Edward Snowden: 'The US government will say I aided our enemies' [video]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/video/2013/jul/08/edward-snowden-video-interview

by hermanywong • 13 years ago

211 38 13 years ago

guardian.co.uk

pvnick3• 13 years ago

Nice! This just made my day. I must have listened to part 1 dozens of times to try and extract every bit of information, and I admit I enjoy hearing his voice. Notice this is still from the June 6th interview; Snowden's proved to be so prescient, especially with regards to the response by the US government. Also, the planning on the Guardian's part is quite commendable.

doe88• 13 years ago

Of course you meant June

pvnick3• 13 years ago

You're right, thank you. Edited.

lordCarbonFiber• 13 years ago

Just a minor note, Snowden has been in no way prescient. Everyone that works with confidential information has to be briefed on export control and the associated consequences for security violations. I know he's pretty popular around here, but the fact of the matter is he would be facing most (if not all) of the charges just for leaving the country with top secret data even without adding any penalty for releasing some subset of said data to the public.

kyle_martin1• 13 years ago

So this interview was released today but it was recorded on the same day as the previous interview?

mpyne3• 13 years ago

So if someone predicts the actions of some other party, does that in itself make that other party's actions invalid?

I'll try, then: "The US government will conduct a census in 2020".

Or on a more humorous vein, the normal joke about the car driver who convinced the cop who pulled him over to call for backup, and later mentioned to the supervisor "I'll bet that asshole told you I was speeding, too".

grey-area3• 13 years ago

So if someone predicts the actions of some other party, does that in itself make that other party's actions invalid?

Where was that claim made in this video?

yebyen• 13 years ago

Upvote, that's a funny joke. I hadn't heard it.

As for your first sentence, I'm not really sure what you're saying. Should we disbelieve when the US government says Snowden aided the enemy, just because he predicted it? I had to really struggle to get that interpretation out of what you said.

mpyne3• 13 years ago

Should we disbelieve when the US government says Snowden aided the enemy, just because he predicted it? I had to really struggle to get that interpretation out of what you said.

To be more clear (as I had very little time when I was writing the original), the title of the article implies that Snowden is prophesying; that he is predicting some future event based on something that he, and those of us waiting on his every word, alone are able to foresee.

This is a fairly normal propaganda ploy to build up our heroes: We see that future! He saw it too! My hero, thank $DEITY he too can unmask the Man Behind the Curtain!

Instead I'm saying that what he really predicted is of the same degree of difficulty as predicting the sun will rise tomorrow (especially given that he knew before the government what he would be leaking). Even Miss Cleo's antics are more impressive than that.

Unfortunately I never did get to see the video in the time I had thanks to the 'third world' Internet that my branch of the government gets to work with, so it's possible Snowden himself was insightful and prescient. But the title wasn't, IMHO.

grey-area3• 13 years ago

It'll be interesting to see this Laura Poitras film when it comes out with a full set of interviews. According to this tweet by Greenwald [1] she has hundreds of hours of footage which she's no doubt in the process of editing. I hadn't seen this video before either by Poitras about Binney, done for the NYT, he gives a nice explanation of the way this sort of multi-domain surveillance is more intrusive than what came before. [2]

[1] https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/354275009826533377

[2] http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/23/opinion/the-national-secur...

jacquesm5• 13 years ago

I think you meant 'he'.

grey-area3• 13 years ago

I meant she, the tweet is about Poitras and as the film-maker she has the video, not Greenwald.

acqq2• 13 years ago

If you haven't seen the Binney video, note the date the video was published, then watch it. Try to identify the claims already public then that you first became aware of just by following the story about Snowden. I was surprised.

tptacek6• 13 years ago

The US government will say that Snowden's actions harmed the US, and because the harm pertains to national security, America's enemies will be part of the discussion.

What's missing from this point is intent. If the USG believed that Snowden had set out to aid America's enemies, he'd have been charged with treason.

acqq2• 13 years ago

If the USG believed that Snowden had set out to aid America's enemies, he'd have been charged with treason.

And the US government would try anything to get him, like grounding the planes of presidents of other countries on suspicion that he might be there. Er, wait, they actually did that!

Are you really sure that the treason charge won't happen once he's jailed? The treason would expose him to the death penalty, one more good legal ground to give him asylum.

