I'm very surprised that there's not a thread on this. I looked in Main, News, and even Random on the "View All Threads" pages for each, using ctrl+f, trying multiple searches. If I have still somehow missed an already existing thread about this, please let me know.

I'll try to sum this up as best I can, from what I've read, but as my own knowledge of this has holes, it's not going to be perfect. I'll provide links at the bottom of this post. Also, I don't remember the specific dates, so forgive me if I'm wrong about them.

Anyways:
Earlier this month (June, 2013), Edward Snowden, a former NSA contractor and CIA employee first leaked previously secret information about U.S. and British surveillance programs to The Guardian (a British newspaper) and The Washington Post. Specifically, these programs gathered data on a large scale of Americans' e-mail and telephone records. Snowden later revealed that the U.S. government has combed through the databases of Chinese cell phone providers. The information Snowden released that I've seen is more general, and has more to do with what the programs do, rather than how they do it. He didn't release specific names of people. He has four laptops with him containing an unknown amount of information.

First, Snowden flew from the U.S. to Hong Kong, which is where he was when he leaked the info about PRISM, one of the programs he disclosed information about. I believe he was in Hong Kong for at least two weeks. The U.S. government charged Snowden with espionage, and tried to get the Hong Kong government to extradite him back to the U.S. to stand trial. The Hong Kong government said that the U.S. government hadn't provided them with the information they needed to extradite Snowden. In the midst of this, Snowden left Hong Kong and flew to Russia. At some point (I'm not sure if it was before he left Hong Kong or after he got to Russia), Snowden began to be accompanied constantly by a legal advisor (I think?) from Wikileaks. Wikileaks have said through their Twitter account that Snowden intends to try to seek asylum in Ecuador, and has requested said asylum. A plane left for Ecuador the day after Snowden arrived in Russia. He had tickets and checked in on two different occasions, but at the time the flight departed, he was not in his seat. At this point, he's still in a transitional area of the Sheremetyevo airport in Russia. He hasn't passed through customs into Russia. Russia has said it would consider granting Snowden asylum, but Snowden has said that he will not seek asylum in Russia. Ecuador has also said it would grant Snowden asylum, but that it could take months to be processed. Today, Wikileaks said that Snowden has a travel document and is on his way to Ecuador. However, apparently the letter wasn't approved by the Ecuadorian government, and is thus invalid.

As far as the arguments I've seen go, they seem generally to be broken into two viewpoints. One considers Snowden a hero, and the other considers him a traitor. Some of the more specific arguments, statements, and viewpoints I've read in comments about this whole thing are thus:
-By collecting that information about Americans without their knowledge or consent, the NSA violated the 4th amendment.
-By releasing this information to the public, Snowden has endangered Americans.
-Everyone already assumes that our governments spy on each other and on their own citizens, so it was pointless for Snowden to do what he did.
-The information that the NSA gathered with these programs has helped thwart multiple terrorist attacks.
-Terrorists are already changing how they communicate as a result of these leaks.
-There's quite a bit of speculation and assumption about whether or not Chinese and Russian intelligence officials have copied the data from Snowden's laptops.
There are others, of course, but I don't remember them.

Personally, I'm still very torn about this, as I understand and can sympathize with where both sides are coming from.

I tried to find some of the more useful links. They're in chronological order:
-http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/09/edward-snowden-nsa-whistleblower-surveillance
-http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/11/edward-snowden-russia-asylum-request
-http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/snowden-departs-hong-kong-for-a-third-country-government-says/2013/06/23/08e9eff2-dbde-11e2-a9f2-42ee3912ae0e_story.html
-http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/26/world/snowden.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
-http://news.yahoo.com/ecuador-heats-rhetoric-obama-downplays-snowden-194838354.html (This is from today--June 27, 2013.)

In addition to the links I've posted, you can find dozens of articles about this on your own by doing an internet search.

I know that this post contains topics which many people feel very strongly about, but let's please try to keep this discussion civil. :)

D'oh! I can't believe I forgot this:
I've read that the data that was collected by the telephone surveillance is comprised of names and numbers, but does not contain the content of the calls. The data collected by the internet surveillance programs consists of e-mail addresses and the names attached to them, and IP addresses. I've heard these referred to as metadata. If I remember what I read correctly, the NSA would still have to get a warrant to obtain the content of the phone calls and e-mail messages.

In addition, I've read that there was oversight on these programs, although how strong or effective that was seems to be debatable.

