countries that have announced they will give him political asylum. Iceland is one. I also read Moscow announced he could go there, but I'm not sure if that was the Russian government or just the city itself.

It's appalling to me that they are actually going after him. I can't see how what he did threatens national security unless we are saying informing the American public that the government is watching all of us (which a lot of us consider a violation of our civil rights) some sort of threat. Sure it's a threat to them and their practices. National security? No. The terrorists already know our various agencies are monitoring everything they did. We just didn't know we were being monitored in the process.

ETA: He's probably not in Hong Kong anymore. He checked out of the hotel he was staying in days ago.

 

[5 digit know nothing]

Snowden is no Edward Lyle (Gene Hackman from Enemy of the State), it took balls to do what he did, but this will not end well for him.

He may never be able to come back to the US. But I've read there are at least a couple of countries that have announced they will give him political asylum. Iceland is one. I also read Moscow announced he could go there, but I'm not sure if that was the Russian government or just the city itself. It's appalling to me that they are actually going after him. I can't see how what he did threatens national security unless we are saying informing the American public that the government is watching all of us (which a lot of us consider a violation of our civil rights) some sort of threat. Sure it's a threat to them and their practices. National security? No. The terrorists already know our various agencies are monitoring everything they did. We just didn't know we were being monitored in the process. ETA: He's probably not in Hong Kong anymore. He checked out of the hotel he was staying in days ago.

Not sure how easy it is to sneak out of China undetected. If he went to an airport I assume he did not have a second identity to rely on, if they had any interest in detaining him they would.As far as what reason they are using to go after him, I assume they don't have to reveal it "for National Security purposes", given that we were only able to see 10% of the slides he wanted the public to see, there's a good chance something on those other slides would be considered (by the NSA) as a threat to national security.

 

[SacramentoBob]

Announcing where you want to go is silly unless you aren't really gonna go there.

 

[Mr. Cross]

They haven't been just looking for trends, they have been listening to calls. For years now.

This is sickening.

Broken link?

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=5987804&page=1#.UbiSSNhNUjx

 

[5 digit know nothing]

Didn't know this:

Hong Kong has a separate government, being that they were a British colony up until 1997, and, from what I've read, they don't want to be part of China. Britain only turned them over to China after two of their treaties, both allowing Britain a 99-year lease of the territories of Hong Kong and Kowloon, expired. China refused to acknowledge the other treaty they had made that allowed Britain to maintain ownership in perpetuity. China called the treaty "unfair and unequal", because Britain didn't have any obligations in return - although the treaty was made in repayment of the seizure of trade goods in international waters and for the way the Chinese treated European prisoners in the Second Opium War. When demanding Hong Kong back, China also threatened invasion and war if Britain didn't cede to their demands. The British had no choice but to allow China to take control of Hong Kong, but did institute a 50-year transitional period. So, until 2047, the government of Hong Kong is separate from that of China.

 

[Slapdash]

what are the odds we never hear from Snowden again, that he was erased? cue black helicopters

If we don't, it will be due to how well he hides himself.If the Feds catch him, they will want to make an example of him by keeping him locked up and drag out the judicial process as long as possible, as to not appear to be violating his rights at all, but to show those who are considering to be the next whistleblower what a pain in the ###, and life altering, the process of having your rights protected is.Killing him would make him a martyr. That is the last thing the Feds would want.

Unless he is just never heard from again. I liken it to the hunt for Dorner, he knows too much. They bring him in and unless they torture/brainwash him/threaten his family what is to keep him from keeping his mouth shut, a plea deal maybe? I guess it would depend on the strength of the charges brought against him, given that we are only allowed to see 4 of the slides would the whole investigation be under wraps?

The two of you are such perfect archetypes of your classic conspiracy junkie that you're almost caricatures.

Says the David Brooks wannabe

 

[Nikki2200]

Snowden is no Edward Lyle (Gene Hackman from Enemy of the State), it took balls to do what he did, but this will not end well for him.

