Ecuador gives US the finger; "we will not be blackmailed"

[Chizzang]

Isn't this situation a pretty common old problem...
After all: We have a grand tradition & rich history of Presidents training, funding, supporting and dealing arms to terrorists - so nothing new there
Secondly: We have become our destiny / A mostly paranoid Military Industrial Complex
The above two will always be followed by limiting citizens rights and making criminals out of those who attempt to expose any ugly truth

We are exactly where we belong...

[Ivytalk]

Isn't this situation a pretty common old problem...
After all: We have a grand tradition & rich history of Presidents training, funding, supporting and dealing arms to terrorists - so nothing new there
Secondly: We have become our destiny / A mostly paranoid Military Industrial Complex
The above two will always be followed by limiting citizens rights and making criminals out of those who attempt to expose any ugly truth

We are exactly where we belong...

And more from the Cassandra of CS.com...

[Ivytalk]

Holy frijoles, Batman! Hero-of-the-masses(and Cluck) Snowden has his choice among Venezuela, Bolivia and Nicaragua! Oh, scheit! He can't leave Russia because his passport has been revoked! Never mind.

[kalm]

Thanks for the reply IT.

[Ivytalk]

Thanks for the reply IT.

Reply to what?

[kalm]

Thanks for the reply IT.

Reply to what?

Sad that you'd give up the fight so willingly. Then again, you didn't have much to go on from the start.

Directional school FTW!

[Ivytalk]

Reply to what?

Sad that you'd give up the fight so willingly. Then again, you didn't have much to go on from the start.

Directional school FTW!

Suit yourself.

[Ibanez]

I Partied with two Ecuadorian girls last night. They were cute. Ask Trip.


Sent from my iPhone

[kalm]

Sad that you'd give up the fight so willingly. Then again, you didn't have much to go on from the start.

Directional school FTW!

Suit yourself.

I respectfully responded to your post with some legitimate questions...so thank you...and I will.

[Ivytalk]

Frankly, kalm, true to form, you've flipped the treason argument into a Fourth Amendment ploy. Let me try to address both. As to whether Snowden is a traitor in the constitutional sense, the answer is maybe not -- but the more "aid and comfort" he gives to our enemies the Russians and the Chinese by letting them copy his files, the closer he gets to the line.

As to the Fourth Amendment issue, I feel less secure in my "papers and effects" when I file my annual tax return with the IRS than I do when I consider what Snowden did. Technology has eclipsed
traditional concepts of privacy, as many people
have recognized, and the key in determining the propriety of the NSA's actions -- or any other
government action dealing with personal data -- in Fourth Amendment terms is whether the "search and seizure" (if any) is unreasonable. We'll see the full-throated ACLU types line up against national security absolutists, and the courts will end up somewhere in the middle. My sympathies are more with the national security argument at this point. I have no fear of being hauled before a FISA court based on anything I've done. You?

Always happy to give guidance to a directional school grad.

1) I've admitted in other threads that Snowden probably violated some crimes
and should be prosecuted. That does not mean however that he's a traitor.

2) Do you have knowledge what information or can you describe how he has given aid and comfort to the Chinese and Russians or are you basing that on what the establishment media has had leaked to them by the administration

3) Do you apply the same technological principle pertaining to the 2nd amendment that you do to the 4th? Regarless, how does a digital letter differ from a written letter? Why wouldn't the simple premise of the 4th amendments "probable cause" wording still be effective? Why does technology change that
all of a sudden?

4) I have nothing related to terrorism to hide. But that's
entirely beside the point. Again, there's probably some wisdom in setting the bar a little higher than that. The possibility of stealing private correspondence
and using that against political enemies or as a tool in the hands of present and future bad actors and unconstitutional practices alone should make it worth protecting.

Sorry I was on the rag last night. Got a nasty scrape while snorkeling and was in a foul mood. Here comes my respectful response to your respectful response.

1. OK, although you don't deny that his own ongoing conduct could land him a treason rap down the road.

2. Not sure I accept your premise about "establishment media" with an ax to grind, but I find it hard to believe that the Russians didn't download files when they interrogated him. Do you honestly believe that Snowden clutched his laptop to his chest and said "hell no, Ivan, you can't look at these!"
Who knows about the Chinese: they didn't have him as long.

3. For some reason, you ignored my threshold point about "unreasonable" searches and seizures. Probable cause kicks in in accordance with the Fourth Amendment text. My point about technology was meant not to change the legal analysis, but to point out that "papers and effects" etc. probably includes personal information on your hard drive. We'll see what the courts say. And I think the
SCOTUS hasn't let technology affect it's analysis of the Second Amendment text, either.


