Subject: Re: Snowden and the Jews Tue Feb 23, 2016 10:57 am
I see it more simply. Gov agencies are not out to steal passwords, rob accounts, or embarrass anybody by exposing their social media or web caches, etc. The FBI is relatively low level, and filled with employees that are solely focused on catching illegal behavior, to include drug running, racketeering, insider trading, child porn rings, and complicity in all the acts called terrorism. These low level FBI agents, unless they are jews, largely don't understand how the jews work, and how regular jews may play small parts in big crimes. To jews, the privacy issue is huge. To regular people, it should not be. That's why Snowden got legs, and why this very-related, accidental Apple situation has jews nervously squirming.
_________________ Nobody gets paid to tell the truth.
The US Justice Department does not have the authority to force Apple to unlock an iPhone involved in a Brooklyn drug case and hand the data over to the FBI, a New York judge ruled Monday.
In this case, the FBI was applying the same 18th century legislation that it argues must compel Apple to unlock the iPhone belonging to one of the shooters in the San Bernardino massacre.
“The government has failed to establish” that the All Writs Act permits it to make Apple provide access to data stored on a locked iPhone, US Magistrate Judge James Orenstein wrote in the ruling. He also stated that if the AWA does allow the FBI to make such an order, “discretionary factors” in the case compelled him to reject the motion.
The AWA of 1789 established the federal justice system and enabled federal judges to order third parties to assist the government.
In July of 2015, federal authorities looked to obtain a warrant to search an iPhone belonging to Jun Feng, a New Yorker charged with conspiracy to traffic in methamphetamine. However, Judge Orenstein gave Apple the chance to contest the government’s argument that it had the power to force the company to unlock the mobile device, and he ultimately decided that law enforcement’s argument wasn’t good enough to place the burden of unlocking the phone on Apple.
While the drug case that Orenstein ruled on is unrelated to the San Bernardino one, it’s nevertheless a significant victory for Apple as it continues to argue that it cannot be forced by law enforcement to create a “back door” into encrypted devices.
Earlier this month, Apple was ordered to help law enforcement crack an encrypted phone that belonged to San Bernardino gunman Syed Rizwan Farook by writing software that would enable authorities to bypass the built-in security. Apple has argued that the AWA has never been used to make companies create new software to aid the government.
The company has asked the courts to vacate the order, arguing that breaking into the phone would help create a back door that could be exploited against other devices and compromise individual privacy.
For its part, the government says it is not asking Apple to create a back door into all phones. Rather, it simply wants help getting into this particular phone.
According to the AP, Apple has declined to help the government unlock encrypted iPhones in more than a dozen cases across multiple states, leaving the question for courts to consider.
In his opinion on Monday, Orenstein noted that Congress has also yet to pass laws affirming the government’s authority to make technology companies bypass encryption.
_________________ Nobody gets paid to tell the truth.
NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden said that the FBI’s claim to need Apple to unlock the iPhone a San Bernardino shooter is a sham.
The FBI says that only Apple has the ability to crack the work phone left behind by the San Bernardino terrorists, and last month convinced a federal judge to compel the tech giant to write a custom operating system with intentionally weakened security mechanisms. Apple is refusing to do so, and said that it is willing to take the fight to the Supreme Court.
Over a video link appearance at Blueprint for a Great Democracy conference on Tuesday, Snowden took Apple’s side.
“The FBI says Apple has the ‘exclusive technical means’ to unlock the phone,” Snowden told the audience from Moscow. “Respectfully, that’s horse sh*t.”
Snowden later tweeted a link to an American Civil Liberties Union blog post titled “One of the FBI’s Major Claims in the iPhone Case Is Fraudulent,” which argues that the government doesn’t actually need Apple’s help to bypass the “auto-erase” feature on the iPhone in question.
This sentiment echoes that of many tech experts, as well as some lawmakers. At a hearing last week, Representative Darrell Issa, a California Republican who made his fortune in electronic car alarms, asked FBI Director James Comey if he considered the possibility of creating enough copies of the phone’s data to try hundreds of passwords. Apple likely wouldn’t have objected to this simple method, and the FBI couldn’t answer why they didn’t consider it.
Comey also acknowledged that the FBI made the mistake of changing the iCloud password on Farook’s account, security researcher Jonathan Zdziarski wrote in a blog post.
“In other words, the mistake of trying to break into the safe caused the safe to lock down in a way that made it more difficult to get evidence out of it,” Zdziarski said.
Snowden has previously applauded Apple for its defense of privacy and strong encryption, even before their current battle with the FBI.
“We should support vendors who are willing to [say], ‘You know, just because it’s popular to collect everybody’s information and resell it to advertisers and whatever, it’s going to serve our reputation, it’s going to serve our relationship with our customers, and it’s going to serve society better. If instead we just align ourselves with our customers and what they really want, if we can outcompete people on the value of our products without needing to subsidize that by information that we’ve basically stolen from our customers',” he told TechCrunch in June, months before the December massacre in San Bernardino. “That’s absolutely something that should be supported.”
_________________ Nobody gets paid to tell the truth.
Subject: Re: Snowden and the Jews Tue Mar 15, 2016 9:55 am
FBI's push to unlock iPhone mirrors state, local fight for criminals' data
A man holds up his iPhone during a rally in support of data privacy outside the Apple store in San Francisco. Protesters assembled in more than 30 cities to lash out at the FBI for obtaining a court order that requires Apple to make it easier to unlock an encrypted iPhone used by a gunman in December's mass murders in California. (The Associated Press) Print [email=?subject=FBI%27s%20push%20to%20unlock%20iPhone%20mirrors%20state%2C%20local%20fight%20for%20criminals%27%20data&body=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cleveland.com%2Fcourt-justice%2Findex.ssf%2F2016%2F03%2Fthe_fbis_fight_to_unlock_terro.html#incart_email]Email[/email] By John Caniglia, The Plain Dealer Email the author | Follow on Twitter on March 15, 2016 at 7:00 AM, updated March 15, 2016 at 7:18 AM
CLEVELAND, Ohio – In a Cleveland conference room, police and prosecutors studied some of the same issues raging in the FBI's fight over a terrorist's iPhone: how to legally gain access to cell phones and laptops of criminal suspects.
From search warrants to subpoenas, experts detailed how best to deal with a digital side of crime that has festered for years in the underbelly of the Internet.
As the U.S. Justice Department's legal assault to gain access to terrorist Syed Farook's Apple iPhone has made headlines nationally, a similar debate has emerged locally and across the state.
"The criminals are well aware of Apple's policies, and they appreciate them,'' said Cuyahoga County Prosecutor Timothy McGinty. "The drug dealers and the pimps are fully aware of this.''
McGinty made the statements moments before a session at the inaugural Ohio Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force Prosecutors' Conference that his office hosted last week at the First Merit Convention Center of Cleveland. The conference drew hundreds of police officers and prosecutors. It highlighted encryption and the sensitive line between police and the public's right to privacy. It also underscored the growing confidence felons have in online devices. Cuyahoga County Prosecutor Timothy McGinty on the FBI's push to unlock a terrorist's phone: "This is a federal case, but it affects us, too.''Gus Chan/The Plain Dealer
One of its messages: The heated debate over law enforcement's attempt to obtain information from online sources has simmered for years, and it goes well beyond just terrorism cases.
Authorities said the spike in child pornography obtained through online sources has been stunning. Those who obtain it often keep it on several devices, whether laptop, tablet or cell phone, much of it protected by encryption programs.
For law enforcement, gaining access to those devices has been a struggle, no matter the crime. In a high-profile corruption case, McGinty's office lost a legal fight to obtain the password of a portion of an encrypted personal laptop from former Bedford Municipal Judge Harry Jacob.
In 2014, prosecutors asked Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Judge Brian Corrigan to compel Jacob to turn over the password that would unlock an encryption program. Prosecutors said in documents that Jacob searched for prostitutes and had relationships with them.
Jacob refused give up the password, saying the move would violate his Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination.
"Very few cases have addressed the issue squarely in front of this Court: whether (Jacob) must disclose the password that will decrypt his laptop's hard drive,'' Corrigan wrote in his decision.
