Edward Snowden whereabouts unknown as US presses Russia
guardian.co.uk
guardian.co.uk
The story is that the governments are illegally bugging people. They are not stopping the terrorists (Woolwich/Boston). They are harassing legitimate activists. They are not serving the people they are meant to represent.
EDIT: And of course we, the general public, are not free of responsibility either for the media choosing to cover the personal interest story rather than getting their teeth into the politicians who might improve things.
"Take the following event. A car drives over a bridge, and the bridge collapses. What does the news media focus on? On the car. On the person in the car. Where he came from. Where he planned to go. How he experienced the crash (if he survived). What kind of person he is (was). But – that is all completely irrelevant. What’s relevant? The structural stability of the bridge. That’s the underlying risk that has been lurking and could lurk in other bridges. That is the lesson to be learned from this event."
Also:
"Terrorism is overrated. Chronic stress is underrated. The collapse of Lehman Brothers is overrated. Fiscal irresponsibility is underrated. Astronauts are overrated. Nurses are underrated. Britney Spears is overrated. IPCC reports are underrated. Airplane crashes are overrated. Resistance to antibiotics is underrated."
Overrated and underrated are subjective terms. Without the so-called "overrated" stories, the underrated stories wouldn't be written.
Hell, we're commenting on a so-called overrated story.
The fact that them pleading guilty played a major part in their conviction should tell you a lot about how much effort was put into getting them to plead guilty, if you catch my drift.
As an aside if I was inventing my own reality it would be a lot nicer than the front page of the Guardian today. While the right-hand story is Snowden the left-hand story is exactly why his leak is so important.
Well that proves it doesn't it! Except that those people were entrapped by the US government. Talked into doing attacks they'd have never actually done sans government involvement and suggestion.
The actual terrorist attacks that have been tried either worked or failed because the terrorist was incompetent. In any case, terrorism is such a minuscule cause of death or injury that there is no reason to even consider it. Just ignore it like the gnat that it is.
I remain skeptical that we were saved from anything, at least in this case. Are there others? http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/dec/12/newburgh-four-fb...
If you prefer the safety and protection of this New America, then you are welcome to it.
But if there were an Old America, an America ruled by the original words and meanings of the Constitution, an America where you could be proud of the goals and ideals of your government, yet humble and grateful that you and your family were part of it - THAT America is the one I would CHOOSE to live in, and the one I would defend with my life if called upon.
He didn't write that, though, did he? He merely asserted that a very broad spying program was likely to have nabbed some actual bad guys. I don't get why people can't simultaneously believe that and also be against all the secret courts and lack of checks and balances, or indeed the spying itself.
edit:
Also most of the spying program is secret. I think I have heard reports detailing most of what he has released. I have heard several reports on the secret court. There just isn't that much information available as it is all classified.
The problem is that most people are more interested in Snowden (people are always drawn to the human aspect of a story) and that's why he is now getting so much attention.
It's not just that. Snowden is staying in the news because his story has had developments. If it keeps "NSA" in the headlines for another week or so, I am more than happy to have The Guardian report on every move he makes.
If the focus tends to turn to "let's hunt this dog down and get him." that's bad.
I'd rather see more focus on why Snowden felt the need to run.
Snowden's future is showing future whistle-blowers what they can expect, and is therefor hugely important. I urge any who still haven't to sign the pardon petition (https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/pardon-edward-snow... - it already has enough that it should officially be responded to, but the more signatures the more likely a real response of some sort). Whistle-blowers are the only check we have against abuses in secret programs, unless you expect our representatives to prefer the public good over that of private companies when only those private companies know enough to make campaign donations based on it.
1. Snowden's success at evading capture is important in the long term. It has an impact on the actions of future whistle blowers.
2. Until some new documents are leaked, it's good that the media is keeping the public's eye on the situation somehow.
Right. Hacker News has been dominated by Snowden stories (particularly over the weekend), and far fewer NSA stories.
But it's not "the story." It's "a story."
> The story is that the governments are illegally bugging people.
Are you suggesting that this story hasn't been told at all? That the only story that's been told is Snowden's travel plans? Because I've read more stories about the governments illegal bugging than I have of Snowden's travel plans. I'll admit, I haven't counted up all the stories that have been published.
Just guessing here, but the real route (if Ecuador is in fact his destination) may be something like bizjet to Iceland, refuel, continue to somewhere in North Africa, refuel, then over the south Atlantic. And that's assuming he was ever in Moscow in the first place.
http://flightaware.com/live/flight/AFL150
But on other days it goes nowhere near it:
http://flightaware.com/live/flight/AFL150/history/20130620/1...
I didn't get that impression at all. If that post wasn't "Just the facts, ma'am", what is?
He didn't say all other days, after all.
It makes great sense he did not take the flight to Cuba he was expected to go on; I think he will take a flight suddenly and unexpected and to a country we did not consider. To avoid any presence of other nationals[0] and journalists on the flight.
This will his plan all the way to his final destination. He might even at times move through means we did not consider (e.g. by train or car; under diplomatic protection, of course).
[0] In particularly American officials.
I will give a press conference at 7 pm. in Melia hotel, Hanoi.
Vietnam! The plot thickens!
I feel an urge to stick bits of string onto a map with push pins.
EDIT: btw 7pm in vietnam is basically now.
I doubt Vietnam is relevant here. This visit was announced a week ago:
http://talkvietnam.com/2013/06/top-ecuador-diplomat-to-visit...
"Vietnam will be Patino’s second stopover during his Asian tour. Besides Vietnam, he will visit the Republic of Korea, Malaysia, and Singapore."
