Russia and China decrypt Snowden files

[BoberFett]

Not even close. I see why you have the Confused Emoticon by your post. If you think Snowden is a hero you are confused.

I'm pretty sure George Washington was a traitor.

Are you actually an idiot, or do you just play one on the internet?

 

[master_shake_]

Thank our plucky hero for that. What countries are those dollars going to go to now? I'm sure, say, Germany would never spy on on anyone, and their data is much safer in China.

don't blame the government that is fucking over us tech companies blame the guy who told them they were going to get fucked...

makes sense.

edit forgot rolleyes

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

Snowden shouted fire in a theatre over burning popcorn.

 

[master_shake_]

Snowden shouted fire in a theatre over burning popcorn.

wow. just wow.

how does one get to be that ignorant.

oh oh i know.

murica'

 

[Genx87]

Snowden shouted fire in a theatre over burning popcorn.

You must be slow. Who was shouting fire yesterday?

 

[ivwshane]

http://www.businessinsider.com/snowden-and-john-oliver-2015-4
I'm wondering how many people that still see Snowden as anything other than a little shit didn't watch the Oliver interview.

I missed where he lied, where was it? Between answering the question and the innuendo?

 

[pcgeek11]

I'm pretty sure George Washington was a traitor.

Are you actually an idiot, or do you just play one on the internet?

I guess you are entitled to Your Opinion. :|

 

[Victorian Gray]

So, the lead reporter for the story in the Sunday Times was interviewed on CNN and had some choice information to share:

"Asked how the files were breached, Harper responded, “I don’t know the answer to that.”

Asked about the nature of the files, Harper responded, “That’s not something we’re clear on, so we don’t go into that level of detail in the story. We just publish what we believe to be the position of the British government at the moment.”

Asked whether the files were hacked or whether Snowden handed them over to officials in Hong Kong or Russian, Harper responded, “I’m sorry to repeat myself…but we don’t know…it could be either, it could be another scenario.”

Asked whether the MI6 agents were under threat or were moved for precautionary purposes, Harper responded, “Again, I’m afraid to disappoint you, we don’t know.”

Asked as far whether the Sunday Times had any evidence to substantiate these claims, Harper responded, “No. We picked up on the story a while back from an extremely well-placed source in the home office.”

Harper finished his time on CNN by capably summing up his (lack of) reporting: “Unless you actually have leaked intelligence documents like Snowden had, it’s very difficult to say anything with certainty.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...eporter-on-snowden-story-we-dont-have-a-clue/

Well I'm convinced.

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

So how many copies of Snowden's files are floating around out there? Who has access to them? How are they secured?

 

[Jimzz]

Yep as VG has posted, its a BS propaganda piece.

Reporter Who Wrote Sunday Times 'Snowden' Propaganda Admits That He's Just Writing What UK Gov't Told Him
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/2...-hes-just-writing-what-uk-govt-told-him.shtml

"Harper just keeps repeating that he doesn't know what's actually true, and that he was just saying what the government told him -- more or less admitting that his role here was not as a reporter, but as a propagandist or a stenographer."

That's a good summary.

 

[Blanky]

Iops

 

[Blackjack200]

We just publish what we believe to be the position of the British government at the moment.
We just publish what we believe to be the position of the British government at the moment.

We just publish what we believe to be the position of the British government at the moment.

 

[Blackjack200]

So pretty much this guy says "I believe Edward Snowden 110%, Russian and Chinese governments 100% and the US government 0%".

And then we believe this guy 100%.

Snowden has already been caught in numerous lies. What makes anybody think he's being truthful?

Anything to say for yourself now that the story has been shown to be a complete fabrication?

Just keep skating by on your narrow financial expertise, and thinking that makes you some kind of expert on politics.

In one of Snowden's early interviews, he stated that he took all the information necessary to unveal the domestic surveillance, plus some extra information to ensure his safe passage. He later changed his story about the "extra information", but it was originally his defense against the US government saying it took nearly 2 million documents.

Honestly, it seems like he planned from day 1 to sell valuable intel to the Chinese to ensure safe passage. I think his ending up in Russia was just him not being as good at the spy game as he thought he was, he probably expected to live safely in Hong Kong for the rest of his life, a modern 1st world city.

And when he left Hong Kong he destroyed his own copies.

 

[Blackjack200]

Oh yeah, and not that it matters since NYT or CNN would have happily ran with the story too... but... Murdoch-owned paper.

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

Yep as VG has posted, its a BS propaganda piece.

Reporter Who Wrote Sunday Times 'Snowden' Propaganda Admits That He's Just Writing What UK Gov't Told Him
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/2...-hes-just-writing-what-uk-govt-told-him.shtml

"Harper just keeps repeating that he doesn't know what's actually true, and that he was just saying what the government told him -- more or less admitting that his role here was not as a reporter, but as a propagandist or a stenographer."

That's a good summary.

You know, if these journalists asking Harper these questions had any interest in what's actually true they'd be asking their sources many of these same questions and trying to get answers themselves and not just using them to put Harper on the spot.