Fight over terrorist's iPhone echoes across Ohio As the U.S. Justice Department's legal assault to gain access to terrorist Syed Farook's Apple iPhone has made headlines nationally, a similar debate has emerged locally and across Ohio.
Corrigan, citing the Fifth Amendment, ruled that Jacob did not have to turn over the password. Jacob was later convicted of soliciting and falsifying records and left the bench.
The FBI case with Apple is a bit different. The FBI wants to gain information off Farook's locked iPhone, which had been given to him by his former employer, the San Bernardino County Health Department. Federal agents have sought Apple's help in getting that information, according to court documents and published reports.
To do that, the company must create a piece of software that would unlock the phone. The company balked, citing privacy concerns.
"The government and the community need to know that is on the terrorist's phone, and the government needs Apple's assistance to find out,'' federal prosecutors wrote in a brief last week. The Electronic Privacy Information Center countered in support of Apple. It said security features on phones are vital to consumers, who often store sensitive information on the devices.
"The security features on mobile devices, such as the Apple iPhone, limit the opportunities for crime that has caused enormous financial, reputational and emotional harm to consumers across the country,'' the public interest research center in Washington, D.C., said in court documents. "If these safeguards are weakened, consumers will suffer, crime will increase and the work of law enforcement will be made more difficult.''
At the Cleveland conference last week, Farook's iPhone was part of a discussion on privacy and encryption. Next week, a federal judge in California will listen to arguments from the Justice Department and the company.
"We're watching this case with much interest. It is an important issue,'' said Rick Bell, an assistant county prosecutor in charge of investigations. (Encrypted material) hasn't thwarted us, but it has hindered us.''
Consumers and privacy advocates also will be watching. Authorities fear a few predators also will take notice.
_________________ Nobody gets paid to tell the truth.
Cellebrite, an Israeli mobile forensic software company, is aiding the Federal Bureau of Investigation in its quest to unlock the iPhone used by one of the San Bernardino shooters, Israeli media reported.
Read more Apple-FBI encryption tensions spiked upon iOS 8 reveal in 2014 - report The FBI has been contracting with Cellebrite to break through a locked iPhone, “according to experts in the field familiar with the case,” according to Ynet, online outlet of the Israeli newspaper Yedioth Ahronot.
This would be a step in a much different direction in the FBI’s ongoing battle with Apple over the device belonging to Syed Farook, one of the perpetrators of December’s massacre in San Bernardino, California, that left 14 people dead. Cellebrite, considered a global leader in the field of digital forensics, hasn’t officially commented on their involvement with the FBI. However, The Verge reported the company has had a sole-source contract with the Bureau since the 2013, specifically to help with data extraction – the very task at hand in the San Bernardino case.
The FBI initially attempted to force Apple to crack the iPhone via an ongoing court battle, one which the company’s CEO Tim Cook said he was willing to carry all the way to Supreme Court, to defend the privacy of its customers. Just as the two parties were scheduled to go to court on Tuesday, a federal judge agreed to the FBI’s request to postpone the hearing, after prosecutors announced that an unnamed "non-governmental third party" had presented a potential way to crack Apple’s flagship product without the company’s help.
If the third party successfully bypasses the iPhone’s security features, it could have business implications for Apple that go beyond this particular case.
Other tech giants – and as of this month, the Department of Defense – routinely set bounties for identifying and fixing exploitable flaws for outside hackers to claim. Facebook paid out almost $1 million total in such bounties to independent researchers who found bugs in 2015, and Google paid hackers $6 million in 2010. Read more ‘That’s horse sh*t!’: FBI can already unlock iPhone without Apple’s help – Snowden Apple, however, doesn’t engage in this industry-standard practice, and hackers have turned to underground markets to sell knowledge of flaws in the company’s software that not even the company itself has, and this could be why the FBI is able to turn to third parties.
The showdown between Apple and the federal government has spilled over from the realm of the courts and technology, finding itself under the scrutiny of lawmakers. Senators Dianne Feinstein (D-California) and Richard Burr (R-North Carolina) have been working since the Paris terror attacks in November, followed quickly by the one in San Bernardino, on an encryption bill that could be introduced to the Senate any day, reported The Hill.
Feinstein and Burr argue that it is currently too easy for criminals and terrorists to “go dark,” and the new bill would force companies like Apple to comply with court orders that seek access to encrypted communications.
“The going-dark issue has been gathering momentum (in Congress) like a train coming down the tracks, but it still seemed for a while like it was going to be a long time before it got to the station,” said Representative Adam Schiff, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, according to Reuters. “But it arrived with a fury with this lawsuit.”
Maybe this Israeli firm will help the FBI track down the roots of the terrorist org?
_________________ Nobody gets paid to tell the truth.
He described them as "an unworkable, unjustifiable violation of rights that should never be signed."
The package of antiterrorist bills, which the State Duma endorsed on Friday, was initiated by deputy Irina Yarovaya and Senator Victor Ozerov. It contains a mandatory provision for Internet providers to store data on the transfers of information and the users’ personal data over a period of twelve months.
In addition, mobile telephony operators will be obliged to store the data on acceptance, as well transfer, delivery and processing of voice messages, texts, images, sounds, and videos for three years.
As for the most cumbersome content - the contents of messages, including graphic information, sounds and videos - will be maintained for up to six months.
If the package gets approval of the Federation Council, the upper house of Russian parliament, the bulk of the amendments will take effect only Jul8y 20, 2016. But for mobile telephony and Internet providers the data of effectuation of the law is July 1, 2018.
"Mass surveillance doesn’t work," Snowden twittered. "This bill will take money and liberty from every Russian without improving safety." He also believes that "to store 6 months of content is not just dangerous, it’s impractical.".
_________________ Nobody gets paid to tell the truth.
Subject: Re: Snowden and the Jews Mon Jul 18, 2016 2:14 am
I thought Ed was supposed to stay out of politics as part of his asylum deal. If I were Russian, I'd find him to be an interesting character to have around in his own right, but not one to be looked up to or regarded as any source of advice on national policy points; which would seem to include the ones keeping kept him protected from a severe and tortuous fate.
Bold and lacking taste, he shouldn't be rocking the boat.
Subject: Re: Snowden and the Jews Mon Jul 18, 2016 9:58 am
Jill Stein Just Promised To Pardon Snowden, Appoint Him To Cabinet If Elected
by Tyler Durden Jul 15, 2016 10:50 AM
Submitted by Claire Bernish via TheAntiMedia.org, Presumptive Green Party presidential nominee Dr. Jill Stein promises to grant NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden - whom many describe as a true American hero - not just a full pardon, but a promotion to the upper echelons of government should she win the White House.
“[Snowden] has done an incredible service to our country at great cost to himself for having to live away from his family, his friends, his job, his network, to basically live as an expatriate,”Stein asserted during a town hall live-streamed to supporters on her Facebook page, US Uncut reported.
“I would say not only bring Snowden back, but bring him into my administration as a member of the Cabinet,”she continued, “because we need people who are part of our national security administration who are really, very patriotic. If we’re really going to protect our American security, we also have to protect our Constitutional rights, and that includes our right to privacy.”
Stein said her pardons wouldn’t stop with Snowden, but would extend to others, including CIA whistleblower John Kiriakou, who first revealed proof of U.S. government employment of waterboarding and other torture tactics, as well as Chelsea Manning.
