Cuba bound? Edward Snowden leaves Hong Kong Edward Snowden, the NSA PRISM whistleblower, left Hong Kong for Moscow today, sidestepping US attempts to extradite him for espionage. According to reports, he has already left Russia for Cuba. In a statement issued on June 23, The Hong Kong Government confirmed that Snowden had left the country on "his own accord for a third …
This post has been deleted by its author
Oh hell, if the FSB won't buy him a drink, I'll be happy to. The smartest thing any US President could do at this point is to give Snowden a blanket pardon for any charges arising from this fiasco. Granted, they'll just use the snooping data to conjure up evidence of other worse crimes and persecute him for those instead so it wouldn't really matter.
It takes a brave man to do the right thing and give up his former lifestyle. Pity the US is such a bunch of busybodies now with bitcoin, we could use an anonymous currency to support true patriots like Snowden without the whole "aiding the enemy" BS.
This post has been deleted by its author
Good luck to him I say. Had the US government tried to explain the world had nothing to worry about from this then I may feel differently, but they have pretty much said the US population has nothing to worry about and everyone else actually does because we really do whatever we want with you data!
Personally if the US classes itself as a world leader, perhaps it should afford the worlds citizens the same protections it offers its own. Until then I offer my full support to people like Snowden.
"Personally if the US classes itself as a world leader, perhaps it should afford the worlds citizens the same protections it offers its own. Until then I offer my full support to people like Snowden."
If they want us to accept their "leadership" then they have to accept we have a say whether they like it or not.
.. someone isn't getting anywhere fast.
So, here we have someone against whom the US has a *real* grievance, and he has now happily travelled to another part of the world. Doesn't that exposes the whole Assange statement of a US extradition threat as BS?
Inquiring minds want to know.
Not really. For some reason Assange allowed himself to be caught inside the borders of the 51st state. The dangers of him being handed over to the Americans seem real enough, plus he himself is not American so his treatment would be that much less, shall we say, congenial, upon arrival. Snowden otoh seems to have been canny enough - so far - to avoid putting himself within easy reach of the eagle's talons.
At some stage, probably today is a bit early, he may be on a flight which may have a multi-fatality incident, and he will be a fatality. The deaths of the others on board, while regrettable, will be deemed by The Powers That Be as acceptable collateral damage.
Six months ago you'd have said that idea was preposterously farfetched, fit only for fiction.
How sure are you now?
You obviously need to read up on the USS Liberty.
After reading the report, it became clear, America sees everyone and everything as just a pawn in the game of "Own the World".
Sacrificing a plane full of people with a dubious political affiliation is item 5 in "They're All Expendable" a US booklet issued to new recruits of the shady ones.
Harsh thought there. A friend was on that Moscow to HK Aeroflot flight that went down with all hands 15 years ago.
The idiot pilot let his teenage son take the controls: with autopilot turned off.
Which was fairly annoying, to say the least. But what really got me pissed off (and drove the wife into paroxysms of rage) was that after the memorial service the coffin was to be flown back to Britain. And the bastard customs guys at Shemety'evo insisted that they would have to open up the coffin.....while his parents were there of course....to check that it really was his body, not something being smuggled. Although a small fee would makes this procedure unnecessary.
Of course, you don't actually get the body back after an entire plane drops from 30,000 feet straight down. You get a bit of the hillside with maybe the right bones in it. And they were prepared to rub that in for the grieving parents for a bit of backsheesh.
Some bastards is just bastards.
Now, I dislike the current US regime as much as anyone, and I think that they would stoop fairly low to protect whatever it is they think they are protecting, but killing a plane-full of passengers to get at one person - that requires too many layers of tin-foil to the hat even for me ...
If anyone reading El-Reg thinks that the US Gov will sit back and let him be tried on charges that carry a max of 10years )per offence) you are probably living in Cloud Cuckoo land (or La-La land for that matter)
I am sure that the will want to make an example of him and execute him.
If Aaron Swartz was facing a lot more years in chokey for some fairly minimal crimes then his charges would be more like 1000+ years or death whichever comes earlier (no parole after the death sentence...)
I can hear the Black Choppers already and my name appearing on the US No-Fly list as I write this.
So much for the 1st Amendment thingy then.
Aaron Swartz was being pursued by an ambitious U. S. Atttorney and her staff, who were overcharging on an arguable interpretation of an overly broadly written law and the claimed victim was disinclined to prosecute. Edward Snowden was charged with theft of government property (perhaps a laptop or two?), unauthorized communication of national defense information, and willful communication of classified communications information to an unauthorized person. There is at least a minor difference between the two, and I consider the implied equivalence of the two cases more than slightly offensive.
