If Only Ed Snowden Worked On Wall St. He'd Be Free From Prosecution Risk

from the sad-but-true dept

Wed, Jul 3rd 2013 7:39pm — Mike Masnick

Here's a post on Google+ from Rick Falkvinge that says it all in a single picture:

Yeah, this one belongs in the sad-but-true category. Hell, if he were on Wall St., perhaps he could ask for a bailout too.

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: ed snowden, wall st.

110 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it

out_of_the_blue, 3 Jul 2013 @ 8:09pm

Holy cow! Mike takes a swipe at Wall Street!
Once past 30, you begin seeing through the lies of The Rich.

To celebrate this turn toward my views -- if it is -- and if he's always agreed with me that Wall Street is nothing but thieves, then his fault for not making that clear -- anyhoo, I'm going to take a holiday from commenting tomorrow.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 3 Jul 2013 @ 8:17pm
  
  Re: Holy cow! Mike takes a swipe at Wall Street!
  Well, we see through the constant lies that you tell on this site.
  
  So I guess that you don't need to be past 30 to see through the lies of a paranoid nutcase.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Akari Mizunashi (profile), 4 Jul 2013 @ 6:53am
    
    Re: Re: Holy cow! Mike takes a swipe at Wall Street!
    I laughed at your use of "commenting".
    
    Why stop at tomorrow? You'd do us a favor if you took a sabbatical.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Akari Mizunashi (profile), 4 Jul 2013 @ 6:55am
      
      Re: Re: Re: Holy cow! Mike takes a swipe at Wall Street!
      Oops. Wrong post reply. Meh, the point's still valid.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 3 Jul 2013 @ 8:58pm
  
  Re: Holy cow! Mike takes a swipe at Wall Street!
  Few people would defend how the bankers at Wall Street got no punishment. Your claim that Masnick is "turning towards your views" is nothing but masturbation.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - DOlz (profile), 3 Jul 2013 @ 11:53pm
    
    Re: Re: Holy cow! Mike takes a swipe at Wall Street!
    In his case wouldn't that be Masnickurbation?
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Pragmatic, 4 Jul 2013 @ 3:25am
      
      Re: Re: Re: Holy cow! Mike takes a swipe at Wall Street!
      What do you expect from a woman who actually believes that the Straw Man version of Mike she has created to bash is the real deal?
      
      Mike doesn't share her views, nor is he turning. Correct me if I'm wrong but he comes across as being reality-based, center-right, slightly libertarian. I can live with that.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - tqk (profile), 4 Jul 2013 @ 8:09am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Holy cow! Mike takes a swipe at Wall Street!
        Correct me if I'm wrong but he comes across as being reality-based, center-right, slightly libertarian.
        
        Well, except for that "center-right", I agree with your assessment.
        
        I wish people would just stop using that left vs. right BS. It's a meaningless, empty concept which was only briefly useful centuries ago in France. Today it's as useless as liberal vs. conservative. It's either a crutch for those too lazy to bother understanding mildly complex, nuanced concepts (degrading the ideas they attempt to express), or a club used to bash political opponents with intentional ignorance.
        
        While I'm at it, "slightly libertarian" is goofy too. Either you're describing individual freedom and liberty or its opposite authoritarian, possibly even statist. Eschew intellectual sloth! I do. :-)
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 4 Jul 2013 @ 9:53am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Holy cow! Mike takes a swipe at Wall Street!
        Not sure what you're ranting about. He never said left vs right, he just said what Mike's position appears to be. Just because you favor a particular area or are in a certain camp, doesn't mean you are against the other side either.
        
        That's just pundit talk.
        
        Center-right implies mild right leaning view point, not that he hates lefts. Sometimes you don't have an entire essay to outline the nuances of your political belief spectrum.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 4 Jul 2013 @ 11:04am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Holy cow! Mike takes a swipe at Wall Street!
        No, categorizing everything as left vs. right is pundit talk. 'Center-right' implies a binary, pundit-like view of the political universe and it's hilarious you'd not only endorse that kind of bullshit but simultaneously suggest that rejecting it is punditry.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        tqk (profile), 4 Jul 2013 @ 12:24pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Holy cow! Mike takes a swipe at Wall Street!
        Not sure what you're ranting about.
        