Tribal protection racket
_________________ Nobody gets paid to tell the truth.
Subject: Re: Snowden and the Jews Fri Jul 22, 2016 10:06 am
Edward Snowden designed an iPhone attachment that detects unwanted radio transmissions
By [url=http://www.theverge.com/users/Chaim Gartenberg]Chaim Gartenberg[/url]
on July 21, 2016 11:24 am
(Andrew “Bunnie” Huang and Edward Snowden)
Share on Facebook (760) [url=https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=Edward Snowden designed an iPhone attachment that detects unwanted radio transmissions&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.theverge.com%2Fcircuitbreaker%2F2016%2F7%2F21%2F12247610%2Fedward-snowden-introspection-engine-device-andrew-huang&via=verge&counturl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.theverge.com%2Fcircuitbreaker%2F2016%2F7%2F21%2F12247610%2Fedward-snowden-introspection-engine-device-andrew-huang] Tweet [/url] Share (62) Pin (3) Edward Snowden thinks about phone security a lot more than the average person. And with good reason, as the world-famous whistleblower revealed methods of government data collection on phone calls, and even from his exile in Russia, still remains a major advocate for digital privacy. Snowden, together with hacker Andrew "Bunnie" Huang, announced today at the MIT Media Lab a design for a case-like attachment to modify an iPhone, allowing you to monitor if and when the radio transmitters within the device are active. Huang is known among other things for reverse engineering parts of the original Xbox and security vulnerabilities in microSD cards. Their device will offer security to reporters in high-risk locations Snowden’s argument for the need for such a device is that consumer-side methods, such as turning off the radios via airplane mode, shutting off the phone entirely, or even sealing it within a Faraday cage are all not nearly secure enough when faced with a government-backed adversary. Snowden and Huang’s device is designed to offer an option for reporters and journalists traveling in areas that use high-level hacking methods to monitor devices, and where, they claim, governments can use exploits to trick you into thinking your phone is off while actually monitoring your conversations and locations. Snowden and Huang hope that their device will offer security to reporters in high-risk locations by preventing the monitoring or tracking of phones, and to ensure that reporters can definitively shut down radio connectivity but maintain use of the device.
Andrew “Bunnie” Huang and Edward Snowden The device, which Snowden and Huang are referring to as an "introspection engine," consists of an attachment to a modified iPhone that physically wires into the antennas inside the phone for GPS, Bluetooth, cellular connectivity, and Wi-Fi through the SIM card slot (moving the SIM card itself into the external pack). It then can directly monitor radio transmissions, alert users to any unauthorized output when the radios are meant to be off, and even offer a kill-switch to immediately shut off the device. A final production model would be intended to be both open-source and open hardware At this point in time, the design from Snowden and Huang has yet to move beyond the basic testing stage, with no prototype or product in the pipeline for now beyond a concept rendering. The two hope to be able to eventually produce a prototype, and eventually work with manufacturers in China to build modified devices to sell or distribute to reporters. A final production model would be intended to be both open-source and open hardware to allow users to ensure that the device hasn’t been compromised during the manufacturing process. Additionally, Huang does have some previous experience with hardware design, as seen in his open-source Novena laptop, making it more likely that the design does become an actual device one day. Huang and Snowden’s complete research paper further describing the methodology behind the introspection engine can be found here.
_________________ Nobody gets paid to tell the truth.
Subject: Re: Snowden and the Jews Sat Jul 30, 2016 12:51 am
International Business Times (UK) 7/29/16 WikiLeaks vs Edward Snowden: Twitter feud kicks off over recent data leaks http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/wikileaks-vs-edward-snowden-twitter-feud-kicks-off-over-recent-data-leaks-1573236
WikiLeaks has hit back at comments made on Twitter by former NSA analyst-turned-whistleblower Edward Snowden in which he questioned the group's approach to responsibly releasing sensitive information on the web.
Snowden, who famously leaked files from within the highly secretive US National Security Agency, slammed the approach WikiLeaks had taken during its most recent releases, which included nearly 20,000 emails from the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and messages from within the Turkish government.
"Democratising information has never been more vital, and WikiLeaks has helped. But their hostility to even modest curation is a mistake," tweeted Snowden on 28 July. The response from Julian Assange's whistleblowing platform was swift. It hit back accusing Snowden of cosying up to presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.
"Opportunism won't earn you a pardon from Clinton & curation is not censorship of ruling party cash flows," the account replied, adding in a link to a Wikipedia page detailing 'digital curation'.
Ed, you violated your contract, please. You should be camping in Siberia in summer, not headed there in the fall.
Subject: Re: Snowden and the Jews Sun Jul 31, 2016 1:34 am
That concept certainly comes to mind. He's being lured away by an unseen hand or two. It's an 'inspired' apologetic new approach he's taken, with apparent incentive to draw a line against his erstwhile Wiki partner. This earns him nothing in terms of personal security with his Russian hosts either, who may start seeing him as a greater liability than originally anticipated. He's getting into politics in a way he'd agreed not to.
Maybe his new handlers can talk him into a sex change while they're at it,
Subject: Re: Snowden and the Jews Sun Aug 07, 2016 4:35 am
Snowden seems to want a jewish filter between whistleblowers and document release.
Nice simple spot-on analysis. That's exactly what is going on here.
Snowden and Assange -- one has to wonder if they're just the 'Emmanuel Goldsteins' of the present day. If they were legit, would they be handed 'legitimate' media sourcing status, prime time interviews, and direct political power to effect public opinion etc by the mainstream jew media, as they are now? Major hollywood movies have been made about both of them - dead giveaway. It's tempting to cheer on Wikileaks for exposing the Hillary/ISIS connection, or Snowden for - what, opening up the paranoid truths of personal tech use/spook spying to the populace (things most thinking people already knew) -- but of course the narrative isn't over, the great mindf**ks and red herrings remain waiting on the wings, while the jewish paradigm remains unaffected, unexposed, unchallenged, even reinforced. People are waking up (inevitable) - but to red herrings, not to the source of our ills, that which eats at our essence. The Great Rally Point remains elusive, almost the last thing in sight -- no coincidence, and appears to be the jew imperative - other 'truths' are allowed to slip through. Without a rally point, the tension for decisive opportunity unwinds back to various tangled starting points. But the opportunity is there, always just two or three steps away, as people awaken. I suppose the question is: can we get beyond the red herrings and momentary/illusory/powerless 'victories' or 'defeats', and go further and deeper to that destined rally point.
Emmanuel Goldstein is a character in George Orwell's dystopian novel Nineteen Eighty-Four. He is the principal enemy of the state according to the Party, depicted as the head of a mysterious (and possibly fictitious) organization called "The Brotherhood" and as having written the book The Theory and Practice of Oligarchical Collectivism. He is only seen and heard on telescreen, and may be a fabrication of the Ministry of Truth. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emmanuel_Goldstein
Subject: Re: Snowden and the Jews Sun Aug 07, 2016 8:20 am
"... red herrings remain waiting on the wings, while the jewish paradigm remains unaffected, unexposed, unchallenged, even reinforced. People are waking up (inevitable) - but to red herrings, not to the source of our ills..."
The misdirection is more Hollywood than WShakepeare, that's for sure.
More like who's controlling whom at this point, back to Snowden's filter; not being what he wanted but what got installed in a line of invited hopeful thinking ... of and a nature he is so unexceptionally programmed to be receptive and vulnerable to. It even looks like he wants the filter there, as if access to a back-up plan.
Assange is now being called out for releasing megavolumes of personal details on women registered as Turkish voters, circa 17 million, in a country where significant numbers already get killed by jealous husbands (who are allowed multiple partners). Movie hero or no, suddenly the guy has no friends. Again the filter. Was this release done it for a 'friend' ... who says he can help spring him from his trap ... when he's being set up into a worse one?
Waiting for a second round on this Turkish Belle package.
Subject: Re: Snowden and the Jews Sun Aug 07, 2016 6:18 pm
What, did enough people figure it out by now?
Edward Snowden Dead: NSA Whistleblower Killed In Russia?
By Ana Peters on August 7, 2016
Edward Snowden (Photo Credit: Commons Wikimedia)
Is Edward Snowden dead? That’s what the public is asking after a cryptic tweet was sent out by the infamous NSA contractor turned whistle-blower.
Advertisement On Friday, Snowden sent out a series of letters and numbers to his two million strong social media platform following which set people in a frenzy. As it stands, it hasn’t been revealed what the 64-character code mean but there are many that indicate it could be his “dead man’s switch.”
A dead man’s switch is a pre-programmed message that is automatically sent out if the holder does not perform a routine check-in. These switches act as a person’s fail safe that go into effect if the information/ data owner is killed or captured. According to a publication, in the case of the 33-year-old computer professional, Snowden has revealed that unreleased files have been distributed to journalists and associates this would be the encryption key to the encrypted files he distributed to journalists.
