Wikileaks Says Snowden Has Arrived in Moscow

ReasonReasonWikileaks has announced via twitter that NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden has touched down in Moscow after leaving Hong Kong. Snowden’s final destination remains unknown, however there have been reports that Snowden may be hoping to travel to Venezuela, Ecuador, Cuba, or Iceland next.

From CNN:

(CNN) -- The global cat-and-mouse hunt for Edward Snowden took a dramatic turn Sunday when the man wanted on U.S. espionage charges fled Hong Kong and reportedly arrived in Russia.

WikiLeaks said in a Twitter post Sunday that Snowden had touched down in Moscow. But the organization, which facilitates the publication of classified information, did not disclose what country would be his final destination.

Snowden, who leaked top-secret details about U.S. surveillance programs, left Hong Kong on Sunday "through a lawful and normal channel," the Hong Kong government said.


Snowden’s travel to Russia will undoubtedly anger American officials, who had asked Hong Kong to extradite him, and could further complicate American relationships with Russia and China.

Read more from Reason.com on Edward Snowden and the NSA here and here.

Follow this story and more at Reason 24/7.

Spice up your blog or Website with Reason 24/7 news and Reason articles. You can get the widgets here. If you have a story that would be of interest to Reason's readers please let us know by emailing the 24/7 crew at 24_7@reason.com, or tweet us stories at @reason247.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • ||

    Yeah, this morning I got from my mom "Did you hear that your friend the traitor is in Russia?"

    Oy.

  • VG Zaytsev||

    He betrayed the government to the American public and there's no telling how much damage the public will do to the government now.

  • Xenocles||

    "None" is usually a good bet.

  • VG Zaytsev||

    Well, they'll just have to kill him to be sure.

  • sloopyinca||

    "We'll have to kill him to find out what's in him."

    -Nancy fucking Pelosi

  • RBS||

    Ellen Brody: [to Chief Brody] You told me the shark was caught. And I, I heard it on the news... I heard it on the Cape station.
    Hooper: They caught A shark, not THE shark. Big difference. Not the shark that killed Chrissie Watkins... and probably not the shark that killed the little boy... which I wanted to prove today, by cutting the shark open...

  • Kurbster||

    defending the government amongst wrongdoing isn't patriotism....it's statism

  • Ted S.||

    Ask her why she thinks it's OK for the government to commit treason against the people.

  • sgs||

    I'll never understand how grown men allow themselves to be spoken to like that.

  • Fluffy||

    Wayne Allen Root just tweeted that Snowden is a Benedict Arnold.

    Proving that not even voting libertarian is safe.

  • robc||

    Voting libertarian is safe. Who said Root was one?

  • sloopyinca||

    Wayne Allyn Root is the turd in the LP punchbowl. Unfortunately, his stank is still present and is hurting the brand even after he renounced his membership.

    How many of you have met the man? (I have) And to those that have, did he remind you more of a used car salesman, an infomercial spokesman or the guy why slips roofies into coed's drinks so he can get laid?

  • RBS||

    did he remind you more of a used car salesman, an infomercial spokesman or the guy why slips roofies into coed's drinks so he can get laid?

    Yes?

  • sloopyinca||

    In retrospect, I knew I should have put "all of the above" in there as an option.

    That slimy fuck. I met him at the 2012 LP convention. He is not what the LP needs a a face of the party and the more loudly they denounce him, the better they'll ultimately be.

  • RBS||

    I've never met him but I think I can make a pretty good call based on what I've read about him and heard him say.

  • cavalier973||

    If everyone calls him by all three names, doesn't that mean he's an assassin?

  • Almanian!||

    PWND!

  • np||

    Remember Brian Doherty's story of how Barrett Brown faces 125 years in prison? More on his connection with Michael Hastings:
    http://cryptome.org/2013/06/brown-hastings-fbi.htm


    Before his untimely death, Hastings was working on a story about Barrett, announcing mysteriously to his followers "Get ready for your mind to be blown." Hastings had been in touch with Barrett's lawyers, and intended to interview him in June for the story. Barrett has been in prison for 281 days pending trial, and faces over a hundred years imprisonment for what Hastings called "trumped up FBI charges regarding his legitimate reportorial inquiry into the political collective known sometimes as Anonymous."

    The loss of Michael Hastings is a tremendous blow to adversarial journalism, but the circumstances surrounding his death leave many questions unanswered. Michael believed he was under FBI investigation at the time of his death, and that his calls with Barrett were being recorded. May he rest in peace.


