Edward Snowden: Whistleblower Behind Leaks Outs Himself
from the boom dept
Well, here's a bit of surprise. Rather than waiting for the massive manhunt that was surely underway to track him down to find him, the guy behind last week's incredible whistleblowing concerning the NSA's massive surveillance capabilities has outed himself as Edward Snowden, a 29-year-old who used to work for the CIA, and has been working as a contractor for the NSA for a while:The individual responsible for one of the most significant leaks in US political history is Edward Snowden, a 29-year-old former technical assistant for the CIA and current employee of the defence contractor Booz Allen Hamilton. Snowden has been working at the National Security Agency for the last four years as an employee of various outside contractors, including Booz Allen and Dell.The Guardian piece explains what he did and why ("My sole motive is to inform the public as to that which is done in their name and that which is done against them"). It also notes that he feels that his case is one of pure whistleblowing, distinguished from, say, Bradley Manning, in that he carefully chose which documents to reveal for the sole purpose of exposing a surveillance system that he (correctly) blew the whistle on a surveillance infrastructure that appears to go well beyond what the public believed was appropriate or within the bounds of the 4th Amendment.
The Guardian, after several days of interviews, is revealing his identity at his request. From the moment he decided to disclose numerous top-secret documents to the public, he was determined not to opt for the protection of anonymity. "I have no intention of hiding who I am because I know I have done nothing wrong," he said.
The companion interview is probably even more interesting than the initial Guardian article.
Q: Why did you decide to become a whistleblower?Snowden left Hawaii, recently, where he lived to travel to Hong Kong, where he's been hiding out in a hotel. He appears to be fully aware that a lot of people are going to find him and that "nothing good" is about to happen to him, but he felt that he couldn't stay silent.
A: "The NSA has built an infrastructure that allows it to intercept almost everything. With this capability, the vast majority of human communications are automatically ingested without targeting. If I wanted to see your emails or your wife's phone, all I have to do is use intercepts. I can get your emails, passwords, phone records, credit cards.
"I don't want to live in a society that does these sort of things … I do not want to live in a world where everything I do and say is recorded. That is not something I am willing to support or live under."
Q: What do the leaked documents reveal?There is some additional scary stuff about the culture within the intelligence community concerning how they feel about due process and the Constitution. It's been widely reported that a foreign affairs analyst overheard some intelligence officials in an airport lounge discussing how the leaker and the reporters involved in these leaks should be "disappeared" -- and Snowden responded to that by nothing that he's not surprised, because this is how things work:
A: "That the NSA routinely lies in response to congressional inquiries about the scope of surveillance in America. I believe that when [senator Ron] Wyden and [senator Mark] Udall asked about the scale of this, they [the NSA] said it did not have the tools to provide an answer. We do have the tools and I have maps showing where people have been scrutinised most. We collect more digital communications from America than we do from the Russians."
"Someone responding to the story said 'real spies do not speak like that'. Well, I am a spy and that is how they talk. Whenever we had a debate in the office on how to handle crimes, they do not defend due process – they defend decisive action. They say it is better to kick someone out of a plane than let these people have a day in court. It is an authoritarian mindset in general."And, like Bradley Manning -- who Snowden calls "a classic whistleblower... inspired by the public good," -- Snowden appears to believe strongly that his actions are not to hurt the US, but to help it.
"I think the sense of outrage that has been expressed is justified. It has given me hope that, no matter what happens to me, the outcome will be positive for America. I do not expect to see home again, though that is what I want."There's plenty more in both the article and the interview that's worth reading. I'm sure there will be much more on this, but this truly does seem like a classic whistleblower case, though I doubt that's how Snowden will be portrayed by many in power.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: edward snowden, leaks, nsa, nsa surveillance, whistleblower
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Before that the US government would have to prove to the Hong Kong authorities that the request was not politically motivated.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
http://rss.slashdot.org/~r/Slashdot/slashdot/~3/YB1ZxnI-zak/story01.htm
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
That said, it is INSANE that he is in fear for his life... because he exposed a program that is about American safety. Dafuq?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I don�t consider it surprising that Snowden fears for his life. I consider it surprising that he lived long enough to say so.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
The law is not above the law and he made the right choice for the good of the nation. If anything this man is a hero.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
So a program is running amok, but they are so terrified of looking soft on terror they are willing to sacrifice the law, citizens rights, and another person willing to point out the emperor is naked.