Within minutes of posting, the “code” was deleted. Mashable notes that it could be an accidental post but without news on what the characters were for or mean, people have been falling all over themselves trying to figure out what Snowden just posted. Of course, Twitter blew up with people posting what they thought it could be. From jokes about not giving the nuke codes to presidential candidates Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump, others posted their thoughts. One pondered if it’s a digital signature, a Marina Joyce conspiracy theory, trap and a range of other theories. To answer the Edward Snowden dead frenzy, while many figured that the “dead man’s switch” may have been activated, per Glenn Greenwald, a journalist with The Intercept, Edward is “fine” but no details were provided. For those who don’t know why Snowden causes such a stir, back in 2013, Snowden released a number of confidential files from the NSA that revealed the state has been spying allies, rivals, and private lives. It basically confirmed that the US has been utilizing advanced surveillance techniques that triggered a massive public discourse.
What are your thoughts on the Edward Snowden dead news? What do you think the code was for?
_________________ Nobody gets paid to tell the truth.
Subject: Re: Snowden and the Jews Sun Aug 07, 2016 6:26 pm
Assange is now being called out for releasing megavolumes of personal details on women registered as Turkish voters, circa 17 million, in a country where significant numbers already get killed by jealous husbands (who are allowed multiple partners).
CIA supports coup and probably also created phony identities in a plan B to steal next election. Erdogan just had a nice meeting with Putin.
Subject: Re: Snowden and the Jews Thu Aug 11, 2016 12:17 pm
In exile, Edward Snowden rakes in speaking fees while hoping for a pardon
Michael Isikoff and Michael Kelley •August 11, 2016
Edward Snowden at the Roskilde Festival in Roskilde, Denmark, on June 28, 2016. (Photo: Scanpix Denmark/Mathias Loevgreen Bojesen/via Reuters)
More than three years after fleeing the United States with a massive cache of top-secret documents, former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden remains a federal fugitive, living in Moscow courtesy of President Vladimir Putin of Russia. But Snowden — who is the subject of a new Oliver Stone biopic that hits movie theaters next month — is making the most of his exile: Over the past year, he has collected over $200,000 in fees for digital speaking appearances that have been arranged by one of the country’s elite speakers bureaus, according to a source close to Snowden who is intimately familiar with his business affairs. At least three of these paid speeches were hosted by public American universities, and documents obtained by Yahoo News highlight various concerns raised by college officials about paying Snowden. The former intelligence analyst uses video chat technology to address audiences around the globe: In the last five months, a larger-than-life Snowden has appeared on giant screens to a sold-out audience at the Brooklyn Academy of Music, northern Europe’s largest music festival, a symposium on surveillance and civil rights in Tokyo, and Comic-Con in San Diego. In all of these cases, as with most of his appearances, sympathetic crowds greeted him with thunderous applause and praise for his decision to leak classified documents to journalists about U.S. surveillance programs. “Arguing you don’t care about privacy because you’ve got nothing to hide is no different than saying that you don’t care about free speech because you have nothing to say,” Snowden, using one of his classic lines, last month told the Roskilde Festival in Denmark. After the crowd — reportedly Snowden’s largest ever — sang “Happy Birthday,” the 33-year-old said: “Everyone, thank you. Really. You guys staying with me… is overwhelming. But this is not about me. This is about us.”
Revelers react as Edward Snowden is seen on a screen during the Roskilde Festival in Roskilde, Denmark, on June 28, 2016. (Photo: Scanpix Denmark/Mathias Loevgreen Bojesen /via Reuters)
The events promote Snowden’s credentials as a whistleblower whose disclosures triggered significant changes in the U.S. surveillance laws. And they come at a crucial moment for him. Timing their efforts to coincide with next month’s release of the Stone movie about his life, Snowden’s supporters are planning a major public relations campaign this fall to petition President Obama to grant him a full pardon before he leaves office. But the spectacle of Snowden, who stole hundreds of thousands of classified government documents, profiting from his celebrity has irked some U.S. intelligence officials. This could frustrate his supporters’ hopes — admittedly unlikely to be realized — of striking a deal with the Obama administration to allow him to return the United States without standing trial and risking substantial prison time. “In my view, I think he has violated the oath that he made to this Constitution and this government,” said CIA Director John Brennan in a recent interview with Yahoo News. “Getting remuneration for it is very unfortunate and wrong.” Ben Wizner of the ACLU, who serves as Snowden’s U.S. lawyer, strongly defended his client’s blossoming speaking career. “There is nothing remotely improper about Edward Snowden making a living by speaking to global audiences about surveillance and democracy,” Wizner said, arguing that some in the U.S. intelligence community who approved torture and other abuses have “cashed in” with lucrative book deals and consulting careers. Snowden is “not getting rich off public speaking,” Wizner said. “He lives a frugal and modest life.”
One of the only photos featuring Snowden in Moscow, taken in the fall of 2013 while he rode a boat passing the Cathedral of Christ the Saviour. (Photo: LifeNews/Rossiya24)
‘I can assure he will pay all taxes that he might owe’ Snowden has kept a well-crafted media profile in exile, digitally emerging more than 100 times at various events since arriving in Russia, according to a review of his public appearances. In 2014, he began appearing via video chat — or robot — at events around the world. Sometimes the American leaker-turned-activist speaks to events for free, especially for nonprofit groups, according to Wizner. In other cases, including talks at American colleges and universities, Snowden is paid as much as $25,000 for an appearance, his lawyer says. Since September 2015, these paid talks have been arranged by the American Program Bureau (APB), a prestigious speakers bureau whose A-list clients range from world leaders such as former President Jimmy Carter and Desmond Tutu to TV stars such as Jon Stewart and Ellen DeGeneres. (Also advertised on the bureau’s website are a number of former U.S. officials, including retired Lt. Gen. Karl Eikenberry, the former U.S. commander in Afghanistan, and former State Department counter-terrorism coordinator Daniel Benjamin.) During that time, three public universities — the University of Iowa, the University of Colorado and the University of Arizona — signed contracts with the bureau for Snowden to appear, according to documents obtained by Yahoo News under open records requests.
The website for the American Program Bureau.
The APB does not publicize its arrangement with Snowden, omitting his name from a list of advertised speakers on its website, although its officers have signed the contracts for Snowden’s talks at the schools. The emails obtained by Yahoo News show that officials at the schools, while usually enthusiastic about the idea of having Snowden speak to their students, raised multiple questions about his appearances, including whether Snowden was donating some portion of his payments to charities or nonprofit groups, whether he was paying U.S. taxes on his fees and whether the payments might be prohibited by an executive order signed by President Obama last year declaring cyberhacking a national security threat subject to sanctions by the U.S. Treasury Department. The bureau declined repeated requests to answer any questions from Yahoo News about its arrangement with Snowden. Wizner, Snowden’s U.S. lawyer, indicated to Yahoo News that Snowden has not filed any U.S. tax returns on his income in exile, but added: “I can assure you he will pay all taxes that he might owe. But he’s going to do that in connection with a settlement of all the charges” against him. Snowden’s legal trouble dates back to the spring of 2013. On May 20 of that year, he landed in Hong Kong with what some U.S. officials feared was as many as 1.7 million classified documents taken from NSA systems during his work as an NSA contractor for Dell and Booz Allen Hamilton. (Exactly how much he took remains unclear.) He subsequently gave American journalists Laura Poitras and Glenn Greenwald an estimated 200,000 documents, the contents of which became the subject of hundreds of news stories detailing NSA practices, including a top-secret program to collect records of phone calls made by Americans. Snowden also provided documents to Washington Post journalist Barton Gellman and South China Morning Post journalist Lana Lam. The subsequent media reports informed the world of pervasive spying by Western governments and spurred efforts by all three branches of government to reform the U.S. surveillance apparatus. On June 14, 2013, Snowden was charged in a Justice Department criminal complaint with theft of government property and two violations of the U.S. Espionage Act, for disclosing classified communications. Nine days later, Snowden, asserting he was on his way to Latin America, wound up at the Moscow airport and was unable to go any farther because the U.S. government had revoked his passport.