    (see source for links)

  • np||

    http://leaksource.wordpress.co.....t-pm-site/

    “… Endgame executives will bring up maps of airports, parliament buildings, and corporate offices. The executives then create a list of the computers running inside the facilities, including what software the computers run, and a menu of attacks that could work against those particular systems. Endgame weaponry comes customized by region — the Middle East, Russia, Latin America, and China — with manuals, testing software, and ‘demo instructions’. There are even target packs for democratic countries in Europe and other US. allies. Maui (product names tend toward alluring warm-weather locales) is a package of 25 zero-day exploits that runs clients $2.5 million a year.

    The Cayman botnet-analytics package gets you access to a database of internet addresses, organization names, and worm types for hundreds of millions of infected computers, and costs $1.5 million. A government or other entity could launch sophisticated attacks against just about any adversary anywhere in the world for a grand total of $6 million …”


    It's OK when the state does it.

  • sloopyinca||

    You conspiracy theorists are just nuts. Mercedes motors are known to fly over 100 feet out of a chassis when they hit a tree with a diameter of less than 12". They're also known to erupt into fireballs immediately upon impact, as has been noted by the myriad carcasses of them lining America's highways.

  • Heedless||

    To be fair, some of those details may indicate sensationalist reporting rather than suspicious circumstances.

    I'm at least as willing to believe that the press are (mostly) idiots as that the government committed a flashy yet secret murder. OD would have been much easier.

  • sloopyinca||

    I trust our government so little that my default position in a case like this is to be suspicious. We are a nation ruled by thugs, and I would be surprised if they didn't disappear somebody that was on the verge of exposing some serious malfeasance on their part.

    And in light of their activities IRT Sheryl Atkinson, James Rosen and a few others, I'm sure they're not above erasing someone that refused to back off and play ball.

  • DEATFBIRSECIA||

    Fuck yeah! Best news I've had all day. And the IRONY, being let go by HK due at least in part to disclosures about US hacking China, then flown via Cuba, where we have the most high-profile gulag that's ever been created, being assisted by WIKILEAKS to receive safe haven in Venezuela of all places.

    I am literally smiling from ear-to-ear.

  • Fatty Bolger||

    and could further complicate American relationships with Russia and China.

    Not a problem, Kerry still has Hillary's reset button handy.

  • ||

    You know, this NSA drama is really bringing out the 'tards on HN:

    jpatokal

    Hmm. Either they're calling Venezuela a "democratic nation", which seems a bit of a stretch, or Snowden's actually heading somewhere other than the media is reporting. I'm hoping for option B.

    octo_t

    Venezuela is one of the most democratic countries in the world?
    All of their last elections have been externally ratified as being fair: [...]

    jpatoka

    Are you serious? Chavez spent his entire period in office warping the machinery of the state in his favor, and his successor is refusing to investigate some pretty serious allegations of fraud for the last one.

    justsee

    "Chávez himself read my findings on potential elections theft – to his nation on his TV show – and then he moved swiftly, establishing an election system that Jimmy Carter, who has headed vote observer teams in 92 nations, called, 'an election process that is the best in the world'."
    [...]
    In the face of significant US interference Venezuala could have gone extremely dictatorial, but it seems they went the other way and implemented a more secure voting process than in many other countries where electronic voting is used.
  • Jon Lester||

    I hope this will finally dislodge the likes of Pelosi, Schumer and DiFi from office, as people start to notice who obviously cares more about the state than the electorate.

  • Ted S.||

    Sadly, they're in exceedingly safe districts.

  • ||

    Maybe they could be primaried? You'd still end up with economic statists but maybe they'd end up actually being principled on right to privacy, freedom of speech, etc

  • Xenocles||

    They would, if nothing else, be less powerful than the incumbents they would replace.

  • PapayaSF||

    Which is the reason Democrats will never do it. Pelosi and Feinstein are safer in their California seats than any royalty in history.

  • RyanXXX||

    I was arguing with a guy who seriously thought Snowden should be put before a firing squad for "treason" because he "sold out his country." I told him I wished the same thing for the Administration officials in charge of this bullshit, and shit escalated quickly. My fault for talking politics at work

  • Killazontherun||

    guy who seriously thought Snowden should be put before a firing squad for "treason" because he "sold out his country."

    You could have mocked you co-worker by giving him a nudge and a wink, and whispering, 'they could be listening to us right now.' Then loudly stating in your best Monty Python English, 'no punishment is too vile for that traitor. He should be drawn and quartered going against his king and country like that.'

  • Xenocles||

    Russia makes some sense since it seems pretty easy to disappear in - just need to make sure it's the good kind of disappearing. I just wish it were somewhere that wasn't an adversary country since that will focus the weak-minded on the person rather than the ideas, which are the real problem.

  • crashland||

    It has to be an adversary, an ally would just hand him back tied up with a pretty bow stuck to his forehead.

  • Xenocles||

    There are more neutral countries that might not play ball. Iceland seems to be the leader in that respect in the current conventional wisdom.