Spooky stuff...

Bump. Because this is important.

bump

bump :v

Okay guys, you do realise that using the program of internet surveillance, NSA were able to nip over 40 threats to national security in the bud. I'm usually against that kind of thing but even I find it impressive. However, I do think it is important to have people jumping up and down about it; I'm okay with how it is now but the amount of public scrutiny they are getting should keep them from growing further which would be bad. Still though, 40 plots.

>>7 Finally, someone responds with actual discussion and their own opinions, not just bumping the thread and saying nothing useful! Thank you!

Anyway, the data that they've said they collect, I'm honestly fine with. The only thing that makes me feel really iffy about that is the precedent that it sets up. While the current people who operate the programs may not go deeper, who's to say that they won't do so in the future, or that the people who operate the programs after them won't go deeper? That's more of a concern to me than the data itself.

>>7 >>8 I agree that is an amazing thing, but I don't trust our goverment not to go further.
I don't trust them at all.

It's not the fact that they are watching us, it's the fact that they did it without telling anyone about it.

That seems shady to me.

>>9 The government is only as good as the people it governs, if we never trust them and try to make productive steps, it wont be good for anyone. You can't polarise politicians, or else no good ones will ever break through. If you stick to the stereotypes, so will they.


And anyway, somebody finally did tell us and look how we reacted. They wouldn't tell us because not only would the terrorists stop using the internet to communicate so liberally, they would become the targets of hackers and we would kick up a shitstorm.

I'm not saying it's okay, I'm just saying I can see how they justified it.

>>10 Well yea, I can see how they justified it.

But I swear, this is the start of WW3.

>>11 Pretty much.
The idea of being watched by the government is no new concept to me. I'm thinking I'll just throw all my stuff in the ocean and swim to South Africa where I will dig a hole and lie in it for the rest of my life at this point.
Honestly I'm just glad not to live in America right now. Though admittedly the government here is probably doing the same thing.

>>9 "It's not the fact that they are watching us, it's the fact that they did it without telling anyone about it." I completely agree with that.

While I don't think it's good to blindly trust government (or any group or individual for that matter), I think blindly mistrusting is just as counterproductive. I'm not saying you blindly mistrust, Reggie. But, I've seen so many people commenting on various online news articles about this who do seem to have this incredibly, firmly stubborn idea that the government is inherently bad. They don't usually give reasons, it's just a huge mistrust of government. The problem I have with that is that, if you close your mind to everything except this one idea you fiercely believe to be correct (that goes for any idea, not just ideas related to government), it makes it unnecessarily difficult to try to make amends and fix what's wrong.

Bump over saged

>>11 There will never be a WW3, at least not anytime soon. And if there is it will be like no war ever seen before.

Just wait about thirty years.

>>16 For what, India to become a productive, economic nations? China to become the biggest economic power that would not want in the least a world war? For America to sink out of military dominance, no longer making it capable of? For Russia to break off ties with Syria as they are now? If anything the world's major global relations are getting better, not worse.

Sad to see that this thread does not have many people commenting on it.

I for one do not consider Snowden a traitor.

Snowden notified Americans that we are being spied on by our own government.(Witch all the smart Americans already new)And that they were also spying on Americas allies.

The President and every member of congress and the senate took an oath to uphold the constitution. They violated their agreement.

“Those who desire to give up freedom in order to gain security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one.” -Benjamin Franklin

I love how you made 2 spelling mistakes in the statement "Witch all the smart Americans already new", the irony is palpable. Also that doesn't mean they were smart, merely suspicious like *cough cough* Reggie *cough*.

The government is clearly in the wrong on this one, but they were doing (If I may quote The Truth) a few little wrong things to do one big good thing; the world isn't black and white. Anyway, I have already instated my opinions in earlier posts so I don't really have anything new to add.

The spelling is not important, its the message behind it that is.

>>20 But it's freaking hilarious that you were talking about "the smart Americans" and proceeded to misspell several words in your post.

Anyway, since I haven't posted anything on this thread yet, I think Snowden is a traitor and deserves what the American government does to him. Yes, he "exposed" to the American people that the government was spying on us, but he gave the information to countries that have been hostile to us in the recent past. Honestly, though, we all knew the government was spying on us, we just couldn't get up the effort to really care.

>>21 You mean China and Russia? How do you know he gave them anything? You can assume all you want, but assumptions aren't facts. Do you have anything more concrete to go on?