        No kidding? I'd never have guessed.
        
        He never said left vs right ...
        
        Learn to read. The post I replied to called Mike "center-right", and my reply was questioning the use of that empty phrase. I know the US is pretty much addicted to it (as well as liberal vs. conservative), but try to fight it. They both make you look foolish. The world and ideas are more complicated those things can describe, and you'll be better off (less easily manipulated) without them.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Pragmatic, 5 Jul 2013 @ 3:43am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Holy cow! Mike takes a swipe at Wall Street!
        Oh, FFS! Try, "Somewhat conservative, but generally reasonable and as fair as possible. Doesn't like government overreach."
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Niall (profile), 5 Jul 2013 @ 4:42am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Holy cow! Mike takes a swipe at Wall Street!
        Well, as a (European) centre/centre-left (so way left in US terms) I don't detect anything in Mike's posting that makes me twitch and reach for the (gun I never had, could never have and never want) the way that, say, the average Faux/Daily Mail poster does. Or even most US Paulbots ^H^H^H^H^H^H^H libertarians do.
        
        I think Mike does an admirable job of keeping his personal politics out of here. That, or he does a wonderful job of being 'slightly right of centre' without all the frothing hatred and fear that seems to usually characterise their discussions.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Pragmatic, 5 Jul 2013 @ 5:23am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Holy cow! Mike takes a swipe at Wall Street!
        That's why I said "Center."
        
        You're right, Niall, the American Right is scary at the moment and "Conservative" now means "nut job" and "Tinfoil hat-wearer." I remember a time when it meant "Not a moonbat who wanted to make it legal to [insert craziness here]" or "sensible, rational person."
        
        It's the sensible rationality that draws me back here time and time again.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        tqk (profile), 5 Jul 2013 @ 8:25am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Holy cow! Mike takes a swipe at Wall Street!
        Oh, FFS!
        
        It wasn't my intention to cause you anger. I was just stating my opinion. You chose the perfect username for yourself. You're pragmatic to a fault. "Whatever works, damnit!" I, on the other hand, am an idealist. As Aristotle said, "Things as they could, and should be." "Whatever works" isn't good enough (for me; YMMV). I want things "done right." In IT, I want to make problems disappear never to return. I don't want a (pragmatic) quick fix that just gets me to tomorrow.
        
        Try, "Somewhat conservative, but generally reasonable and as fair as possible.
        
        See, to me, that says nothing. Compared to Frank Zappa, Jon Stewart is conservative, but compared to the Pope he's a flaming liberal. To me (and "Your Mileage May Vary", certainly), the left vs. right, liberal vs. conservative scales carry no meaning and are incapable of shedding any real light in a discussion. They're as empty as marketroid buzzwords; much sound and fury, signifying nothing.
        
        Would you say Edward Snowden is conservative? He looks that way to me, but look at what he's done. Richard Stallman's never done anything even remotely like what Snowden's done, but Stallman's a flaming liberal!
        
        Left, right, liberal, and conservative are out of their depth when trying to describe ideas. That's all I'm saying.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - PopeRatzo (profile), 4 Jul 2013 @ 4:04pm
    
    Re: Re: Holy cow! Mike takes a swipe at Wall Street!
    Few people would defend how the bankers at Wall Street got no punishment.
    Actually, you'd find lots of people who would defend that. Unfortunately, they are high-ranking members of the government and the business media.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Tom, 3 Jul 2013 @ 8:27pm

The dissenters on this site are plentiful, but objectivity lacks. Why do they like to post their disagreement so vehemently that we can tell that they can't see humor. There are plenty of news outlets that serve the drivel they would prefer.

Anyway I personally thought the picture was funny.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- tqk (profile), 4 Jul 2013 @ 8:38am
  
  Re:
  Why do they like to post their disagreement so vehemently that we can tell that they can't see humor.
  