FSM have mercy on us all...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The denials are already starting...
Oh, how nice to have a 'deniable plausibility' clause in your employment contract.
But he's still a hero for all of that. Takes guts to take on the biggest security apparatus in the world, I say.
Let's see if he makes it out alive from Hong Kong.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The denials are already starting...
'We're so focused on security we let people who haven't even been with us half a year have access to highly classified briefing materials.'
Yeah, that would make them look so much better...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The denials are already starting...
Report to the HR department immediately !!
NB: According to the reporting none are actually denying wrong-doing: it's now "it's Snowden's fault for whistle-blowing"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: The denials are already starting...
When a firm's 'core values' consist of violating the Constitutional rights of millions of Americans, that firm has no credibility.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Disappeared
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Disappeared
At least this way he might get one of them thar high priced defense attorneys, pro bono. I think it's probably better in the sunlight, given his position.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
For anyone who hasn't figured it out yet, the US government doesn't give a shit about the law. They believe that they have the right to do anything they want, therefore whatever they do is automatically "legal" and anyone who opposes them is a traitor.
As for Snowden, I expect the Obama administration to paint him as the worst criminal in US history and to use every trick in the book to put him away for life. I'm calling it here and now; They'll try to claim that his choice of Hong Kong as a safe haven shows that he's in cahoots with the Chinese government.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Well, if this story holds up -- already under attack -- then
Getting out in public is the best way to stay alive. -- Note how casually but chillingly this guy confirms that the NSA is full of savages who don't care beans about your rights. The attack dogs trained in Iraq are now turned on Americans. This is why "moral panics" EARLY and OFTEN are the only wise course: you can't make people moral again once they've tasted blood.
SO, turns out all the "conspiracy kooks" are right so far... But you can bet your last fiat dollar that the conspirators aren't done yet. I'm still of the opinion that this "leak" is carefully calibrated -- this guy even admits that it is! He's claiming that he did it alone, but WE don't know that.
To repeat, he and NSA may still be working a psyop. Time won't tell, because in any case they'll have moved on to the next stage of ratcheting up the tyranny.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Well, if this story holds up -- already under attack -- then
I'm supposed to be framed up and killed soon. Maybe it will be days, months, or possibly years. Who knows?
I just know my friends are dead (like the boston guys friends). They started in on me when I was a 12 year old, and did what they could to twist me along the way. We are ruled by psychopaths.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Even though he wasn't in the military.
I applaud this American Hero. We need more people like him and Bradley Manning.
The American government is way out of control and people like these do this country good.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
And the denials by Google and Facebook begin to fade:
As was clarified here by your present writer, the lawyerly weasel-worded "direct access" and "back door" non-denial denials of Friday actually mean that they built special front ends for NSA:
"But instead of adding a back door to their servers, the companies were essentially asked to erect a locked mailbox and give the government the key, people briefed on the negotiations said. Facebook, for instance, built such a system for requesting and sharing the information, they said."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: And the denials by Google and Facebook begin to fade:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: And the denials by Google and Facebook begin to fade:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: And the denials by Google and Facebook begin to fade:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: And the denials by Google and Facebook begin to fade:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
― Benjamin Franklin
�Those who surrender freedom for security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one.�
― Benjamin Franklin
�Justice will not be served until those who are unaffected are as outraged as those who are.�
― Benjamin Franklin
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
I'm sure I've seen that line somewhere before ..
Learn to reference properly!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: founding fathers
Why do we have to quote the Bible, Koran, or "moldy Babylonian Gods" to find answers to the challenges of our time.
The world would probably be better off without religion and quotes from Shakespeare. Think.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: founding fathers
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: founding fathers
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: founding fathers
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: founding fathers
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: founding fathers
How does the wise saying go?
"Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: founding fathers
Not only was this said by George Santayana 75 years or so ago (so he lived in a different time and anything he says couldn't possible hold any relevance to us now), but he didn't actually say that. He said "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."
But, he just ripped that off from Edmund Burke, who said "Those who don't know history are destined to repeat it.". Burke lived in the 18th century, so we can safely ignore him even harder.
Plus, this sentiment comes directly from the teachings of Aristotle, Socrates, and Plato -- so we can ignore this so hard that history itself will break into a thousand pieces!
/sarc
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/09/booz-allen-hamilton-edward-snowden
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
troubling
A few more like him and Manning, and the US is done for. This is the sort of failure in chain of command that shows that you just cannot trust the very people in positions of trust.