He may never be able to come back to the US. But I've read there are at least a couple of countries that have announced they will give him political asylum. Iceland is one. I also read Moscow announced he could go there, but I'm not sure if that was the Russian government or just the city itself. It's appalling to me that they are actually going after him. I can't see how what he did threatens national security unless we are saying informing the American public that the government is watching all of us (which a lot of us consider a violation of our civil rights) some sort of threat. Sure it's a threat to them and their practices. National security? No. The terrorists already know our various agencies are monitoring everything they did. We just didn't know we were being monitored in the process. ETA: He's probably not in Hong Kong anymore. He checked out of the hotel he was staying in days ago.

Not sure how easy it is to sneak out of China undetected. If he went to an airport I assume he did not have a second identity to rely on, if they had any interest in detaining him they would.As far as what reason they are using to go after him, I assume they don't have to reveal it "for National Security purposes", given that we were only able to see 10% of the slides he wanted the public to see, there's a good chance something on those other slides would be considered (by the NSA) as a threat to national security.

Hong Kong isn't really China. They are a territory, but they have their own government and they aren't as restrictive about things like that as the Chinese would be.

ETA: I see you already found that.

 

[SacramentoBob]

I'd like to go back to the e-mail versus physical mail distinction. How is storing the contents of every e-mail any different than, say, opening and photocopying every piece of physical mail before delivery?

*bump*

I didn't answer because you already know my thoughts on this. Emails by design are not as private as regular mail. How could they be? The email company you use keeps records of all of them. If your email is through Yahoo, then Yahoo is already a third party with access. That doesn't exist in physical mail. The entire email system is nowhere near as private as regular mail.There is no means for the government to search through billions of physical mail- therefore any search they intend has to be more specific, and therefore a warrant is required; if they perform the search without a warrant that would violate the 4th amendment. But with emails the government is able to perform mass searches without needing to focus on specific parties- thus no warrant is required and these searches do not violate the 4th IMO

So if technology comes along that would allow USPS to scan the contents of all mail and store them in a database, then it would be okay for the government to search it without a warrant? It's not the action, but the level of difficulty involved?

 

[Slapdash]

Snowden is no Edward Lyle (Gene Hackman from Enemy of the State), it took balls to do what he did, but this will not end well for him.

He may never be able to come back to the US. But I've read there are at least a couple of countries that have announced they will give him political asylum. Iceland is one. I also read Moscow announced he could go there, but I'm not sure if that was the Russian government or just the city itself. It's appalling to me that they are actually going after him. I can't see how what he did threatens national security unless we are saying informing the American public that the government is watching all of us (which a lot of us consider a violation of our civil rights) some sort of threat. Sure it's a threat to them and their practices. National security? No. The terrorists already know our various agencies are monitoring everything they did. We just didn't know we were being monitored in the process. ETA: He's probably not in Hong Kong anymore. He checked out of the hotel he was staying in days ago.

Not sure how easy it is to sneak out of China undetected. If he went to an airport I assume he did not have a second identity to rely on, if they had any interest in detaining him they would.As far as what reason they are using to go after him, I assume they don't have to reveal it "for National Security purposes", given that we were only able to see 10% of the slides he wanted the public to see, there's a good chance something on those other slides would be considered (by the NSA) as a threat to national security.

Hong Kong isn't really China. They are a territory, but they have their own government and they aren't as restrictive about things like that as the Chinese would be.

ETA: I see you already found that.

I would guess the closer HK is to the Chinese government, the safer he would be.

 

[Nikki2200]

Snowden is no Edward Lyle (Gene Hackman from Enemy of the State), it took balls to do what he did, but this will not end well for him.

He may never be able to come back to the US. But I've read there are at least a couple of countries that have announced they will give him political asylum. Iceland is one. I also read Moscow announced he could go there, but I'm not sure if that was the Russian government or just the city itself. It's appalling to me that they are actually going after him. I can't see how what he did threatens national security unless we are saying informing the American public that the government is watching all of us (which a lot of us consider a violation of our civil rights) some sort of threat. Sure it's a threat to them and their practices. National security? No. The terrorists already know our various agencies are monitoring everything they did. We just didn't know we were being monitored in the process. ETA: He's probably not in Hong Kong anymore. He checked out of the hotel he was staying in days ago.

Not sure how easy it is to sneak out of China undetected. If he went to an airport I assume he did not have a second identity to rely on, if they had any interest in detaining him they would.As far as what reason they are using to go after him, I assume they don't have to reveal it "for National Security purposes", given that we were only able to see 10% of the slides he wanted the public to see, there's a good chance something on those other slides would be considered (by the NSA) as a threat to national security.