  They've apparently never heard the saying, "Tis better to be thought a fool than to open one's mouth and confirm the opinion."
  
  Current US political discourse in a nutshell: Pick a side and fight!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 3 Jul 2013 @ 8:42pm

It's not what you know, it's who you know.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 5 Jul 2013 @ 7:05pm
  
  Re:
  It's WHAT you know about WHO.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it

Anonymous Coward, 3 Jul 2013 @ 8:57pm

Yeah, this one belongs in the sad-but-true category.

Yeah, 'cause no one on Wall Street has been subject to the reach of U.S. law enforcement.

Good grief, Mike.

I hope you enjoy your Fourth, DDOSing government websites, burning American flags, or doing whatever it is you do.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- AC Unknown (profile), 3 Jul 2013 @ 9:11pm
  
  Re:
  You have some citations to support your accusations?
  
  If not, then STFU and GTFO.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 3 Jul 2013 @ 9:21pm
  
  Re:
  Are you even trying anymore?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- DOlz (profile), 4 Jul 2013 @ 12:07am
  
  Re:
  I'm not sure, but I believe you're saying Wall Street has been subject to law enforcement. If that is the case may I suggest you watch the video below.
  
  http://server2.shiatv.net/view_video.php?viewkey=394fc33d6cc91dc5f9a7&page=&viewty pe=&category=
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- tqk (profile), 4 Jul 2013 @ 8:41am
  
  Re:
  I hope you enjoy your Fourth, DDOSing government websites, burning American flags, or doing whatever it is you do.
  
  To quote Bugs Bunny, "What a imBECile. What a ULTRA-maroon!"
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 3 Jul 2013 @ 9:08pm

" DDOSing government websites, burning American flags"
Nice accusations you have there. I trust you have some proof to back them up?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it

horse with no name, 3 Jul 2013 @ 9:29pm

Rick
Honestly, Rick is a fool. A well spoken fool, but a fool.

I am waiting to see how many people on Wall Street have a security clearance and access to this sort of national security information. Oh, none.

Rick does it again. Glorified masturbation pictures for his followers, but no actual content.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 3 Jul 2013 @ 9:33pm

LMFAO Good one Rick.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 3 Jul 2013 @ 9:40pm

ahh, another political troll "story".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
apauld (profile), 3 Jul 2013 @ 9:42pm

simply
wonderful
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it

Anonymous Coward, 3 Jul 2013 @ 9:50pm

Can you do better ? "Look at what this guy did"
All we are getting is

"but he did this" and "look at what this guy did"

You see 4 years olds saying things like that in the playground, not supposedly intelligent people, or even Masnick.

Snowden has not been to trial so how can you compare what a Court decided on one case, (totally unrelated), and what you "guess" they would do to Snowden.

The US HAS DONE NOTHING TO SNOWDEN, except lay charges and seek his presence in a court of law.

But this does not matter to Masnick, if he ever see's what he perceives to be an injustice, he will compare it to NO JUSTICE, Snowden has received NO JUSTICE, because HE RAN AWAY, these other people went to court argued their case and received (possibly lighter punishments) for being honest and up front.

Snowden has done none of this, he is not game to face his accusers, and is hiding to avoid having to do so.

But you just keep up the "but look at what this guy did and got away with it" "Look at what he said, and they 'punish' Snowden.

Snowden has not been punished (yet) he has not faced a court, and he has rejected his opportunity of a fair trial.
That is Snowden's decision, he chose to run away.

At least all the other people you are trotting out have been upright enough to face a court and confront the charges.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 5 Jul 2013 @ 4:33am
  
  Re: Can you do better ? "Look at what this guy did"
  Hahahh are you kidding. The president of bolivia just had his plane grounded to find this guy.
  