What happens when all of this turns out to be within the law, reasonable, and within the scope of military operations? What happens when it turns out that every member of congress (even the sainted Wyden) had at least some knowledge? What happens to the guy when it turns out that all he did was destroy a legal intelligence program that took years to built, and now is pretty much busted?
If you call this guy a hero, you missed the point.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: troubling
Simply following orders is never an excuse. To stay silent in a corrupt system makes you a part of that corruption.
I am quite sure though that he has violated national security laws, confidentiality agreements and a whole lot more to reveal these documents. Quite a brave man who simply wants the United States to be a better place.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: troubling
The system isn't corrupt - the system works fine. There is always, always a trade between law enforcement, public safety, and your absolute privacy. When you give it up (by using third party services) there is no reason why the government can't collect the information.
You may not like it, but it's a fact of life. My suggestion for you is turn off your cell phone, disconnect your computer from the interwebz and find a cave to go live in. At least you have less chance of a terrorist blowing up your children... right?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: troubling
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: troubling
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: troubling
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: troubling
... oh, yeah, it utterly failed to do so. My bad.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: troubling
When you give it up (by using third party services) there is no reason why the government can't collect the information but this I agree with, as long as it applies to everyone else as well.
Laws should be applied to everyone and everything equally. So what is good for the government should be good for the citizen. Conversely, if its illegal for the private citizen then its supposed to be illegal for a corporation and government agency's, but often we find this not to be true.
When laws are not applied evenly or consistently, and are changed in secret, there is a problem (a big problem) in the system that controls the laws. This is the situation we are faced with in the United States government. I don't know how long its been going on, but its clear that it has been for some time. I personally feel like the government is both traitor and terrorist rolled into one.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: troubling
Ahhh, and here's the nut of the source of our disagreement.
I think the system doesn't work fine. It's incredibly corrupt -- to the point of collapse.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: troubling
Wow.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: troubling
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: troubling
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: troubling
Of course Wyden had knowledge. Why do you think he's been asking the questions he's been asking?!?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: troubling
How did he vote on the creation and maintenance of this stuff anyway? You should know his voting record on this, right?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: troubling
If he did, he wouldn't be able to give the warnings that he did. Which is worse, to know how this program began and get these people on the record, or to be on the outside looking in while they do this without explicit knowledge?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: troubling
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: troubling
You seem to be woefully behind the times regarding Wyden's actions. Please try to keep up.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: troubling
Catch up on a few more news stories; Wyden has been asking questions that are way out in front of everybody else, including almost every other member of the Senate Intelligence Committee.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: troubling
When the executive branch is monitoring my calls to my U.S. representative�something is seriously unbalanced.
When the President, in his CinC role, orders the military to monitor my calls to the legislature�then something is just plain wrong.
�
No matter how severe the terror threat might be today, we are not living in a state like Tennessee in 1862. Even if we were �even under those peculiar conditions� I'd still have serious doubts about letting the military interfere in communications between citizens and their Congress.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: troubling
If you pay attention, you would understand that they are NOT monitoring your calls. They are collecting data that you give to a third party (which phone number calls which phone number, for how long, if mobile where the mobile is). All of that data is generally considered 3rd party.
Nobody is recording your calls and listening to them You aren't that important.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: troubling
Senator Mark Kirk, from Illinois, begins his questions and remark a little after the 2:00:00 mark in the webcast.
Senator Kirk is followed by South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham. I listened to him too.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: troubling
They don't need to:
http://gizmodo.com/why-the-metadata-the-nsa-has-on-you-matters-512103968
What they are trying to say is that disclosure of metadata � the details about phone calls, without the actual voice � isn't a big deal, not something for Americans to get upset about if the government knows. Let's take a closer look at what they are saying:
They know you rang a phone sex service at 2:24 am and spoke for 18 minutes. But they don't know what you talked about.
They know you called the suicide prevention hotline from the Golden Gate Bridge. But the topic of the call remains a secret.
They know you spoke with an HIV testing service, then your doctor, then your health insurance company in the same hour. But they don't know what was discussed.
They know you received a call from the local NRA office while it was having a campaign against gun legislation, and then called your senators and congressional representatives immediately after. But the content of those calls remains safe from government intrusion.
They know you called a gynecologist, spoke for a half hour, and then called the local Planned Parenthood's number later that day. But nobody knows what you spoke about.