 

[Jimzz]

You know, if these journalists asking Harper these questions had any interest in what's actually true they'd be asking their sources many of these same questions and trying to get answers themselves and not just using them to put Harper on the spot.

They have many times, they have not given any official statement. All of Harpers work has been "anonymous quotes" that he can not back up and the British Gov has not backed up either.

 

[Victorian Gray]

You know, if these journalists asking Harper these questions had any interest in what's actually true they'd be asking their sources many of these same questions and trying to get answers themselves and not just using them to put Harper on the spot.

"We just publish what we believe to be the position of the British government at the moment"

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

"We just publish what we believe to be the position of the British government at the moment"

As opposed to insisting it's not the position of the British government at the moment based on, umm, what exactly?

Say Snowden doesn't have them anymore and didn't give them to anyone past the journalists. <--- Big fucking security hole. Who knows how many copies, who has access, how they're secured, all while no doubt being surveiled by elements even more dastardly than US security agencies. And that's not even taking into account the sensitive info journalists have incompetently blabbered out themselves. There is every conceivable possibly, no, likelihood, that Russia, China, and anyone else have this info now or at some point will.

 

[BoberFett]

I don't know if anyone has mentioned it, but they're just publishing what they believe to be the position of the British government at the moment.

 

[Victorian Gray]

As opposed to insisting it's not the position of the British government at the moment based on, umm, what exactly?

Say Snowden doesn't have them anymore and didn't give them to anyone past the journalists. <--- Big fucking security hole. Who knows how many copies, who has access, how they're secured, all while no doubt being surveiled by elements even more dastardly than US security agencies. And that's not even taking into account the sensitive info journalists have incompetently blabbered out themselves. There is every conceivable possibly, no, likelihood, that Russia, China, and anyone else have this info now or at some point will.

I repeat:

"Harper responded, “I don’t know the answer to that".

"Harper responded, “I’m sorry to repeat myself…but we don’t know"

"Harper responded, “Again, I’m afraid to disappoint you, we don’t know"

"We picked up on the story a while back from an extremely well-placed source in the home office."

"Harper finished...: “Unless you actually have leaked intelligence documents like Snowden had, it’s very difficult to say anything with certainty"

 

[LegendKiller]

Anything to say for yourself now that the story has been shown to be a complete fabrication?

Just keep skating by on your narrow financial expertise, and thinking that makes you some kind of expert on politics.



And when he left Hong Kong he destroyed his own copies.

Are you a fucking moron? Of course he would print what government sources gave him. Do you expect CIA operatives to publicly announce they had to leave the country they were in?

Narrow financial expertise? LOL. The dickhair I left on the mens room urinal this morning has forgotten more about finance than you'll ever know.

And what are you? Henry Kissenger? You're just as much as a novice at politics as everybody else, except I don't take some dipshit Snowden's perspective at 100% of face value like you cumwads.

 

[irishScott]

Well I'm glad to see it appears to be propaganda, but sadly even if true the NSA deserves to take some damage for undermining the Constitution, and the recent "freedom" act doesn't go nearly far enough, though like all government agencies they whine like it's the end of civilization when their toys get taken away.

The NSA made the mistake of hiring a contractor who actually believes in a literal, as opposed to operationally convenient interpretation of the Constitution. If anyone died on account of Snowden's actions that's a tragedy, but the root cause of those deaths is government corruption, not Snowden. The government created a situation where the route Snowden took was the only effective one available. It's hardly the first time innocent people have suffered on account of our government's corruption, and it won't be the last.

 

[blankslate]

Maybe if he hadn't been chased out of the country, and if Russia wasn't the only country willing to offer him asylum, maybe it wouldn't have ended up in the Russians' hands.

Not only that but the person that many compare his unfavorably to; "Why didn't Snowden stay and face the courts like a real whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg did?"....

spoke about the differences in the state of the country when he spoke out and when Mr. Snowden spoke out.

Daniel Ellsberg: NSA Leaker Snowden Made the Right Call

Daniel Ellsberg is the author of &#8220;Secrets: A Memoir of Vietnam and the Pentagon Papers.&#8221; He was charged in 1971 under the Espionage Act as well as for theft and conspiracy for copying the Pentagon Papers. The trial was dismissed in 1973 after evidence of government misconduct, including illegal wiretapping, was introduced in court.
Many people compare Edward Snowden to me unfavorably for leaving the country and seeking asylum, rather than facing trial as I did. I don&#8217;t agree. The country I stayed in was a different America, a long time ago.