Hong Kong isn't really China. They are a territory, but they have their own government and they aren't as restrictive about things like that as the Chinese would be.

ETA: I see you already found that.

I would guess the closer HK is to the Chinese government, the safer he would be.

Actually you're probably right. But he was talking about it not being easy to get out of China, and Hong Kong is not like China on that front.

 

[Black Box]

So if technology comes along that would allow USPS to scan the contents of all mail and store them in a database, then it would be okay for the government to search it without a warrant? It's not the action, but the level of difficulty involved?

Start here: http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=682440&p=15643008

Peaks right about here: http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=682440&p=15643096

 

[timschochet]

Didn't know this:

Hong Kong has a separate government, being that they were a British colony up until 1997, and, from what I've read, they don't want to be part of China. Britain only turned them over to China after two of their treaties, both allowing Britain a 99-year lease of the territories of Hong Kong and Kowloon, expired. China refused to acknowledge the other treaty they had made that allowed Britain to maintain ownership in perpetuity. China called the treaty "unfair and unequal", because Britain didn't have any obligations in return - although the treaty was made in repayment of the seizure of trade goods in international waters and for the way the Chinese treated European prisoners in the Second Opium War. When demanding Hong Kong back, China also threatened invasion and war if Britain didn't cede to their demands. The British had no choice but to allow China to take control of Hong Kong, but did institute a 50-year transitional period. So, until 2047, the government of Hong Kong is separate from that of China.

Yes and no. They have free newspapers and can criticize China, so in that sense they're independent. But the PRC carefully controls all economic and trade decisions.

 

[timschochet]

Snowden is no Edward Lyle (Gene Hackman from Enemy of the State), it took balls to do what he did, but this will not end well for him.

He may never be able to come back to the US. But I've read there are at least a couple of countries that have announced they will give him political asylum. Iceland is one. I also read Moscow announced he could go there, but I'm not sure if that was the Russian government or just the city itself.

It's appalling to me that they are actually going after him. I can't see how what he did threatens national security unless we are saying informing the American public that the government is watching all of us (which a lot of us consider a violation of our civil rights) some sort of threat. Sure it's a threat to them and their practices. National security? No. The terrorists already know our various agencies are monitoring everything they did. We just didn't know we were being monitored in the process.

ETA: He's probably not in Hong Kong anymore. He checked out of the hotel he was staying in days ago.

As I wrote earlier, I tend to agree with you here. I don't regard this guy as the hero that you do, but your bolded argument makes a lot of sense to me. Unless there is some aspect about this we don't know, I can't see that Snowden threatened national security either.

 

[Politician Spock]

what are the odds we never hear from Snowden again, that he was erased? cue black helicopters

If we don't, it will be due to how well he hides himself.If the Feds catch him, they will want to make an example of him by keeping him locked up and drag out the judicial process as long as possible, as to not appear to be violating his rights at all, but to show those who are considering to be the next whistleblower what a pain in the ###, and life altering, the process of having your rights protected is.Killing him would make him a martyr. That is the last thing the Feds would want.

Unless he is just never heard from again. I liken it to the hunt for Dorner, he knows too much. They bring him in and unless they torture/brainwash him/threaten his family what is to keep him from keeping his mouth shut, a plea deal maybe? I guess it would depend on the strength of the charges brought against him, given that we are only allowed to see 4 of the slides would the whole investigation be under wraps?

The two of you are such perfect archetypes of your classic conspiracy junkie that you're almost caricatures.

Why would the government wanting to punish Snowden as an example of what happens to whistleblowers be a conspiracy theory?Of course they want to punish that behvior. They want to discourage those internally who are thinking about whistleblowing. Even if the government is doing absolutely nothing wrong, there will be people who work for government who think they need to whistleblow what they believe is wrong. The government has to punish those who commit that crime, or else more people will be inclined to do it.You are really grasping at straws to paint people who are opposed to their rights being violated as extremists, populists, and wackos. When the basis of your argument is we should should just have faith in the government to do what is best for us, it makes me wonder if you even understand why the Bill of Rights was adopted in the first place.

 

[Slapdash]

Snowden is no Edward Lyle (Gene Hackman from Enemy of the State), it took balls to do what he did, but this will not end well for him.