  • Fatty Bolger||

    In Chicago they knew how to deal with rats: Obama’s crackdown views leaks as aiding enemies of U.S.

    President Barack Obama’s unprecedented initiative, known as the Insider Threat Program, is sweeping in its reach. It has received scant public attention even though it extends beyond the U.S. national security bureaucracies to most federal departments and agencies nationwide, including the Peace Corps, the Social Security Administration and the Education and Agriculture departments. It emphasizes leaks of classified material, but catchall definitions of “insider threat” give agencies latitude to pursue and penalize a range of other conduct.

    Government documents reviewed by McClatchy illustrate how some agencies are using that latitude to pursue unauthorized disclosures of any information, not just classified material. They also show how millions of federal employees and contractors must watch for “high-risk persons or behaviors” among co-workers and could face penalties, including criminal charges, for failing to report them. Leaks to the media are equated with espionage.
  • Xenocles||

    This is fairly old. My (Navy) information assurance training last year offered "opposes US foreign policy" as a danger sign for potential espionage.

  • Fatty Bolger||

    I'm curious, were you threatened with criminal charges for failing to report it?

    Anyway, one of the documents they reference is a year old. Obviously this isn't something that just started today.

  • Xenocles||

    Failing to report what? Myself? No, the training wasn't that explicit, it just said that they were people to watch more closely. As if a spy would draw attention to himself with iconoclastic office conversation.

  • bmp1701||

    Can you direct me to the nuclear wessels?

  • Fatty Bolger||

    See, that doesn't sound like what the article is talking about at all:

    Government documents reviewed by McClatchy illustrate how some agencies are using that latitude to pursue unauthorized disclosures of any information, not just classified material. They also show how millions of federal employees and contractors must watch for “high-risk persons or behaviors” among co-workers and could face penalties, including criminal charges, for failing to report them. Leaks to the media are equated with espionage.
  • Xenocles||

    That is new, thanks for setting me straight.

  • PapayaSF||

    Anyone want to bet that "insider threat" and "high-risk behavior" is interpreted to mean "Tea Party/Republican/libertarian sympathies"? And that being, say, a Marxist or a Muslim is not considered any sort of threat?

  • sloopyinca||

    I'd rather wager my life savings on Red 11 the next time I walk by a roulette table.

  • Jon Lester||

    So if I advocate for a more respectful and fair-minded policy towards Russia, and against intervention in Syria and the Caucasus, I'm a potential espionage risk?

  • ||

    "Leaks to the media are equated with espionage."

    I think that says all that needs to be said about this government.

  • Fluffy||

    I don't care if he stays in Cuba. Or goes to Iran.

    I care about his information, not his destination.

    When the Constitution goes into exile, it sometimes has to hide in some strange places.

  • Killazontherun||

    Pelosi gets booed:

    "I feel sad that this had to come down to this because I know some of you attribute heroic status to that action, but again, you don't have the responsibility for the security of the U.S.," she added. "Those of us who do have to strike a different balance."

    "The fact is that you should reject any notion that President Obama's actions have anything to do with what President Bush was doing or was done," Pelosi said, adding that there was no Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) court under the Bush administration.

    It's only a false dichotomy when the other side does it. That they are using the secret FISA court to stake a claim that they respect civil liberties leaves me almost speechless.

    But don't get your hopes up for the Netroot lefties who booed her:

    "the real crime is outsourcing our national security."

    "I'm with you, babe, all the way," Pelosi said, responding to a comment shouted out from a person in the crowd that criticized the government's outsourcing of defense work. "The real problem is outsourcing our national security. I am so with you on that."

    She is still talking about Snowden and the process that put those documents in his hands you fucking morons with your knee jerk hatred for everything private sector.

  • Fatty Bolger||

    adding that there was no Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) court under the Bush administration.

    WTF? The FISA court was founded in the 70's.

    "Outsourcing our national security." What is that supposed to mean? Because Snowden was a contractor? That's the real problem here?

  • PapayaSF||

    Of course. Progs never miss a chance to diss any sort of privatization or outsourcing. Everything will work fine once everyone works for the government and belongs to a union, don't you know.

  • Killazontherun||

    This part got chopped off in the last quote --

    But shortly after Pelosi was booed over her comments on Snowden, she received applause from the crowd by declaring that "the real crime is outsourcing our national security."

  • np||

    "Those of us who do have to strike a different balance."

    I really hate this idea of "balancing". There's no need to sacrifice freedom, rights, privacy for the sake of security. Warrants don't solve the issue because they are just rubber stamped, neither do interpreting weasel words like "(un)reasonable". The way to do it is by using solid first-principles, namely having a (negative) rights-based, property bounded system. This implies also removing sovereign immunity.

    A real criminal has lost his rights until justice is served i.e. makes restitution. Therefore, the actions taken against a target is justified *IF* that target turns out to be criminal. BUT if not, then you now in turn have committed an offense yourself.