  That is fuckin extreme
  
  And what kind of dumbass would turn themselves in after embarassing the usa. Secret courts. Secret laws. Nuff said
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it

Anonymous Coward, 3 Jul 2013 @ 9:52pm

Comment held for censorship
Nice to see Masnick !!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 3 Jul 2013 @ 10:18pm
  
  Re: Comment held for censorship
  Aw, don't worry, darryl. I'm sure someone at Wall Street would buy your solar panels with average_joe's man milk all over it!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
    
    Anonymous Coward, 4 Jul 2013 @ 6:05am
    
    Re: Re: Comment held for censorship
    WTG Masnick..
    
    Are you going to admit you censor comments now ?? I guess it's easier than being exposed by your detractors.
    
    For someone who says they fight censorship, you SURE DO LIKE TO USE IT....
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Rikuo (profile), 4 Jul 2013 @ 6:09am
      
      Re: Re: Re: Comment held for censorship
      Hi, dipshit! Great to see you! (Get it? I can see your comment...thus NOT CENSORSHIP) Surely is a good thing to know that you're being paranoid about the wrong people. If you're so worried about censorship, why is it you're railing against Mike and not someone else...oh I don't know...the US government maybe? Ya know, a little thing they've done called spying on pretty much everyone in the entire world, but please...not like that matters to you. The only thing that matters to you is trying to smear Mike.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - tqk (profile), 4 Jul 2013 @ 8:48am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Comment held for censorship
        Ya know, a little thing they've done called spying on pretty much everyone in the entire world ...
        
        You forgot the bit about walling off the entire Guardian site from the US military. That's censorship (though certainly a pathetically poor implementation of it).
        
        Bradley Manning opens eyes. The US authorities use duct tape to attempt to close them. Pathetic.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
        
        Anonymous Coward, 4 Jul 2013 @ 6:54pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Comment held for censorship
        hey DIPSHIT,, NO YOU CANT SEE MY COMMENT !!
        
        NOT the comment I made that Masnick censored..
        
        YOU CANT SEE IT BECAUSE IT'S NOT THERE !!!!
        
        MANICKS HAS CENSORED IT..
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 4 Jul 2013 @ 7:16pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Comment held for censorship
        *click*
        
        Nope, we can still see it! Learn to spell, you brainless turdtwat.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 4 Jul 2013 @ 10:01pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Comment held for censorship
        Darryl, go home. You're drunk.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Rikuo (profile), 5 Jul 2013 @ 8:46am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Comment held for censorship
        "This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it."
        
        What do you not understand about Click here to show it?
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 5 Jul 2013 @ 9:30am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Comment held for censorship
        His solar panel wife didn't tell him to click it, that's what happened.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 4 Jul 2013 @ 6:56am
      
      Re: Re: Re: Comment held for censorship
      I'd like to hear your theory as to how Mike could possibly single you out for censorship. In technical terms, that is, not in emotional "everyone hates me" terms.
      
      I mean, out_of_the_blue is still able to comment. bob is still able to comment. We also have a few ACs that are critical and some times embarrass Mike that sill are able to comment.
      
      Are we supposed to believe that Mike has found the mythical "magic wand" that allows him to block only certain content? Or should we simply jump to the more plausible conclusion: that you are a waste of carbon?
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
        
        horse with no name, 4 Jul 2013 @ 7:20am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Comment held for censorship
        I'd like to hear your theory as to how Mike could possibly single you out for censorship. In technical terms, that is, not in emotional "everyone hates me" terms.
        
        I mean, out_of_the_blue is still able to comment. bob is still able to comment. We also have a few ACs that are critical and some times embarrass Mike that sill are able to comment.
        
        Honestly, I have not idea why Mike has put essentially an entire country on the "automatically moderate comments" list, but there ya go. He does it like that and that is Techdirt Censorship at it's finest.
        
        You would have to ask him why he insist on censoring certain people. I think it just shows the same level of cowardly behavior he mocks others for.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 5 Jul 2013 @ 2:47am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Comment held for censorship
        out_of_the_blue, average_joe, darryl, hurricane head, you...
        
        Wow, a country just for five people? Five people is essentially a country?
        