He may never be able to come back to the US. But I've read there are at least a couple of countries that have announced they will give him political asylum. Iceland is one. I also read Moscow announced he could go there, but I'm not sure if that was the Russian government or just the city itself.

It's appalling to me that they are actually going after him. I can't see how what he did threatens national security unless we are saying informing the American public that the government is watching all of us (which a lot of us consider a violation of our civil rights) some sort of threat. Sure it's a threat to them and their practices. National security? No. The terrorists already know our various agencies are monitoring everything they did. We just didn't know we were being monitored in the process.

ETA: He's probably not in Hong Kong anymore. He checked out of the hotel he was staying in days ago.

As I wrote earlier, I tend to agree with you here. I don't regard this guy as the hero that you do, but your bolded argument makes a lot of sense to me. Unless there is some aspect about this we don't know, I can't see that Snowden threatened national security either.

I'm sure great American patriots like Dianne Feinstein know what they're talking about, probably best to just take their word.

 

[Slapdash]

Why would the government wanting to punish Snowden as an example of what happens to whistleblowers be a conspiracy theory?Of course they want to punish that behvior. They want to discourage those internally who are thinking about whistleblowing. Even if the government is doing absolutely nothing wrong, there will be people who work for government who think they need to whistleblow what they believe is wrong. The government has to punish those who commit that crime, or else more people will be inclined to do it.You are really grasping at straws to paint people who are opposed to their rights being violated as extremists, populists, and wackos. When the basis of your argument is we should should just have faith in the government to do what is best for us, it makes me wonder if you even understand why the Bill of Rights was adopted in the first place.

Maybe he should do some research for Sir Yorke's Lamp Shoppe

 

[The Commish]

what are the odds we never hear from Snowden again, that he was erased? cue black helicopters

If we don't, it will be due to how well he hides himself.If the Feds catch him, they will want to make an example of him by keeping him locked up and drag out the judicial process as long as possible, as to not appear to be violating his rights at all, but to show those who are considering to be the next whistleblower what a pain in the ###, and life altering, the process of having your rights protected is.Killing him would make him a martyr. That is the last thing the Feds would want.

Unless he is just never heard from again. I liken it to the hunt for Dorner, he knows too much. They bring him in and unless they torture/brainwash him/threaten his family what is to keep him from keeping his mouth shut, a plea deal maybe? I guess it would depend on the strength of the charges brought against him, given that we are only allowed to see 4 of the slides would the whole investigation be under wraps?

The two of you are such perfect archetypes of your classic conspiracy junkie that you're almost caricatures.

I wouldn't be throwing stones if I were you. If they're one extreme, you are certainly the other. Though, I'll say this about the others. I'm not sure they think these things WILL happen and the government WILL use this data in the future. I think they are just seeing what doors this COULD open and it IS scary. If I'm being honest, I'd be surprised if the government doesn't abuse their access to this information.

 

[timschochet]

Snowden is no Edward Lyle (Gene Hackman from Enemy of the State), it took balls to do what he did, but this will not end well for him.

He may never be able to come back to the US. But I've read there are at least a couple of countries that have announced they will give him political asylum. Iceland is one. I also read Moscow announced he could go there, but I'm not sure if that was the Russian government or just the city itself.

It's appalling to me that they are actually going after him. I can't see how what he did threatens national security unless we are saying informing the American public that the government is watching all of us (which a lot of us consider a violation of our civil rights) some sort of threat. Sure it's a threat to them and their practices. National security? No. The terrorists already know our various agencies are monitoring everything they did. We just didn't know we were being monitored in the process.

ETA: He's probably not in Hong Kong anymore. He checked out of the hotel he was staying in days ago.

As I wrote earlier, I tend to agree with you here. I don't regard this guy as the hero that you do, but your bolded argument makes a lot of sense to me. Unless there is some aspect about this we don't know, I can't see that Snowden threatened national security either.

I'm sure great American patriots like Dianne Feinstein know what they're talking about, probably best to just take their word.

My overall opinion of Feinstein (or anyone else for that matter) has very little to do with whether or not I personally share their views.

 

[5 digit know nothing]

Tim, please change your avatar to this

it would make this thread a lot easier to follow.