Anyone seen Snowden yet?

No. He's in the sequel where he and Snowden have to steal James Madison's historic emails from the NSA databases to prove the 2nd amendment only applies to the military.

t. cuck

Yes as an instructor at CIA hacking school.

>He outed not only technology used to spy on Americans, he outed our technology to spy on Enemies.

It's the same technology you mong. They were abusing it because they could and there was no oversight or public accountability.

The Constitution, in the 4th amendment, DEMANDS that the people's right to privacy be respected. Nowhere does it charge the government with spying on foreign nationals. It's that simple.

And he's made the clay you love more vulnerable.

You don't get it both ways: security and knowledge of what was once hidden.

That's it. Use that word unironically. Continue to act like Reddit.

Pretty boring almost fell asleep

> duh duh...saying he outed technologisms for us and them are two diffwent tings...duh duh..you mong

Listen here, retard. That's what I was implying. Your simple brain couldn't reason any further than what it read. Read between the lines next time.

did your mother stick thermometers up your ass when you were little? Do you have an iphone?

>Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.

I'd rather have my right to privacy respected than spy on foreigners. Deal with it, tyrant. The day of the rope is coming.

>You don't get it both ways

Yeah I'll take my rights. Fuck spying on foreigners. SIGINT A SHIT HUMINT A BEST. Stop being so fucking lazy.

The problem in have with the person is that he's verified on twitter. How can you be a wanted fugitive and still have noteriety?

>Expose illegal activity
>Crimelords proclaim they were betrayed and to kill him

kek

No and no.

My parents taught me to think for myself. Read and process. Not read and regurgitate. There is a big difference.

There is very little reasoning going on in this thread. A lot of, "He's Robin Hood looking out for the little guy!"

The girl who plays Snowden's girlfriend in the movie is dating an Asian guy

> lazy

Where did you get that I was lazy?

I don't see you working for the government to protect your lands. If I'm lazy, how are you not?

Stop with your retarded bullshit, what your spouting is another jew mindtrick

>The girl who plays Snowden's girlfriend in the movie is dating an Asian guy

As much as Cred Forums wants to deny reality, AMWF relationships are on a tremendous increase (see more below)
instagram.com/explore/tags/amwf/

And perhaps using that "jew mindtrick" is the real jew mindtrick to corner you into this little box with the rest of the people who "see the light".

nah I don't watch (((hollywood))) stuff anymore.

kek

I went and saw the early screening of it. Pretty good movie, I really enjoyed it. I'd recommend seeing it, gives you a good look at the more intimate details of the Snowden affair.

Nothing that the government did was illegal.

Edward Snowden stole mostly defense dept files that had nothing to do with the surveillance programs. He probably exchanged those for his freedom, so he has likely committed treason against the united states.

JGL did a bad job, not believable at all. The frame story was boring, everybody knows he gets away at the end so it is useless to try and make suspenseful scenes about whether he'll get caught or not. Also the movie was kept reminding the viewer how brave everybody who works at The Guardian is. It would have been much better if they cut everything that took place after he left his job for the last time.
6/10

>Nothing that the government did was illegal.

Wrong.

Illegal spying, warrentless wiretaps, secret courts.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM_(surveillance_program)

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Eyes

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NSA_ANT_catalog

How did this movie even come out? If the Jew's are saying snowden did good, does that mean he is actually bad?

>rf-transmitting video cable
Jesus.

Under the 3rd party doctrine information that you give to a 3rd party doesn't require a warrant to obtain. The government may ask the 3rd party for it (as is the case here) or compel the party to produce the information.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third-party_doctrine

Further the software programs are no different from what Google, Amazon, Facebook etc use to target advertising to you. Your search data is already known. It is already mined for relevant information by the parties that you give it to.

SIGINT is by definition lazy.

EVERYTHING they did was illegal.

That's not what the government was doing. They were not asking for data, they were stealing it. Illegal.

Who knows where Snowden now lives?
I forgot

imagine what we DON'T know.

RF spectrum is serious shit man. If you're not monitoring/jamming it, you're wrong. Use faraday cages.

I agree, every whistleblower should be trialed and executed

I didn't even know this was a thing. Guess I'll go watch it.

> In order to authorize the targeting, the Attorney General and Director of National Intelligence need to obtain an order from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISA Court) pursuant to Section 702 or certify that "intelligence important to the national security of the United States may be lost or not timely acquired and time does not permit the issuance of an order."[188] When requesting an order, the Attorney General and Director of National Intelligence must certify to the FISA Court that "a significant purpose of the acquisition is to obtain foreign intelligence information."[188] They do not need to specify which facilities or property will be targeted.[188]

>After receiving a FISA Court order or determining that there are emergency circumstances, the Attorney General and Director of National Intelligence can direct an electronic communication service provider to give them access to information or facilities to carry out the targeting and keep the targeting secret.[188] The provider then has the option to: (1) comply with the directive; (2) reject it; or (3) challenge it with the FISA Court. If the provider complies with the directive, it is released from liability to its users for providing the information and is reimbursed for the cost of providing it,[188] while if the provider rejects the directive, the Attorney General may request an order from the FISA Court to enforce it.[188]

your babcia's house
>EVERYTHING they did was illegal.
nothing is illegal if the government does it

The process is identical to the one used in criminal proceedings.

>nothing is illegal if the government does it
I'll see you on the day of the rope, faggot.

>secret kangaroo courts
Unconstitutional as fuck.

The right to a public trial is strictly enforced, but is not absolute. Trials may in exceptional cases be regulated. Closures are decided case-by-case by the judge evaluating a claimed danger to a substantial or legitimate public interest. But whatever the interest at stake, the likelihood of danger to that interest must meet a "‘substantial probability’ test".[1] Examples of cases presenting closure issues include organized crime cases (overall security concerns), rape cases (decency concerns), juvenile cases,[2] and through the Silent witness rule and/or Classified Information Procedures Act, cases involving sensitive or 'classified' information.[3]

And there's no oversight. Snowden showed that.

It's the state abusing power to spy on citizens illegally. Period.

Can you point to section of the Constitution which requires public oversight of a law court besides the 6th amendment which has already been addressed? You've not made a true statement this far so I'm skeptical that there is any evidence in your favor.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

>and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Bulk collection is explicitly forbidden in the fourth amendment.

Hiding behind secret kangaroo courts doesn't suddenly make it legal.

Not yet but Citizenfour is good!