    So go ahead and take rights-violating actions... or heck, go ahead and shoot first. BUT you better be damn sure you have the right guy, for given the universal first-principles of property and self-ownership, no one, not even the state would be immune from weregild

    If this system were used, I suspect the entire intelligence infrastructure would transition to human intelligence, such as bribing people for information, getting informants to gains a suspect's trust in various organizations, etc. Basically gaining info via psyops, social means.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    "Those of us who do have to strike a different balance."

    The only thing that needs to be balanced better are the chemicals in Pelosi's brain, since they clearly aren't working like a normal human's should. On what planet is it appropriate for a US representative to on the one hand defend the concealment of an enormous, Executive-led program to spy on millions of Americans -- and on the other encourage nonsensical conspiracy theorizing about the "outsourcing" of national defense (whatever that means)?

  • ||

    "Pelosi said, adding that there was no Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) court under the Bush administration."

    Obama operates a secret court identical to the Star Chamber, where Bush didnt. Is she changing sides or does she think that is a good thing?

  • ||

    Oh, never mind that FISA has been around for decades.

  • Sevo||

    Pelosi's a porta-potty with sound; ignore it.

  • Fluffy||

    Candy Crowley and John King are just BESIDES THEMSELVES that Hong Kong let Snowden go.

    Fuck you, Quislings.

  • PapayaSF||

    In a just world, that fool Crowley would have been hounded out of her profession for jumping into the debate to defend Obama with a lie.

  • The Late P Brooks||

    The ugly fact that Pelosi does not get booed every time she appears in public means the Republic is circling the drain.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    It is interesting that the entirety of the established parties in Washington, from "liberal" Democrats to "conservative" Republicans, are marching in complete lockstep on this issue. The mask drops as it is once more clear that when it comes right down to it, politicians on both "sides" are more comfortable with each other than with the American people at large. Most of the "conflict" is kabuki theater for the masses to satisfy the national myths about democracy, in much the same way that ancient kings would re-enact scenes from their religions traditions to establish their own legitimacy.

    I suspect that most R pols would feel far more at home in the party which openly advocates for larger government and would join it if they thought they could win elections in their home states.

  • sloopyinca||

    I hope he gets away and releases everything he has. I'm sure he's got information that says we're spying on the citizens of most of our allies. Once the Limeys find out the extent we've been spying on them directly as individuals, they'll turn on Obama. Once the Germans find out, they'll go batshit. Once the Chinese find out, we can expect some sharp tariff increases on American goods. Those three things will shitcan our standing on the foreign stage and destroy our fragile economy. And I'm fine with all of that if it means we can finally start to dismantle the security state we're rapidly becoming.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    I hope he gets away and releases everything he has.

    I hope he doesn't. Both Assange and Manning took this tack, which a) endangered the lives of many of our local associates in Afghanistan and Iraq, and b) detracts from what Americans need to know by introducing a whole bunch of noise.

    The government classifies a whole raft of stupid stuff that no one cares about, as well as some things that do need to be kept secret. I'd much rather Snowden keep himself fixated on the classified information which is in fact inimical to the American public's interest rather than going off into a tangent and posting the trivial TMZ-style nothingburgers that Assange and Manning released.

  • sloopyinca||

    I doubt he's got shit on what we're doing to kill rock farmers and goat herders living in earthen huts in Afghanistan in the name of national defense. But even if he does, I'm fine with it. Anyone not refusing orders to go over there and kill people who are in no way a threat to American safety and security deserve to be outed.

    Same goes for our "resources" in Pakistan, Yemen, Libya, Egypt, Jordan, (probably) Syria and any other place we're sneaking around and blowing people up.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    That's a load of crap, sloopy. I was not in favor of OIF and the time to leave Afghanistan to its own devices was after "", but it's simply not the case that what we are doing in either country amounts to killing "rock farmers and goat herders living in earthen huts" for no reason.

    More importantly, the people burned by Manning's docudump were not US military personnel -- they were locals in Afghanistan and Iraq who helped us, oftentimes for the sake of their own people and the hope of a secular, rights-respecting government in their countries. I hope you're not going to go Michael Moore on us and claim that those people are traitors who deserve whatever comes to them -- opposition to the regimes formerly in power in Iraq and Afghanistan is just as valid and legitimate as our own opposition to the US government's actions against Snowden, and such heroism shouldn't be rewarded by leaking information of those people for their countrymen to harass them and their families.

  • sloopyinca||

    but it's simply not the case that what we are doing in either country amounts to killing "rock farmers and goat herders living in earthen huts" for no reason.

    Why, pray tell, are we killing them then? OUr military is for national defense. I have a hard time believing there is a national defense need to kill people who don't have the means to impose any real danger on us.

