Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

On the 10th anniversary of the Snowden revelations

electrospaces.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 242 posts

Re: On the 10th anniversary of the Snowden revelations

#171

Post by TedDoesntTalk »

datavirtue wrote: post #139
rrrrrrrrrrrryan wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the parent is claiming that whistleblower protections don't apply to Snowden. A vigilante's actions can be both morally right and blatantly illegal. There are people that are glad he did what he did, but also believe in the rule of law, and feel his actions might have carried more weight if he turned himself in and accepted the legal repercussions. Personally, if I were the judge I'd give him a light slap on…

He would have been executed.

What peacetime charge carries the death penalty for espionage or related?

Re: On the 10th anniversary of the Snowden revelations

#172

Post by didntcheck »

2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #166
93po wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Based on information from…

So you are claiming that the NSA (at all levels) lied to the House Intel committee? That's a big claim, you should back it up with some evidence. Which part of the report is not accurate? Have you read the report?

Isn't it confirmed that they've lied under oath to Congress before?

Re: On the 10th anniversary of the Snowden revelations

#173

Post by WarOnPrivacy »

2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #138

I urge everyone interested to read the intel report and tell me what about it is false or inaccurate. https://intelligence.house.gov/uploadedfiles/snowden_report_... https://intelligence.house.gov/uploadedfiles/hpsci_snowden_r... > “The Committee further found no evidence that Snowden attempted to communicate concerns about the legality or morality of intelligence activities to any officials, senior or otherwise, dur…

Since you have examples at your fingertips, kindly post some examples of massive surveillance wrongdoing that was ended, once it was reported thru official channels.

> The Committee further found no evidence that Snowden attempted to communicate concerns about the legality or morality of intelligence activities to any officials, senior or otherwise, during his time at either CIA or NSA.

By design, this sentiment omits what happened to previous individuals who worked within the given channels. Specifically it omits how official channels failed at every level and omits the consequences for the individual who continued their push to end the wrongdoing.

Whistleblowers were ignored, resisted and eventually revenged. Every administration. Every time.

Re: On the 10th anniversary of the Snowden revelations

#174

Post by jcranmer »

denton-scratch wrote: post #117
yreg wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For what it's worth almost everyone but US government predicted the Russians won't invade. Zelensky himself predicted there is no imminent invasion and complained that the west creates panic which is harmful to UA economy.

This is true; and I find it hard to understand. I mean, I can understand Zelensky talking it down; as the public face of Ukraine's government, I assume everything he says is propaganda of some kind (whether or not it's true). But back in December, the satellite photos were showing the huge build-up of troops and armour on Ukraine's border. I didn't believe it was just an "exercise", nor did I believe it was sabre-rat…

> This is true; and I find it hard to understand.

It's actually not that complicated. The US intelligence services relied on high-level sources, essentially the military's plans for invasion, to come to its conclusions. European intelligence services tended to rely on low-level sources (the status of the units in question) instead. It turns out that the units were, even on the eve of the invasion, simply not ready for an invasion, and the European intelligence had sussed that out. In effect, when the US reported to the Europeans that Russia was preparing for war, the Europeans went "With what army? This one clearly ain't ready for war."

Combine those contradictory signals with the preconceptions that people had. The US intelligence had badly misfired during the Iraq War. There is a (not entirely undeserved) tendency to view the US as excessively warmongering. Putin had a (mostly undeserved) reputation of being a skillful and crafty manipulator. And Russia engaging in naked territorial aggression would require painful reassessments of 30 years of Russia policy (not least of which is the degree to which Europe depended on Russian gas). With all of that weighing against believing the US intelligence, it should be no surprise that Europeans did so.

Re: On the 10th anniversary of the Snowden revelations

#175

Post by [deleted] »

didntcheck wrote: post #172
2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you are claiming that the NSA (at all levels) lied to the House Intel committee? That's a big claim, you should back it up with some evidence. Which part of the report is not accurate? Have you read the report?

Isn't it confirmed that they've lied under oath to Congress before?

