Your video, Edward Snowden - How your cellphone spies on you, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

I found one thing extremely interesting in *2* separate interviews with Assange when he was asked whether or not there was any Russian involvement -- including the one with Hannity shown early in the video here:

Hannity: Did Russia give you this information? Or anyone associated with Russia?
Assange: Our source is not a state party.

Very close to verbatim that exchange appeared in a print interview a week or two ago. The resulting headlines: "Assange denies Russian Involvement in the Leaks", etc.

But look at that answer. It is very carefully worded, but it doesn't directly answer the question. "Our source is not a state party" doesn't rule out that the source is Russian. It sort of rules out a source with known associations with the government (of Russia or anywhere else), but it could be an independent / private individual at face value that got the information from state parties.

I find it odd that nobody (as far as I've seen) has brought up that carefully worded answer, when it stuck out like a sore thumb to me the first time I saw it in print.


That being said, I 100% agree with Greenwald when he suggests that accusations are not proof. And the CIA and other agencies have a massive track record of shady dealings done in the name of "national security", as defined by whoever is in charge. Taking them at their word seems pretty hopelessly naive at this point.


But beyond all of that, I honestly don't care who did the hacking and what their motivations were. The government seems happy to record and analyze everything we say and do, and to claim that people like Edward Snowden are traitors for simply telling us about it. Well, get used to some of your own goddamn medicine. If you are running for public office, you should expect that your rights to privacy are going to be challenged much more strongly than those of Joe Average. You're a person of interest -- for pretty legitimate reasons.

Assume that absolutely everything you've ever said on the record (and lots OFF the record) is going to be gone over with a fine-toothed comb. If you've got any skeletons in your closet, expect that there is a good chance they will get exposed. And probably at the worst possible time.

What should both parties take away from this? Gee, it might be a good idea to choose candidates that can stand up to at least a basic level of scrutiny. Backing slimy weasels that look great and charismatic after a quick once-over might come back to bite you in the ass.

Two days ago, there was a forum/panel about freedom & democracy, where the lineup included: Jeremy Scahill, Edward Snowden, Paul Jay (of TRN), Rick Wolff, and others.

Now, I know I'm biased when it comes to the topics of surveillance, the war on terror, capitalism, etc, but that does sound like a panel worth reporting on, doesn't it? It's not frontpage stuff, sure, but a column/comment online...

Nothing, last I checked. Not a peep.

Who did report on it? RT Germany.

As far as I am concerned, RT is a valid source, as long as you remain aware of their (pro-Russia) angle. It's actually a great source for stuff on the US or the UK, most of the time. Just like I've seen good stuff on Russia in the Swiss media, unlike the red-baiting so prevelant in the WaPo these days.

Apparently he can, but I'm not a legal expert, so I'll defer to anyone who has the expertise.

What about Edward Snowden?

Most of the Syrian refugees are actually still in Syria, or just over the border in Turkey, it's a fairly small percentage of that group who have chosen to try their luck in westernised countries.

On top of all this, according to several sources, including Edward Snowden, the FBI already have the ability to reset the number of attempts to unlock the phone. Here's an ACLU post about it:
https://www.aclu.org/blog/free-future/one-fbis-major-claims-iphone-case-fraudulent

According to the article, if there are too many attempts to unlock, the data on the phone doesn't get deleted, just the key to unlock that data. It's possible (and not all that difficult for an organisation like the FBI) to take a copy of the key ahead of time, and restore that key if they cause it to be wiped.

The money and manpower that have already gone into this case would easily cover the effort to go through this process. For those of you so inclined, this raises the question (and obvious answer) of why would the FBI go to so much bother to force apple to do it. You don't get a locked mass-murderer's phone and public support like this too often.

I've been watching for a good counter to that claim since I read it about a week ago, and haven't seen one. Anyone out there able to enlighten me?

When someone is interviewing another, like when John Oliver interviewed Edward Snowden, two cameras are used so that factual continuity can be maintained.

In the movie Broadcast News, the character Tom Grunick did an extremely powerful interview where he started crying during it. It was later found that he only had one camera with him, so how could he have cut to him crying as the lady spoke... That's why shot/reverse shot interviews are always filmed with two cameras simultaneously.

In movies, there is usually only one camera, they will set up one side of the conversation, film it all the way through, then set up the shot from the other direction, film IT from that direction, taking however many takes each way, then edit the two together.

In the Die Hard example, Rickman was obviously filmed first, and Bochner's ad-lib made a "happy mistake" they got on film.

If Bochner had been filmed first, you would never have seen Rickman's perfect reaction.

...then again, Rickman was a God. He probably could have made the same reaction a couple dozen times after the initial confusion.

On a serious note, that was really quite good. On the other hand, it is perhaps a little easy to convince people to stick up for Apple, considering how ubiquitous iPhones and other iThings are in the US.

Someone that could really use this sort of supportive message campaign is Edward Snowden, without whom we wouldn't know just how *much* the Government and all the 3-letter agencies are trying to skirt the constitution. He doesn't have the benefit of the degree of public appreciation that Apple does (even though I think he is *more* deserving of it -- not to take anything away from Apple doing the right thing here)...

I'll tell my son, "I need to get this map to the Resistance. It shows the location of Edward Snowden."

And my kid will reply, "Snowden? Snowden's real? I thought he was just a myth!"

Never had an interest in joining Twitter, but now i just might https://theintercept.com/2015/09/29/edward-snowden-twitter-snowden/

Hey, I recognize that sheep kicking the TV!

I think I saw him on TV.

Congratulations! Your video, LastWeekTonight w/ John Oliver: Edward Snowden on Passwords, has reached the #1 spot in the current Top 15 New Videos listing. This is a very difficult thing to accomplish but you managed to pull it off. For your contribution you have been awarded 2 Power Points.

This achievement has earned you your "Golden One" Level 118 Badge!

Your video, LastWeekTonight w/ John Oliver: Edward Snowden on Passwords, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Also this http://videosift.com/video/Gorilla-Art-Honoring-Edward-Snowden

Tags for this video have been changed from 'citizen four, edward snowden, laura poitrus, glann greenwald, robert scheer, truthdig' to 'citizen four, edward snowden, laura poitras, glenn greenwald, robert scheer, truthdig' - edited by eric3579