After the New York Times had been enjoined from publishing the Pentagon Papers &#8212; on June 15, 1971, the first prior restraint on a newspaper in U.S. history &#8212; and I had given another copy to The Post (which would also be enjoined), I went underground with my wife, Patricia, for 13 days. My purpose (quite like Snowden&#8217;s in flying to Hong Kong) was to elude surveillance while I was arranging &#8212; with the crucial help of a number of others, still unknown to the FBI &#8212; to distribute the Pentagon Papers sequentially to 17 other newspapers, in the face of two more injunctions. The last three days of that period was in defiance of an arrest order: I was, like Snowden now, a &#8220;fugitive from justice.&#8221;

Yet when I surrendered to arrest in Boston, having given out my last copies of the papers the night before, I was released on personal recognizance bond the same day. Later, when my charges were increased from the original three counts to 12, carrying a possible 115-year sentence, my bond was increased to $50,000. But for the whole two years I was under indictment, I was free to speak to the media and at rallies and public lectures. I was, after all, part of a movement against an ongoing war. Helping to end that war was my preeminent concern. I couldn&#8217;t have done that abroad, and leaving the country never entered my mind.

He goes on to say that unlike him being allowed to be allowed to go about his daily business Mr. Snowden would be arrested.

There is no chance that experience could be reproduced today, let alone that a trial could be terminated by the revelation of White House actions against a defendant that were clearly criminal in Richard Nixon&#8217;s era &#8212; and figured in his resignation in the face of impeachment &#8212; but are today all regarded as legal (including an attempt to &#8220;incapacitate me totally&#8221.

I hope Snowden&#8217;s revelations will spark a movement to rescue our democracy, but he could not be part of that movement had he stayed here. There is zero chance that he would be allowed out on bail if he returned now and close to no chance that, had he not left the country, he would have been granted bail. Instead, he would be in a prison cell like Bradley Manning, incommunicado.

He would almost certainly be confined in total isolation, even longer than the more than eight months Manning suffered during his three years of imprisonment before his trial began recently. The United Nations Special Rapporteur for Torture described Manning&#8217;s conditions as &#8220;cruel, inhuman and degrading.&#8221; (That realistic prospect, by itself, is grounds for most countries granting Snowden asylum, if they could withstand bullying and bribery from the United States.)

Snowden believes that he has done nothing wrong. I agree wholeheartedly.

Given the unconfirmed nature of the article in the OP and the statements of the person I have heard critics of Edward Snowden holding up as an example of a proper whistle-blower I am skeptical about these files being decrypted atm.

The NSA make the mistake of hiring a contractor who actually believes in a literal, as opposed to operationally convenient interpretation of the Constitution. If anyone died on account of Snowden's actions that's a tragedy, but the root cause of those deaths is government corruption, not Snowden. The government created a situation where the route Snowden took was the only effective one available. It's hardly the first time innocent people have suffered on account of our government's corruption, and it won't be the last.

There are times when I don't agree with the above poster but when he's right... he's right.

Imagine if you will an America where politicians didn't vote to violate the 4th Amendment is such egregious ways... following an attack that the administration had months of warning about.... Imagine an America where people were brave enough to head the warning of Benjamin Franklin.

Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.

Perhaps Mr. Snowden wouldn't have felt the need to be a whistle-blower.

In fact there was an internal debate about the surveillance program.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slat..._over_collecting_americans_phone_records.html

Edward Snowden wasn&#8217;t the only one concerned with the National Security Agency&#8217;s secret collection of Americans' telephone records. Years before Snowden&#8217;s disclosure of the agency&#8217;s data mining ways, some NSA executives argued the surveillance program's methods "exceeded the agency's mandate to focus on foreign spying and would do little to stop terror plots,&#8221; the Associated Press reports.

&#8220;The 2009 dissent, led by a senior NSA official and embraced by others at the agency, prompted the Obama administration to consider, but ultimately abandon, a plan to stop gathering the records,&#8221; according to the AP.

Yes you can hold to the idea that Snowden is a traitor.

However, I would suggest that if you do you better take also take a long hard look at the members of agencies who swore an oath to protect the U.S. Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic and then went on to break that oath....

elsewise perhaps you could very well be the practitioner of a favorite pastime of many politicians... Hypocrisy.


.....

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

The fact is we lived under these "abuses" for over decade and outside of a few specific (and inexcusable) incidents no one even fucking noticed. If these abuses were as widespread and egregious as the narrative that's been going on now that the government *could be* looking at your dick pics it wouldn't have taken the leaks to spark all the outrage. It's not hypocrisy to want the agencies tasked with protecting the country to have the most accurate info as possible and it's flat stupid to think your "private" information is any sort of private when numerous third parties already have their hands on them if not full outright possession. Are things like wanting back doors into encrypted info too far? Absolutely, it's absurd even, but snooping info that bunches of third parties already have access to is exactly what these agencies should be doing.

 

[Genx87]

The fact is we lived under these "abuses" for over decade and outside of a few specific (and inexcusable) incidents no one even fucking noticed. If these abuses were as widespread and egregious as the narrative that's been going on now that the government *could be* looking at your dick pics it wouldn't have taken the leaks to spark all the outrage. It's not hypocrisy to want the agencies tasked with protecting the country to have the most accurate info as possible and it's flat stupid to think your "private" information is any sort of private when numerous third parties already have their hands on them if not full outright possession. Are things like wanting back doors into encrypted info too far? Absolutely, it's absurd even, but snooping info that bunches of third parties already have access to is exactly what these agencies should be doing.

Well here you have it folks. If the govt violates our rights without our knowledge why should we care?