Man on the run: Former CIA spies on what they'd do if they were Snowden(andmagazine.com)
andmagazine.com
Man on the run: Former CIA spies on what they'd do if they were Snowden
http://www.andmagazine.com/content/phoenix/13012.html
83 comments
I believe by "state" they meant "nation," not "administrative region in the United States."
Do you work in intelligence?
Do you work in intelligence?
Your comment amuses. On the one hand, its possible that the CIA folks in the article are offering bad advice, either knowingly or unknowingly. For example, I imagine that the CIA has a guy in the basement making fake ids, rather than having field agents make their own. On the other hand, I doubt you know more about it than they do. Of course, you'd never show off your collection of fake ids to win a internet argument...
> I imagine that the CIA has a guy in the basement making fake ids
As a government agency, don't they already have legitimate access to the real ID printing machines?
As a government agency, don't they already have legitimate access to the real ID printing machines?
The guy in the basement is making fake non-US IDs.
Why in the basement? Is it illegal?
Sorry, I'm flabbergasted at the legal/illegal discussion over massive spying on non-US citizens.
Sorry, I'm flabbergasted at the legal/illegal discussion over massive spying on non-US citizens.
[deleted]
I assume they will know if you don't use a plane ticket that they know you bought, but the idea is that by the time they could know that you are already in a different place?
That is pretty clever. I wonder if tickets with less verification could be even more effective (for example, two bus tickets; one with cash and one with credit for a day later.) Might buy you more time, but the lower ticket price might also make it less convincing.
That is pretty clever. I wonder if tickets with less verification could be even more effective (for example, two bus tickets; one with cash and one with credit for a day later.) Might buy you more time, but the lower ticket price might also make it less convincing.
Maybe tell everyone you're in Hong Kong when you're in fact somewhere else?
In a couple points. Much of the advice may be more valid for overt CIA operations than in Snowden's case. Snowden is writing his own rulebook and it is based on a fairly narrow array of relatively novel tactics plus more standard tools I suspect he picked up in his special forces training (remember he has at least some special forces training).
A careful look at Snowden's tactics is that he is working off an understanding at how to play various groups and people off eachother. He has a keen sense of what everyone's interests are. His goal is not to be invisible but rather to be too hot to handle for anyone.
A careful look at Snowden's tactics is that he is working off an understanding at how to play various groups and people off eachother. He has a keen sense of what everyone's interests are. His goal is not to be invisible but rather to be too hot to handle for anyone.
I'd like to clarify the bit about his Special Forces 'training'. He did not receive any.
There is a program that he signed for called the 'X-ray' program (18X). It affords the enlistee a pipeline directly to Special Forces Assessment and Selection (SFAS). There is no faster way to go to SFAS than the 18X program.
The 18X program begins with 16 weeks of Infantry training followed by 3 weeks of Airborne school. This is not Special Forces training, however. It isn't even around Special Forces personnel- not even in the same state. Those 19 weeks encapsulate the period of time leading up to his "training accident" that resulted in his separation.
Had he completed Infantry OSUT and Airborne, he would have been sent to a 4 week preparation and conditioning course and then given a slot for SFAS (which is another 3 weeks). At that point, he STILL would have had ZERO Special Forces training. He's only been assessed for toughness and fitness generally speaking. Were he selected, he would begin the Special Forces Qualification Course (SFQC). During the time he enlisted, had he actually entered the SFQC, he would have begun with a preparation course for Small Unit Tactics (3 weeks). The closest to Special Forces training he'd have at the conclusion of that course would be land navigation and patrolling. No guerrilla warfare. No survival school. Nada.
His tactics are not so novel. He's taken "by, with, and through" from indigenous personnel to state agency.
There is a program that he signed for called the 'X-ray' program (18X). It affords the enlistee a pipeline directly to Special Forces Assessment and Selection (SFAS). There is no faster way to go to SFAS than the 18X program.