        See, this is why no one believes your claim of how much time have you spent your life in China or Germany. If you think five people count as a country you're hopelessly self-deluded.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        horse with no name, 5 Jul 2013 @ 4:04am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Comment held for censorship
        You guys are clueless. I don't know how Techdirt as censored other people, but I can tell you how I am being censored. Every post goes to "moderation" and requires that someone approve it before it gets posted. The cycle time on it is generally 24- 48 hours, usually making the comment meaningless by the time it comes out, the thread is long since past.
        
        I have tried a number of different connections on different devices, using other posting names, assuring all cookies are removed, and so far, it appears that my entire country is blocked. The only way I can post (I tested) was via a proxy. So certainly it's a country based / IP range based block, which is pure out and out censorship at it's finest.
        
        You guys should wake up. All the nice stuff that Mike talks about being against censorship and all that, and he does this sort of thing right in front of you. Why are you not outraged?
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 5 Jul 2013 @ 7:11am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Comment held for censorship
        Automatic == Efficient readers reporting comments
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        RD, 5 Jul 2013 @ 11:34am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Comment held for censorship
        "Honestly, I have not idea why Mike has put essentially an entire country on the "automatically moderate comments" list, but there ya go. He does it like that and that is Techdirt Censorship at it's finest.
        
        You would have to ask him why he insist on censoring certain people. I think it just shows the same level of cowardly behavior he mocks others for."
        
        Liar. You are making stuff up. You are not being censored (though, you SHOULD be, as far as I am concerned) nor is anyone. I have said some pretty horrific and scathing things here, and have never once had my comments held, delayed or removed, and I've been coming to this site for over 12 years.
        
        There is the report button (which is NOT censorship) and your paranoid imagination.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        horse with no name, 5 Jul 2013 @ 6:02pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Comment held for censorship
        Liar. You are making stuff up. You are not being censored (though, you SHOULD be, as far as I am concerned) nor is anyone. I have said some pretty horrific and scathing things here, and have never once had my comments held, delayed or removed, and I've been coming to this site for over 12 years.
        
        RD, you are an idiot. Pay attention. If I write a post (including this one) it does not appear on the site at all - it's held for moderation. It takes 24-48 hours for someone to bother to look at it, and about 90% of them never make it onto the site. When they do, it's typically so late that it is no longer relevant.
        
        As an example, I made the very first post in the doug englebart thread "horse with no name, Jul 3rd, 2013 @ 6:46pm"
        
        yet, when I check Google cache for that thread "It is a snapshot of the page as it appeared on 5 Jul 2013 06:43:44 GMT" my comment does not appear - and there is no "block by the community thing", because the community never saw the post. In this case, it took almost 72 hours for the comment to be "moderated". In normal times when Techdirt is tossing up a dozen or more posts a day, that would mean my comment would have appeared when the post on page 3 or 4.
        
        It's censorship - but Mike doesn't want to admit it and most certainly does not want to discuss it.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 4 Jul 2013 @ 7:15am
      
      Re: Re: Re: Comment held for censorship
      You have no idea what censorship is.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Pragmatic, 4 Jul 2013 @ 7:40am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Comment held for censorship
        To trolls, censorship is when we're not huddled adoringly at their feet listening carefully to every froth-filled rant.
        
        No one is automatically entitled to be heard, though Mike gives everyone, even the trolls, an opportunity to post here without having to log in. Yes, his hospitality gets abused, but as a favor to us, he lets us hide the posts we don't want to see. That's not censorship, it's being sensible. Long live the report button!
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 4 Jul 2013 @ 7:45am
      
      Re: Re: Re: Comment held for censorship
      You couldn't expose a room when you open a door. That's how horrible at exposing you are, darryl. Or is it alright for Australian solar panel engineers to be this atrocious with punctuation?
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 4 Jul 2013 @ 7:38am
  
  Re: Comment held for censorship
  You've confused a group of people telling everyone else that your comment is a waste of their time with censorship as per usual.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
handymanlondon, 3 Jul 2013 @ 11:27pm

