Warnings, pressure and threats from US government officials
US warns Hong Kong of reprisals
While Edward Snowden was in Hong Kong the US requested his arrest and extradition. A senior White House official warned of future diplomatic reprisals, stating: “If Hong Kong doesn’t act soon, it will complicate our bilateral relations and raise questions about Hong Kong’s commitment to the rule of law.”
After Snowden left Hong Kong, White House press secretary Jay Carney stated that Hong Kong having allowed Snowden to board a flight “unquestionably has a negative impact on the US-China relationship”. He continued: “We see this as a setback in terms of their efforts to build mutual trust and our concerns are pretty clearly stated” and said that US authorities “did not buy” Hong Kong’s reasons for rejecting the extradition request.
US pressures Ecuador not to grant asylum
US Vice-President Joe Biden personally called Ecuadorian President Rafael Correa to urge him against granting asylum to Edward Snowden, who had already submitted asylum requests to Ecuador and other countries.
US Senator Robert Menendez, head of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, warned that should Ecuador offer asylum to Snowden, they would risk losing US trade benefits. In response, Ecuador renounced its trade benefits and offered the US$23 million a year to fund human rights education.
US condemns Russia for giving Snowden “propaganda platform”
While staying in Sheremetyevo International Airport, Edward Snowden held a press conference where he met with representatives from multiple human rights groups, including Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch. It was his first public appearance since his interview with Glenn Greenwald, published by the Guardian on 9 June 2013.
President Obama’s press secretary Jay Carney was quick to condemn the meeting, stating: “I would simply say that providing a propaganda platform for Mr Snowden runs counter to the Russian government’s previous declarations of Russia’s neutrality, and that they have no control over his presence in the airport.” On the attendence by human rights organisations, Carney commented: “Those groups do important work. But Mr Snowden is not a human rights activist or a dissident.”
Secrectary of State threatens Venezuela after it offers asylum to Snowden
Shortly after Venezuela agreed to offer asylum to Edward Snowden, US Secretary of State John Kerry personally called Venezuelan Foreign Minister Elias Jaua and threatened to ground any Venezuelan aircraft in US or NATO airspace over any suspicion of Snowden’s presence on board. He also said he would intensify the ongoing process of revoking US entry visas to those associated with the late Hugo Chavez and begin prosecuting Venezuelan politicians on allegations of drug-trafficking, money-laundering and other crimes. He further threatened to cut off fuel supplies, stating his awareness of Venezuela’s dependence on US oil.
Obama cancels meeting with Putin over Snowden
President Obama pulled out of a planned bilateral meeting in Moscow with President Putin in response to Russia granting asylum to Edward Snowden. The White House stated that other issues contributed to the decision but commented specifically on Snowden, saying: “Russia’s disappointing decision to grant Edward Snowden temporary asylum was also a factor that we considered in assessing the current state of our bilateral relationship.” During an apperance on NBC’s Tonight Show President Obama commented directly on the issue, stating: “There have been times where [Russia slips] back into Cold War thinking and a Cold War mentality.”
US threatens Germany not to grant asylum
German Vice Chancellor Sigmar Gabriel has said that the US government threatened to “cut off” its intelligence sharing relationship with Germany if the country granted Edward Snowden asylum or safe passage.
Threats to Edward Snowden from the US
Edward Snowden has been charged by the US government with theft of government property (18 USC § 641), unauthorised communication of national defense information (18 USC § 793(d)) and wilful communication of classified communications intelligence information to an unauthorised person (18 USC § 798(a)(3)). These charges together incur a maximum 30-year prison sentence and, as happened in Chelsea Manning’s case, it is possible that a second set of charges might be added at a later date. Two of the current charges fall under the draconian 1917 Espionage Act, for which there is no public interest or whistleblower defence allowed. The threat these charges pose to Edward Snowden should be seen in the context of the intensifying ‘war on whistleblowers’ of the current US administration, which has now embarked on its ninth Espionage Act prosecution over leaks to the press (the ninth is former FBI agent Donald Sachtlenben, for which the US government secretly obtained the telephone records of AP reporters). This is three times more than all previous administrations combined.
“The campaign to flush out media sources smacks of retaliation and intimidation. The Obama administration is right to protect information that might legitimately undermine national security or put Americans at risk. However, it does not protect national security interests when it brings cases against whistleblowers who divulge information that communicates important information to the public; sparks meaningful dialogue; or exposes fraud, waste, abuse, illegality, or potential dangers to public health and safety.” The Criminalization of Whistleblowing [pdf], Jesselyn Radack & Kathleen McClellan, Government Accountability Project
For more on the threats faced by Edward Snowden, see this Congressional Research Service report Criminal Prohibitions on the Publication of Classified Defense Information, updated September 2013 to include Snowden, and the Threats section of the EdwardSnowden.com website.