I doubt that the revelations will be either terribly surprising to the foreign governments that doubtless will receive copies, or that they will be overly damaging to the NSA or the U.S. We know, for two examples, that the PRC and Afghanistan governments have first rate network and system penetration teams. There should be no doubt that they also have equally good computer network defense teams who were well aware of whatever NSA activity might have been directed at them.
What I have seen so far surprises me more by the limited nature and scope of the activities described and the legal constraints that were imposed, if maybe not always fully operative. I had assumed they were collecting far more than what has been published, and they may be, but I am so far unimpressed both by Snowden's revelations and by the government claims that these activites were important in disrupting "possible" terrorist attacks, whatever that might mean.
The U. S. NSA, and the government that spawned it and excessive laws like the USA Patriot act is our problem, and we will have to deal with it as we can, or not.
For the offended British I have only good will, but suggest respectfully that you have more important worries closer to home - not GCHQ alone, but other government activities to filter and control communications to the detriment of your own liberty.
I haven't followed the PRISM case in detail, but what I've read this far hasn't surprised me much - the US is a superpower both by name and in their own minds.
Your claim that the Afghan government (which has trouble securing even Kabul, its own capital) has first rate network and system penetration teams does surprise me, though. I must read up on that.
Overall, I like my country (US) but you've lost your mind if you think that the justice system is in any way fair or representative of 'good'. The system is riddled with holes and the 'scales of justice' are pre-weighted depending on whether they like you or they don't.
Horrible people go free here all the time (or are never even charged) and people who have done little go to prison for decades. The system is broken, justice is a whore who can be paid for, and not running from it is probably the dumbest thing I can think of.
But it's rather amusing how HK responded to the US's attempt to get hold of him quickly:
"HK has formally requested clarification on "earlier reports about the hacking of computers systems in Hong Kong by US government agencies. The HKSAR Government will continue to follow up on the matter so as to protect the legal rights of the people of Hong Kong."
In other words... "Whateva! How about you [U.S.] calm down and clarify a few espionage-related questions first, before you can reasonably expect any help from our end?"
That's all Snowden needed. HK turned a blind eye on the issue at hand for a moment and let him proceed with his travels. Such a slap into the US's face! Love it.
The fact that the US want to have him jailed so quickly only proves two things:
* he's right
* they are afraid that the really shocking revelations haven't even been published yet
Got to admire that guy's nerves really. From a safe and well-paid job to being the target of a man hunt. No matter how you interpret the morality of his actions (I endorse them), he's got balls and I believe he did the right thing.
Probably the Russians and Chinese are laughing their arses off as to how foolish the U.S. approached it. First they deny, then they get the spin doctors on the case making it appear lawful (including canned statements for the companies to share with customers and the public), then maybe it wasn't quite as lawful as they tried to put it, and then the hunt for the "traitor" is under way, and even HK bluntly slaps them in the face, while Iceland has openly offered support for Snowden....
This is the material movies should be made of. Sadly it's happening for real.
I'd say it was the Americans with the balls. I mean, seriously, you hack their institutions, tap their citizens internet, slurp as much data as you want then have the f*cking cheek to ask them to hand over the guy that told them what you were up to! I'd say the Americans might be getting more than one polite "get f*cked" to any extradition requests, treaty or not. How many countries, with the exception of the UK, will be adopting a "yeah whatever" attitude to the US now they know just how special each of their relationships really is?
The UK is obviously just a conduit for gathering information on American citizens. The NSA don't do it, sure, but I bet they get a nice big feed of data GCHQ may have gathered in a quid-pro-quo "you barge through our loophole and we'll barge through yours" arrangement.
Anonymous Coward posted Sunday 23rd June 2013 12:03 GMT
"he fact that the US want to have him jailed so quickly only proves two things:"
Overall your post makes sense but not the part I quoted here. There are a few things wrong with it. It's not that they want him jailed but more like back within their own jurisdiction and then trialled, which is not the same. Too late to prevent the leaks now as all documents are probably spread out.
And it's not only two things as what you mention are just two possibilities. The most likely options need to be listed as well, Snowden appears to have broken several laws and technically, legally, he's treated exactly as would be required by law. If there are circumstances which might change the final verdict is for a judge to decide, not for the general public. However Showden is wise not to put the legal system he is challenging with his very actions to the test.
"Overall your post makes sense but not the part I quoted here."
You're quite right; I should have worded those parts you mentioned more accurately. Proves at least two things, in my opinion, not only two. And I used "want him jailed" as a term to express that they want him over there, so that he's no longer at large. Whether he'll be trialled the way he should, or if he just faces (possibly worse) treatment like the Manning guy who fed the cables to Wikileaks, remains to be seen. Fact is, and I think we can agree on that: The US are not happy that Snowden is on the loose.
(I avoided playing the "English is not my native language" card, although that applies as well) :-)
you have the Wrong Attitude. Meet them at the door carrying a large Bible (I got one for just this reason myself) and rant about how they're anti-Christian Satanists who will be wearing their special 'temple' garment in Hell when they meet their master. And how if they take one step onto your property to try to spread their soul-destroying lies, you'll help them on their way to said master.
