BitCoins for Edward Snowden.

[marcus_of_augustus]

http://btc.to/cja

Edward Snowden BTC address

Ed? ... is that you?

[runam0k]

Older people think back to how the West used to view this kind of behaviour in the former communist Eastern bloc and Nazi Germany with absolute abhorrence. The movie "The lives of others" is relevant.

Great movie(!), but perhaps a bit OTT suggesting we have it as bad as people did in East Germany.

[marcus_of_augustus]

Older people think back to how the West used to view this kind of behaviour in the former communist Eastern bloc and Nazi Germany with absolute abhorrence. The movie "The lives of others" is relevant.

Great movie(!), but perhaps a bit OTT suggesting we have it as bad as people did in East Germany.

You have no idea how bad it is since it is all tied up in sealed orders, secret courts and closed-door briefings ... that's just the way they like it.

The real widespread damage only begins when the populace realises the grey-hand of the State envelopes their every thought and move ... the widespread chilling effect on the psyche of the society is deeply damaging and long-lasting. There are studies about it, people from the East were basically suffering post-traumatic stress after living in a surveillance society.


Edit: Steve Wozniak says ....

Asked about US surveillance programmes in an earlier interview with a Spanish technology news site, FayerWayer, Wozniak said: "All these things about the constitution, that made us so good as people – they are kind of nothing.

"They are all dissolved with the Patriot Act. There are all these laws that just say 'we can secretly call anything terrorism and do anything we want, without the rights of courts to get in and say you are doing wrong things'. There's not even a free open court any more. Read the constitution. I don't know how this stuff happened. It's so clear what the constitution says."

He said he had been brought up to believe that "communist Russia was so bad because they followed their people, they snooped on them, they arrested them, they put them in secret prisons, they disappeared them – these kinds of things were part of Russia. We are getting more and more like that."

The latest revelations about the NSA, show that judges have approved orders allowing it to make use of information "inadvertently" collected from domestic US communications without a warrant, according to top secret documents submitted to the court that oversees surveillance by US intelligence agencies.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/21/wozniak-guilty-nsa-surveillance-snowden ... constitutional crimes, all the way to the top I'd say on an honest appraisal, judges, generals, politicians, bureaucrats ... but who's going to prosecute them?

[TomUnderSea]

Just wondering if it is possible to remotely hack a 2013 Mercedes C250 instrument system and set throttle to full? Or would a separate remote control device need planting on the vehicle to effect such an outcome?

Sorry.  Lost the quote codes...

http://autos.yahoo.com/mercedes-benz/c-class/2013/c250-coupe/features.html

It looks like there is electrical assistance for steering, throttle, and brake controls.  Whether these can override operator inputs to the point of causing a lethal accident is an open question.

A hack versus an external device is also an open question.  There certainly is a capability to remotely operate subsystems. 

I'm thinking I will be sticking with older model, manual vehicles.

[BTCLuke]

Older people think back to how the West used to view this kind of behaviour in the former communist Eastern bloc and Nazi Germany with absolute abhorrence. The movie "The lives of others" is relevant.

Great movie(!), but perhaps a bit OTT suggesting we have it as bad as people did in East Germany.

The thing is we just can't know that.

The nature of our predicament today is that they're better at controlling our BELIEFS. So perhaps it is better in that they aren't forcing us to do so much against our beliefs, but they could be forcing us to do 10x as much stuff against what we'd believe without their mindgames.

I guess we'll know when it becomes publicly accepted to commit mass Genocide again, like the last time this experiment was run. Personally, I'm not waiting around.

[Its About Sharing]

Just wondering if it is possible to remotely hack a 2013 Mercedes C250 instrument system and set throttle to full? Or would a separate remote control device need planting on the vehicle to effect such an outcome?

Sorry.  Lost the quote codes...

http://autos.yahoo.com/mercedes-benz/c-class/2013/c250-coupe/features.html

It looks like there is electrical assistance for steering, throttle, and brake controls.  Whether these can override operator inputs to the point of causing a lethal accident is an open question.

A hack versus an external device is also an open question.  There certainly is a capability to remotely operate subsystems. 

I'm thinking I will be sticking with older model, manual vehicles.

Yes, it appears so... (piece of article)

From the International Business Times: http://www.ibtimes.com/michael-hastings-car-hacking-theory-latest-attempt-explain-suspicious-death-richard-clarke-says

Hastings’ car may have been hacked. Richard Clarke, the former chief counter-terrorism adviser on the National Security Council, believes that Hasting’s death may have been the result of a cyberattack on his car.

...

In an interview with the Huffington Post, Clarke said that given current knowledge about hacking cars, the fatal, single car crash involving Hastings’ 2013 Mercedes C250 coupe, was “consistent with a car cyberattack.”

Clarke said that not only does the technology to hack cars exist, but “there is reason to believe that intelligence agencies for major powers,” like the United States, are already equipped to stage such an attack.