A TV screen shows a news report of Edward Snowden at a shopping mall in Hong Kong. (Photo: Vincent Yu/AP)
‘How much is actually donated?’ The idea for Snowden’s appearance at the University of Colorado, Boulder, arose after the APB speakers bureau emailed the university’s Distinguished Speakers Board. The chair of the board told Yahoo News that “the email was more of an advertisement-type format, just informing us that Mr. Snowden was on the speaking circuit.” The university agreed to pay the bureau $56,000 to host a joint appearance with Snowden and Pulitzer-Prize winning author and journalist Ron Suskind on February 16, 2016, for 90 minutes. “The speaking ‘fee’ for Snowden is also a donation to a non-profit, correct?” Brandon Myers, coordinator for Student Activities + Special Events at University of Colorado, Boulder, asked APB senior agent Tammy Haschig in a Feb. 1, 2016, email. “If so, which organization? The ACLU? How much is actually donated?” Haschig replied that Snowden “contributes a significant portion of his speaking fees to the Freedom of the Press Foundation, where he is a board member.”
APB correspondence with the University of Colorado.
Snowden echoed the claim during his digital talk with Suskind, telling the crowd that he planned to donate part of his fee to the press organization — a San Francisco nonprofit whose stated mission is to “support and defend journalism dedicated to transparency and accountability.” Other board members of the Freedom of the Press Foundation alongside Snowden include Greenwald and Poitras, both of whom received the initial cache of NSA documents from Snowden. “I want to make sure journalists are able to operate,” said Snowden, explaining his decision to make the donation. Suskind, whose appearance with Snowden was also arranged by APB, said that it was his “understanding” from Wizner that Snowden was going to donate half of his fee to the Freedom of the Press Foundation. But Trevor Timm, president of the Freedom of the Press Foundation, told Yahoo News that the organization never received any direct donations from Snowden as a result of the Colorado talk or any other of his speaking appearances. On a “handful of occasions,” Timm said, Snowden has forfeited speaking fees and directed that they go to the group, estimating that the organization has received between $10,000 and $20,000 this year under such arrangements. But, he added in an email, “there have been no direct donations from Snowden to Freedom of the Press Foundation.” If Snowden did not actually make the contribution to the Freedom of the Press foundation for the Colorado talk, then “I would be disappointed and surprised,” Suskind said in an interview.
Edward Snowden appearing with writer Ron Suskind at the University of Colorado on Feb. 16, 2016. (Photo: Patrick Campbell/University of Colorado)
When asked about the discrepancy, a University of Colorado spokesman told Yahoo News that “Snowden and APB fulfilled their end of the contract. And we paid the specified amount to APB as outlined in the contract.” (The contract obtained by Yahoo News does not specify how the $56,000 was divided between Snowden and Suskind, or how much APB took as its fee.) Wizner said his client still intends to direct some future speaking fees to the Freedom of the Press Foundation, estimating this will amount to $50,000 by the end of the year. ‘Ed doesn’t have a clue what the LLC is’ The question of whether Snowden was directing donations to nonprofits was only one of the issues raised by school officials in preparation for Snowden’s talk. Norm Skarstad, the assistant director for the University of Colorado’s Student Organizations Finance Office, asked Haschig in an email if Snowden was paying taxes on his speaking fees. “I only ask because paying foreign nationals can be problematic for us.” Haschig replied: “This is not an issue. We are actually paying him through an LLC [a limited liability company] to streamline things.”
APB correspondence with the University of Colorado.
Haschig, like other APB officials, did not respond to questions about the corporation that is paying Snowden. But Wizner said he is confident that the LLC referred to in the email is not a corporation in which Snowden has any interest. “Ed doesn’t have a clue what the LLC is,” Wizner said after consulting with his client. In light of potential legal issues, Wizner said he assumes the LLC was set up by APB to shield the fees it pays to Snowden from the amounts it collects on behalf of other clients, presumably in case the U.S. government targets Snowden’s income. ‘Tom do we have other options or is it the last one’? The possibility of the government targeting Snowden’s fees was raised by some university officials, who took notice of an executive order by President Obama last year aimed at thwarting “malicious cyber-enabled activities.” “Kelly, Please hold everything,” University of Iowa Vice President for Student Life Tom Rocklin told university lecture committee advisor Kelly Soukup on Sept. 17, 2015, during final arrangements for a talk featuring Snowden. “[A] concern has been identified. Based on an executive order signed by President Obama in January, it is illegal to transfer funds to a fugitive. My understanding… is [that] unless we can have an assurance that no funds will be transferred to the speaker we cannot have him.”
APB correspondence with the University of Iowa.
The executive order, signed in April 2015 and referenced in subsequent emails, imposes financial sanctions against anyone found to be directly or indirectly involved in cyber-related activities deemed to be “a significant threat to the national security, foreign policy, or economic health or financial stability of the United States.” On Sept. 18, the University of Iowa withdrew the $3,000 offer to host Snowden at the talk, which also featured former CIA analyst Ray McGovern and former FBI agent Coleen Rowley. Three days later, after speaking with Wizner, Soukup emailed Haschig: “Wait! We may have some hope!” Soukup then explained to his colleagues that according to Wizner, “the interpretation of the executive order is incorrect. He indicated that Snowden is not on the list at the Dept. of Treasury for those who are impacted by the order.” In fact, as Wizner pointed out to Yahoo News, the Treasury Department had yet to designate any violators who might be subject to financial sanctions. Asked if Snowden could potentially be subject to sanctions in the future, a Treasury Department spokeswoman replied by email: “Treasury does not speculate on any potential future actions.” As of Sept. 24, four days before the event, Iowa lawyers still wondered if a payment to Snowden “falls under the umbrella of donation that is restricted [no] matter how it reaches him.” Rocklin subsequently asked if the university could pay for the appearances of Rowley and McGovern instead of Snowden. The nonprofit Veterans for Peace agreed to pay for Snowden, but Snowden didn’t “want to take money from Vets for Peace,” according to Soukup. “The deal to have the veterans pay for the speaker has fallen through,” Rocklin emailed then-interim university president Jean Robillard, conspicuously avoiding Snowden’s name at that point. “Are you still comfortable with paying the speaker using foundation funds?” “Tom do we have other options or is it the last one”? “Last one I can identify.”
APB correspondence with the University of Iowa.
After Robillard decided to use funds from a University of Iowa foundation account, Rocklin told other Iowa staff: “FYI. We’re back on with the speaker we discussed.” “SNOWDEN IS A GO!” Soukup subsequently emailed to the venue. “As they say: ‘better late than never!’” When asked about the deliberations about hosting Snowden, Iowa University spokeswoman Jeneane Beck told Yahoo News in an email: “The University of Iowa values intellectual debate and believes in providing students the opportunity to hear from speakers with diverse viewpoints.” She added: “However, as a public institution, we are careful to follow all state and federal guidelines, so it was important to do our due diligence when hosting Mr. Snowden.” After the event, which was deemed a huge success, Haschig told Soukup that “I’m sure [Snowden] would appreciate if you kept the fee confidential as he did this more as a favor to colleagues. We wouldn’t want other clients feeling as though they were being over charged as I’m sure you can understand!” The most recent paid Snowden appearance at an American university occurred at the University of Arizona on March 25, 2016. The school paid APB $20,000 for Snowden to digitally appear for a talk with Greenwald and prominent linguist-turned-activist Noam Chomsky (who spoke for free).
Snowden appearing with Glenn Greenwald and Noam Chomsky at the University of Arizona on March 25, 2016. (Photo: University of Arizona)
‘The pardon power exists’ How Snowden has made money in exile has been an open question from the beginning. Snowden claimed that he withdrew “enough financial resources to survive on my own for years without anyone’s assistance” before leaving the United States with classified documents. Nevertheless, while settling into asylum, the former systems administrator accepted a job at a major Russian website, according to his Russian lawyer Anatoly Kucherena. And by November 2013, the American was reportedly almost broke. “The savings he had, he has almost entirely spent on food, rent, security and so on,” Kucherena told the Russian newspaper Rossiiskaya Gazeta. As of February 2015, according to Kucherena, Snowden was “still working for a Russian company.” But by mid-2015, according to Wizner, speaking fees that sometimes exceeded $10,000 were his primary source of income. The APB organized its first Snowden event in September of 2015, speaking to an invitation-only “investors forum” sponsored by a Chinese brokerage firm in Hong Kong. Snowden has appeared in about 25 interviews and appearances so far in 2016 and is reportedly scheduled for more. He has supplementing his public profile with a Twitter account; he now shares his riffs on world events with his 2.1 million followers. Through tweeting regularly, Snowden burnishes his credentials as a privacy advocate. In June, Snowden criticized a “Big Brother” surveillance law passed in Russia. In July, he appeared to chastise WikiLeaks for publishing personally identifiable material in leaked documents related to the Democratic National Convention.