An asylee is a person who is seeking or has been granted asylum outside of his or her country of nationality on the basis that they are unable or unwilling to return because of persecution or a well-founded fear of persecution on account of their race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion. This definition is set out in the 1951 United Nations Convention on Refugees and its 1967 Protocol. The right to seek asylum is also codified in Article 14 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Edward Snowden’s fear of persecution if he is returned to the US is well-founded. The recent trial and 35-year sentence of Chelsea (previously Bradley) Manning has shown that the defense strategies a whistleblower can employ against an Espionage Act charge are severely curtailed, making it impossible to receive a fair trial. Michael Ratner of the Center for Constitutional Rights has also highlighted concerns over how Snowden might be treated in pre- or post-trial detention:
“Think about how the US defines torture. The US doesn’t really think that anything it did under the Bush era was torture, with the exception possibly of waterboarding. So that means Ed Snowden can be subjected to every enhanced interrogation techniques – you know, lights on all the time, loud noise, cold temperatures, hot temperatures, strapped into a chair. All of the, quote, “enhanced interrogation techniques” are allowed under US view of torture. That’s one. Secondly, prolonged, arbitrary detention? It doesn’t say anything in [Eric Holder’s] letter we won’t put him into some underground cell and keep him there the rest of his life. And then it says he doesn’t have any right to asylum. And that’s just wrong. Whistleblowers are entitled to apply for asylum, and it can’t be interfered with by the United States.”
International customary law includes the principles of non-refoulment and safe passage. Non-refoulment prohibits states from returning refugees in any manner whatsoever to countries or territories in which their lives or freedom may be threatened, and is binding on all states. The US ignored international law in preventing safe passage for Edward Snowden from Moscow to Latin America by obstructing access to US allies’ airspace and threatening economic consequences for any country which granted him asylum. The UN General Assembly Resolution 2312 (1967) states that: “the grant of asylum… is a peaceful and humanitarian act and… as such, it cannot be regarded as unfriendly by any other State.” Read more at Political interference.
Harassment of people and organizations associated with Snowden
Forced landing of Bolivian President Evo Morales’ plane
During a flight home from Moscow, the Bolivian presidential plane carrying President Evo Morales was forced to reroute and land in Vienna over false rumours that Edward Snowden was on board. Prior to the incident, President Morales had stated he would consider granting asylum to Snowden. The flight was set for a refuelling stop in Lisbon, but had been denied airspace permission from France, Italy, Spain and Portugal, according to Bolivian Defence Minister Ruben Saavedra, who said France and Portugal cited “technical reasons“. The plane remained in Vienna for 14 hours while waiting for airspace approval from the four European nations. In the meantime, Austrian border police checked the plane, but Spain’s ambassador to Austria was denied access by President Morales.
This came shortly after President Obama stated during a press conference that he was “not going to be scrambling jets to get a 29-year-old hacker”.
Spanish Foreign Minister José Manuel García-Margallo stated that Spain and other European countries were told Snowden was aboard President Morales’ plane, but did not specify the source of the information: “They told us that the information was clear, that [Snowden] was inside.”
The US declined to comment on the incident. President Morales denounced the act, saying: “This was an open provocation toward a continent, not just a president. North American imperialism uses its people to terrify and intimidate us. I just want to say they will never frighten us because we are a people of dignity and sovereignty.”
UNASUR (Union of South American Countries) called an emergency meeting in relation to the incident. They issued a statement expressing solidarity with Bolivia and President Morales, while condemning the “unfriendly and unjustifiable” act and demanding an explanation. President Morales also filed a formal complaint to the United Nations.
Detention and investigation of Glenn Greenwald’s partner David Miranda
David Miranda, partner of journalist Glenn Greenwald and a Brazilian citizen, was detained by UK authorities while in transit at Heathrow airport under Schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act of 2000. His electronics were confiscated, including his mobile phone, laptop, camera, memory sticks, DVDs and games consoles. It was revealed at a later court hearing that Miranda was detained as part of a criminal investigation by the UK Home Office and Metropolitan Police under suspicion that he was transporting classified material. Miranda was returning from a trip to Berlin where he had visited filmmaker Laura Poitras.