"What has been revealed as a result of some research at universities is that it's relatively easy to hack your way into the control system of a car, and to do such things as cause acceleration when the driver doesn't want acceleration, to throw on the brakes when the driver doesn't want the brakes on, to launch an air bag," Clarke said. "You can do some really highly destructive things now, through hacking a car, and it's not that hard."

"So if there were a cyberattack on the car -- and I'm not saying there was, I think whoever did it would probably get away with it,” he added.

Clarke’s comments likely referenced a 2011 study completed by computer scientists from the University of California, San Diego and the University of Washington, which found that it was possible for hackers to remotely gain access to a person’s vehicle, and potentially assume control of some the basic functions. In an article on the study, The New York Times reported that embedded cellular connections used in vehicles manufactured by GM, Toyota, Lexus, Ford, BMW and Mercedes Benz were all capable of being remotely undermined by hackers.

“These cellular channels offer many advantages for attackers,” the report said. “They can be accessed over arbitrary distance (due to the wide coverage of cellular data infrastructure) in a largely anonymous fashion, typically have relatively high bandwidth, are two-way channels (supporting interactive control and data exfiltration) and are individually addressable.”

...

[QuestionAuthority]

They militarised the Internet quite few years back (after the 3 planes-4 buildings attack) ... militarisation of 'social' media is a more recent phenomena, but more disturbing imho.

I don't know what kind of person thinks it is normal for the military to be routinely twisting the minds and discussions of free association in a civil, democratic society ... they are like a sickness that has infected the halls of power. Dick "We need to go over to the dark side" Cheney would be proud, his 5th heart will be beating out of its chest.

Older people think back to how the West used to view this kind of behaviour in the former communist Eastern bloc and Nazi Germany with absolute abhorrence. The movie "The lives of others" is relevant.

[Perseus353]

They militarised the Internet quite few years back (after the 3 planes-4 buildings attack) ... militarisation of 'social' media is a more recent phenomena, but more disturbing imho.

What the hell do you mean by "they militarized the internet" -- the "internet" STARTED as as a military project. ARPANET was a US Defense department project of a network of trusted US universities and national research labs. It was Senator Albert Gore Jr. who managed to pass the 'High Performance Computing Act' (the "Gore Bill) in 1991 (and signed into law by Bush Senior), which opened up this technology to private actors. Only then did the internet take off. It was a state-made invention that later became an economic and social success in private hands. Similarly, the TOR-network started as a defense project that was later privatized. 

[CurbsideProphet]

They already have the 100,000 signatures necessary but the more the merrier:

https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/pardon-edward-snowden/Dp03vGYD

[BitBank]

They already have the 100,000 signatures necessary but the more the merrier:

https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/pardon-edward-snowden/Dp03vGYD

It's going to be hilarious to see the whitehouse's attempt to respond to this while not simultaneously making their case for hypocrites of the century.  

I can only imagine the cognitive dissonance occurring when they try to dismiss the pro-snowden people as right-wingers looking to score partisan points, when the issue is one that the left supposedly champions (transparency / civil liberties), and an issue the president ran on.  His words in defending the NSA could have just as easily been uttered by Bush, Clinton, etc.  If times like this don't wake people up to the fact that both US political parties are the same (authoritarian), I don't know what will.

[marcus_of_augustus]

They militarised the Internet quite few years back (after the 3 planes-4 buildings attack) ... militarisation of 'social' media is a more recent phenomena, but more disturbing imho.

What the hell do you mean by "they militarized the internet" -- the "internet" STARTED as as a military project. ARPANET was a US Defense department project of a network of trusted US universities and national research labs. It was Senator Albert Gore Jr. who managed to pass the 'High Performance Computing Act' (the "Gore Bill) in 1991 (and signed into law by Bush Senior), which opened up this technology to private actors. Only then did the internet take off. It was a state-made invention that later became an economic and social success in private hands. Similarly, the TOR-network started as a defense project that was later privatized. 

Quite right ... but you are going back in time before anyone really cares ... should have said they de-militarized it (Tim Berners-Lee and www era) before they re-militarised it (ISP intercept equipment installs).

[cryptoanarchist]

Edward Snowjob is just another government meme.

Any real leaker wouldn't be given mainstream media press coverage.

[QuestionAuthority]

Edward Snowjob is just another government meme.

Any real leaker wouldn't be given mainstream media press coverage.

What? Why do you say that?

[cryptoanarchist]

Edward Snowjob is just another government meme.

Any real leaker wouldn't be given mainstream media press coverage.

What? Why do you say that?

Because ALL mainstream media is crafted to serve a purpose and 99% of it is complete made up bullshit - not biased covering of events, but complete fabrication.

Most americans already know that the NSA can listen in whenever they want - nothing new has been revealed.

[QuestionAuthority]

Edward Snowjob is just another government meme.