A recent tweet by @Snowden.
When asked about his life in Russia at the Brooklyn Academy of Music in March 2016, Snowden replied that he lived an ordinary life in “an apartment like anybody else’s.” He continued: “My physical location is different, but that’s not new for me. I worked for the CIA, under cover, overseas, in Switzerland and other places. I worked for the NSA as a contractor in Japan and other places. And so having a foreign posting where I have to live in a country that I don’t plan to stay in for the rest of my life to pursue work on behalf of my own country is really nothing new for me. I do have a normal life, I do all of my own shopping, I ride the subway like everybody else.” At this point, more than three years and many revelations later, Snowden’s backers are aiming at a full pardon. According to Wizner, they are creating a new nonprofit organization that will promote the cause starting this fall, after the Stone movie is released on Sept. 16. Among the advisers to the campaign, he said, is veteran liberal public relations executive David Fenton. The basis for the campaign, Wizner said, is that Snowden “has really made a significant contribution to a global conversation about open societies at a time when open societies are under threat around the world.” As a result of Snowden’s disclosures, he added, “we’ve had an historic debate about surveillance and democracy and the most significant legal reforms since the 1970s — none of which would have occurred without Snowden.” ‘I would only support his coming back and facing the charges’ But arguments for clemency are not likely to sit well with U.S. intelligence community officials, who continue to argue that Snowden’s disclosures endangered national security by alerting terrorist groups, including the Islamic State and al-Qaida, to ways they could evade U.S. surveillance, accelerating their move to encrypted communications. “You’ve seen al-Qaida expressly, for example, reference the [Snowden] disclosures,” said NSA Director Admiral Michael Rogers about Snowden’s disclosures in an interview with Yahoo News earlier this year. “You’ve seen groups — ISIL does the same — talk about how they need to change their discipline, need to change their security as a result of their increased knowledge of what we do and how we do it.” In early 2015, an ISIS-affiliated group used clips of “Citizenfour,” the Oscar-winning documentary about Snowden, to make a 13-minute propaganda video titled “The Electronic War and the Negligence of the Supporters of Mujahedeen.” At the end, the film points viewers to more than 20 tutorials and several online manuals detailing encryption and information security.
A screenshot from the ISIS video “The Electronic War and the Negligence of the Supporters of Mujahedeen,” which uses clips from “Citizenfour.”
And while many experts have argued that the movement toward encryption is the inevitable result of evolving new technologies, Rogers pointed to Snowden. “No one should doubt for one minute there has been an impact here,” Rogers said. “I will leave it to others to decide right, wrong, good or bad. But there shouldn’t be any doubt in anybody’s mind that there has been an impact as a result of these disclosures.” “I respectfully but vehemently disagree with the former attorney general,” Brennan said in his interview with Yahoo News. “I would only support his coming back [to the United States] and facing the charges that have been levied against him and to let a court of law determine his fate.” Wizner, for his part, doesn’t dispute that his client violated federal law by stealing and disclosing NSA documents. “The argument is not that he didn’t break the law,” he said. “The argument is that the president should use his discretion [to pardon Snowden] just as he used his discretion not to investigate and prosecute members of the intelligence community [who] broke the law” by engaging in torture and other illegal activities. Asked whether President Obama would be open to considering a request to pardon Snowden, White House spokesman Edward C. Price replied by email: “When it comes to Edward Snowden, our position has not changed. Mr. Snowden is accused of leaking classified information and faces felony charges here in the United States. As such, he should be returned to the U.S. as soon as possible, where he will be accorded full due process.” Daniel Klaidman contributed to this report. Edward Snowden contracts with U.S. colleges
_________________ Nobody gets paid to tell the truth.
Subject: Re: Snowden and the Jews Sun Aug 14, 2016 6:34 pm
WikiLeaks Is Getting Scarier Than the NSA
Karl Vick @karl_vick
Aug. 12, 2016
"It’s not striving for objectivity. It’s more careless"
When Wikileaks surged to global prominence six years ago, it was for its work posting hundreds of thousands of pages of secret government documents about the U.S. wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, followed by a quarter million confidential cables by American diplomats. Working with major news organizations, including the New York Times, the Guardian and Der Spiegel, the site was associated both with accountability and a bold new version of “radical transparency.”
That has changed. With the publication of e-mails expressly aimed at damaging Hillary Clinton’s presidential candidacy, WikiLeaks has shifted from a global platform for whistleblowers to something less exalted—and lately, a bit strange. Julian Assange, the site’s founder, hinted darkly in a Dutch television interview on Tuesday that a young Democratic National Committee staffer who had been murdered in Washington on July 10 had been killed because he had provided information to WikiLeaks, which posted a $20,000 reward for information on the July 10 death of Seth Rich. “Whistleblowers go to significant efforts to get us material and often very significant risks,” Assange said. “There’s a 27-year-old who works for the DNC who was shot in the back, murdered, just a few weeks ago, for unknown reasons as he was walking down the streets in Washington.”
Read More: No, WikiLeaks Isn’t Trying to Hack Donald Trump’s Tax Returns
Assange offered no support for the incendiary suggestion—”We don’t comment on who our sources are,” he coyly replied, when the Dutch interviewer pressed for details on his guest’s insinuation. Nor was the suggestion welcomed by Rich’s family, which subsequently issued a statement praising the efforts of the D.C. police, who have said they are investigating the slaying as a mugging gone bad. Rich, who had worked at the DNC since 2014, was killed at 4 a.m. while walking home, and was on the phone with his girlfriend when the fatal encounter began. “Some are attempting to politicize this horrible tragedy, and in their attempts to do so, are actually causing more harm that good and impeding on the ability for law enforcement to properly do their job,” said the statement released by Brad Bauman, a Democratic communications consultant representing the family. “For the sake of finding Seth’s killer, and for the sake of giving the family the space they need at this terrible time, they are asking for the public to refrain from pushing unproven and harmful theories about Seth’s murder.”
The episode—coming on the heels of the DNC emails Assange held for release on the eve of the Democratic convention—is seen by critics of WikiLeaks as a sign that once-lauded enterprise no longer qualifies as an independent platform promoting openness. “It’s become something else,” says John Wonderlich, executive director of the Sunlight Foundation, a Washington nonprofit that advocates for transparency. “It’s not striving for objectivity. It’s more careless. When they publish information it appears to be in service of some specific goal, of retribution, at the expense of the individual.”
“On the death of staffer, that’s just to me so far over the line,” Wonderlich adds. “If they feel like they have a link to the staffer’s death, they should say it and be responsible about it. The insinuations, to me, are just disgusting.”
Read More: WikiLeaks Says It Will Publish More Hillary Clinton Emails
One measure of the uneasiness that now surrounds WikiLeaks is the difficulty of finding people who will talk about it these days. TIME approached a half dozen groups and prominent individuals who work on the same issues. Only the Sunlight Foundation responded, having earlier posted a detailed critique of the DNC leak, titled On Weaponized Transparency. The article emphasized that, by failing to hold back private information like email addresses and credit card information, WikiLeaks poses a similar threat to privacy—if not a greater one—as the government agencies it rails against. “The Center for Responsive Politics was able to report that the DNC asked the White House to reward donors with slots on boards and commissions without exposing unnecessary personal information,” the post noted. “I’m more afraid of WikiLeaks than I am of the NSA,” says one American privacy advocate, who would speak only without being further identified, partly out of concern about retribution. “When they first burst into our consciousness, they were acting like publishers and journalists. The idea that these rascals were turning the tables on the deep state had great emotional relevance to me. But they turned out not have any principles.”
Read More: The Future of Civilization Is a Battle Between Google and Wikileaks
Efforts to reach a WikiLeaks spokesperson, by phone, text and email, to comment produced no response. But both Assange and the site have been spirited to the point of anger in defending their enterprise. After a Turkish academic based in North Carolina took the site to task last month for a posting links that exposed the personal emails and phone numbers of some 20 million Turkish women, Wikileaks pushed back hard, tweeting: “A journalist that cannot take responsibility for their errors, in this case, a catastrophic error, will not work in journalism again.” And when Edward Snowden tweeted that Wikileaks’s “hostility to even modest” redaction of documents “is a mistake,” WikiLeaks accused the fugitive of trying to curry favor with the Democrat it has targeted: “Opportunism won’t win you a pardon with Clinton,” the site tweeted in reply.