The 18X program begins with 16 weeks of Infantry training followed by 3 weeks of Airborne school. This is not Special Forces training, however. It isn't even around Special Forces personnel- not even in the same state. Those 19 weeks encapsulate the period of time leading up to his "training accident" that resulted in his separation.
Had he completed Infantry OSUT and Airborne, he would have been sent to a 4 week preparation and conditioning course and then given a slot for SFAS (which is another 3 weeks). At that point, he STILL would have had ZERO Special Forces training. He's only been assessed for toughness and fitness generally speaking. Were he selected, he would begin the Special Forces Qualification Course (SFQC). During the time he enlisted, had he actually entered the SFQC, he would have begun with a preparation course for Small Unit Tactics (3 weeks). The closest to Special Forces training he'd have at the conclusion of that course would be land navigation and patrolling. No guerrilla warfare. No survival school. Nada.
His tactics are not so novel. He's taken "by, with, and through" from indigenous personnel to state agency.
I don't think he got much if any special forces training. Basic + AIT is about 13 weeks. Jump school is 3 weeks. He left after four months, so that's before or at SF preliminary tryouts. He probably picked up a few things when he was working in the intel field, though.
His choice of HK was very game theoretic.
I wish more people understood the situation like you, but there are many fickle HN users who are silly putty in the hands of big media.
Also according to some sources he has been planning for years (according to some sources he held off in 2008 because he was hoping for action by Obama). He is uncommonly bright and prepared. I don't think the choice of regions or timing can be a coincidence at all. He announced he was in Hong Kong when the leaders of both Hong Kong and China were in the US, and he has managed to very skilfully play various groups off eachother.
He almost comes across as too prepared. Occasionally I have wondered if someone was coaching him, but if he has been planning for years, he could have half a million dollars stashed somewhere (or at least a sizeable fraction of that), and he may simply have spotted his opportunity and known it wouldn't come again.
He almost comes across as too prepared. Occasionally I have wondered if someone was coaching him, but if he has been planning for years, he could have half a million dollars stashed somewhere (or at least a sizeable fraction of that), and he may simply have spotted his opportunity and known it wouldn't come again.
On the other hand, I would have thought that he might have been better off just letting himself get arrested in the US. He has the attention of the world, and every time his case moved in court he would be on the front pages again. I can't imagine the US government having the courage to face the public opprobrium that would come with placing a whistleblower acting for the people in prison. This guy is no Bradley Manning - he wasn't revealing legitimate US state secrets that could put innocent people in danger, he was revealing potentially illegal behaviour of the US government with respect to its own citizens.
Whilst on the run however he can be "disappeared". How do we tell the difference between a Snowden lying low in some forgotten corner of the world, and a Snowden chained up in some forgotten US prison cell, or a Snowden burned to ashes in a car in Afghanistan? In both cases he is invisible to us. Dangerous, dangerous game. In fact it's so dangerous it's bordering on unbelievable for me.
Whilst on the run however he can be "disappeared". How do we tell the difference between a Snowden lying low in some forgotten corner of the world, and a Snowden chained up in some forgotten US prison cell, or a Snowden burned to ashes in a car in Afghanistan? In both cases he is invisible to us. Dangerous, dangerous game. In fact it's so dangerous it's bordering on unbelievable for me.
Let's not forget he's also been able to see how the US has treated cases like Manning and Assange and learn from those situations.
I'm fully expecting that Snowden has prepared some kind of "insurance file" ala Assange and made sure it's set up and triggered to go in case he's suddenly taken into custody and rendered into parts unknown. He's hinted as much in his initial Guardian interview (e.g. "there's a lot more here but I don't want to hurt anybody personally").
I'm fully expecting that Snowden has prepared some kind of "insurance file" ala Assange and made sure it's set up and triggered to go in case he's suddenly taken into custody and rendered into parts unknown. He's hinted as much in his initial Guardian interview (e.g. "there's a lot more here but I don't want to hurt anybody personally").