Even the fake ones will be gone long before you can finish the rant. And they'll never come back, either.
This post has been deleted by its author
You won't even get as far as the departure airport these days if they don't want to let you in. The immigration form for the visa waiver program(me) must be filled in online in advance (it's called 'ESTA') and without pre-approval your airline won't board you.
(They still ask you questions on your arrival, and can in theory kick you out at that point, but you don't get a form to fill in other than a customs declaration).
Different if you have a visa, but I presume you don't...
I worked at USIT during a summer processing their J1 visa applications. One guy actually ticked "insurrection" as it was the least worst choice and he thought you had to select one. The problem was that you only got one form, so we had to tell him to write a covering note. <sigh>
It gave us a good laugh, that and the photos of guys wearing "First Communion jumpers", if you're Irish (and of a certain age), you'll know what I'm talking about. I'm trying to find photos, but am failing miserably.
I liked that post.
But did you know there was a British author who was sent on a lecture tour of the US (with much reluctance, I believe) and so when he got there he wrote in that section of the form "Sole purpose of visit"? And they let him in.
I've forgotten his name for the moment, sadly.
No, it was Gilbert Harding (I've remembered)
Wilde actually lost the battle of wits at US Customs. He reportedly said "I have nothing to declare but my genius", and the Customs official replied that that was a commodity which the United States had plenty of, and did not need to tax on import.
Q. Do you support the overthrow of the US government by subversion or direct aggression?
A. We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security
Wear a t-shirt with a picture of a gun on it, or Osama, or some Arabic; or as suggested, put 'yes' in all the boxes that no-one in their right mids would ever pick- "Are you or have you ever been a Communist/ Terrorist/Democrat/ Member of New Model Army?"
They have no sense of humo(u)r and will boot you right back out.
Geographical distance doesn't really matter. You can be anywhere on the planet within less than 48 hours. (Certainly less when you're destined for US Fed "Accommodation")
That guy isn't stupid. He would have done his research (and possibly had access to better information than we do) to work out where his chances of being extradited or snatched and brought back home by US agents are lowest.
I just hope that he deposited a copy of the evidence somewhere safe, so that if he gets snatched there's still a reasonable chance of it being published. I don't think he'll be on the run for long. Question of time until they get him.
But he's clever to take the gamble and provide one piece of evidence at a time. Keeps the issue (and him) in the headlines and the US can't just eliminate him.
While we're at it, thanks to the Guardian for ignoring the D-Notice, which seems to have successfully silenced most other newspapers and telly channels. This is a really fucked up situation for the western world.
Guess no D-Notice here. Despite massive flooding in one of our major cities, Snowden story is on front page of :
thestar.com
theglobeandmail.com
cbc.ca
Amazingly, even our right-wing paper The National Post has fairly balanced coverage.
"The Espionage Act arguably is a political offence." Direct quote from the author of their latest article, albeit used to poke at Obama.
Canada, Land of the Free and Home of the Brave.
"Canada, Land of the Free and Home of the Brave."
Except that Canada is one of the "Five Eyes" and is probably complicit with similar programs to those that have been outed at the NSA and GCHQ, or its an active supporter of those programs, or its an active customer of the programs run by the "Mother Country" and your southern neighbors.
I think the big thing is that by this move Snowden's been recognized by BOTH China and Russia as a political refugee. American relations with BOTH countries are not exactly cordial, so this puts America in a vice. They KNOW about Snowden, and by moving him to a KNOWN Anti-American country, they're basically telling the US to not even think about Extraordinary Rendition. Either one can make things extremely uncomfortable for the US should Snowden "slip in the shower".
OK, here is the version for slow learners.
Mandela: Part of a formerly oppressed majority, a leader in the struggle to overthrow the elite minority
Obama: Part of an elite minority (American plutocrats and their hangers-on) presently attempting to oppress majority of Americans and everyone else on the planet.
The idea of comment is that Mandela should tell Obama off for his and his government's behaviour.
Are we clear now?
It's a bit rich to blame the current US president of all this when it is a given that surveillance like this, within the maximum of technological capacity, has been going on since well before WW II, with such little gems as the mcCarthy era as shining example.
Not unlike the UK, and basically any other stable nation you can think of, the real cause, and power, behind this program is hidden in the layers of bureaucracy and career civil "servants" who outlast politicos and go on with whatever they were doing. Find the people who stay *just* out of the spotlights but in positions of authority since roughly the Clinton era, and you'll find the ones really responsible for this mess.
The US government doesn't give a shit about non-Americans (let alone their own country-folk). They invade whatever, wherever it suits their or their lobbyists' interests. They kill themselves and foreigners with impunity. They strong-arm their allies. They slurp the world's data. They accuse China (rightly, but that just adds irony) for cyber espionage, whilst doing worse themselves.