Still whatever the charges against Snowden are, they are going to claim on the court that he aided the enemies, just like in Manning's case ("bin Laden himself wanted to read that, that automatically means Manning aided bin Laden.")

tptacek6• 13 years ago

The USG could tomorrow transform itself into a despotism dedicated to the proposition that all men should wear loincloths made of cheese curds. You can't falsify that argument either.

I'm not making a substantive argument about Snowden's charges, except to point out that the notion of "aiding America's enemies" has force only when coupled with intent. Treason isn't a strict liability crime.

at-fates-hands• 13 years ago

>>>And the US government would try anything to get him.

Trust me, if they wanted to go get him, they would. Right now it's still a very public story, and doing anything in haste would shed more bad light on the admin and vilify what Snowden is doing.

Once the story dies down is when you need to start paying attention.

Just in case you were wondering. . .

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Omar_case

"Abu Omar was abducted on February 17, 2003, in Milan by the CIA.[1] and transported to the Aviano Air Base, from which he was transferred to Egypt, where he was secluded, interrogated and allegedly tortured and abused"

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/15198047/ns/world_news-terrorism/t...

"Al-Masri, a former car salesman and a father of five, said he was abducted on Dec. 31, 2003, at the Serbia-Macedonia border while on vacation. He said he was taken to a hotel in the Macedonian capital of Skopje where he was imprisoned and tortured for 23 days before being flown to Kabul, Afghanistan."

jacquesm5• 13 years ago

There is a fair chance they're holding off on any charges that potentially carry the death penalty (which as far as I know still holds true for treason in the USA) as long as there is a chance of getting Snowden extradited.

No country in Europe for instance would extradite if a death penalty worthy charge was made beforehand.

tptacek6• 13 years ago

They've charged him with offenses sufficient to incarcerate him for life. If their plan was a bait and switch, they'd have charged him with a parking violation.

This thought also ignores the fact that the USG does not in fact wield the charge of treason casually. John Walker Lindh, for instance, wasn't charged with treason, despite being charged with deliberately planning and conspiring to murder American troops.

WestCoastJustin• 13 years ago

Around 3:50 mark -- Snowden talks about NSA PRISM access and US tech giants. This might have been the underpinning of the "direct access" quotes made by The Guardian and The Washington Post in the past.

Also, Glenn Greenwald is a great story teller. He releases documents, lets the public digest and understand them, and then he releases a second video, which builds on our existing understanding.

Sven7• 13 years ago

I think there are good odds we will see privacy related whistleblowing happening at US tech giants in the coming years.

Asparagirl• 13 years ago

"From your mouth to God's ears" as my grandmother would say.

pvnick3• 13 years ago

No, the underpinning is the slide [1] which explicitly states "collection directly from the servers"

[1] http://cdn-static.zdnet.com/i/r/story/70/00/016565/new-prism...

spoiledtechie• 13 years ago

What I believe is truly interesting is the plain fact that:

We have heard many companies, politicians and even directors of three letter orgs specifically say things that contrast this video. Direct back end access to corporations data without their knowledge.

I love the fact that we are hearing these things in parts. Because after the first video we heard plenty of things from those mentioned above, but then Snowden comes out in part 2 and says those things they have said in the past month, that are directly contradicting and therefore lying.

kurd_debuggr• 13 years ago

Part 2 people, the Guardian should get a Golden Globe for this highly organized (and entertaining) delivery of the news.

trendoid• 13 years ago

so this undermines the statement made by Larry or has he been kept in the dark ? "First, we have not joined any program that would give the U.S. government—or any other government—direct access to our servers. Indeed, the U.S. government does not have direct access or a “back door” to the information stored in our data centers. We had not heard of a program called PRISM until yesterday."

gdonelli• 13 years ago

Any idea why they delayed the release of this second video?

scrrr• 13 years ago

I think it's just good journalism. The story needs to stay popular for as long as possible. They are storing and reading all our private communication, for crying out loud.

jayfuerstenberg• 13 years ago

I love that this video was recorded in advance of the US government actually saying all the thing he predicted.

It deflates the whole argument that Snowden "aided the enemy" in a way that would not work if he responded to the accusation after the fact.

Edward Snowden: 'The US government will say I aided our enemies' [video]

Related Stories