You almost wonder if he'd be better off "hiding in plain site" if he does intend to hide, by staying in the (continental) US. I mean, the USA is a BIG place, and outside the major cities, there are some damn remote areas in the US, where the population density is pretty low, and you could probably hole up out of site for quite some time and rarely even be seen. Look at how long Eric Rudolph stayed hidden in the Appalachians, for example. Although, to be fair, while he may not have been a "trained operative" he was apparently a survivalist type, and had quite a bit of skill at living in the woods and living off the land. I have no idea where Snowden falls on that.
But still, it's not that hard to find a job in the US doing some kind of manual labor, where they don't ask for any ID, pay cash, don't pay any taxes, and where the crew usually all go back to the bosses house and burn a few joints after work. If you're willing to swing a hammer and can run a mitre-saw and/or rip a piece of plywood on a table-saw, without cutting your hand off, you can probably find a construction job working "under the table". Finding a place to say would be tougher, since most (all?) US states require hotels / motels / etc. to collect ID information. But if you can find somebody friendly to let you crash on their couch, or find a low-paid motel clerk in some hick town, who'll take a small "donation" in order to rent you a room without ID...
Bus around the country, move periodically, and dye your hair a different color, grow a beard, let your hair grow out, and you could probably stay hidden in the US for quite some time.
But still, it's not that hard to find a job in the US doing some kind of manual labor, where they don't ask for any ID, pay cash, don't pay any taxes, and where the crew usually all go back to the bosses house and burn a few joints after work. If you're willing to swing a hammer and can run a mitre-saw and/or rip a piece of plywood on a table-saw, without cutting your hand off, you can probably find a construction job working "under the table". Finding a place to say would be tougher, since most (all?) US states require hotels / motels / etc. to collect ID information. But if you can find somebody friendly to let you crash on their couch, or find a low-paid motel clerk in some hick town, who'll take a small "donation" in order to rent you a room without ID...
Bus around the country, move periodically, and dye your hair a different color, grow a beard, let your hair grow out, and you could probably stay hidden in the US for quite some time.
To me, living in the woods as a survivalist is a fate worse than prison, and when you are eventually caught you have to serve the entire prison sentence on top of the time you spent eating squirrels and freezing in the woods. But there are definitely a few notable cases of wanted people who have lived in plain site for a long time before being captured. A convicted serial rapist named Gary Alan Irving was caught a couple months ago after 34 years on the run living near Portland, ME. He married and had children and grandchildren during this time.
I think you could totally do it in many cases. But I'm not sure that you could do it in this case. Snowden's face has been plastered all over newspapers, TV, the Internet, etc. Video of him, including his voice, has been all over TV and the internet. He has some distinguishing features that would make it fairly easy to confirm his identity. Also, hawkish conservatives (of which there are many in rural areas) are going to view this man as a traitor and delight in turning him in.
If he did stay here he probably would have many people willing to harbor him and give him food and shelter. But eventually they are going to slip up and he is going to be caught.
I think you could totally do it in many cases. But I'm not sure that you could do it in this case. Snowden's face has been plastered all over newspapers, TV, the Internet, etc. Video of him, including his voice, has been all over TV and the internet. He has some distinguishing features that would make it fairly easy to confirm his identity. Also, hawkish conservatives (of which there are many in rural areas) are going to view this man as a traitor and delight in turning him in.
If he did stay here he probably would have many people willing to harbor him and give him food and shelter. But eventually they are going to slip up and he is going to be caught.
Actually he has been hiding in plain sight. His goal is not to be found. He has told everyone where he is. He is writing his own rulebook and playbook. He will be remarkably hard to touch.
He realizes he can't hide. He's taking quite a gambit with Hong Kong but the calculations to do it have been extraordinarily well thought out.
He realizes he can't hide. He's taking quite a gambit with Hong Kong but the calculations to do it have been extraordinarily well thought out.
I wouldn't necessarily classify what he's doing now as hiding, although he does seem to have lowered his profile considerably the last couple of days. But publicly he's said he doesn't really intend to hide, so I was speaking more to the hypothetical case where he does decide to just flat out "go to ground" and try to evade being found at all. As opposed to hoping the Hong Kong government or some other political process will shield him.