Any real leaker wouldn't be given mainstream media press coverage.

What? Why do you say that?

Because ALL mainstream media is crafted to serve a purpose and 99% of it is complete made up bullshit - not biased covering of events, but complete fabrication.

Most americans already know that the NSA can listen in whenever they want - nothing new has been revealed.

So you think they fabricated a story about Snowden because you think they want America to think they can't trust their government? That sounds a little nuts.

[cryptoanarchist]

Edward Snowjob is just another government meme.

Any real leaker wouldn't be given mainstream media press coverage.

What? Why do you say that?

Because ALL mainstream media is crafted to serve a purpose and 99% of it is complete made up bullshit - not biased covering of events, but complete fabrication.

Most americans already know that the NSA can listen in whenever they want - nothing new has been revealed.

So you think they fabricated a story about Snowden because you think they want America to think they can't trust their government? That sounds a little nuts.

Um..no. Please try to avoid making strawman arguments.

If you don't understand what a strawman is, it generally takes this form "So you think [inject something other person didn't say here], that's crazy!"

What I think is that everyone already knows that the government spies on them, and no one trusts the government already. Pretty much every independent poll ever done on gov trust confirms that.

Why this Snowden story? Not sure, but the folks over at the Daily Bell have some good guesses: https://www.thedailybell.com/29215/Edward-Snowden-Limited-Hangout-or-a-Globalist-Step-Back

Let's speculate about the forces motivating a Snowden gambit. First of all, the surveillance state is so big that those behind its creation cannot deny it anymore. Second, it is has been exposed constantly by the alternative media, making mainstream media look even less credible than usual.

What to do? They used to call what is going on a "limited hangout." What we call the Internet Reformation has perhaps forced the hands of those behind the surveillance state. Under pressure to acknowledge what is clearly taking place, they have created a great and dramatic show.

How do you do something like that? With an argument. Creating the argument is simple enough, as is the solution. With so much information available on Intel spying, the powers-that-be have apparently decided it is time to create a public discourse. Thesis (there is surveillance state) plus anti-thesis (it shouldn't exist) yields to synthesis: Some of it is necessary.

[QuestionAuthority]

Edward Snowjob is just another government meme.

Any real leaker wouldn't be given mainstream media press coverage.

What? Why do you say that?

Because ALL mainstream media is crafted to serve a purpose and 99% of it is complete made up bullshit - not biased covering of events, but complete fabrication.

Most americans already know that the NSA can listen in whenever they want - nothing new has been revealed.

So you think they fabricated a story about Snowden because you think they want America to think they can't trust their government? That sounds a little nuts.

Um..no. Please try to avoid making strawman arguments.

If you don't understand what a strawman is, it generally takes this form "So you think [inject something other person didn't say here], that's crazy!"

What I think is that everyone already knows that the government spies on them, and no one trusts the government already. Pretty much every independent poll ever done on gov trust confirms that.

Why this Snowden story? Not sure, but the folks over at the Daily Bell have some good guesses: https://www.thedailybell.com/29215/Edward-Snowden-Limited-Hangout-or-a-Globalist-Step-Back

Do you or do you not believe the Snowden case is real?

[cryptoanarchist]

Do you or do you not believe the Snowden case is real?

I don't believe anything, so the answer to your question is "no", even if I thought it was real. I don't know anything about the guy personally, and I KNOW the media plain makes shit up, and I know that if he is all over the msm, it is because the powers that be want him to be on it, and that they are using the story to push an agenda.

Pretty ironic that your sig is "GROUPTHINK kills braincells!!!!!!"

[QuestionAuthority]

Do you or do you not believe the Snowden case is real?

I don't believe anything, so the answer to your question is "no", even if I thought it was real. I don't know anything about the guy personally, and I KNOW the media plain makes shit up, and I know that if he is all over the msm, it is because the powers that be want him to be on it, and that they are using the story to push an agenda.

Pretty ironic that your sig is "GROUPTHINK kills braincells!!!!!!"

Groupthink requires that you THINK! What your saying sounds like mad rambling paranoia. What agenda could they possibly have for making the government look bad? The "powers that be" wouldn't happen to be aliens would they?

[cryptoanarchist]

Do you or do you not believe the Snowden case is real?

I don't believe anything, so the answer to your question is "no", even if I thought it was real. I don't know anything about the guy personally, and I KNOW the media plain makes shit up, and I know that if he is all over the msm, it is because the powers that be want him to be on it, and that they are using the story to push an agenda.

Pretty ironic that your sig is "GROUPTHINK kills braincells!!!!!!"

Groupthink requires that you THINK! What your saying sounds like mad rambling paranoia. What agenda could they possibly have for making the government look bad? The "powers that be" wouldn't happen to be aliens would they?

Why don't you follow your own advice. You didn't even read what I wrote or any of the article. You've switched from strawman to ad hominem fallacies. I think we're done here.