4. Kalm, you have here invoked a "parade of horribles," as skeptical judges tell lawyers. You need state action to have a constitutional violation. The further you get from the national security context (where the "unreasonable" concept will be highlighted by defenders of the practice), the more likely it is that state-sponsored theft of personal information would give rise to a constitutional claim. If private political actors steal your hard drive and dig up some dirt they can use against you in a
campaign, they may be guilty of theft, but there's no Fourth Amendment claim. That's no different from the "negative research" that
goes on every day. If a government agency does it to influence an election, the constitution should provide a defense.

I await your next respectful response.

[Chizzang]

Isn't this situation a pretty common old problem...
After all: We have a grand tradition & rich history of Presidents training, funding, supporting and dealing arms to terrorists - so nothing new there
Secondly: We have become our destiny / A mostly paranoid Military Industrial Complex
The above two will always be followed by limiting citizens rights and making criminals out of those who attempt to expose any ugly truth

We are exactly where we belong...

And more from the Cassandra of CS.com...

I think you've got your metaphors askew...
Cassandra predicted the future and was ignored (or something like that)
I am not predicting the future as much as I am sarcastically observing the present while making note of the past

(But you do have the ignored part right )

[YoUDeeMan]

"House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers told CNN on Sunday that he “absolutely” thinks one of the South American countries will provide Snowden with travel documents.

Rogers (R-MI) said on CNN’s “State of the Union” that the U.S. should “send a very clear message” to the nations offering Snowden asylum “that we won’t put up with this kind of behavior.”

Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey told CNN on Sunday that Snowden’s revelations have hurt U.S. diplomatic relationships and “the importance of trust.”'


This is ridiculous. Trust.

I hope Snowden has downloaded all the materials he had to the Chinese, the Russians, the Bolivians, the Washington Post, the World Weekly News, and Mr. Universe.

Seriously, all of this has little to do with our national security...it is just another attempt to cover up the behind the scenes political crap that goes on each and every day.

Our government allows our military suppliers to sell hardware and software to just about anyone with a nickel. Sure, we don't sell out top notch software stuff immediately...but that stuff has a shelf life that compares to the latest laptop technology. So, we sell knock offs...which are still used to kill our people...so that we can get the sale instead of the Russians and Chinese. After all, we have to keep our businesses happy and profitable. So what if those weapons are used to kill our folks...and don't bother to think of putting the leaders of our military suppliers in jail.

What information, specifically, has Snowden leaked that will endanger America? He simply "leaked" what most people suspected was true in the first place. Egg on the President's face? Too bad.

Wake me when someone provides proof Snowden is a threat to national security.

[Chizzang]

"House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers told CNN on Sunday that he “absolutely” thinks one of the South American countries will provide Snowden with travel documents.

Rogers (R-MI) said on CNN’s “State of the Union” that the U.S. should “send a very clear message” to the nations offering Snowden asylum “that we won’t put up with this kind of behavior.”

Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey told CNN on Sunday that Snowden’s revelations have hurt U.S. diplomatic relationships and “the importance of trust.”'


This is ridiculous. Trust.

I hope Snowden has downloaded all the materials he had to the Chinese, the Russians, the Bolivians, the Washington Post, the World Weekly News, and Mr. Universe.

Seriously, all of this has little to do with our national security...it is just another attempt to cover up the behind the scenes political crap that goes on each and every day.

Our government allows our military suppliers to sell hardware and software to just about anyone with a nickel. Sure, we don't sell out top notch software stuff immediately...but that stuff has a shelf life that compares to the latest laptop technology. So, we sell knock offs...which are still used to kill our people...so that we can get the sale instead of the Russians and Chinese. After all, we have to keep our businesses happy and profitable. So what if those weapons are used to kill our folks...and don't bother to think of putting the leaders of our military suppliers in jail.

What information, specifically, has Snowden leaked that will endanger America? He simply "leaked" what most people suspected was true in the first place. Egg on the President's face? Too bad.

Wake me when someone provides proof Snowden is a threat to national security.

Not to blow Cluck here but "I love that post" ^ right there....

[kalm]

"House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers told CNN on Sunday that he “absolutely” thinks one of the South American countries will provide Snowden with travel documents.

Rogers (R-MI) said on CNN’s “State of the Union” that the U.S. should “send a very clear message” to the nations offering Snowden asylum “that we won’t put up with this kind of behavior.”

Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey told CNN on Sunday that Snowden’s revelations have hurt U.S. diplomatic relationships and “the importance of trust.”'


This is ridiculous. Trust.

I hope Snowden has downloaded all the materials he had to the Chinese, the Russians, the Bolivians, the Washington Post, the World Weekly News, and Mr. Universe.