The CIA is not going to disappear him now that he went public. And he can't slip out of Hong Kong without everyone knowing. Seems to me that this can only workout in one of two ways. Either he requests and receives asylum from some 3rd party country before the US requests extradition so that Hong Kong can't stop him from leaving. But I suspect he has a short time window to make this happen, maybe only days before the US delivers the extradition request. At which point Hong Kong will probably take his passport.
If that doesn't happen then it'll just work its ways though the Hong Kong courts. If he attempts a legal delay and obstruction tactic similar to Assange it could take years. Meanwhile the US demonization will continue and the US/China/Hong Kong politics will wax and wane. But most probably he'd end up in a US jail eventually, with all the political fallout that that will entail.
If that doesn't happen then it'll just work its ways though the Hong Kong courts. If he attempts a legal delay and obstruction tactic similar to Assange it could take years. Meanwhile the US demonization will continue and the US/China/Hong Kong politics will wax and wane. But most probably he'd end up in a US jail eventually, with all the political fallout that that will entail.
He could be somewhat valuable for the Chinese in countering some PR claims against itself -- "China is monitoring dissidents", "China is hacking peaceful countries" etc etc. All that is true, but now that they have him in exchange of asylum he could become a talking head for them so they can now say "Aha, but US can't tell us anything concerting privacy, look at what they are doing!" And then invite him on a TV show to describe all the massive NSA surveillance apparatus.
What would he do? Would he cooperate with the traditional enemy? That might put his motives in question and he would become an easier target to slander. ("aha, he was a traitor all along, a Chinese spy etc etc.")
What would he do? Would he cooperate with the traditional enemy? That might put his motives in question and he would become an easier target to slander. ("aha, he was a traitor all along, a Chinese spy etc etc.")
It wouldn't work for the reason in your second paragraph: he would loose too much credibility if he was seen as a mouthpiece for China.
"The CIA is not going to disappear him now that he went public."
I won't be surprised if they already got him.
When they make him disappear the world would scream horror for a week and the week after that nobody will even remember him.
I won't be surprised if they already got him.
When they make him disappear the world would scream horror for a week and the week after that nobody will even remember him.
I wouldn't be surprised if he left Hong Kong before we'd even heard of Edward Snowden. I imagine getting overland from China to Europe wouldn't be too difficult (we're talking high values of difficult here).
Equally he could have previously acquired an alternateidentity during his planning, and might even be in South America by now.
Equally he could have previously acquired an alternateidentity during his planning, and might even be in South America by now.
[deleted]
I never seen so many former federal employees promoting their books in one post.
And not just any federal employees: spooks. Gotta milk that James Bond cachet, I guess ;-)
It's funny how they all seem to be rather theoretic, context-free comments, not taking the details of Snowden's circumstances in account. He wasn't really trying to hide, otherwise he wouldn't have made a public statement from a known location.
And it seems most of those spooks interviewed never actually had to run for their life, putting their theories to the test.
And it seems most of those spooks interviewed never actually had to run for their life, putting their theories to the test.
Everyone seems to think this guy should go and hide. But if he is hiding he can't defend himself publicly. I think we all know that the US can eventually find him. We also know that if he is found cowering in some hole, far from media scrutiny, that he's likely to be killed, or secretly rendered for torture. Retreating to a semi-friendly place like HK where the press might not be completely captured by US influence, where the gov't might not be completely pliable may have been the best thing he could have done.
Are the CIA basically the not-so-bad guys now? Seems like they haven't been busted for doing anything super-nasty lately.
You mean besides running the secret prisons? It's exactly the opposite for me; I can deal with the NSA overreaching on surveillance (so long as they occasionally get slapped back), but the CIA is a national embarrassment.
[deleted]
Take everything negative that you have ever heard about the CIA. Now consider that the victors write the history books and the CIA records have not yet been seized and poured over. Both those things considered together should paint a rather chilling picture.
Never underestimate the crimes of the CIA. We will likely never live to see the full extent of their atrocities.
