Snowdon is a dummy

[...]
It is a scenario Merkel would like to avoid. But a showdown is not in her interests either -- and formal investigative proceedings would mark the next step toward escalation. In conflicts like this, there are often many losers, but seldom winners.
[...]
The official line at the Public Prosecutor's Office is that it remains unclear what will become of the allegations against the NSA. The office is treating the surveillance as two separate instances. One is the allegation that the NSA spied on the data of Germans millions of times. The other is the allegation that it eavesdropped on the chancellor's mobile phone. Thus far, the Prosecutor's Office has told parliament that there isn't yet enough evidence to pursue a formal investigation.
[...]
However, one person is giving serious consideration to doing just the opposite: Prosecutor Range himself. He already signaled to Merkel's last government that there was sufficient evidence for him to launch an investigation into the issue of the chancellor's mobile phone. It's an assessment he has since shared with the new leadership inside the Justice Ministry, despite some concerns within his own agency. "Who's going to spring into action like a tiger if they know they will wind up a bedside rug?" posits one source close to the proceedings.

The new government seems split on the issue. Justice Minister Maas is sympathetic to the idea of opening an investigation. Both Foreign Minister Steinmeier and Chancellor Merkel haven't taken positions yet. Under German law, the justice minister has the right to order the federal prosecutor to either open legal proceedings or to prevent the agency from doing so. But it's a discretionary power used by the justice minister only very rarely. In this case, it would likely prove highly controversial.

In addition, the chancellor and her two ministers are concerned about potential consequences if the federal public prosecutor does take action. Indeed, they don't see much practical use in Range doing so. One of Merkel's driving principles as a politician has always been to not announce things publicly when it isn't clear if she can deliver.
[...]
The German government faces a dilemma. Should an investigation be launched, it could trigger an ice age in German-American relations -- just at a time when the two countries are in the middle of a difficult withdrawal from Afghanistan and are negotiating over the trans-Atlantic free trade agreement.

Furthermore, German intelligence officials are concerned that an open conflict could result in the reduction in the amount of information the US is willing to share. ... ... ...

On the other hand, however, an investigation would send a clear signal that Germany isn't willing to simply accept everything the US does. Merkel isn't a big fan of such muscle flexing, but she has no illusions anymore regarding her relationship to Obama. It has had its ups and downs from the very beginning.
[...]

Edward Snowden will be answering questions submitted by the public on his official support site, freesnowden.is, this Thursday 23 January at 8pm GMT, 3pm EST. The support site is run by The Courage Foundation and is the only endorsed Snowden Defence Fund.

This is the first Snowden live chat since June 2013 and will last for an hour starting at 8pm GMT, 3pm EST. Questions can be submitted on twitter on the day of the event using the #AskSnowden hashtag. Edward Snowden’s responses will appear at http://www.freesnowden.is/asksnowden

Davos has kicked off with a controversial warning from BT chief executive Gavin Patterson that telecoms customers cannot expect total privacy.

"People recognise that they have to give up some of their privacy to be protected," he said at the World Economic Forum in Switzerland.
[...]
However, he added there would always be some intrusion from the state because of the need to protect the public from the threat of terrorism. "I don’t think it will ever be zero,” he said.

On the same panel, Yahoo chief executive Marissa Mayer said the reputation of internet firms such as hers was damaged by last year’s revelations of mass data collection and blanket surveillance by the US National Security Agency.

"We need to be able to rebuild trust with our users” she said. "There are concerns with what the NSA is looking at and what it’s being used for.”

She called for internet firms to be allowed to reveal what requests for information they had received from security agencies.

Interesting opinions ...

Quote:

Davos has kicked off with a controversial warning from BT chief executive Gavin Patterson that telecoms customers cannot expect total privacy.

"People recognise that they have to give up some of their privacy to be protected," he said at the World Economic Forum in Switzerland.
[...]
However, he added there would always be some intrusion from the state because of the need to protect the public from the threat of terrorism. "I don’t think it will ever be zero,” he said.

On the same panel, Yahoo chief executive Marissa Mayer said the reputation of internet firms such as hers was damaged by last year’s revelations of mass data collection and blanket surveillance by the US National Security Agency.

"We need to be able to rebuild trust with our users” she said. "There are concerns with what the NSA is looking at and what it’s being used for.”

She called for internet firms to be allowed to reveal what requests for information they had received from security agencies.

I would, however, put a 35 year sequestration on the release...so as not to alert people about surveillance who should not be alerted.

Actually, I suspect this is bait to try to entice Mr Snowden to come out and tell them exactly how he did it. Because they're still scratching their heads trying to figure it out.

The New Yorker published an interview with NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden last night in which he explains why recent claims by Rep. Mike Rogers that he is a Russian spy are “absurd.” Rep. Rogers, who made the allegations on Sunday, did not present any evidence to support his statements and even the FBI reportedly believes Snowden acted alone.

While it’s well-known that Rep. Rogers has a long history of making things up and telling the media, it's less known that his tactics are drawn straight from Richard Nixon’s playbook, when his administration tried to discredit Daniel Ellsberg after he leaked the Pentagon Papers to the New York Times in 1971.

Ellsberg is commonly looked at as the quintessential whistleblower today, but shortly after he leaked the top secret Vietnam War study, the Nixon administration made a concerted effort to paint him as a Soviet spy in the press, using anonymous quotes and non-existent ‘secret’ evidence. (Sound familiar?) More

I read Daniel Ellsberg's book, and felt he did the right thing by revealing the lies and coverups by the administration and head honchos in our government. They should never get a free pass when they lie to the world for the false accusations they made about being attacked in the Gulf of Tonkin.

According to leaked [sic!!!] copies of a forthcoming report by the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board (PCLOB), the government’s metadata collection program "lacks a viable legal foundation under Section 215, implicates constitutional concerns under the First and Fourth Amendments, raises serious threats to privacy and civil liberties as a policy matter, and has shown only limited value…As a result, the board recommends that the government end the program."

Benedict Arnold felt he did the right thing. Adolph Hitler felt he did the right thing.

Quote:

Benedict Arnold felt he did the right thing. Adolph Hitler felt he did the right thing.

So if Snowdon had found out that the US government was building secret death camps out in the mid west he should not then let the American people know about them as their existence had been declare a state secret?

Seems that the US is the one playing Hitler, a head of state not a private person, with your over the top analogy far more then Snowdon with their secret governmental spying and unconstitutional programs.

Next I am very surprise Frank that you with the view that the government is always right...

Where have I ever said that I view the government is always right?

Quote:

Where have I ever said that I view the government is always right?

Your position had been clear that an individual or small group have no moral rights to take actions against an out of control government such as Snowdon had done and many others throughout our history had done.