DoJ to Snowden: Hope your 15 minutes were worth it, pal

[crazy canuck]

I am not arguing over semantics here my point is that it is new enough that the common joe in the street does not understand how things have changed...yet.

I attribute the lack of outcry over this to the "common Joe" understanding that what the government is doing isnt at all like tapping his phone or opening his letters.  If that was the case I think we would likely see a large and general hue and cry. 

[Bluebook]

Yeah but I don't see Iceland or several other democratic countries being willing to extradite him. When you put your safety in the hand of tinpot thug rulers like Putin or the leaders of Venezuela and Ecuador you're only protected as much as they want to spite the United States. Maybe right now, that's enough. But in countries like that with weak rule of law and weak legal protections literally the leadership's whim could be all it takes for your asylum to be revoked and you to be in a helicopter on your way to an interrogation center.

A country like Iceland on the other hand, whatever happens it'll be what their courts say. Given they protected Bobby Fischer I doubt Snowden would have much to worry about.

I guess it comes down to what you believe is a stronger protection. The rule of law in Iceland or the animosity towards the US in China/Russia/Equador. You may also want to consider the implications of an attempt on Snowdens life carried out by the US in Iceland compared to in China.

[Admiral Yi]

When did Ecuador become a rogue state dictatorship btw?  Shows how informed I am with events in Quito.

A founding member of Chavez' Axis of Blowhards.

[crazy canuck]

I think it is important to remember that South America has a strong history of providing political asylum.  I had a professor who once quipped that kind of safety valve was necessary to get anyone to want to lead given the extreme political shifts in that region over the decades.

[Bluebook]

What is unrealistic about that?  Clearly there are sympathetic ears in Congress

It is not realistic to expect that the system that has created this intelligence gatherning operation, and gone to long lengths to keep it secret, would allow you to testify against it in Congress. Manning is a good example of what sort of treatment you can expect if you leak one word of this to a congressman.

Don't understand.  Once the ACLU has the info, they could issue a press release.

And what would that press release say? If it says what Snowden said, Snowden still gets the Manning treatment. While it becomes third hand information for the public and easier for the government to explain away.

"The ACLU issued a press statement today claiming that the US government is recording and storing all phone, email and text-message conversations. The source is an anonymous source" --it doesnt really fly, does it?

he WashPo took some extra time to vet the information, he decided to dump them for an outlet with less punctilious editorial control?
If the Guardian hasdn't jumped to his tune, where would have gone next: Granma?

Yeah, he decided to get the information out there. He offered it to WaPo, they failed to live up to their part of the agreement, he found another news outlet. Nothing strange about that.

And where does the flee to China piece fit in here?

"What part of the world is least likely to extradite me to the US and life imprisonment"

[Admiral Yi]

"The ACLU issued a press statement today claiming that the US government is recording and storing all phone, email and text-message conversations. The source is an anonymous source" --it doesnt really fly, does it?

No.  It's not true. 

[crazy canuck]

It is not realistic to expect that the system that has created this intelligence gatherning operation, and gone to long lengths to keep it secret, would allow you to testify against it in Congress. Manning is a good example of what sort of treatment you can expect if you leak one word of this to a congressman.

So now the US government is a Unitary State with one party rule.

[Valmy]

I attribute the lack of outcry over this to the "common Joe" understanding that what the government is doing isnt at all like tapping his phone or opening his letters.  If that was the case I think we would likely see a large and general hue and cry. 

I would like to think that would be true.  But I do not think so.  We generally do not do the large and general hue and cry anymore. 

[crazy canuck]

I attribute the lack of outcry over this to the "common Joe" understanding that what the government is doing isnt at all like tapping his phone or opening his letters.  If that was the case I think we would likely see a large and general hue and cry. 

I would like to think that would be true.  But I do not think so.  We generally do not do the large and general hue and cry anymore.

And there is a reason for that.  The Rule of Law is strong in your country.

[Valmy]

So now the US government is a Unitary State with one party rule.

Well on issues like this the two parties are in basic agreement on everything so it might as well be.  I mean we elected a guy who specifically said he was not going to do this, shows how meaningful those elections are eh?

[crazy canuck]

So now the US government is a Unitary State with one party rule.

Well on issues like this the two parties are in basic agreement on everything

You might want to reflect on how very unlikely this statement is.

[Valmy]

And there is a reason for that.  The Rule of Law is strong in your country.

Your wide-eyed idealism is heart warming.  We shall see how things go.  I hope you are right.

But that is not the reason for that.  Protest movements are quickly infiltrated and discredited these days.  It is pretty amazing.

[Valmy]

You might want to reflect on how very unlikely this statement is.

Uh oh the semantics police!

[crazy canuck]

You might want to reflect on how very unlikely this statement is.

Uh oh the semantics police!

Its not really.  It seems to me the position that we ought to be outraged is all built on hyperbole.  I want to see what comes of the ACLU litigation.  If the reports I have read of what is actually going on are accurate then my guess is that nothing will come of the litigation.  If those reports are inaccurate then the ACLU will uncover it.

The point is that all of this could have been accomplished with either the first or second methods of disclosure I proposed to Bluebook.  There was no need for Snowden to try to get his 15 minutes of fame.

Your system works.  He should have used it.

[Valmy]

I want to see what comes of the ACLU litigation.

As do I.

Your system works.  He should have used it.

The methods of discourse have been going around for awhile with no traction.  If the system works we would not need to wait until somebody leaks something before people actually have standing to sue.  People have been talking about this and trying to go through official channels for years both politicans and regular folks.