^

That is True also why do you think of him as a traitor when it should be the peoples right to know what their Gov't is doing. I believe what Snowden did was a good thing he is truly an American. But we all know that when the U.S.A has an Intel leak they are like a teenage girl searching for her IPhone. And we all know that girl will do whatever it takes to get her Phone back....

bump, and finaly that picture is gone, thank god

sdf

asdf

asdf

Apparently Snowden is now perfectly fine with asking for (and accepting, if offered) asylum in Russia, even under the condition that he stop releasing information. Originally, at the very beginning, he said he wouldn't seek asylum in Russia. Then, he considered it until they said he'd have to stop releasing the information he had, at which point he withdrew his asylum request. Now, he seems fine with all of it.

Here's my source for this info: http://news.yahoo.com/snowden-wants-russia-asylum-lawmaker-says-142132735.html

Needless to say, I'm incredibly disappointed. Initially, I got the impression from Snowden that he was willing to endure hardship, and that he fully understood and accepted that he was giving up all the good things in his life to do what he thought was right. Then after a while, he started blaming his losses and setbacks (leaving his girlfriend, quitting/losing his cushy job, having trouble getting asylum) on the U.S. It's looking more and more to me like so much of what he said was just hot air. It's really very sad. I would like to believe and hope otherwise, but the evidence to the contrary that's staring me in the face makes it very hard.

Well I understand how you feel but you have to understand that Snowden cant stay in the Moscow airport forever especially when many close American allies in the E.U. denied the Bolivian presidents Plane to go further in or leave their airspaces to where the plane had to make an emergency landing and we also have to think about if that were lets say an American president or a E.U. Prime Min. War would have started instantly... The fact is that the U.S. will do anything since Snowden revealed the U.S. dealings with various companies like Microsoft as well as almost all of the known E.U. countries and the O.A.S that they have been facing heat from all over

^

bump

bump

He's a fucking hero

Bump to cover

Edward snowden is so awesome. I hope america dies.

I love how ignorant kids bump comments just because they dont want others to view them

>>37 You're a fucking idiot, I was bumping to get a spam thread off the top. Just because nobody bothered to reply to your post doesn't mean we are scared of it.

>>37>>38 10/10
Screen capped dis one.

Also, bumping dumb comments. lel

>>39
>spells this "dis"

Bump

Bump.

I'm sorta half-half on this issue. I know the NSA violated the 4th ammendment, but I also know they weren't doing it just to do it. And I know Snowden is a traitor, but I can understand where he's coming from.

For me, 'threats to national security' is waaaay too open ended. Especially considering this is decided by human beings, what to think of as a 'terror plot' could be anything. And, if someone does decide a text message or email contains plans for something that is a threat to national security, is stopping those crimes worth taking away all security and privacy for everyone? This is starting to sound like the beginning of Big Brother.

You could also take the opposite side, though. People are way too confident about privacy online, especially on sites that are quite public such as Twitter. Maybe we have to accept that there is no privacy online to begin with.

All in all, I think that this sort of monitoring could be forgivable, but it seems worse since we weren't told. To me, this seems more of a power thing than something to actually accomplish a specific task.

สำนักข่าวต่างประเทศรายงานว่า (11 พ.ค.) เอเปกัวเอน อดีตเมืองท่องเที่ยวริมทะเลสาบทางตะวันตกเฉียงใต้ของกรุงบัวโนสไอเรส ประเทศอาร์เจนตินา ที่ประสบภัยธรรมชาติจนจมลงบาดาลเมื่อ 28 ปีก่อน โผล่พ้นน้ำ

เอเปกัวเอน ก่อตั้งขึ้นเมื่อทศวรรษที่ 1920 เป็นหมู่บ้านตากอากาศริมทะเลสาบน้ำเค็ม คอยต้อนรับนักท่องเที่ยวที่มาแช่ทะเลสาบน้ำเค็ม ที่มีปริมาณเกลือมากกว่าในทะเลถึง 10 เท่า ที่นี่มีประชากรอาศัยอยู่ราว 1,500 คน แต่ทั้งหมดก็ต้องอพยพออกจากบ้าน ในวันที่ 10 พ.ย.1985 เพราะเกิดพายุฝนตกกระหน่ำติดต่อกันนานอย่างไม่เคยพบมาก่อน ทำให้ทะเลสาบล้นตลิ่งทะลวงกำแพงกั้นคลื่นจนท่วมถนนริมทะเลสาบ ไม่กี่วันต่อมาบ้านของพวกเขาก็ถูกน้ำท่วมสูงกว่า 10 เมตร