    I hope you're not going to go Michael Moore on us and claim that those people are traitors who deserve whatever comes to them -- opposition to the regimes formerly in power in Iraq and Afghanistan is just as valid and legitimate as our own opposition to the US government's actions against Snowden, and such heroism shouldn't be rewarded by leaking information of those people for their countrymen to harass them and their families

    If those people want a free nation, they're free to fight for it. But we're complicating the efforts by being there, picking sides and changing our loyalties whenever a stiff breeze of public opinion there shifts direction.

    I'm all for those people becoming more secular. Hell, I'd donate money to the cause. But what I can't abie is our government using the military to meddle in affairs that are none of our fucking business. It's not worth the American or Pakistani, Yemeni, Afghan, Iraqi or any other lives, including many innocent children that have been terminated in the name of American national security.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    I have a hard time believing there is a national defense need to kill people who don't have the means to impose any real danger on us.

    It is indirectly related to national defense; we are doing so on behalf of a client regime as part of a misguided attempt to stabilize the region. The government's thesis is that stability, prosperity, and democracy will stop Islamic terrorism, which it sees as stemming from economic factors. I think this is a highly flawed and suspect approach to national security, but it's not a sadistic rounding up of random, innocent Afghans and Pakistani goat farmers for its own sake.

    what I can't abie is our government using the military to meddle in affairs that are none of our fucking business.

    Same here; we should leave pronto. I don't see how releasing specific information about locals who helped us in the region helps in that regard or does anything good for the cause of transparency. Knowing that Abdullah in Kabul approached US forces in Bagram with a tip about Taliban activity in Helmand Province is useless to me; it will get Abdullah in a lot of trouble with the Taliban if that information is made widely available. I don't appreciate that Manning set back the cause of transparency with his narcissistic stunt, and so far Snowden is head and shoulders above him in terms of information released.

  • sloopyinca||

    It is indirectly related to national defense; we are doing so on behalf of a client regime as part of a misguided attempt to stabilize the region.

    Sorry, but that kind of interventionist claptrap has been used since WWII ended, and it's resulted in a shit-ton of American lives lost, foreign lives lost and a diminished stature for us around the world.

    Fuck client regimes. And fuck our government for doing their bidding with American blood.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    Babysitting client regimes isn't my idea of a good time, either. Since the end of the Cold War, there's been no good reason to maintain them.

    That said, it's more a problem for us than for the people living in our client regimes; S Korea and Europe are much better off for our military interventions than they would have otherwise been.

  • PapayaSF||

    I am (mostly) with T. I. Trouser and not sloopy here, and I worry that Snowden is moving toward Assange/Manning territory, and will do more harm than good. He know doubt has much more he hasn't released, and what if the Russians or Cubans or Venezuelans get their hands on it? It could easily end up hurting US interests for no benefit, except to the world's bad guys.

  • sloopyinca||

    Ever stop to think that after the drone campaign, all of the foreign entanglements, arming AQ in Syria and Libya and now running an intricate and secret spying apparatus on the entire American populus, that our government should be included in that list of "the world's bad guys"?

  • PapayaSF||

    Well, "bad guys" is relative. The US, while not perfect, is, on balance, the good guys.

  • sloopyinca||

    Ever stop to think that after the drone campaign, all of the foreign entanglements, arming AQ in Syria and Libya and now running an intricate and secret spying apparatus on the entire American populus, that our government should be included in that list of "the world's bad guys"?

    Well if he has a shitload of dirt that makes our government look like petty, neurotic tyrants then so much the better.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    I don't really care if something comes out that makes our government look bad, especially if it really is something bad.

    I do care when misleading info or misinformation dumped (as was the case with a selectively edited video released by Assange), and when information with no valid public use which can harm others is dumped (information on people working with us abroad, for instance).

    So far, Snowden has only released the former type of information... and I hope that he keeps it that way.

  • sloopyinca||

    I do care when misleading info or misinformation dumped (as was the case with a selectively edited video released by Assange), and when information with no valid public use which can harm others is dumped (information on people working with us abroad, for instance).

    That's a lot of faith in our government you have there. Shouldn't we have a transparent and open government anyway? Something about "Of, by and for the people" comes to mind.

    So far, Snowden has only released the former type of information... and I hope that he keeps it that way.

    No reason to think he won't either. In fact, the only ones lying like crazy to cover their tracks has been the government. And they have been shown to have lied in every claim Snowden made and they denied, having been forced to admit that he is correct in every case when he released corroborating evidence.

    Your distrust in him based solely on his potential destination doesn't make sense in light of the fact that he's been honest and has corroborated every claim he's made so far...and also in light of the fact that every single thing he's exposed has been of vital importance to the American people and the rest of the world who values individual freedom and privacy.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    I don't have any distrust in Snowden, actually -- precisely because he has done the opposite of what you advocate and has handled the information he has obtained with discretion instead of datadumping or misleadingly editing it a la Assange and Manning.