Nor is it an attempt to overlook the ambiguity of the total situation and the need for a collective solution to the tragedy of Vietnam. Neither is it an attempt to make North Vietnam or the National Liberation Front paragons of virtue, nor to overlook the role they can play in a successful resolution of the problem. While they both may have justifiable reason to be suspicious of the good faith of the United States, life and history give eloquent testimony to the fact that conflicts are never resolved without trustful give and take on both sides.
"Beyond Vietnam", A Time to Break Silence By Rev. Martin Luther King
Edit: It's live
(reply to edit: it's 7 AM in Ecuador)
If you look at the above-linked twitter feed, he's talking about it being 5 minutes from now. Imminent basically.
the "real" story should be how seemingly easy it is to get into NSA systems. billions of dollars in security and they failed to notice what this guy was accessing/downloading. assume for every Snowden there are at least 5 real spies in it for the money.
So you've been:
1. Robbed via taxation.
2. Robbed via inflation.
3. Left without any voice via complex bureaucratic system and multi-level censorship (licenses, regulations, "chilling effect" threats etc).
4. Bombed by people being angry that your government bombed theirs.
5. If you try to speak about it out loud, you'd be kicked, threatened, laughed at etc. And if NSA collects info on you, they'll use all that info about your public activity to manipulate you if needed.
All that while you yourself had neither intentionally, nor accidentally hurt anyone around you or anywhere in the world.
I think Manning deserves zero torture while everyone who tries to punish what he uncovered deserve all the blame and blacklisting from civilized society: courts, senators, president, all of army and police. Everyone who professionally kicks asses of normal people to get paid for kicking even more asses.
As we both probably agree, the nominal money supply does not matter. E.g. there is no functional difference between 1 million dollars in total supply and 1 billion. All prices are nominally higher in the latter case, but the relative distribution of wealth is the same. (In other words, rename "1000 dollars" into "1 shmollar" and you'll get the same prices in 1bln economy as in 1mln economy.)
Since all that matters is relative distribution, when anyone increases money supply, it matters to whom it will go. If your central bank prints new dollars and distributes them to everyone in proportion to their existing holdings, relative distribution does not change. Prices will rise, but wealth will not move.
If, however, the central bank prints new money and gives only to some people, they will have higher purchasing power comparing to anyone who did not get the new money. The money is being shifted towards those who are closer to central bank, so their economical decisions get more power. Example: today we both have $1 and compete equally for 1 apple. Tomorrow I get extra $1, so I can outbid you for 1 apple at a price $1,15 per apple. You didn't get the best apple and I still have $0,85 to outbid you elsewhere on the market. So my new money raises prices for both of us, but I have more of it, so I'm more frequently outbidding you and buying what you cannot buy anymore.
If this game is voluntary (e.g. if we voluntarily use gold as money and some people dig it from the ground on regular basis), I have no problem with it. If suddenly someone discovers an infinite gold mine and starts affecting everyone's wealth, I may choose to use something more stable as money. Or may stick to gold if its utility is still better than the price of inflation.
However, if the game is not voluntary, then we have a huge conflict of interests. If everyone in the country is OBLIGED (directly with legal tender laws and taxation in USD, and indirectly via various currency controls) to significant extent to store and transact money in centrally-controlled currency (e.g. USD), then those who control money supply get huge power. They can reallocate resources wherever they please in a nice hidden manner. And users of the money cannot invalidate the scheme by switching to other money because of the aforementioned laws. And laws (by definition) are legal threats against disobedience. So if you don't like that your wealth is being diluted towards certain persons (e.g. generals and soldiers in Iraq), the only way to really confront this is to avoid using USD. But it's not that easy because of tons of guns pointed at various levels at many different people in the whole economy. If you even try to do something money-related, you'll be attacked pretty quickly on "money laundering" and "helping terrorists" grounds. Just look at what problems Bitcoin exchanges face and how banks are self-censoring by preemptively shutting down exchanges' accounts to avoid regulatory intervention and losing their license.
See also how the gold was confiscated by the feds in 1933 to avoid repeating the myth that "we switched from gold voluntarily to superior USD": http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-6okepMAnHdc/TZrXaHL7ymI/AAAAAAAAAe...
PS. On the "long run": it never happens. It is a moving target, but never a destination. A lot of individuals during "short runs" define how the wealth is spent and where investment goes. If music-loving individuals print themselves some money, the whole economy will slightly shift towards their music preferences and you'll have more music halls, concerts and sound studios than if they didn't print that money or if people could blacklist that printed money, or switch to another money.
Sounds like it is quite possible that the whole Russia thing was an intentional diversion planted by Snowden / Wikileaks, to divert media and US official attention from the true destination..
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/24/edward-snowden-b...
36m ago Apparently those poor journalists on the plane to Cuba can't even drown their sorrows ...
And worse (or, really, better?): Thanks to travel regulation
in Cuba, they'll have to stay there three days before they'll
be allowed to fly back.
* The Oslo flight left only 20 minutes after the Hong Kong arrival
* That route would involve four flights to reach Iceland (stopping in Moscow, Stockholm, and Oslo). The trip can be done in two: you don't need the Moscow or Oslo stops.
With all this mess, I wouldn't be surprised to wake up tomorrow to see "Snowden says 'screw it, take me back to Hong Kong.'"
Unless this is all some very well orchestrated smoke screen, it must be crazy stressful. Maybe he should just parachute out and take his time to figure out what to do in international waters.
Did he actually have a ticket for this flight in his name? If not this is just a seat on a plane that a lot of incorrect people thought he would be on.