During his nine-hour Terrorism Act detention, Miranda was denied access to his lawyers, as well as a translator. Brazilian officials and lawyers for the Guardian newspaper were also unable to obtain any information during that time.
In an interview Miranda said: “They were threatening me all the time and saying I would be put in jail if I didn’t co-operate. They treated me like I was a criminal or someone about to attack the UK… It was exhausting and frustrating, but I knew I wasn’t doing anything wrong.” He further stated: “It is clear why they took me. It’s because I’m Glenn’s partner. Because I went to Berlin. Because Laura lives there. So they think I have a big connection. But I don’t have a role. I don’t look at documents. I don’t even know if it was documents that I was carrying. It could have been for the movie that Laura is working on.”
White House spokesman Josh Earnest stated that the US had received a “heads up” prior to the UK’s detainment of Miranda. However, they denied involvement in the actual decision.
A 2013 judicial review of the UK Government’s actions found that the use of Terrorism Act powers against journalists was lawful. More than two years later, the Court of Appeal found that the use of Schedule 7 against those carrying journalistic material constituted a breach of the UK’s international human rights obligations and asked the British Government to redraft the law to provide proper protections. The panel of three judges also recommended that the UK’s definition of terrorism be narrowed so as not to include legitimate freedom of expression that does not aim to coerce the government with violence.
WikiLeaks’ Sarah Harrison at risk
WikiLeaks journalist Sarah Harrison accompanied Edward Snowden from Hong Kong to Moscow and during his 39-day stay inside Sheremetyevo airport. Harrison remained with Snowden in order to protect his safety and security.
Government Accountability Project lawyer Jesselyn Radack noted the risks facing Harrison and other people associated with Edward Snowden. Harrison has also been advised by lawyers that she is at risk from both the US and UK due to her journalistic work with Snowden, and thus she is unable to return to the UK.
WikiLeaks’ publisher Julian Assange informally requested that Brazil grant asylum to Sarah Harrison due to the risks she is facing.
Destruction of the Guardian’s hard drives
Two GCHQ (the UK’s Government Communications Headquarters, equivalent to the US National Security Agency) officers oversaw the destruction of hard drives in the basement of the Guardian newspaper.
A senior UK government official had met with the Guardian’s editor Alan Rusbridger to demand the return or destruction of all material from Edward Snowden that the newspaper was working on. Rusbridger wrote that he had received a call “from the centre of the government” who told him: “You’ve had your fun. Now we want the stuff back.”
Rusbridger further stated that he allowed the “slightly pointless” destruction of the hard drives, as the Guardian was in possession of multiple digital copies outside Britain and thus able to continue publication.
Emails obtained by the Associated Press under the Freedom of Information Act show that senior NSA officials were given advance notice of the destruction of the Guardian hard drives, which current deputy NSA director Richard Ledgett described as “good news”.
Stand with Snowden
Truthtellers should be protected, not persecuted or prosecuted. Edward Snowden’s safety lies in the hands of governments who have the power to make the offers of asylum he needs – but political leaders will not act unless they feel the popular pressure to do so. Here’s how we can show governments around the world that their citizens want a safe haven for Edward Snowden.
Alternative Theory: Snowden a Product of CIA / NSA Internal War
Former Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, was manipulated by the CIA’s leaks from Snowden, proving his testimony before Congress concerning NSA surveillance to be false. The CIA was compromised by the NSA leak, and the CIA’s main international offices in Geneva were found to be tied to Swiss banking scandals and CIA illegal activities. The CIA did not realize that every Cisco router and server had a back-door for NSA spying. The CIA was furious because their European headquarters was super-secret and the CIA believed it was un-hackable. The CIA demanded that the NSA stop spying on their criminal activities which included gold fixing and gold market manipulation with Swiss bankers. The NSA’s surveillance brought numerous Swiss bankers to justice and they were not willing to stop spying on the CIA because that information connected them to the work of many criminals that they were in league with.
In retaliation against the NSA, the CIA chose Edward Snowden, who was working for the CIA through Booz Allen Hamilton, to release stolen NSA documents that proved the NSA was illegally spying on Americans through computers, phones, and many other electronic devices. Snowden didn’t work for the NSA and did not have access to NSA files though he released a huge amount of data that confirmed the NSA’s surveillance. Michael Alperovitch’s CIA handlers ordered Snowden to turn over the NSA’s PKI encryption codes so that the CIA could enter the NSA’s system and steal the files needed to prove the NSA’s illegal surveillance. Snowden did not personally have access to those codes nor the information in the NSA system as part of his job.