The US populace is just as bad - either complacent or stupid.
If they DO know what their government is doing they're making no attempt to force change. If they DON'T know what their government is doing, then, well, here's the pulse *points*. And here's the finger *points* - stuck right up your arse. Because they're too drunk on the red, white and blue koolaid.
I don't know what a gorge is, but these days I feel mine rising every time I see the word "America".
I'm afraid you don't know much about the US populace or how tremendously skewed the system is. The majority of people aren't happy with the government but the choices we are given for elected officials are two sides of the same shit covered coin. The two parties have so evenly split 'the issues' that no matter how you vote you're compromising on some of your principals. There isn't a choice of the lesser of two evils, its a choice between equals where the only difference is (now) the color of their skin or how well their suit is cut.
The system has legislated itself into a deadlock and there isn't any possible action that will result in immediate change. It has taken a long time to get this screwed up and it will take a long time to turn this thing in any other direction. Im not sure you realize how large and diverse this country is but you are hugely over generalizing based on the loud noises you hear from the loony quarter. You learn to look past them after a while, they aren't representative of most people in the US.
The biggest problem is the great lie of "Wasting your vote", ie; if you don't vote for one or the other, your vote is wasted.
Actually, the reverse is true. If you only vote along the lines they've dictated, your vote is a complete waste, since the two major parties only real concern is remaining in power with the fewest concessions to the populace possible.
If Americans want their votes heard, they have to vote for *any* third option available, to drive home the point that "business as usual" is no longer tolerable!
My favorite are the horses asses that refuse to vote because they don't like any of the candidates.
Or maybe these are people that consider that taking part in the charade legitimises it? Same people who are likely to tell you "it doesn't matter who you vote for. The government still gets in."
That's a very insightful post. Given its actual inwardness, US foreign policy often seems to be more about getting votes from a given immigrant community than what is actually happening in their countries of origin. As well as Cuba, there's Ireland, Israel, Iraq, Afghanistan and now Syria. It's funny how when there is a "crisis" in these countries, the US Government suddenly turns out to have highly placed "advisers" in Washington who are US citizens.
And now, Ecuador reports a request for asylum.
I'm not even going to try to comment on that, my mind hasn't quite gone through the whole boggling thing yet..
And I was not in favor of Bradley Manning's leaks. Manning leaked a bunch of combat reports, which were unremarkable except for outing some Afghan supporters of NATO and the Afghan government. And he leaked a bunch of diplomatic cables, some of which outed opponents of dangerous movements like Hezbollah, but mostly they made the U.S. look like the the adult in a world full of out-of-control kids.
Snowdon's leaks have informed us of the very real dangers that the nascent security state holds for our liberties, and the international partnerships that allow countries to outsource their domestic surveillance of their people while remaining true to the letter of the law.
If Snowdon is caught, I will be happy to donate to his legal defense fund.
Obama will never appear on any stage, physical or virtual, with Eric Snowden. Not after he has been changed with espionage by the Obama administration.
A better choice would be Rand Paul or Ron Wyden.
(but I did sign the petition)
at this news.... you all did'nt really believe that the various security services around the world never monitered the internet, or spied on their own citizens or got a friendly country to spy on them and pass the info.
We've known or suspected this for years
The only thing that surprises me is the scale of the operation... and how small it is.
I thought they were saving ALL the information for later search and analysis.
Oh and for all the various civil liberties people .. where were you when the patroit act was signed into law that allows all this spying to take place?
Im amazed at you thinking that just because "everyone knew" it doesnt make it worth causing a scene or fighting about it. Laws are made in response to the political climate - they can be repealed in the same way.
I'll think you find all the civil liberties people DID protest about the Patriot act.
Except I'm not a leftist. I used to be a fairly staunch Republican before the Bush Administration's big government/surveillance state tendencies started to become clear. And I rightly predicted that Obama would do nothing to improve things from a civil liberties standpoint.
Nowadays I am an independent voter. Civil liberties are one of my key concerns when selecting a candidate to support, which pretty much makes me part of a tiny minority of voters.
Surveillance is the technique of Governments of both the extreme Left and the extreme Right. Opposing it is a centrist, liberal position that can be supported by moderate conservatives and socialists.
If Snowden goes to Cuba, at least he'll be going somewhere where the government makes no secret of its activities.
Meanwhile here on the right-hand bank of the Atlantic.
Has any UK politician dared pipe up to ask what the hell is going on with the intelligence agencies of the UK and US rifling through our communications? Or would that mean the terrorists have won?
We have come to a fine thing when our best hope is that the German government and the ECHR will uphold our rights. Shows what utter bollocks Cameron's talk of a 'British Bill of Rights' was.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
