He knows the moment he slips from the public eye he's a dead man. He's just grasping onto life as long as he can before he gets drone'd.
Man, I know you're joking because you're not stupid, but I've seen SO MANY PEOPLE very seriously thinking that he's going to get hit by a drone strike. Oh yeah, you fuckin' morons, the US government is going to deliver an air-strike directly into the heart of Hong Kong, nobody will mind that at all because 'Murrica and we is world police. Fuckwits.
He knows the moment he slips from the public eye he's a dead man. He's just grasping onto life as long as he can before he gets drone'd.
Man, I know you're joking because you're not stupid, but I've seen SO MANY PEOPLE very seriously thinking that he's going to get hit by a drone strike. Oh yeah, you fuckin' morons, the US government is going to deliver an air-strike directly into the heart of Hong Kong, nobody will mind that at all because 'Murrica and we is world police. Fuckwits.
Indeed. If the US government actually does want to rub him out, they're not going to use a drone. It'll be some sort of professional assassin, whether it's an actual operative working for the CIA or some other government agency or a mercenary on their payroll. Personally, I think it's most likely to be a mercenary as that would probably lend to better plausible deniability, but I could be wrong here. Anyway, said assassin would probably try to use some discreet method of taking him out that most resembles death by accident or natural causes as I don't think "making an example" of Snowden is really beneficial, whereas quietly shutting him up probably would be.
If they (whoever they may be) wanted to get rid of Snowden, they would just do him like Jimmy Hoffa. If he just vanishes then they can plausibly deny doing anything to him. After all, it's not unreasonable to expect a fellow like that to go into deep hiding is it?
Killing him now would make him a martyr. If they were going to do anything right now it would have to involve getting him back in the country to stand trial. Mush better to wait until six months from now when he is largely forgotten by the public at large then make him "disappear".
I'm fully in support of the fellow. He did what he thought was right with the full knowledge of how much it was going to punch him in the nuts. You have to admire that kind of integrity. You can also pity it.
I'm fully in support of the fellow. He did what he thought was right with the full knowledge of how much it was going to punch him in the nuts. You have to admire that kind of integrity. You can also pity it.
Same here... I can't say for certain if I'd have the guts to do what he did in his circumstances, even though deep down inside I'd know it was the right thing to do.
Indeed. If the US government actually does want to rub him out, they're not going to use a drone. It'll be some sort of professional assassin, whether it's an actual operative working for the CIA or some other government agency or a mercenary on their payroll. Personally, I think it's most likely to be a mercenary as that would probably lend to better plausible deniability, but I could be wrong here. Anyway, said assassin would probably try to use some discreet method of taking him out that most resembles death by accident or natural causes as I don't think "making an example" of Snowden is really beneficial, whereas quietly shutting him up probably would be.
Indeed. If the US government actually does want to rub him out, they're not going to use a drone. It'll be some sort of professional assassin, whether it's an actual operative working for the CIA or some other government agency or a mercenary on their payroll. Personally, I think it's most likely to be a mercenary as that would probably lend to better plausible deniability, but I could be wrong here. Anyway, said assassin would probably try to use some discreet method of taking him out that most resembles death by accident or natural causes as I don't think "making an example" of Snowden is really beneficial, whereas quietly shutting him up probably would be.
Yep, possibly, although given Snowden's youth a heart attack would be kinda suspicious. They are extremely rare in people under 40. I know first-hand as the pulmonary embolism I had at age 31 was first misdiagnosed as a heart attack (the symptoms are similar enough at first that you can't tell the difference without further tests) and the cardiologist on call was like, "damn, that's unfortunate, I never heard of someone so young having a heart attack."
Its far to complicated to kill him, far easier however to discredit him. If they he dies regardless of how it happens then people will asume foul play on behalf of America. Yet it is much easier, at least at home (the US), to portray him in a negative light and call his reputation into question. Its not 007 here at the most he might have some people come round and tell him to watch himself, thats about it.
Its far to complicated to kill him, far easier however to discredit him. If they he dies regardless of how it happens then people will asume foul play on behalf of America. Yet it is much easier, at least at home (the US), to portray him in a negative light and call his reputation into question. Its not 007 here at the most he might have some people come round and tell him to watch himself, thats about it.
That's already what's kind of going on with the various smear campaigns against him.
Last I checked, American's are not being subjected to unreasonable search and seizure...
Wait, what? I think you and I have different definitions of unreasonable.
The courts likely have an entirely different definition than anyone here. Don't forget that in any legal statute, the words used often have special (usually more specific) definitions that differ from colloquial use.
And what is considered "reasonable" has been determined primarily through case law.
They did get warrants, which makes them legally reasonable -- that being said, the parameters for what warrants one of these warrants are VERY unclear. My major objection to the NSA's surveillance is that so little is clear. "Terrorism" can take so many forms, and be classified in such odd and inconsistent ways (up until the late '60s, the Black Panthers were classified by the FBI as a terrorism group, but the Klan wasn't) that I can't be certain that I haven't already been classified a terrorist just because of the subjects of e-mails.
Also, as someone whose phone may or may not have been directly used in several drug deals, but who himself was not (I was young and dumb, okay...), it kind of directly affects me.
He knows the moment he slips from the public eye he's a dead man. He's just grasping onto life as long as he can before he gets drone'd.
Man, I know you're joking because you're not stupid, but I've seen SO MANY PEOPLE very seriously thinking that he's going to get hit by a drone strike. Oh yeah, you fuckin' morons, the US government is going to deliver an air-strike directly into the heart of Hong Kong, nobody will mind that at all because 'Murrica and we is world police. Fuckwits.
Yeah, those people are pretty dumb. If the US government wants to kill this guy, they'll reach back into their Cold War playbook to do it.
Which may mean they'll need to wait for him to grow a beard so they can put itching powder into it.
My default assumption is that US intelligence agencies are both more malevolent than I wish they were, and more incompetent than I can imagine.
So the US is seeking extradition of Snowden from Hong Kong, but it looks more and more like the Chinese aren't too keen on cooperating. Probably has to do with the info he leaked that the US hacked Chinese computer networks, including telephone companies, universities, and trans-oceanic telco companies.
So the US is seeking extradition of Snowden from Hong Kong, but it looks more and more like the Chinese aren't too keen on cooperating. Probably has to do with the info he leaked that the US hacked Chinese computer networks, including telephone companies, universities, and trans-oceanic telco companies.
So that's why he leaked those facts, despite so many people saying "he'd gone to far beyond public interest". Instead he was looking out for his own not-getting-renditioned-and-waterboardeded interest. Genius.
Comments
Killing him now would make him a martyr. If they were going to do anything right now it would have to involve getting him back in the country to stand trial. Mush better to wait until six months from now when he is largely forgotten by the public at large then make him "disappear".
I'm fully in support of the fellow. He did what he thought was right with the full knowledge of how much it was going to punch him in the nuts. You have to admire that kind of integrity. You can also pity it.
And what is considered "reasonable" has been determined primarily through case law.
Also, as someone whose phone may or may not have been directly used in several drug deals, but who himself was not (I was young and dumb, okay...), it kind of directly affects me.
Which may mean they'll need to wait for him to grow a beard so they can put itching powder into it.
My default assumption is that US intelligence agencies are both more malevolent than I wish they were, and more incompetent than I can imagine.