The CIA was not concerned about the NSA’s reputation and just wanted to stop the NSA from spying on them because the NSA had uncovered the nature of the three factions in the CIA that work against each other, an internal war of sorts. Clapper was called to the Congress and under oath swore that the NSA did not spy on Americans in any fashion. He perjured himself repeatedly with the lie that no surveillance was going on at all on any American. This was, of course, found to be false and that, in fact, the NSA spies on every American and even has a file for every person in America extracted principally from the Internet, Google, Facebook (all social media), every PC, phones, and bank accounts among other sources. Snowden’s “leaks” have become the bane of the NSA who now has to admit they certainly do spy on Americans because Obama expanded the NDAA to include Americans as warfare combatants.
The battle between the CIA and the NSA became public again when the CIA set up a sting that uncovered that Cisco Systems, a DARPA company, has built-in back doors on all their routers so that the NSA can spy undetected. The main stream media was even given videos of Cisco employees installing the backdoors in routers. The CIA found out about the back doors and made the information public to stop the NSA’s hacking of the CIA systems. Cisco Systems essentially controlled 100% of Internet traffic up until 1998 with a monopoly that was created as a DARPA project to weaponize the Internet as the ultimate intelligence collection tool. When the CIA released these videos, Obama distanced himself from Cisco publicly and would not come to their aid because the evidence was overwhelming. Cisco lost $50 billion over the scandal and a good deal of confidence of the public but was not prosecuted.
It was because of this battle between the CIA and the NSA and other intelligence agencies that lead to Obama’s executive order making available all the data from NSA spying to the other 16 intelligence agencies. Now, the CIA will know exactly what the NSA is collecting and then do better at hiding their own information systems and the criminal activity that is conducted on those systems. No longer can the NSA hide information from the Director of National Intelligence and the CIA. Of course, this action would mean little if these agencies were not conducting illegal activities and were actually working for the American people and the Constitution of the United States of America. But we must remember that the CIA is in charge of international security which trumps the NSA’s national security.
Sources:
Recommended Books:
No Place to Hide: Edward Snowden, the NSA, and the U.S. Surveillance State – In May 2013, Glenn Greenwald set out for Hong Kong to meet an anonymous source who claimed to have astonishing evidence of pervasive government spying and insisted on communicating only through heavily encrypted channels. That source turned out to be the twenty-nine-year-old NSA contractor Edward Snowden, and his revelations about the agency’s widespread, systemic overreach proved to be some of the most explosive and consequential news in recent history, triggering a fierce debate over national security and information privacy.
Now Greenwald fits all the pieces together, recounting his high-intensity eleven-day trip to Hong Kong, examining the broader implications of the surveillance detailed in his reporting for The Guardian, and revealing fresh information on the NSA’s unprecedented abuse of power with documents from the Snowden archive. Fearless and incisive, No Place to Hide has already sparked outrage around the globe and been hailed by voices across the political spectrum as an essential contribution to our understanding of the U.S. surveillance state.
THE PROVEN WAY TO DISAPPEAR FROM BIG BROTHER & RECLAIM PRIVACY … READ ON
By International Best Selling & Amazon #1 Best Selling Author CHRISTOPHER DAVID ALLEN
Obtain an Anonymous New Name to Use As You See Fit, an Alternate Identity, New Credit, and an Unlimited Future Completely Invisible to Everyone and Every Entity
Legally Disappear, Hide Your Digital Trail, Be Protected, and Safe
Inexpensive, Easy, Fast, and Legal Process Anyone Can Do. Legal In All 50 States.
Note: This book is for the USA and may not be applicable in the UK or other English speaking countries.
TOR and the Dark Net: So many people take their privacy on the internet for granted. Some may know and choose to ignore the fact, but every single thing you do online is being tracked and guess what? For better or for worse it is there forever. Whether you’re simply browsing websites or you are accessing confidential information that you would rather no one know about there are ways to remain anonymous. Imagine this scenario, you create an account on a forum with your name and decide to do some political freedom fighting with it. Years down the road a future employer of yours does a simple google search of your name and finds everything you’ve ever done. They don’t hire you.
This is a very simple scenario that just scratches the surface of reasons to stay anonymous but the point remains the same. Knowing when and how to remain anonymous is very important. Many people already realize this but have no clue where to start. This book has step by step instructions and techniques involving Tor, VPN’s, Proxies, and more that will take you to the deepest levels of anonymity in which not even the all seeing NSA will be able to track you.