Never underestimate the crimes of the CIA. We will likely never live to see the full extent of their atrocities.
OTOH, the CIA has some incentive to being known as ineffectual. If enemies underestimate them, the mission of the CIA will be easier.
OTOH, as far as I can tell, to call them ineffectual from ~1989 until ~2000s sometime would be excessively kind. So maybe they did also suck before that as well, but I think the end of the Cold War and political turnover after GHWB really gutted them, and it wasn't until they remade themselves as a black site operating, drone killing paramilitary group that they came back.
OTOH, as far as I can tell, to call them ineffectual from ~1989 until ~2000s sometime would be excessively kind. So maybe they did also suck before that as well, but I think the end of the Cold War and political turnover after GHWB really gutted them, and it wasn't until they remade themselves as a black site operating, drone killing paramilitary group that they came back.
If the CIA has an incentive to be known as ineffectual, then I can only conclude that I am most likely assuming that they are incapable of far less than they actually are. The idea that I am underestimating their vile capacity only serves to disturb me further.
They have very strong institutional motives to be seen as highly-competent. A cynical view would be to think of intelligence agencies as semi-rational actors attempting to capture as much of the budget as possible with secrecy reducing all the costs of getting caught lying (think FEMA with no transparency and machine that prints get out of jail free cards).
The cynical view is never fully accurate, sometimes it isn't accurate at all because organisations always include idealist/true believers/patriots. Organisations which don't include idealists tend to weed themselves out pretty quickly and collapse.
The cynical view is never fully accurate, sometimes it isn't accurate at all because organisations always include idealist/true believers/patriots. Organisations which don't include idealists tend to weed themselves out pretty quickly and collapse.
Highly-competent in private/classified, highly incompetent in public, is the ideal balance. Although it does affect recruiting, so "highly constrained by morals and ethics" in public is probably better than generally incompetent.
It would be interesting to see what a "we are really professional, but generally law abiding" intelligence service could do.
It would be interesting to see what a "we are really professional, but generally law abiding" intelligence service could do.
[deleted]
Aside from running drones everywhere except Afghanistan itself (and even there I assume they run some). All those Pakistan, Yemen, etc. civilian casualties due to drones = CIA. And secret prisons, both gitmo and worse ("black sites", many of which are still unknown to the public.) Ongoing.
They are too busy toppling countries.
no the nsa is still cuter, cuddlier, and less deadly than the cia.
There was some novel where I read NSA has their own resident tough guys. was that pure fiction?
There are plenty of military assigned to NSA, to do things like operate SIGINT aircraft, or handle key distribution to the military on the COMSEC side.
NSA doesn't do much field intelligence stuff; it's mainly radio/etc. intercepts on military bases, aircraft, ships, etc. Their regular site security is either military or contracted out to Wackenhut or other private security companies, after all (which is apparently what one of Snowden's early jobs was).
The real tough guys of the signals world are the Army's ISA, who do tactical sigint and killing, all in one. I'm sure ISA and NSA cooperate a lot.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligence_Support_Activity
They're the guys who caught Pablo Escobar. Essentially the most secretive of the tier-1 JSOC units. IMO, the world's most awesome job for a bofh sysadmin -- you get to listen in to enemy communications, and use their improper security procedures to find them, and then punish them (by killing them).
NSA doesn't do much field intelligence stuff; it's mainly radio/etc. intercepts on military bases, aircraft, ships, etc. Their regular site security is either military or contracted out to Wackenhut or other private security companies, after all (which is apparently what one of Snowden's early jobs was).
The real tough guys of the signals world are the Army's ISA, who do tactical sigint and killing, all in one. I'm sure ISA and NSA cooperate a lot.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligence_Support_Activity
They're the guys who caught Pablo Escobar. Essentially the most secretive of the tier-1 JSOC units. IMO, the world's most awesome job for a bofh sysadmin -- you get to listen in to enemy communications, and use their improper security procedures to find them, and then punish them (by killing them).
The real ____ guys of the...