  • sloopyinca||

    He's done the opposite of what I advocate? How do you figure that? I want our government secrets hat go against the founding principles exposed in all their splendor. If part of that exposes the details of our expansionist, interventionist foreign policy, that I say good. I'm sorry, but I fail to see how keeping some of the details of our disgusting foreign entanglements private can be a good thing.

    Looks like that's exactly what Snowden is doing, by the way.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    Snowden worked with Greenwald and the Guardian to select which portions of what he obtained would be published. They didn't datadump.

    Question, sloopy: suppose someone decided to leak a government database with the names and SSNs of private citizens -- ethical, or no? Transparency, or no? Stop looking at this ideologically and tell me that there aren't some things that a legitimate government wouldn't have to keep secret. I am not talking about keeping *policy* secret; I'm talking about keeping the information of people attached to our programmes and specific operational details secret. There needs to be some editorial discretion in what to release (or at least in editing that information to do the least possible harm to private citizens), or you end up badly damaging the lives of others for the sake of an ideological crusade taken too far.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    Snowden worked with Greenwald and the Guardian to select which portions of what he obtained would be published. They didn't datadump.

    Question, sloopy: suppose someone decided to leak a government database with the names and SSNs of private citizens -- ethical, or no? Transparency, or no? Stop looking at this ideologically and tell me that there aren't some things that a legitimate government wouldn't have to keep secret. I am not talking about keeping *policy* secret; I'm talking about keeping the information of people attached to our programmes and specific operational details secret. There needs to be some editorial discretion in what to release (or at least in editing that information to do the least possible harm to private citizens), or you end up badly damaging the lives of others for the sake of an ideological crusade taken too far.

  • ΘJΘʃ de águila||

    Let's just dismantle the whole fucking trillion-dollar total-surveillance apparatus. Let tax slaves keep more of their money and have no information to worry about getting lost. Fuck.

  • Sam Grove||

    The government's thesis sales pitch is that stability, prosperity, and democracy will stop Islamic terrorism, which it sees as stemming from economic factors.

    Fixed.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    I don't see strong evidence that they are acting in a way inconsistent with their stated thesis. Their stated thesis is unfactual and their aims unrealistic, but not duplicitous -- unless you have a better explanation that doesn't involve over-the-top, nonsensical characterization of rational actors or conspiracy theorizing?

  • sloopyinca||

    Yes, their aims aren't duplicitous. But for some reason, we're arming Al Qaeda in Syria and we armed them in Libya, all the while shooting them in Afghanistan.

    No duplicity there.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    What do you think is going on, sloop? I think that's easily explained by naivette and an assumption that Islamists in power will moderate (a mistaken assumption, IMO).

    Do you really think that people like McCain are rubbing their palms in glee over funding their terrorist buddies and that they're secretly in cahoots with Al-Qaeda, or that (somehow) they are profiting from an alliance with Al-Qaeda? Those are, after all, the prevailing alternative theories of their behavior on the right and left, respectively. I know you and the rest of this board are smarter than that.

  • PapayaSF||

    I don't believe the administration is literally insane, or that Obama is a Secret Muslim. The only two explanations that make sense are ideological blindness ("the Islamists will moderate once in power") or geopolitical gamesmanship. Iran is going all-out for Assad, and anything that drains Iran is OK with the administration and with me. Maybe they think having Sunni jihadis fighting in Syria is better than having them fighting in Iraq or Afghanistan. I doubt that they are cold-blooded enough to see a region-wide Sunni-Shiite war as a good thing, but I am actually OK with it on some levels.

    But of course, the way Obama is doing all this looks supremely clumsy, and I doubt if that is intentional misdirection.

  • sarcasmic||

    Security states are never dismantled. Not without the entire government falling apart.

    The security state will continue to grow, along with the regulatory stranglehold on the economy. At some point in the next twenty or thirty years the regulatory stranglehold will reach a point where the economy will die completely, and only then will the government fall apart.

    Unfortunately what will replace it will be a socialist state that enshrines things like a basic living standard and free healthcare as basic rights, and the American experiment in liberty will be officially dead.

    Happy Sunday!

  • sloopyinca||

    America will split into several mini-states before that happens. There are just too many regions of the country that don't want all that "free" shit that comes with overly burdensome taxation, regulation, bureaucracy and other big government bullshit.

    The ecomony shitting the bed part is spot-on though.