Sorry, your phone records�oops, "so-called metadata"�can reveal a lot more about the content of your calls than the government is implying.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: troubling
The same could be said for having someone note the license plates of cars that go to local gun shops (legal) and those who visit local politician's offices (also legal), and combining that list. "Metadata" is a scare word to use here, when really it's just data that you disclose to third parties (breaking privacy) or that happens in your normal course of life in public.
They know you spoke with an HIV testing service, then your doctor, then your health insurance company in the same hour. But they don't know what was discussed.
They can imply things, and this information may (in a given situation) create probably cause for a wiretap or similar in the case of insurance fraud as an example. There is very little real value to that information because it beyond the obvious because it cannot be used outside of criminal cases.
All you need to do is replace "called" with "drove your car to" or "walked" to understand that the data can be collected anywhere, which is pretty much the standard.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: troubling
Can be yes, is it? Only when law enforcement have a reasonable suspicion of wrong doing (they have to justify the man hours). I've got no problem with limited targeted surveillance but grabbing everything with no oversight is not good.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: troubling
And if that were happening on anywhere near the same scale as this you might have a point. But it's not, so you don't.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: troubling
Yes, it could. In fact, I'll say it (and denounce it) myself. It's an incredibly dangerous and invasive practice that, if extended to all the metadata you generate, amounts to wholesale, invasive surveillance of the sort that the Constitution was trying to prevent.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
If you are correct
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: troubling
I call that "monitoring my calls". How nice that they (claim they) aren't actually listening to the call contents themselves, but that's pretty weak sauce. It's still monitoring by any definition of the word.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: troubling
Assuming you were being serious though, I have to say, with a mindset like that any would-be-king or dictatorship would absolutely love to have you around, as you seem to be saying that being in charge or in a position of power, no matter how they got there, is enough to make people and organizations unquestionable and above reproach.
To say that this is wrong is like saying a forest fire is kinda warm, a monumental understatement, and if you need any reasons provided look up a whopping three posts above yours for a few quotes from someone apparently much wiser about such things than you.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: troubling
Horse with no name is walking around, bumps into NSA man. NSA man is a dick, and demand's Horse's name. Horse, being the willing slave that he is (according to what he writes, he'd be the kind of person who would gladly do this) gives up his name. NSA man doesn't arrest Horse or have a cop do so (I'm unsure if someone from the NSA can arrest someone but that would be incidental here).
NSA man goes to his office and has access to Horse's name and details. He looks up Horse's phone records. He notices a few interesting details.
He sees that Horse has called a doctor well known for specializing in AIDS related diseases. Horse has also called a suicide prevention hotline, a gay support network. With information culled from Facebook and Google, he learns that Horse is from the Bible Belt, from an area where it is generally not socially acceptable to be gay.
NSA man has enough information here to ruin Horse's life. He does not need call recordings. Just this metadata is enough for NSA man to use logic to figure out that Horse is homosexual, that he hides said homosexuality from his family and friends, and that he has contemplated suicide and is worried about possibly having AIDS.
Now...what if it turns out that Horse is a political candidate or already in office? Suddenly, NSA man now has leverage over him.
Think about it. That is what can and will happen.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: troubling
Wow... you went a long way for that one. Have you considered that (a) if they are a political person they would already be known, no requirement to "ask their name" and (b) most people are discrete enough not to do those sort of things openly.
Basically, the politician wouldn't walk into an aid clinic in the open, and they generally wouldn't be stupid enough to use a phone that can be tracked to them for the same purpose. Remember, each of your calls, like it or not, is information given to a third party (the phone company). Every call on your cell phone is tracked. It's the nature of the device.
You guys need to step back and discover reality, and stop getting all excited about some grand secret conspiracy. Just go look at your cell bills "detailed calling" list. It's all there. Aren't you shocked?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: troubling
Oh and notice what you said, "walk into an aid clinic". I never said my hypothetical Horse would walk into one. He called an AIDS specialist doctor. Big difference. As for using a phone that can't be tracked to them? That's a big problem in and of itself. It means that now, just to make private calls, they now have to go out of their way to get specific phones.