ทั้งนี้ เอเปกัวเอน ไม่ได้รับการบูรณะใดๆ แต่ยังเป็นจุดสนใจของนักท่องเที่ยว ซึ่งผู้ที่มาจะได้พบกับนายพาโบล โนวัค วัย 82 ปี ที่เดินทางกลับมาอยู่บ้านของเขาทันที ที่น้ำเริ่มลดลงในปี 2009 ซึ่งกล่าวว่า เขามีความสุขดี แม้จะต้องอยู่คนเดียว

ทั้งนี้ เอเปกัวเอน ไม่ได้รับการบูรณะใดๆ แต่ยังเป็นจุดสนใจของนักท่องเที่ยว ซึ่งผู้ที่มาจะได้พบกับนายพาโบล โนวัค วัย 82 ปี ที่เดินทางกลับมาอยู่บ้านของเขาทันที ที่น้ำเริ่มลดลงในปี 2009 ซึ่งกล่าวว่า เขามีความสุขดี แม้จะต้องอยู่คนเดียว

I've seen mainly American comments on this matter, so I'll add a non-American one.

I'm grateful for Snowden's whistleblowing actions, and I wouldn't consider him a traitor if he leaked this information on my country. Of course, the gist of what he made public is nothing new, and anyone who was attentive enough could have guessed as much (e.g. Facebook's, Google's, Windows' issues with handling personal data). Why else would anyone pay a lot of cash to have a server on non-American ground?
Still, I'm glad Snowden pointed out which data the USA are collecting from all over the world because he gives us the opportunity to react.

Wide parts of numerous peoples have blindly trusted the internet although it never forgets anything, and those who knew about the surveillance had their hands tied because they had no proof for their suspicions. Snowden who provided the missing proof enabled us to address this matter directly. The USA haven't offended their constitution only but also the ones of allied countries with an even stricter policy for privacy (e.g. no security cameras in public places for privacy's sake, lawsuits against companies because they didn't ask people for permission while taking advertisement shots etc.).

This is no minor offense. If Russia or China collected data (which they do), it would be different. As allies, they should have asked for their partners' permission before collecting data about their people's phone calls, e-mails etc. How else can they expect them to have faith in their partnership and in their common devotion to democratic and human rights?

Another service Snowden rendered us is the opportunity to check if our own countries abide by our right to privacy. People have become a lot more attentive when it comes to virtual security now, and we should use this occasion to remind our governments of their own duty as a democratic system. I simply hope that people will do so.

All in all, I consider Edward Snowden neither a traitor nor a hero but an attentive and devoted citizen of a modern democratic nation.

----

----

----

asdf

asdf

Sleepology you can say no go away all you want but im not going anywhere I have every right to come on this site as you do.

^

I believe that Snowden is more of a middle man in the whole situation. I understand that it was for the good of the nation but they shouldn't have kept the information for themselves. Its a matter of can we trust our government and that is one of the biggest reasons why there are many gun debate. It all leads back to one important question. Can we trust our own government. Yeah Snowden broke his contract but what would you rather have? Him following his contract and never knowing the government is keeping tabs on you or him telling you the truth and being able to confront the source of the problem. On one hand you have the government which is basically using a necessary evil to keep the people safe. On the other hand, they are keeping information from the people that they want to trust them.

Honestly I could really give a fuck less. Before Snowden I thought everyone already knew that was going on. I mean I did. There's a reason why they say "big brother is always watching or some shit like that.

>>56

For a lady you do swear a lot.

>>57 I know. My name is a bit of an irony or an oxymoron.

Well isn't it the truth that everyone spies on each other? I don't think the US or any other Government is trying to be like Big Brother but it would be a lie if we said they didn't spy on their own peoples or other nations. It's been like this for centuries just the tools we've had to do so changed. Snowden being charged with releasing information about the US doing things like this is kind of... how shall I say, "old news". At least to me. I find that most people in the world aren't well informed even the ones that believe they do and get surprised at anything. Still there's been a lot of former agents of different groups leaking information and getting media attention, I wonder about the ones who aren't publicized at all. What about those who are waging their information game out of our eyes? ...but that's just a bit of fanciful thinking at least.