You can fill in that blank with just about any superlative and it fits. My dream job would be to work for the secret army of northern virginia.
You can fill in that blank with just about any superlative and it fits. My dream job would be to work for the secret army of northern virginia.
Probably fiction. The NSA might use its black budget to fund tough guys (paying the payroll and overhead), but they'd probably be trained and managed by the CIA and / or military, as part of some joint operation.
It's very common for public officials to get too much money, and not be able to spend it. So they find another agency which wants the money, and organise some kind of joint operation. It keeps their spending nice and robust (so the bean counters don't realise they don't need all that money), and the other side gets the resources they need. It's win-win (for everyone but the taxpayers).
It's very common for public officials to get too much money, and not be able to spend it. So they find another agency which wants the money, and organise some kind of joint operation. It keeps their spending nice and robust (so the bean counters don't realise they don't need all that money), and the other side gets the resources they need. It's win-win (for everyone but the taxpayers).
Ubisoft dropped Michael Ironside from the Splinter Cell franchise, so I'm pretty sure NSA has no tough guys left now.
This really sounds like something straight out of some Ludlum book, which, incidentally, I loved.
This is by no means advice for Snowden, but it's worth a shot.
When you're on the run, burn your passport. Get rid of your wallet except for cash. If you can, withdraw as much cash as possible and close your bank accounts. Toss your wallet in a fire, taking only cash. Get rid of any physical attributes that could be used to easily find you. If you wear the same type of shirt every day, wear a different one every day. Shave your facial hair, and get a new hairdo.
Be a nomad. Sleep in homeless shelters, and go from place to place, never staying in one location too long. Set false breadcrumbs, like Facebook logins, at strategic locations. Map out a route of where you plan to go, and map out the route where you'll leave linked IPs, logins, property along the way, maybe make a call or two with a prepaid phone and dispose of it.
When your money supply is running low, forge your own identity. Create a new name, with a new ethnicity. Get a job. Live there for a while, never getting too close to anyone. Disappear. Get off the grid permanently. If the United States approves a pardon, then show up only after 4 months, it could be a decoy.
Always stay on the run. And never. Trust. Anyone.
------
for added effect, listen to https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dc7qiosq4m4
This is by no means advice for Snowden, but it's worth a shot.
When you're on the run, burn your passport. Get rid of your wallet except for cash. If you can, withdraw as much cash as possible and close your bank accounts. Toss your wallet in a fire, taking only cash. Get rid of any physical attributes that could be used to easily find you. If you wear the same type of shirt every day, wear a different one every day. Shave your facial hair, and get a new hairdo.
Be a nomad. Sleep in homeless shelters, and go from place to place, never staying in one location too long. Set false breadcrumbs, like Facebook logins, at strategic locations. Map out a route of where you plan to go, and map out the route where you'll leave linked IPs, logins, property along the way, maybe make a call or two with a prepaid phone and dispose of it.
When your money supply is running low, forge your own identity. Create a new name, with a new ethnicity. Get a job. Live there for a while, never getting too close to anyone. Disappear. Get off the grid permanently. If the United States approves a pardon, then show up only after 4 months, it could be a decoy.
Always stay on the run. And never. Trust. Anyone.
------
for added effect, listen to https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dc7qiosq4m4
"When your money supply is running low, forge your own identity. Create a new name, with a new ethnicity."
Do this early on, preferably before blowing your cover.
Do this early on, preferably before blowing your cover.
I wonder why everyone takes for granted he didn't.
Withdraw cash ? really ? I am sure triggers have been set on his card. The moment he puts his card in an ATM, the police will probably reach there in 5 minutes. At least they will know his location to begin with. They then will have to just create a perimeter around him.
Firstly, before he decided to be a whistle-blower he should have made some plans. If he has not, I would say just go deep into some forest and live there like a hermit for at least a year.
Firstly, before he decided to be a whistle-blower he should have made some plans. If he has not, I would say just go deep into some forest and live there like a hermit for at least a year.
I guess the idea would be to stuff your pockets full before you blow the whistle.
In that case he could have planned everything in a much better way. He could have gone to a much safer place such as a European country like Iceland or Sweden or he could have simply got lost in the crowd in India.
Agreed; he should have done that before he pulled the trigger, along with the identity destruction. It's kind of too late now... and I think either just lying low in Hong Kong or going to some obscure place in Russia or living in the mountains might be his best options.
Snowden could enter China without paperwork from Hong Kong.
Once inside, train travel (usually, though this may have changed a year or so ago) or long distance bus travel requires no identification and there are a huge number of long and porous land borders to cross, particularly in the Southeast Asian direction. Though he'd want to avoid part of the Vietnam one due to the likelihood of leftover land mines.
The Shan, Wa and Kachin armies in northern Burma are known to be extremely hospitable to visitors. Likewise, it's easy to stay off the grid in Laos for decades.
While in China, the lack of a passport could be explained with an easily faked 'receipt' from any semi-local embassy: "they're making me a visa". This would of course gel with one's travel story. (Hint: Between Hong Kong and SEA borders there are international consulates for SEA nations in Nanning and Kunming.)
(Edit: Cambodia has few hills. Vietnam has too high a population density. Laos is a reasonable option. The Shan State Army is perhaps too affiliated with neighbouring powers. The Wa or Kachin would be better destinations, the latter are also near completely Christian due to US missionary activity, and on bad terms with the central Burmese authorities of late so less likely to hand people over. All in all, the Kachin would be a good bet.)
Once inside, train travel (usually, though this may have changed a year or so ago) or long distance bus travel requires no identification and there are a huge number of long and porous land borders to cross, particularly in the Southeast Asian direction. Though he'd want to avoid part of the Vietnam one due to the likelihood of leftover land mines.
The Shan, Wa and Kachin armies in northern Burma are known to be extremely hospitable to visitors. Likewise, it's easy to stay off the grid in Laos for decades.
While in China, the lack of a passport could be explained with an easily faked 'receipt' from any semi-local embassy: "they're making me a visa". This would of course gel with one's travel story. (Hint: Between Hong Kong and SEA borders there are international consulates for SEA nations in Nanning and Kunming.)
(Edit: Cambodia has few hills. Vietnam has too high a population density. Laos is a reasonable option. The Shan State Army is perhaps too affiliated with neighbouring powers. The Wa or Kachin would be better destinations, the latter are also near completely Christian due to US missionary activity, and on bad terms with the central Burmese authorities of late so less likely to hand people over. All in all, the Kachin would be a good bet.)
Have to disagree on many counts. Though not the visa-receipt thing, that was brilliant ;-)
1) Chinese public transport is subject to random stops and searches. Everyone has to show identification.
2) The Chinese borders with Vietnam and Laos are not exactly tourist destinations. The place is rife with ethnic tensions and saturated with military presence, due to opium trafficking, smuggling of goods, and that little war between Vietnam and China.
3) The hill-tribe and minority "armies" (gangs?) are just 2nd-rate heroin traffickers, and that region is one of the most heavily infiltrated by intel, specially Thai. Thailand is one of the closest U.S. allies, right up there with Colombia and Jordan in terms of ass-kissing to State Department.
4) Both China and Vietnam are police states; any whiff of him and they can mobilize undercover cops of an entire city. Hotel and taxi operators are the gov's eyes and ears. Not to mention you're required to register your movement with nearest police station (no one ever does this ;-)
Bangkok would have been a perfect option, since the people are desensitized to white men and no one would notice him.
1) Chinese public transport is subject to random stops and searches. Everyone has to show identification.
2) The Chinese borders with Vietnam and Laos are not exactly tourist destinations. The place is rife with ethnic tensions and saturated with military presence, due to opium trafficking, smuggling of goods, and that little war between Vietnam and China.
3) The hill-tribe and minority "armies" (gangs?) are just 2nd-rate heroin traffickers, and that region is one of the most heavily infiltrated by intel, specially Thai. Thailand is one of the closest U.S. allies, right up there with Colombia and Jordan in terms of ass-kissing to State Department.