Yes, I know that call information is given to a third party, the phone company, (have to, in order for their service to work, their systems have to know what your phone number is and who you're calling, and since most people use mobile phones, their system needs to know where the recipient is), but that's a completely different entity than the NSA! Why does the NSA have to know who Politician Horse called? Or Random Bob? What if Politician Horse called a sex line from his office (not a bright thing to do, but not illegal) and Dick NSA Man is easily able to find that out? Now Dick NSA Man can very easily extort favours from Politician Horse.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: troubling
It's not going to be your problem till it affects you, and then what will you say? "But I'm one of you?" Good luck with that.
You really think it's only for "the pirates," don't you?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: troubling
A normal representative citizen then either couldn't be an elected politician or would have enough dirt on their record to be blackmailed and controlled the minute they take office.
Or these politicians would be an elite class of people with the know how to disguise their every move from surveillance, but they are about to take public office.
This is the sort of non-representative government you would approve of?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: troubling
That's a key word in the context of this enterprise: � �leverage�.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: troubling
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: troubling
Any definition of "hero" you have needs to be taken with a shaker of salt.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: troubling
I'd rather say some more mindless drones like you are doing far worse to any society.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: troubling
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Degrees of shame
We can all hope that Congress calls Edward Snowden before them in the Capital in a fully open meeting to question him about the abuses of the intelligence services.
Should they do so in a closed meeting then they want answers themselves while working on a pubic cover up.
Then should they not take up this opportunity then he would only be a traitor to them and who they would soon let Obama bury.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Pardon Him
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Pardon Him
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Pardon Him
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Pardon Him
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/pardon-edward-snowden/Dp03vGYD
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Pardon Him
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Pardon Him
Apparently they started extradition proceedings; doesn't that imply he's been charged with a crime?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
IF i was a us citizen id be very unhappy with the people i elected to represent me.
As a foreigner i am concerned about the direction the us government is taking, and think something seriously has to give soon.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
God bless Edward Snowden
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
@38
sorry dont know what thats for canceled...and so on.
THE leash becomes the pooper scooper and the poop bag is where they all go.
A few people get unemployed and the rest fo the nation gets more debt paid off quicker.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It's Obvious
How? That's obvious. An asset will poison his food, he has to order it in, they'll get to it while in transit or have someone cook it into the food. The autopsy will be faked or twisted and he'll be cremated or something like that.
Then the masses who might just be waking up will fall back asleep with the next reality show.
The CIA's greatest play was manipulating the people of their own country of origin, using the apathy program.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No matter what they do, it's gonna be hilarious.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Worse than Watergate
Nixon spied on one group of people and covered it up for 2ish years. It may have been for more personal reasons, but the line of national security was used to try and justify it. We already know that really wasn't the case.
Bush and Obama spied on the entire nation and who knows how many foreigners for 7 years. It may not have been for as many personal reasons that Nixon had, but if not already, it was only a matter of time before this program would have been used to do much more than Nixon ever thought possible.
Nixon was run out of office for his actions, I would hope for a similar resolution to this scandal for anybody that did not try and stop it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Worse than Watergate
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
terrorists should have known about this:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
We need to decide what kind of world that we want to live in, one where privacy is trampled for what is to be thought as minimal security gains, or one where we have an open and free society because currently we don't. Adopting a siege mentality is ultimately self defeating and that is what is happening now. Snowden has give us the information that was hidden from us and he gave us what we need to be able to decide what kind of world we want to live in. Now its up to us to do something with it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
History of the Second American Civil War
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The more I read about this guy...
I would almost think he is Wikileaks symp.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
NSA surveillance
It was revealed in "Clear and Present Danger" almost 20 years ago.
Rational thinking would lead one to believe that Tom Clancy had sources about phone surveillance. Frankly, other than bleeding hearts, it would seem like a good idea to be vigilant against the bad guys.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Snowden is a real live hero
I'm humbled by his sacrifice and proud to share a planet with him.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Good for you Snowden.wake up Americans
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Except Manning also had access to a lot more top secret documents he didn't leak because he felt that there were legitimate security risks to leaking them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This has been an end run the government has been using for decades. While blocked from directly getting that info prior to all the laws that have been made since, it was somehow not illegal for them to pay 3rd party to get it for them. The end results come out the same.
Another questionable is:
Security and spying are notorious for the paranoid mindset. So if he's only been with them 3 months, he really didn't learn much at all about the real deep down security, he just learned what everyone else already knows within the agency.
I'm pissed about this, so should you be.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Snowden
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
leaks
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The Voice In Your Head
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
check this footage out http://youtu.be/Z3EF2pvKuo4
[ link to this | view in chronology ]