  • Xenocles||

    My wife and I were discussing how the fault lines might run in a partitioning, and the fates of the resulting states. Basically we figure Cascadia would be best off - relatively sparse population, good enough agriculture and energy, and nuclear weapons (depending on how quickly the feds reacted to the partition, Cascadia might be able to seize the arsenal in Bangor, WA). I'm not sure a northeast bloc could feed itself even if it extended as far west as Minnesota and as far south as northern Virginia. NYC, Boston, and DC are too densely populated. Texas would probably come out all right, and the southeast would be on good enough terms with them to make up for any problems they might have (the SE also has the potential for a nuclear arsenal). Not sure how the midwest and mountain states would split but I think they'd be okay - perhaps could even excel in the short term with the mineral resources they have.

  • ||

    Cascadia FTW. Let's throw BC in there too. I am not sure about Northern CA, though.

  • Ted S.||

    Are you talking about all of BC, or BC splitting off from Vancouver?

  • ||

    I think letting all of BC in is reasonable. There ain't much in between the Cascades and the Rockies, besides some good fruit growing regions in the south, and forests/mines in the north. You are getting a good resources to population density ratio.

  • Xenocles||

    I agree with this. Though I couldn't possibly ever cheer for the Canucks.

  • sloopyinca||

    What would happen to professional sports leagues if this breakup happened? That's important, you know.

  • Xenocles||

    The cartels as we know them would almost certainly fall, since there would be too many international crossings to deal with. We might see the popular sports in each region develop local major leagues with the possibility of some crossings like we see now in NBA/NHL/MLB. A lot would depend on the relations between the resulting states. I could see a lot of animosity between some regions.

  • sloopyinca||

    I would support a breakup of the nation if it resulted in the folding of the Mighty Ducks and the LA Kings, even if there was much bloodshed.

  • sloopyinca||

    If Cascadia includes the central valley of California and partitions the coastal area from SF down to LA, they'd have some strong support and the Ag base necessary to be a prosperous nation. Not to mention they'd control the water supply into the entire southwestern US and eastern rockies.

    Central valley Californians are begging to split off from the coastal retards here. And they have all the dirt, cattle, water and oil necessary to make a go of it alone if need be. And there's no way in hell they'd end joining up with the rest of the state if someone even moderately conservative came calling.

  • RBS||

    I'm all for the SE going it alone. Minus NC of course.

  • ||

    "I'm all for the SE going it alone. Minus NC of course."

    We would be just fine for the most part. The poison pill is the geographically small areas with high concentrations of people currently surviving off of welfare. Without that largesse those areas are ungovernable and the streets will run with blood.

    Even after the initial convulsions they would be unable to feed themselves or keep themselves in basic necessities. It is unlikely that the surrounding populations would be willing to support or absorb them.

    New Orleans is the first that comes to mind, but nearly every city in the south has this problem. Hell, the nearest town to me is less than 5k people and I bet 80% live on government checks.

  • The Immaculate Trouser||

    Mississippi would be a problem. Whole state is essentially a welfare camp, with the added bonus of terrible Old South economics and government administration.

  • ||

    Upon further thought, the expanding surveillance state, the inevitable choking of the economy, the increasingly heavy heel of the government boot...this will take some time and be very painful. It is impossible to say what the demographics and economic conditions will be like when that destructive process has run it's course. We could easily decend into chaos and mayhem for a long time before any area could get back on it's feet.

  • Xenocles||

    The PNW would be my likely destination in the event of partition, and I'd be down with inland CA coming along. Perhaps even as far south and west as Ventura, from what little I've seen (skirting around other places, of course). The central Washington area and Columbia valley would probably be able to feed the whole country, but some extra biodiversity without a lot of extra urban population couldn't hurt.

  • VG Zaytsev||

    Hey don't forget OC, IE and San Diego.

    Really, the only fucked up parts of SoCal are most of LA county and parts of coastal Santa Barbara.

  • sloopyinca||

    I'm living in the IE now, and I think it's still fairly liberal in it's social engineering and big government mindset. For instance, I just started going through a new property acquisition for my new employer. I've had to get three permits so far, and I'm still not halfway to getting permission to use the property. It's a lot that has been unoccupied (except by the homeless, tweekers and copper thieves) for over 3 years and the tax revenue we'll generate over the next year exceeds $1M for San Bernardino County. And they're still breaking my fucking balls over what we're gonna have to do to "comply" with their "regulations".

  • VG Zaytsev||

    A lot of that bullshit is due to state mandates on local government and ultimately pushed by federal policies. It's not coming from the local population.

  • sloopyinca||

    I'm not so sure, man. I had o get a special permit from San Bernardino County just because the location is near the National Orange Show, which the county owns. And I have to get a special county permit for a Hazmat exemption based on the address not falling within a specified County Industrial Zone.

