3 ms·
I think there's reason to believe that a targeting a person like Snowden would cause the U.S. to use the most extreme measures discussed in the post, such as se
by TwoBit 13y ago
I think there's reason to believe that a targeting a person like Snowden would cause the U.S. to use the most extreme measures discussed in the post, such as seizing the servers.
- brongondwana 13y agoThe point is, they wouldn't need to, because the Australian Government would order us to turn over the data, and we would. Everybody wins (except theoretical-Snowden) Mind you, theoretical-Snowden is already screwed at this point, regardless of where his mail is. No reason to believe any European country would be susceptible to pressure: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-23174874 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-23174874 Or maybe there is. Which comes back to the point I've been trying to make all along here. In the most serious extreme, nowhere in the world is "safe". In a less serious case, nobody's going to invade NYI with jackboots on. The window between those two cases is where being not-in-USA could theoretically save us from having our servers snatched (assuming said jackboots weren't willing to just wait for the Australian Government to order us to hand the data over)