[deleted]

Re: On the 10th anniversary of the Snowden revelations

#176

Post by bjourne »

caskstrength wrote: post #133
bjourne wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't the big threat the US government's illegal and omnipresent spying on its own and other countries citizens, rather than what Snowden been up to lately?

I'm Ukrainian, so possible Russian assets like Snowden and Greenwald, or (senile) useful idiots like Chomsky and Waters are obviously much bigger threat to me than some dude in Maryland reading my emails.

Can you explain how?

Re: On the 10th anniversary of the Snowden revelations

#177

Post by bigbillheck »

reducesuffering wrote: post #126
Sharlin wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In late 2021 and early 2022 almost everybody, including most European heads of state, believed Russia was just bluffing and wasn't going to invade (because they correctly thought it would be incredibly irrational).

Then maybe you should start putting a bit more trust on the people giving you accurate information predictions, like the US State dept. and people like Dmitri Alperovitch https://twitter.com/DAlperovitch/status/1473362460673515527 , and less trust on Russian state propaganda spreaders like Snowden, https://twitter.com/Snowden/status/1493646431743356931?lang=... .

I've been fooled once too often by the US State Department to believe them on anything important.

Re: On the 10th anniversary of the Snowden revelations

#178

Post by clucas »

justsomehnguy wrote: post #167
clucas wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are you talking about? Can you provide one example of the US doing a buildup on the Russian or Chinese border that was even a quarter the size of the Russian buildup ahead of their full-scale invasion?

https://www.statista.com/statistics/1294271/us-troops-europe... Germany 35k Italy 12k UK 10k ----------- Total 57k

So... zero on the border with Russia or China.

Re: On the 10th anniversary of the Snowden revelations

#179

Post by clucas »

93po wrote: post #160
clucas wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are you talking about? Can you provide one example of the US doing a buildup on the Russian or Chinese border that was even a quarter the size of the Russian buildup ahead of their full-scale invasion?

At literally any given time, including right now, the US has a wide combination of aircraft carriers and submarines and other vessels in striking distance and with enough nuclear arms to flatten the entirety of China. It terms of destructive power it’s significantly higher than what Russia has built up

I think this situation is different from hundreds of thousands of troops and thousands of pieces of armor and artillery being moved to the border over the course of a couple months.

Re: On the 10th anniversary of the Snowden revelations

#180

Post by caskstrength »

93po wrote: post #157
caskstrength wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is funny how all comments (including mine) pointing out that fact are heavily down-voted without any counterarguments. I know the rules, so I won't insinuate any kind of "shilling", but that really makes you think...

I downvote it because it’s been repeated a dozen times and there’s a lack of intellectual honesty to say that a prediction that Russia wouldn’t invade is the same as spreading Russian propaganda for deliberate and malicious reasons. I can’t be bothered to explain it more than this because any ability to not see this means I’m wasting my time explaining it further

> I downvote it because it’s been repeated a dozen times and there’s a lack of intellectual honesty to say that a prediction that Russia wouldn’t invade is the same as spreading Russian propaganda for deliberate and malicious reasons.

It wasn't just a good-faith prediction, he was quite cocky and arrogant about that[0], including, ironically, accusing others of amplifying disinformation campaign:

"So... if nobody shows up for the invasion Biden scheduled for tomorrow morning at 3AM, I'm not saying your journalistic credibility was instrumentalized as part of one of those disinformation campaigns you like to write about, but you should at least consider the possibility."

At the same time he didn't appear too fazed by the invasion after it had begun, just casually accused others of concern-trolling[1] and "happily and thankfully" accepted Russian citizenship[2].

> I can’t be bothered to explain it more than this because any ability to not see this means I’m wasting my time explaining it further

I'm engaging in this discussion constructively and provide links to support my position. You preemptively accuse me of willful ignorance, but after re-reading his tweets I still stand by my words.

[0]: https://twitter.com/Snowden/status/1493641714363478016

[1]: https://twitter.com/Snowden/status/1498049577131208705

[2]: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/dec/02/edward-snowd...

Post reply on HN