    I've not even started down the road of getting the state permits from OSHA, CARB, the state EPA and every other agency with their hand out for a payoff to get their blessing to conduct private business on private property. The shit I've dealt with has been 100% city and county. If the local population didn't support it, it would go away pretty quickly. CA state government allows regions to operate differently when it comes to this bullshit. I know because I had dealt with different divisions of CARB, EPA and OSHA in the past and their regulations were completely different and arbitrary based on geography.

  • Xenocles||

    Wow, I just looked at a map of CA by county, and I had not fully appreciated just how far south those counties are or how large some of them are. I thought I was pretty far north here in Monterey, but nope.

  • Xenocles||

    And San Francisco gets its own county? Or is it an independent city?

  • sloopyinca||

    And San Francisco gets its own county? Or is it an independent city?

    In a perfect world, San Francisco would get the Lex Luthor treatment.

  • Xenocles||

    The PNW would be my likely destination in the event of partition, and I'd be down with inland CA coming along. Perhaps even as far south and west as Ventura, from what little I've seen (skirting around other places, of course). The central Washington area and Columbia valley would probably be able to feed the whole country, but some extra biodiversity without a lot of extra urban population couldn't hurt.

  • PapayaSF||

    The problem with the Central Valley of CA is that in recent years much of it has turned into something a lot like rural Mexico. Not many of those immigrants are sympathetic to libertarian principles.

  • sloopyinca||

    Not many of those immigrants are sympathetic to libertarian principles.

    And not many of those immigrants would stick around the moment the welfare tap got cut off. They'd move to LA or SF where they'll keep it rolling along.

  • Xenocles||

    It's a big assumption that the resulting state would be libertarian in nature. I think it would in many respects be good enough, but still somewhat welfarish.

  • VG Zaytsev||

    Nah, the endpoint is the death of the dollar as world reserve currency.

    That is what enables the growth of the American empire, domestically and abroad.

  • VG Zaytsev||

    I hope he gets away and releases everything he has.

    I hope he has info on domestic spying info being used to blackmail politicians and individuals in the media.

  • sloopyinca||

    That would just be delicious. I really hope there's some PRISM-like program devoted solely to collecting internet activities, phone records and personal movements via GPS strictly for media members, because I want to see Mika Brzezinski do a Budd Dwyer imitation on national TV, and I think this might actually push her to do it.

  • Killazontherun||

    Russel Brand got her to squeal like a horny vixen, so yes, anything of the sort would be entertaining.

  • VG Zaytsev||

    It explains the shameless sycophancy of the entire press corps and the way that enough republicans cave to support O's statist initiatives.

    Without some exogenous factor, personal amibition and or animus would cause some percentage of the press to break from the established narrative. The same factors and just plain partisan venality should be making the republicans uniformly opposed O and the dems.

  • ||

    You can bet there is. If the admin considers leaking to the press on par with espionage then you can bet they regard the idiotic, sycophantic press as much an enemy as they do the american people.

    It is just stunning to me that the press is not screaming to the heavens about the unconstitutional, tyrannical nature of this government.

  • VG Zaytsev||

    Plata O Plomo

  • ||

    If only that were it. If only.

    The enthusiasm that I see them display in government knob gobbling cannot be explained by fear.

    They are going pedal to the metal down the progressive road, plain and simple. They are just blind to where that road goes or they really do think it will be different this time.

  • sloopyinca||

    They're on a Road To Nowhere.

  • VG Zaytsev||

    Every fucking single one of them?

    And there not even sticking up for 'journalistic independence' when their own kind are attacked.

    And then you have the weird shit happening to the few that do buck the trend, Rosen, Attkisson, Hastings.

  • sloopyinca||

    I just said basically the same thing upthread!

    JINX!

  • sloopyinca||

    Once he comes out of the closet, he'll have acquired the holy trinity of political untouchability. The Leftist Triforce, if you will.

  • Fatty Bolger||

    Keeping their powder dry for 2017.

  • sloopyinca||

    My same statement about the closet will apply to her. Is Huma gonna be as close an "advisor" as Reggie Love is now?

    Somebody in the Dem Party will come out of the closet out of political expediency soon and the press will completely ignore their criminality. Obama and Clinton both fit the profile of the type of person that would do it.

  • sloopyinca||

    The Yokeltarians at Reason won't. The Cosmotarians at Reason will.

    You know, if Virginia Postrel were still around, it wouldn't matter.

  • Xenocles||

    Needs more cocktail parties.

  • sloopyinca||

    Any SoCal-ers want to go to the Los Doyers-Gigantes game tomorrow night, by the way? Or meet up beforehand and have a few drinks? I just bought my tix.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Progressive Puritans: From e-cigs to sex classifieds, the once transgressive left wants to criminalize fun.
  • Port Authoritarians: Chris Christie’s Bridgegate scandal
  • The Menace of Secret Government: Obama’s proposed intelligence reforms don’t safeguard civil liberties

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement