Trapped: An air escape from Moscow unlikely for NSA leaker Snowden (Uh Oh)

[Cali_Democrat]

By Hannah Allam and Matt Schofield | McClatchy Washington Bureau

WASHINGTON — Beginning a third week holed up in a Moscow airport’s transit zone, Edward Snowden finds himself far enough away to evade U.S. authorities, but also too far from any of the sympathetic nations willing to shelter him.

Aviation experts say that even if Snowden accepts the tentative offers of Venezuela, Nicaragua or Bolivia to give him shelter, it’s virtually impossible to chart a flight plan to those nations that doesn’t include traveling over or refueling in a U.S.-friendly country that could demand inspection of the plane – and detain him.

Nations have full, exclusive jurisdiction over their airspace, so any plane carrying Snowden could be forced to land if it flies over the territory of a country that’s willing to help American authorities capture the fugitive intelligence contractor. Snowden faces felony charges in the United States for leaking classified documents that detailed the National Security Agency’s extensive surveillance apparatus.

<...>

Snowden’s best hope for breaking out of the transit area most likely hinges on whether he could sneak onto one of five weekly, direct flights to Havana, Cuba. One such flight landed Tuesday evening, another leaves Thursday afternoon. The main drawback? The path takes the plane directly over the United States, which could flout a standing treaty and force a regularly scheduled commercial flight to land.

There are airplanes that can make the 6,000-mile direct flight from Moscow to Havana or Caracas with fuel to spare. The Airbus A340 has a range of about 9,000 miles and a Boeing 777 can fly for 9,400 miles before refueling. But a direct flight would mean passing through the airspace of European nations and possibly the United States. And chartering such a craft would be incredibly expensive – $100,000 to start, and that’s if a charter service could be found willing to risk angering the United States and perhaps being accused of aiding a fugitive


http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2013/07/10/196362/trapped-an-air-escape-from-moscow.html#.Ud8Ihm0ecoN

[Maximumnegro]

1. Corporatist Imperialist Socialist Totalitarianist Orwellian

Roger Waters Mel Gibsonist Obama is making the world bend to his will so that Snowden would be trapped!!!

[Rex]

2. He is FUBARd.

Gonna grow old in the transit zone or he is gonna get hurt.

[Cali_Democrat]

3. Meanwhile Greenwald will cash in on his new found fame

Free from prosecution.

[Rex]

5. Greenwald's 15 minutes of fame ran out 5 years ago.

Maybe he should pony up the money and go get his golden boy.

[sabrina 1]

64. For a journalist there is a always work to be done. Too bad for the pro-surveillance state

contingency who have been smearing Greenwald for eight years now, Bush supporters I'm talking about, boy how they hated him, Greenwald will continue to report on issues of Civil Liberties just as he always has.

But he will never profit the way the arbiters of these anti-Constitutional criminals have. Cheney, Bush, Fleischer, Halliburton, Booz Allen, Clapper et al.

Why are you so concerned about a journalist making a living but have zero concern about the billions in profits made from the policies being exposed by that same journalist? Is it okay with you that billions, maybe more, of our tax dollars are being paid to Private Security Corporations whose main job appears to be to spy on the American people?

[Cali_Democrat]

74. Actually I have absolutely no problem with Greenwald doing what he does

It's just interesting how he got Snowden to do all the dirty work. Now Snowden is on the run and his life will never be the same. Meanwhile, Glenn is enjoying new-found fame, cruising the talk show circuit all thanks to Snowden who is now an international fugitive.

Glenn used him, abused him and tossed him out like yesterday's garbage.

[sabrina 1]

78. Got some link or anything that backs up this statement: 'It's just interesting how he got

Snowden to do all the dirty work'??

How did Greenwald do this, and before you answer, remember we know how Snowden came to the decision he came to and how HE got in touch with Greenwald. But from everything I've read there is not even a hint that Greenwald 'got him to do the dirty work'.

But if you know something no one else knows, then post it. It should be a headline.

Did the NYT 'use, abuse and toss out Ellsberg, did the NYT 'use, abuse and toss out Tice'?

Is that what we call it when journalists publish information provided to them by sources who come to them with newsworthy material?

[DevonRex]

4. When is the last time anyone actually saw Snowden? nt

[BenzoDia]

6. Been wondering the same. Is he even there?

My most tin foily of hats tells me he's getting a face lift and is waiting to recover before leaving...

[Rex]

7. I would think it would be very unsafe

to be stuck in one place, where you could get shanghaied pretty easily. He better have eyes in the back of his head.

[DevonRex]

23. Putin has effectively washed his hands of him. Snowden was never technically

in Russia. For all we know he never was to begin with. He could be in China. Or North Korea. Or in a Russian transition camp where people disappear. That incident with the Bolivian plane created a fine diversion, didn't it? If someone was looking for a diversion.

But the first thing in question is why did no passenger on the flight from Hong Kong to Moscow snap a picture of Snowden on that plane? Nobody had an iPhone? Hard to believe. Nobody in the Moscow airport has managed to see him in the transit area? Again, no iPhone handy? I smell a rat and have since the beginning.

[WolverineDG]

58. First off, you can't take photos in a transit area

the ones I've been through all have signs indicating no pictures can be taken (doesn't mean they aren't, of course, but most people coming off international flights have other things on their minds than taking pictures in the transit/pre-customs & immigration area)

Secondly, you're presuming that everyone on that flight is just as obsessed with Snowden as some on DU are. Maybe they knew who he was, but didn't give enough of a flip to take a picture.

Or he never was on that flight. Who knows?

[Junkdrawer]

8. Last picture was during the June 5-6 Hong Kong interview....

Some passengers on the Hong Kong to Russia flight say they saw him - but that's fuzzy.

[HipChick]

9. Pics or it didn't happen

[Rex]

12. SO IOW he might still be in Hong Kong.

Pretty soon they will have to play Where is Waldo?

[Junkdrawer]

15. I hold a real minority opinion on the whole affair....

I think Snowden was part of the rollout, not the exposure, of Prism's brave new "you ARE being watched" world.

I think the votes to keep NSA's snooping are safely in place. If they weren't, the corporate press would have kept the whole affair very quiet.

[Rex]

16. Yes, with a rubber stamp court and the M$M on your side

you would not need to worry much about the populace.

It seems that they learned after watching how we behaved after the Iraq invasion, that the general populace only has so much interest or short term memory. I think they are banking on the fact that in a few weeks, something else will garner our attention span and the Prism project will be safe and already forgotten by the majority.

[Junkdrawer]

22. Yep....leaving nothing but the smile....

I spell it out here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022994688

[Rex]

25. I remember people laughing at me here when I mentioned

TIA a decade ago. Like I was a loony. Like it doesn't exist. Some of them are not laughing now and finally starting to ask the right questions.

Good thread btw, K&R!

[BlueStreak]

97. Does it really matter? Either way, the issue is the Security State, not Snowden.

Whether he is an actor playing a part for the Security Industrial Complex or he is a legitimate whistle-blower, I don't see where it much matters. It certainly would be a disinformation tactic the S.I.C. might consider, given that everything Snowden has divulged was already strongly rumored. In the process, they would have been able to peel off the weakest thinkers among us to fall into line with the S.I.C. being necessary for our survival. That would just be another variation on the "You are either for America or your are for _______" bullshit.

Sad to see so many people on this site who are so easily manipulated. One would have thought they might have more awareness of "the new world order" by now.

These NSA sunabeeches aren't playing patty cake.

[DevonRex]

26. I have grave doubts that he flew to Russia.

Putin would rather we believe he has classified information than that we know he doesn't. That would explain his going along with the ruse.

[Recursion]

68. When was the *first* time anybody saw him?

I believe in his existence less and less.

[BenzoDia]

10. Guess he wanted to wind up in a European country

But still, there's always the paddle boat option.

[Skip Intro]

11. "and force a regularly scheduled commercial flight to land"

How would that work? Fighter jets? Would they shoot the foreign plane down if it refused to land?

Or would some "accident" bring it down over the ocean?

[oldhippie]

24. That's a very interesting question ....

What would the US do if an Aeroflot airliner refused instructions to land? It may threaten with fighters, but I can't see the US actually shooting down an airliner with a lot of innocent passengers just to get Snowden. Wouldn't happen and everybody knows it.

What the US would probably do is prohibit all future flights of Aeroflot into the US, thus costing Aeroflot money. The US might be able to arrest Aeroflot officials in the US for refusing to comply with a flight instruction. In any case, I don't think Aeroflot or Putin is going to risk that just to help Snowden.

Unless Snowden finds a REALLY rich sugar daddy, I think he is screwn.

[ManiacJoe]

80. Right on the money: prohibit all future flights

[ret5hd]

81. oh really???

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Air_Flight_655

[oldhippie]

82. Yes really .......

Yes, we know about flight 655. Totally different circumstances. The US did not purposely shoot down a civilian airliner. It was unfortunate multiple human errors in judgment. Not the same as purposely downing an Aeroflot airliner.

[ret5hd]

83. Yeaaaaaaahhhhh...ok.

Keep tellin' yourself that.

[ret5hd]

86. "...arrest Aeroflot officials in the US for refusing to comply..."

How exactly would that work? Some "official" in the U.S. that had absolutely nothing to do with any of those decisions being arrested over a flight that didn't go over U.S. territory?

Tell us about that. Please.

[oldhippie]

90. I don't know how that would work

But I had seen cases where US based officials of foreign banks (UBS in the case I know about, as I had an account there) were arrested for actions of the bank in the US and other countries. I suppose they could come up with something.

If the US can kill people, even US citizens, with remote drone strikes, I don't think coming up with a secret excuse to "detain" Aeroflot officials is that much of a stretch.

But it won't happen.

[muriel_volestrangler]

69. If they'd do it to a head of state, they'd do it to an airline - refuse a flight path

causing it to turn back (and, having so many passengers on board, it's be a major headache for the airline). If the airplane flew into airspace having been denied permission, then, yes, they'd use jets to intercept it and force it to land - but I doubt any airline would go that far. They wouldn't try arguing with an authoritarian country.

[oldhippie]

84. How would you force it to land if .......

... the pilot refused instructions, refused to communicate, and just kept flying? If you are President Obama, do you order fighters to down it with missiles? Or do you have some other method, other than threats? No military air defense commander is going to order the destruction of a civilian airliner without authority from the NCA unless there is evidence that the airliner is about to perform a terrorist act. Who would risk ordering it? This would be Russians we would be talking about, not Iranians.

Now I agree it won't happen, because I don't think Putin likes Snowden that much.

[muriel_volestrangler]

89. If any plane was that uncommunicative (I don't think any ever has been, in the world)

yes, any country would eventually resort to force (flying so close that the airliner has to turn to avoid a collision would be the more likely method, I think - a fighter can turn better, so is at an advantage even without the option of shooting the other one down; they can also try aiming to damage the plane, rather than attempting to completely destroy it). If the pilot refuses to communicate, then the military will assume it has been taken over by terrorists.

But civilian planes just don't play chicken with military ones. In any country. In any situation. Certainly no pilot would do so just because he had Snowden on board.

[oldhippie]

91. You're probably right .....

But I would point out that one of the reasons the Iranian flight 655 was mistakenly shot down by the US Navy was due to the pilots not answering challenges.

And the idea of flying close enough to force an airliner down, or trying to slightly damage it to make it land are problematic. You're still risking the lives of a lot of civilians and the fighter pilot.

But I think your bottom line is correct:

But civilian planes just don't play chicken with military ones. In any country. In any situation. Certainly no pilot would do so just because he had Snowden on board.

[Sheepshank]

13. in 007 fashion,,,he's on a submarine making out with an operative

I'm thinking Consuexuela Venerela.....on the way to Venezuela

[randome]

21. His codename is...OctoEddie!

[hr][font color="blue"][center]Birds are territorial creatures.
The lyrics to the songbird's melodious trill go something like this:
"Stay out of my territory or I'll PECK YOUR GODDAMNED EYES OUT!"[/center][/font][hr]

[dickthegrouch]

88. That was my suggestion a few days ago

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=531029

[Scurrilous]

14. Thanks.

K & R

[oldhippie]

17. Does anyone here know if there are any corporate jets .....

... that have an air-to-air refueling capability? I know that the military has them, but never heard of a private charter jet that does.

If there were, theoretically, with a rich enough sponsor, Snowden could fly out of Russia to international airspace and refuel over water to get to Venezuela or Nicaragua. Never overflying the US or a friendly country. The air refueling tankers are also military planes, but I would think sufficient funds in a Swiss account could conjure one up from one of several countries.

It's all a question of money.

[HooptieWagon]

33. Its not necessary.

Jets used on Moscow to Havana route are capable of taking a longer route over International airspace the entire way to Caracas.

[oldhippie]

42. You're right .....

As I posted below, I measured the route on my globe. Well within the range of normal airliners.

I was thinking a smaller corporate jet like a Gulfstream as it would be cheaper than trying to charter an A340. I don't think they have the range. But trying to come up with a tanker will also be expensive.

I was just trying to make it cheaper for Snowden's sugar daddy, whoever that may turn out to be.

[BlueStreak]

18. A serious question if you don't mind

Why do you folks hang around a site that is supposed to be about promoting democracy when you seem to take such pleasure in seeing an authoritarian government crush any opposition?

Just wondering.

[randome]

20. You mean like Russia promising to arrest gay tourists?

That kind of authoritarian government?
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Birds are territorial creatures.
The lyrics to the songbird's melodious trill go something like this:
"Stay out of my territory or I'll PECK YOUR GODDAMNED EYES OUT!"[/center][/font][hr]

[BlueStreak]

28. Am I to understand that if Snowden were gay

then the anti-Snowden army that has been trashing this site would flip positions?

If we look hard enough, I bet we can dig up something on that.

[randome]

34. You are NOT to understand that.

It means that about 30 of the 'nice' countries turned him down and now he's scraping the bottom of the barrel to run and hide in whatever repressive regime will take him.

You have to admit, the irony is incredible.

"I am not here to hide from justice."
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Birds are territorial creatures.
The lyrics to the songbird's melodious trill go something like this:
"Stay out of my territory or I'll PECK YOUR GODDAMNED EYES OUT!"[/center][/font][hr]

[Cali_Democrat]

29. It's a discussion board and....

not everyone will agree with you or hold your exact point of view.

Shocking, huh?

If you want an echo chamber where everyone agrees with you, this ain't it.

[BlueStreak]

35. That doesn't answer my question. Why do people so fond of authoritarian actions

hang around a DEMOCRATIC website, unless it is just to agitate?

[CakeGrrl]

39. So we should stop expecting those who break the law to be accountable?

And yes, we've all heard BANKERS! WALL STREET!

While it's unfair that 'white collar criminals' are not punished to the extent they ought to be, it doesn't have any bearing on other lawbreaking.

If Snowden should be exempt from his data and property theft, who else gets to be afforded that privilege for breaking an EXISTING law? Why or why not?

[BlueStreak]

61. And likewise, you wanted to see the UC-Davis occupiers prosecuted?

Because they were breaking the law when they got shot in the face with pepper spray.

[CakeGrrl]

66. They are not comparable situations.

Just as shoplifting a bag of chips is not an equivalent offense to stealing a car.

The effects of Snowden's crime are far-reaching and could impact millions of people. It is not a heroic civil disobedience.

[Maximumnegro]

40. Maybe because

they're not as fond of authoritarian actions as you are of stuffing strawmen.

Not that I'm judging - everybody needs a hobby!

[Cali_Democrat]

54. Your assumption is that people here who disagree with your view point are fond of

authoritarian actions.

Not true at all. That is just your opinion.

You haven't even been on DU for a year yet.

You're going to run into a lot of people that disagree with you on various issues. I suggest you get used to it because it will happen time and time again.

Cheers!

[BlueStreak]

60. I have lurked fairly regularly for a decade, and have never seen anything like this at DU

I have a little more time now that I have mostly retired.

Democracy ought to be a core principle of anybody who purports be a member rather than a troll. On many other issues, I would expect some diversity, but I don't see it on this one. This is a core principle.

Did you apply that same principle of prosecuting the law-breakers to the fullest extent of the law when it came to the Occupy movement? Those kids taking the pepper spray in the face at UC-Davis were breaking the law, after all. Which side are you on?

[Proud Liberal Dem]

43. A question in reply

What are you doing on a "Democratic" website spending most of your time bashing a Democratic POTUS and Democrats in general as being little better (if at all) than Republicans?

[BlueStreak]

95. I fight for the principles of the Democratic Party

If the POTUS does not uphold the same principles, then he deserves criticism -- from EVERY SINGLE PERSON HERE.

Let me call your attention to the fact that this is not ObamaUnderground.com. That man will be gone is a couple more years and our fight will continue. I will thank him for the positive things that he did, but frankly, he isn't doing a hell of a lot for Democrats these days. Being the not-Romney is surely insufficient. In reality, he is already well into his lane duck period -- by his own choices.

I will not play your little game of heaping praise on a man who every day is getting farther and farther way from the core Democratic principles he so eloquently spoke about in BOTH of his campaigns.

[randome]

19. Run, Eddie, r...er, Fly, Eddie, fly!

[hr][font color="blue"][center]Birds are territorial creatures.
The lyrics to the songbird's melodious trill go something like this:
"Stay out of my territory or I'll PECK YOUR GODDAMNED EYES OUT!"[/center][/font][hr]

[flamingdem]

31. He's probably watching James Bond movies on his laptop now

looking for ideas!

[leveymg]

27. Someone forgot to look at a map - fly southeast instead of west. Idiots.

[BlueStreak]

32. If China would allow refueling, the route would work.

But the way our government is acting, I'd expect them to shoot down that plane over the Pacific.

Seriously.

[leveymg]

47. Aeroflot does charters, so do several Chinese airlines that serve Russia and South America.

I don't think we would shoot one of THEIR flag carriers down, do you?

[HooptieWagon]

30. Bullfeathers.

It is possible to fly north from Moscow to the arctic ocean, south between Iceland and Greenland, and then on to Venezuela. International airspace the entire way, and well within the range of jets used on regular Moscow-Havana route. Would have to be a charter flight, which is expensive. But entirely feasible.
Another possibility is flying from Moscow to one of the 'stans, then to Africa, then on to Venezuela. This route does overfly some countries, but can be done avoiding US puppet-states.

[oldhippie]

38. Whipping out my ........

... 12 inch globe and my wife's sewing measuring tape, I measured the Russia - Arctic-Atlantic- Venezuela overwater flight path to be about 7300 miles. As you say, well within the range of several different airliners. And yes, expensive.

[BeyondGeography]

36. This whole thing is a terrible misadventure

[Maximumnegro]

45. 'A Terrible Misadventure' Starring Colin Firth

as Edward Snowden, Bill Nighy as Julian Assange and Alfred Molina as multiple Latin American leaders. Special Appearance by Hugh Jackman as Putin.

[randome]

46. Hugh Jackman?

[hr][font color="blue"][center]Birds are territorial creatures.
The lyrics to the songbird's melodious trill go something like this:
"Stay out of my territory or I'll PECK YOUR GODDAMNED EYES OUT!"[/center][/font][hr]

[BeyondGeography]

50. Not sure about the Assange casting, but you don't make this film without Bill Nighy

somewhere in there. He could be Snowden's spurned BAH boss, an editor at The Guardian, a Russian intermediary, Clapper, etc., etc.

[Maximumnegro]

53. Jeff Bridges as Greenwald

"This will not stand, man. Uh, okay, ya know, you guys aren't privy to all the new shit, so uh, you know, but hey, that's what you, that's what you pay me for."

[BeyondGeography]

56. Paul Giamatti

But Greenwald would probably insist on a better hairline.

[Maximumnegro]

65. LOL! nt

[pinboy3niner]

37. Snowden's secret alternate course has just been leaked...

[leveymg]

48. I love it. No need for a stop or inflight refueling. Book it Danno!

[Aerows]

59. That is still

funny as hell I've never seen such an epic fail of a post in my life - except for maybe the others that jumped into the thread to "explain" it to everyone.

[NightWatcher]

41. He's grown a beard and will be riding a camel to the desert

From there he'll get a job as a deckhand on a cargo ship to the Panama Canal. Once there he'll take a burro to which ever country will take him.

[randome]

44. You forget one thing. He can't grow a beard!

[hr][font color="blue"][center]Birds are territorial creatures.
The lyrics to the songbird's melodious trill go something like this:
"Stay out of my territory or I'll PECK YOUR GODDAMNED EYES OUT!"[/center][/font][hr]

[NightWatcher]

51. Oh well I guess it's gitmo then.

[AllINeedIsCoffee]

49. Good. Even an unofficial prison is satisfying to those of us that want justice. nt

[BlueStreak]

62. What "justice" are you seeking?

[AllINeedIsCoffee]

71. Prison for a man that broke the law and is too cowardly to face the charges.

It doesn't matter what he or his supporters think the government will do to him. If you're accused of breaking the law, you should stand trial.

[BlueStreak]

94. Do you apply the same reasoning to the Occupy movement people who broke many laws?

And don't even try to ague that these are not equivalent "crimes". The government has not given a shred of evidence that any of the information revealed by Snowden has actually endangered any terror-fighting activity that would otherwise be legal and Constitutional.

In fact, it is clear that the central thing he blew the whistle on was a government wantonly disregarding the 4th Amendment. A whistle blower is MORE justified that the Occupiers on that basis, because there is an implied responsibility of every government employee to uphold the Constitution. There is no similar obligation for Occupiers to trespass on private property.

[DesMoinesDem]

52. So the BOGers have moved on from the 'No one will give him asylum!' to 'He'll never get there!' LOL

[morningfog]

55. Well, many of them predicted he would be in US custody by last week.

[randome]

57. Eddie feels abandoned by Glenn. Here is his love/hate song. Has planes and everything.

[hr][font color="blue"][center]Birds are territorial creatures.
The lyrics to the songbird's melodious trill go something like this:
"Stay out of my territory or I'll PECK YOUR GODDAMNED EYES OUT!"[/center][/font][hr]

[Gravitycollapse]

63. Moscow to Irkutsk or Vladivostok to Caracas.

[flamingdem]

67. getting closer...

... however it's probably close, but no cigar lol

https://twitter.com/lamparadiogenes/status/355442650381434881/photo/1

[warrprayer]

70. Halo of Flies has the answer!

[Marr]

72. It's skeevy to me, the way authoritarians get giddy over stories like this.

Saw it a lot during the Bush years. It was almost like they were experiencing sexual arousal when they talked about dissidents or prisoners being abused or killed.

[Cali_Democrat]

73. That's awful

[CakeGrrl]

75. Another nasty condescension to slam fellow DUers. Surprise!

Maybe you should look up the Team Snowden post with a cartoon showing a hanged whistleblower from a tree, with President Obama casually sauntering away, dusting his hands as if satisfied with his work.

Pretty ugly the way some of you visualize the Democratic President of the United States as a whistleblower snuff artist. Project much?

[BlueStreak]

96. Authoritarians are not "fellow DUers" They may cohabit here, but there is no basis

for being fellows.

This really is clear cut. It is not possible to be for things like the Patriot Act and the authority state it creates and still consider oneself a person who is a "fellow Democrat".

I don't mean to be disagreeable, but a person who is in favor of enabling the worst polluters has no business here. A person who is in favor of privatizing Social Security has no business here. A person who is against a strong public education system for all Americans has no business here. While there are many issues that rightly have a range of views and possible solutions, there are certain things where we simply cannot "agree to disagree", and an authoritarian government, well along the path to the 1984-style totalitarian state is one of those issues where no compromise is possible.

You cannot be for the authoritarian state and also try to call yourself a Democrat.

[warrprayer]

98. but... but...

that was my cartoon! Alert didn't go your way?

[ProSense]

76. But it features a really cool

poll graphic: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023226956

[BenzoDia]

77. Weird post. You should unplug from the net for a bit. Wind down with a book or some exercise.

[HooptieWagon]

79. Yea, I've noticed it too.

They do sound giddy when discussing Snowden being catured or killed. Gleeful even. Perhaps some kind of sexual-sadism?

[allin99]

85. It's downright creepy.

[Alamuti Lotus]

92. Yeah, I've noticed that as well

It is not so much that certain individuals in this loyalist faction feel passionate about the issue--that can be found on any subject. What is disturbing is the really pathological fixation with the triumph of authority and the execution of power that is so remarkable in this instance. There is definitely an air of almost sexual tension whenever the apparent misfortunes (real or imagined) of the enemy de jure are being discussed--or, more accurately, gloated over.

[randome]

93. Sorry to disappoint (well, speaking for myself, anyways) but we just enjoy mocking a buffoon.

"I'm not here to hide from justice."

[hr][font color="blue"][center]Birds are territorial creatures.
The lyrics to the songbird's melodious trill go something like this:
"Stay out of my territory or I'll PECK YOUR GODDAMNED EYES OUT!"[/center][/font][hr]

[Cha]

87. Well, we know Snowden is nothing if not

"sneaky".. and the World Hypocrisy Tour saga continues..