4) Both China and Vietnam are police states; any whiff of him and they can mobilize undercover cops of an entire city. Hotel and taxi operators are the gov's eyes and ears. Not to mention you're required to register your movement with nearest police station (no one ever does this ;-)
Bangkok would have been a perfect option, since the people are desensitized to white men and no one would notice him.
1) Not that random, but yeah, hence the 'my passports getting a visa in some consulate' note (easily forged).
2) Your info is maybe 30 years out of date. It's one of the largest tourism destinations in the country. I know, I lived there five years.
3) The Shan State Army are ethnic Tai speakers, so yeah, maybe. But further west, the Wa and yet further the Kachin are more independent.
4) It's not hard to find hotels that don't care about registration. Even if they do register, few report identities to the police immediately. Even if they report immediately, few cops are going to be bothered to check. By the time they do, you're gone.
Bangkok is indeed a good destination, except, as you point out, that Thailand is a major US ally.
Bangkok is indeed a good destination, except, as you point out, that Thailand is a major US ally.
Cambodia also has a MAJOR problem with landmines http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_mines_in_Cambodia
> Snowden could enter China without paperwork from Hong Kong.
China requires a visa for US passport holders regardless of port of entry. Coming from HK is not an exception.
China requires a visa for US passport holders regardless of port of entry. Coming from HK is not an exception.
Dude, there's crap-tons of trucks crossing that border 24/7. I'm sure it's possible to get in.
Apparently the hills of vietnam, laos, cambodia etc. are full of westerners on the run. Probably not for quite the same class of crime though.
Not necessarily "on the run"; there are people who have had enough of the modern lifestyle and decided they want something different for themselves.
There are plenty of those as well. But I'm referring specifically to people wanted for crimes in their home countries.
The hippies tend not to stay in the mountains through the winter.
The hippies tend not to stay in the mountains through the winter.
Dude, this area is tropical. There is no winter.
If he's smart, he's not even in Hong Kong anymore, nor has he been for some time.
Prerecorded video explicitly stating where he's located? Seems like a ruse.
Prerecorded video explicitly stating where he's located? Seems like a ruse.
I assume he's actually in a journalist's apartment, not going out. Intelligence agencies may know where he is, but no one is going to go after him.
While trekking The Peak (formerly Victoria Peak) in Hong Kong, I ran into a housekeeper walking the family dog. We saw a group of men getting into a very nice car. She mentioned to me that the license plate on the car allows them to travel into China without the usual checks.
I think the best alternative for him is to get himself arrested in a wide public eye.
I am absolutely sure that several people would come up in his support. He can turn himself into a symbol. Any court case around him will be closely followed and analyzed.
I am absolutely sure that several people would come up in his support. He can turn himself into a symbol. Any court case around him will be closely followed and analyzed.
hey, maybe he has some bitcoins
Did he plan for a picture of his face to be plastered all over every news site for a week? Presumably yes, in which case he's probably not planning on trying to disappear.
I will not be surprised if he is found dead by killing himself like Aron Swarz.
"How do you know it was suicide."
"There was a note. Jimmy, have they found the note yet?..."
"There was a note. Jimmy, have they found the note yet?..."
All of your comments have been duly noted. ;-)
[deleted]
The one I'll point out is using a dead person's birth certificate to get ID and an SSN. The databases for the death index were cleaned up after 9/11 and if you try this, your attempt will be flagged and you'll likely be visited by law enforcement pretty shortly. You will not get an ID nor an SSN.
The best way to hide is to not leave any (legitimate) money/electronic trails. Practice disinformation. For example, use a credit card to buy a plane ticket to Bangkok on Saturday, then go buy a bus ticket to Mongolia with cash for Friday and similar tactics. It won't stop professionals from eventually finding you, but it will buy you (sometimes significant) time.
All this is pointless because almost certainly the US IC knows exactly where Snowden is already. It's laughable that anyone believes they're still searching for Snowden.