Snowden has been living in Moscow since 2013, having accepted refuge from President Vladimir Putin—with the help of a WikiLeaks lawyer—after U.S. authorities issued an arrest warrant for his massive disclosure of National Security Agency operations. And Assange is on the run as well—albeit while staying in the same place: Since 2010, the Australian has holed up in Ecuador’s embassy in London, where this week authorities finally made arrangements to set a date for an interview with Swedish authorities investigating a sexual assault allegation that Assange calls punishment for his work. The two fugitives, both youthful and fair-haired and wanted for exposing government secrets, are frequently confused, as John Oliver found before traveling to Russia to sit down with Snowden. But they are quite different in their aims, says the privacy advocate who asked not to be named.
“Snowden is a reformer,” the advocate notes. “Assange really is an anarchist revolutionary who just wants to blow the whole thing up. In his view, whatever comes in its place will be better.”
_________________ Nobody gets paid to tell the truth.
Subject: Re: Snowden and the Jews Tue Aug 16, 2016 3:00 pm
Snowden: Exposure of alleged NSA tools may be warning to US
By RAPHAEL SATTER Associated Press
PARIS (AP) -- National Security Agency leaker Edward Snowden says the exposure of malicious software allegedly linked to his former employer may be a message from Moscow, adding a layer of intrigue to a leak that has set the information security world abuzz.
Technical experts have spent the past day or so picking apart a suite of tools purported to have been stolen from the Equation Group, a powerful squad of hackers which some have tied to the NSA. The tools materialized as part of an unusual electronic auction set up by a group calling itself "Shadow Brokers," which has promised to leak more data to whoever puts in a winning bid.
In a series of messages posted to Twitter, Snowden suggested the leak was the fruit of a Russian attack on an NSA malware server and could be aimed at heading off U.S. retaliation over allegations that the Kremlin was trying interfere in America's electoral process.
"Circumstantial evidence and conventional wisdom indicates Russian responsibility," Snowden said. "This leak is likely a warning that someone can prove U.S. responsibility for any attacks that originated from this malware server. That could have significant foreign policy consequences. Particularly if any of those operations targeted U.S. allies. Particularly if any of those operations targeted elections."
Snowden did not immediately return messages seeking additional comment. The NSA did not immediately return emails seeking comment on his claim. Messages sent to an address registered by the Shadow Brokers were not returned.
The Equation Group was exposed last year by antivirus firm Kaspersky Lab, which described it at the time as a "God of cyberespionage." Many have since speculated that the NSA is behind the group, although attribution in the field of cyberespionage is a notoriously tricky issue.
_________________ Nobody gets paid to tell the truth.
Subject: Re: Snowden and the Jews Thu Aug 18, 2016 9:58 am
The complex do-do Eddy is now so magnanimously offering help us feeble plebes decipher might not all work through with such a clear fundamental explanation. He's getting deeply caught up in points where his 'expertise' is neither relevant nor vaguely impressive.
It's all speculation anyhow, so why's he taking this noxious bait and getting himself into trouble in Russia now?
Starting to look more like he was naively doing NSA a favor all along by informing the world ... they're being watched.
In a Lunch with the FT — carried below — he complained Moscow had “gone very far, in ways that are completely unnecessary, costly and corrosive to individual and collective rights” and added that his greatest loyalty was still to the US. He described the leak last month of NSA espionage tools, potentially by Russia as an “implicit threat” to the US government. Efforts by hackers called the Shadow Brokers to auction off NSA computer code used to break into foreign networks were an attempt to show Washington how vulnerable it was, he added. Snowden insisted that all dealings with Russian officials were conducted by his lawyer. “I don’t have a lot of ties to Russia and that’s by design because, as crazy as it sounds, I still plan to leave.” … Edward Snowden is not the easiest lunch date. The former National Security Agency operative doesn’t fancy talking in a Moscow restaurant so — via an intermediary — we settle on meeting in my hotel and risk the room service. He will present himself at the agreed time. That’s all I need to know. In the end he’s 20 minutes late, dressed casually in black jeans and black V-neck, buttoned-up T-shirt carrying a pair of unbranded dark glasses. He eyes up the small, dimly lit room 203 of the Golden Apple “boutique” hotel — half an hour’s gentle stroll from the Kremlin — with the look of a man who has spent too much time in such places. How does it compare with room 1014 of the Mira Hotel in Hong Kong, where in June 2013 — having shared many of the NSA’s most closely guarded secrets with a few handpicked journalists — Snowden spent a week as the most wanted man in the world? “A bit smaller, but not dissimilar,” he says. “The Hong Kong room had a glass bathroom wall here,” he adds, pointing to a bland wall featuring an obligatory hotel watercolour. The interior of the Mira hotel room is about to become much better known with the US release next week of Oliver Stone’s biopic about Snowden, which stars Joseph Gordon-Levitt in the whistleblower’s role. Much of the tensest, most claustrophobic action is filmed in a reconstruction of room 1014 built inside a hangar-like studio in Munich. During that intense week three years ago, Snowden and two Guardian reporters worked on those first stories disclosing the full capabilities that intelligence agencies can now deploy against populations. When he revealed himself as the source, he was acclaimed as a hero by some — others recommended the electric chair. I had never met him and was entirely reliant on the judgment of our veteran reporter, Ewen MacAskill, who rang to report (in pre-arranged code owing something to Hollywood) that “the Guinness is good”. I first saw his face about an hour before the rest of the world, when MacAskill filed his video interview to New York. Like everyone else there I was struck by his stubbled youth and impressed by his thoughtful articulacy. Today, at 33, there’s a touch less stubble, and the hair is a smidgen longer. He says he moves freely around Moscow, seldom recognised, which is surprising since he has changed little since that first picture of him etched itself on our consciousness. Reading the laminated room-service menu card, complete with English translations, he is tempted by the spicy chicken curry with rice and chilli sauce. I go for the risotto with white mushrooms and a “vinaigrette” salad with herring. Snowden — skinny thin — decides he can’t resist the crab cakes, too. We telephone the order for the food, with mineral water.
I work for the US but they don’t realise it
He has been unwillingly marooned in Moscow since 2013 when — the subject of a giant manhunt — he was forced to leave Hong Kong. How’s his Russian coming on? He confirms it’s up to ordering in a restaurant, but is reluctant to elaborate. “All my work’s in English. Everybody I talk to I speak to in English,” he says. “I sleep in Russia but I live all around the world. I don’t have a lot of ties to Russia. That’s by design because, as crazy as it sounds, I still plan to leave.” He lives “mainly” on Eastern Standard Time and spends most of his waking hours online — “but it always has been so”. He admits he misses the “sense of home” represented by America, “but technology overcomes most of that divide. For me, I’m a little bit of an outlier to begin with because, remember, I signed up to go work overseas for the CIA and overseas for the NSA. So it’s really not that much different from the postings that I had for the US. “The only difference is that I’m still posted overseas and I work for the US but they don’t realise it.” As anyone who follows him on Twitter knows (he follows just one account: the NSA) he is capable of a very dry wit. He has seen a version of the Stone movie on one of the director’s trips to Moscow, during which Snowden says he would talk to Stone’s co-writer, Kieran Fitzgerald, about “trying to keep the film a little bit closer to being reality”. “But,” he shrugs, “I know it’s a drama, not a documentary.”