Seriously, all of this has little to do with our national security...it is just another attempt to cover up the behind the scenes political crap that goes on each and every day.

Our government allows our military suppliers to sell hardware and software to just about anyone with a nickel. Sure, we don't sell out top notch software stuff immediately...but that stuff has a shelf life that compares to the latest laptop technology. So, we sell knock offs...which are still used to kill our people...so that we can get the sale instead of the Russians and Chinese. After all, we have to keep our businesses happy and profitable. So what if those weapons are used to kill our folks...and don't bother to think of putting the leaders of our military suppliers in jail.

What information, specifically, has Snowden leaked that will endanger America? He simply "leaked" what most people suspected was true in the first place. Egg on the President's face? Too bad.

Wake me when someone provides proof Snowden is a threat to national security.

Not to blow Cluck here but "I love that post" ^ right there....

[kalm]

Boy, I sure hope we go after The Guardian and The Washington Post like we did Assange...on account of providing aid and comfort to the enemy and such. Traitors!

The US has sent Venezuela an extradition request in advance of a potential move by Snowden to travel there.

In it, US authorities claims that the former National Security Agency contractor "unlawfully released classified information and documents to international media outlets" naming both the Guardian and the Washington Post.

http://m.guardiannews.com/world/2013/ju ... ast-chance" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[GannonFan]

Boy, I sure hope we go after The Guardian and The Washington Post like we did Assange...on account of providing aid and comfort to the enemy and such. Traitors!

The US has sent Venezuela an extradition request in advance of a potential move by Snowden to travel there.

In it, US authorities claims that the former National Security Agency contractor "unlawfully released classified information and documents to international media outlets" naming both the Guardian and the Washington Post.

http://m.guardiannews.com/world/2013/ju ... ast-chance" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

What have we actually done to Assange yet? Sure we could try to prosecute him, but as of right now, only Manning is being prosecuted. Snowden is more like Manning, hence his particular problem. If the Guardian or Washington Post were credibly accused of raping girls in Sweden they'd probably face the same process that Assange is running from today.

[houndawg]

"House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers told CNN on Sunday that he “absolutely” thinks one of the South American countries will provide Snowden with travel documents.

Rogers (R-MI) said on CNN’s “State of the Union” that the U.S. should “send a very clear message” to the nations offering Snowden asylum “that we won’t put up with this kind of behavior.”

Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey told CNN on Sunday that Snowden’s revelations have hurt U.S. diplomatic relationships and “the importance of trust.”'


This is ridiculous. Trust.

I hope Snowden has downloaded all the materials he had to the Chinese, the Russians, the Bolivians, the Washington Post, the World Weekly News, and Mr. Universe.

Seriously, all of this has little to do with our national security...it is just another attempt to cover up the behind the scenes political crap that goes on each and every day.

Our government allows our military suppliers to sell hardware and software to just about anyone with a nickel. Sure, we don't sell out top notch software stuff immediately...but that stuff has a shelf life that compares to the latest laptop technology. So, we sell knock offs...which are still used to kill our people...so that we can get the sale instead of the Russians and Chinese. After all, we have to keep our businesses happy and profitable. So what if those weapons are used to kill our folks...and don't bother to think of putting the leaders of our military suppliers in jail.

What information, specifically, has Snowden leaked that will endanger America? He simply "leaked" what most people suspected was true in the first place. Egg on the President's face? Too bad.

Wake me when someone provides proof Snowden is a threat to national security.

Not to blow Cluck here but "I love that post" ^ right there....

If a monkey spends enough time at the keyboard eventually he'll type something that makes sense. Good job, Cucked.

[YoUDeeMan]

I am deeply disappointed and I'm finding absolutely no serenity in that fact that not one of this forum's sci-fi enthusiasts jumped on the, "Mr. Universe" comment.

Anyway, I was in the doctor's office today (I drove a friend) and read Time magazine for the first time in years. Their Snowden article mentioned that the military had determined that their best chance of breaking up and deterring hacker groups was to fiercely prosecute and make examples of the ones they caught. That's why they put Manning into solitary confinement for 23 hours per day...and that's why they want to get Snowden so badly. Not for what he did...but for what he represents.

Also, they mentioned that a few of the guys that helped develop the military's massive intelligence gathering and sorting programs have now gone into business as civilians and are selling similar technology to large companies.

Yet, Snowden is the "leak".

[kalm]

1) I've admitted in other threads that Snowden probably violated some crimes
and should be prosecuted. That does not mean however that he's a traitor.

2) Do you have knowledge what information or can you describe how he has given aid and comfort to the Chinese and Russians or are you basing that on what the establishment media has had leaked to them by the administration

3) Do you apply the same technological principle pertaining to the 2nd amendment that you do to the 4th? Regarless, how does a digital letter differ from a written letter? Why wouldn't the simple premise of the 4th amendments "probable cause" wording still be effective? Why does technology change that
all of a sudden?