Golden Apple Hotel
11 Malaya Dmitrovka str., Moscow, Russia
Room service Spicy chicken curry £5.60 Crab cakes £6.35 Risotto with white mushrooms £5.20 Vinaigrette salad with herring £5.60 Ice cream £3.35 Sorbet £3.35 Espresso £3.35 Total £32.80
How would he score it out of 10? He avoids a rating. “On the policy questions, which I think are the most important thing for the public understanding, it’s as close to real as you can get in a film.” He met Gordon-Levitt in Moscow and thought him “an amazing guy … we had lunch together, talked for several hours just about everything, our personal lives — what we think about, what we care about. At the time I thought it was just a social visit but, after the fact, he told me that he was actually scoping me out, trying to get my mannerisms.” Having interviewed Gordon-Levitt’s “Snowden” as part of my own cameo in the film, I can vouch for how well he captures the real thing. Snowden was impressed, too: “His characterisation of me makes me uncomfortable, with the super-deep gravelly voice, but that’s because you never hear your own voice the way other people do, right?” Was he moved by the film, which in flashback revisits the episodes in his life that led to what he calls his “tortured” decision to engineer the biggest leak of classified documents in history? “There’s always going to be something emotional about seeing something that you did retold as a story by other people. It shows a reflection of how your choices matter to them. Three years later, seeing what we thought was going to be a five-day story still being reported on [makes me think] that I wasn’t crazy.” … There’s a knock on the door — which would have caused a spasm of paranoid anxiety in the Mira in 2013. Now it’s just room service. The floor is so small the waiter balances the tray on the bed and Snowden has to perch his chicken curry on his knee. The water is missing. My vinaigrette salad turns out to be cubed beetroot. I avoid the herrings. Once he nods at the iPhone recording our interview and expands on a point “in case someone is listening”. The first time I met him — to see how he was surviving in his new circumstances in spring 2014 — my iPhone had displayed a giant red thermometer, a sign of alarming overheating. Snowden had observed mildly it was because so many different people were trying to listen in.
As online threats race up national security agendas and governments look at ways of protecting their national infrastructures a cyber arms race is causing concern to the developed world
He confirms he received no money from the movie, adding of his tangential experience of Hollywood: “When I was told that there was going to be a film made about me, it was a scary thing, one of the most terrifying things I can imagine. But, looking back, I hope it helps, I’m cautiously optimistic that it will.” He looks back over the period since the revelations and reflects that all three branches of government in the US — Congress, courts, president — have changed their position on mass surveillance. “We can actually start to impose more oversight on spies, rather than giving them a free pass to do whatever simply because we’re scared, which is understandable but clearly not ethical.” What of subsequent developments in the UK, where the government’s response has been to propose laws that not only sanction, post hoc, the intelligence activities that were revealed to be happening, but extend them? He says it was not his intention to tell the world how to structure their laws, but to give people a voice in the process. “The laws have gotten worse in some countries. France has gone very far, so too, of course, countries like Russia, China. In Britain there’s an authoritarian trend. “We don’t allow police to enter and search any home. We don’t typically reorder the operation of a free society for the convenience of the police — because that is the definition of a police state,” he says, mopping up the last of the rice. “And yet some spies and officials are trying to persuade us that we should. Now, I would argue there’s no real question that police in a police state would be more effective than those in a free and liberal society where the police operate under tighter constraints. But which one would you rather live in?” He has finished his curry and pronounces it “quite good”. The crab cakes are abandoned after a bite. “Less good,” he says. We order ice cream — vanilla, strawberry and chocolate for him, sorbet for me. The voice on the phone launches into a complicated explanation of why, with five scoops in all, we can have a discount. Does he never lose sleep at night wondering whether Isis terrorists might not have gained some useful advantage from the information he disclosed?
I can’t fix the human rights situation in Russia, and realistically my priority is to fix my own country first
Well, firstly, he says, in all the recent European attacks the suspects were known to the authorities, who thus had the ability to target them without having to scoop up everyone else’s data as well. Secondly, he points out, Osama bin Laden stopped using a mobile phone in 1998 — not because of leaks to newspapers but because “there is an aggressive form of Darwinism in terrorist circles. Long before we, the public, know about any of these surveillance measures, they have already known for years because, if they had not, they are already dead. “But,” he goes on, “let’s say that the newspapers had decided this should not be public. Let’s say the intelligence services had been able to continue using these programs in secret. Would it have stopped any of the terrorist attacks that have occurred in the last three years? There’s no public evidence that that’s the case. In fact, there’s no classified evidence that that’s the case, or else we’d be reading it in the newspapers.” We move on to talking about stories alleging Russian hacking of the NSA itself and of the Democratic party’s governing body, the Democratic National Committee. The former involved a group calling itself the Shadow Brokers, who threatened to auction very sophisticated alleged NSA surveillance tools. The latter was a collection of DNC emails published — to general embarrassment — by WikiLeaks in July. The Shadow Broker leak, says Snowden, “doesn’t strike me as a whistleblower: that strikes me as a warning. It’s political messaging being carried out through information disclosure.” And the DNC hack, where, as he observes, the conventional wisdom is that it was the Russians? “This is part of the problem of this surveillance free-for-all that we’re allowing to occur by refusing to moderate our own behaviour. We’ve set a kind of global precedent that anything is possible and nothing is prohibited. “Now, the fact the DNC got hacked is not surprising and interesting. We’re hacking political parties around the world, so is every country. What makes it interesting is that some of the things taken from this server were published afterwards. That’s quite novel. I think.” Which makes him think what? “That it’s for political effect.” He says — as someone who used to try and do this sort of thing to the Chinese — that it would be easy to attribute the hack to whoever had done it. “But this creates a problem because, let’s say, the NSA has the smoking gun that says the Russians hacked the DNC, and they tell us the Russians hacked the DNC, how can we be sure? It presumes a level of trust that no longer exists.” The ice creams arrive along with an espresso, replacing the first set of dishes on the bed. Snowden spills a bit of chicken curry on the duvet and apologetically mops it up with a towel. Aren’t we beginning to discover that no digital databases are secure? “We are living through a crisis in computer security the likes of which we’ve never seen,” he says. “But until we solve the fundamental problem, which is that our policy incentivises offence to a greater degree than defence, hacks will continue unpredictably and they will have increasingly larger effects and impacts.” The answer, he thinks, is that there ought to be some form of liability for negligence in software architecture, such as would apply in the food industry. He adds, drily: “People from my tribe will be extraordinarily mad at me for suggesting regulation in the terms of negligence for software security.” … He has finished his ice cream and declines coffee. Life in Moscow is getting better, he says: “I’m more open now than I’ve been since 2013.” He sees few people — such meetings as this are rare — and divides his time between public speaking (which pays the bills) and devising tools to protect the digital security of journalists. He would rather not go into “the family stuff” or how often he sees Lindsay Mills, his partner, who was left behind in Hawaii when he quit his job for the NSA there and disappeared to Hong Kong. His American lawyer, Ben Wizner at the American Civil Liberties Union, is reported to be preparing to launch a petition to President Barack Obama to grant Snowden a pardon before he steps down. Snowden will only say: “Of course I hope they’re successful but this has never really been about what happens to me. No matter how the outcome shakes out, it’s something I can live with.”
The Big Read
Cyber espionage: A new cold war?
An online ‘auction’ signals a build-up of tension between Russia and America
His chances of a happy ending under President Donald Trump would be zero, I observe. What about under President Hillary Clinton? “You’re trying to drag me into a political quagmire,” he protests. He collects himself, looking intensely at the ground, before sidestepping the question: “I think we should have better choices. We’re a country of 330m people and we seem to be being asked to make a choice between individuals whose lives are defined by scandal. I simply think we should be capable of more.” If he’s tough on the options in US politics, his willingness to tweet criticism of Russian politics to his 2.3m followers has not gone unnoticed. “A lot of people who care about me tell me to shut up, but if I was married to my own self-interest, I never would have left Hawaii. “I can’t fix the human rights situation in Russia, and realistically my priority is to fix my own country first, because that’s the one to which I owe the greatest loyalty. But though the chances are it will make no difference, maybe it’ll help.” He gathers up his dark glasses: it’s time for him to melt into the Moscow crowds. A final question: the Stone film shows him spiriting his trove of secrets out of the NSA on a micro-SD card hidden in a Rubik’s Cube. True or false? “Oliver confirmed in an interview recently that that’s a touch of the dramatic licence, but that’s only because I wouldn’t confirm or deny how it really happened. I will say that I gave Rubik’s Cubes to everyone in my office, it’s true. I really did that.” And with that he is gone. Alan Rusbridger was editor of the Guardian from 1995-2015. It won the 2014 Pulitzer Prize for Public Service for the revelations Illustration by James Ferguson This article will be open for comments on Monday at 11am when we will also publish the full transcript of the interview
_________________ Nobody gets paid to tell the truth.