4) I have nothing related to terrorism to hide. But that's
entirely beside the point. Again, there's probably some wisdom in setting the bar a little higher than that. The possibility of stealing private correspondence
and using that against political enemies or as a tool in the hands of present and future bad actors and unconstitutional practices alone should make it worth protecting.

Sorry I was on the rag last night. Got a nasty scrape while snorkeling and was in a foul mood. Here comes my respectful response to your respectful response.

1. OK, although you don't deny that his own ongoing conduct could land him a treason rap down the road.

How is it treason?

2. Not sure I accept your premise about "establishment media" with an ax to grind, but I find it hard to believe that the Russians didn't download files when they interrogated him. Do you honestly believe that Snowden clutched his laptop to his chest and said "hell no, Ivan, you can't look at these!"
Who knows about the Chinese: they didn't have him as long.

Why would Snowden take the files with him to Russia? That would be pretty dumb, when he can remotely access them from anywhere. Too big of a wildcard to risk losing it all.

3. For some reason, you ignored my threshold point about "unreasonable" searches and seizures. Probable cause kicks in in accordance with the Fourth Amendment text. My point about technology was meant not to change the legal analysis, but to point out that "papers and effects" etc. probably includes personal information on your hard drive. We'll see what the courts say. And I think the
SCOTUS hasn't let technology affect it's analysis of the Second Amendment text, either.

How are emails any different from written letters? What about web-based email which doesnt have to be stored on your hard drive? Regardless, your hard drive in this scenario is in effect, your mailbox.

Regarding technology, it's a common gun rights argument to not acknowledge advancements in weapons. The old "is a rocket propelled grenade covered"...or biological agents...or tanks...

You're kinda arguing from both sides on the tech issue


4. Kalm, you have here invoked a "parade of horribles," as skeptical judges tell lawyers. You need state action to have a constitutional violation. The further you get from the national security context (where the "unreasonable" concept will be highlighted by defenders of the practice), the more likely it is that state-sponsored theft of personal information would give rise to a constitutional claim. If private political actors steal your hard drive and dig up some dirt they can use against you in a
campaign, they may be guilty of theft, but there's no Fourth Amendment claim. That's no different from the "negative research" that
goes on every day. If a government agency does it to influence an election, the constitution should provide a defense.

I await your next respectful response.

So the government has the right to look at your emails without permission or a warrant but it's theft for a private party? Go government! Turn in your conk card immediately

(btw, "parade of horribles" sounds kinky... )

[Chizzang]

So the government has the right to look at your emails without permission or a warrant but it's theft for a private party? Go government! Turn in your conk card immediately

(btw, "parade of horribles" sounds kinky... )

Jeezus, no kidding
We have a congress that is seemingly against "the people" and has been for decades now
Who exactly do they serve these days..? Clearly not citizens

[CID1990]

So the government has the right to look at your emails without permission or a warrant but it's theft for a private party? Go government! Turn in your conk card immediately

(btw, "parade of horribles" sounds kinky... )

Jeezus, no kidding
We have a congress that is seemingly against "the people" and has been for decades now
Who exactly do they serve these days..? Clearly not citizens

If you saw their junkets to Gay Paree and other vacation spots for holidays and their compensation packages it would be clear to you who they serve.


Sent from the center of the universe.

[houndawg]

Jeezus, no kidding
We have a congress that is seemingly against "the people" and has been for decades now
Who exactly do they serve these days..? Clearly not citizens

If you saw their junkets to Gay Paree and other vacation spots for holidays and their compensation packages it would be clear to you who they serve.


Sent from the center of the universe.

One term in the House and your set for life.

[∞∞∞]

I'm not sure if anyone noticed, but the Obama administration slammed Russia today for allowing Snowden a platform to speak his thoughts against "US interests."

Considering the Constitution (and UDHR) covers a person's right to free-speech domestically and overseas, it's a bit upsetting that our government is furious that he was allowed to say what he wants to. Regardless if you agree or disagree with Snowden, he absolutely has the right to do so.

[CID1990]

I'm not sure if anyone noticed, but the Obama administration slammed Russia today for allowing Snowden a platform to speak his thoughts against "US interests."

Considering the Constitution (and UDHR) covers a person's right to free-speech domestically and overseas, it's a bit upsetting that our government is furious that he was allowed to say what he wants to. Regardless if you agree or disagree with Snowden, he absolutely has the right to do so.

He's only a champion of the Constitution when 1) he's in a U if Chicago classroom and 2) when it suits him


Sent from the center of the universe.