Is it a Joke
I don't think that Snowden wouldn't be persecuted even if he worked in Wall st. Is there any place in this earth called "persecution free" or free from any persecution?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 4 Jul 2013 @ 1:42am
  
  Re: Is it a Joke
  yes, there is, it is called a grave. and even there I wouldn't be entirely certain...
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - ethorad (profile), 4 Jul 2013 @ 6:33am
    
    Re: Re: Is it a Joke
    Quite, Jimmy Saville would beg to disagree with you there.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Niall (profile), 5 Jul 2013 @ 4:45am
      
      Re: Re: Re: Is it a Joke
      I'm not sure that what is happening to Jimmy Saville's memory is exactly 'persecution'. More like 'revelation'.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 4 Jul 2013 @ 2:42am
  
  Re: Is it a Joke
  Anonymous land.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 4 Jul 2013 @ 3:27am

I thought Gitmo was the only place no one is prosecuted...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 4 Jul 2013 @ 5:10am
  
  Re:
  That would be the day!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 4 Jul 2013 @ 2:20pm
  
  Re:
  No one is prosecuted at Gitmo. There are plenty of people persecuted there but no one is prosecuted. You have to actually have a trial for someone to be prosecuted.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
U.S. Citizen, 4 Jul 2013 @ 3:27am

Patriot
Mr. Snowden confirms that which intellectuals knew to be true.

The citizens of this nation demand that our government operate under the framework of our constitution. Our government now fails to serve the citizens of this nation. What do the citizens of this nation do when the executive, legislative and judicial branches of government fail to protect us?

Our courts often punish the victims and reward the criminals.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- RD, 5 Jul 2013 @ 11:36am
  
  Re: Patriot
  "What do the citizens of this nation do when the executive, legislative and judicial branches of government fail to protect us?"
  
  It is not their job to protect us, it is their job to UPHOLD THE CONSTITUTION AND THE LAWS OF THE REPUBLIC.
  
  Period.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Guardian, 4 Jul 2013 @ 5:38am

STUDENTS GRILL NSA
https://soundcloud.com/madiha-1/students-question-the-nsa-at

we all are adversaries
and jsut who the hell are there "customers" he refers too....
hollywood? BIG BUSINESS, SPACE ALIENS?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- zem, 4 Jul 2013 @ 5:51am
  
  Re: STUDENTS GRILL NSA
  it be the space aliens. The Mend In Black was realy a doco.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
BentFranklin (profile), 4 Jul 2013 @ 5:46am

Please sticky this article for a few days.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 4 Jul 2013 @ 6:07am

Look what THIS GUY Did
you think Snowden is bad, look how they let this guy off !!

and

"but he did this"..

Typical schoolboy 4 year old argument, it's what you resort too when you have absolutely NOTHING LEFT..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 4 Jul 2013 @ 7:40am
  
  Re: Look what THIS GUY Did
  Nobody made that argument?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 4 Jul 2013 @ 7:46am
  
  Re: Look what THIS GUY Did
  Oh, right, like how John Steele insisted that he shouldn't be punished, because gay marriage is legal in California. Convincing!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 4 Jul 2013 @ 6:13am

I get it now
So if Snowden worked on Wall Street, and then stole secret documents from the NSA, then gave those documents to a UK newspaper, then ran away to China and then Russia then the US Government would not have charged him ??

(Did I get it right???)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 4 Jul 2013 @ 6:18am
  
  Re: I get it now
  Shouldn't you be shooting (Chinese made) rockets at the sky right about now?
  
  Or is this your idea of "fun"?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 4 Jul 2013 @ 6:21am
  
  Re: I get it now
  or is it the other way around ?
  
  If Ed Snowden was called something else, and he did not work for the NSA or a contractor of them, did not steal documents and did not provide them to a newspaper for personal gains, and did not run away to other countries, the US Government would still charge him as Ed Snowden and charge him for stealing NSA Documents ?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 5 Jul 2013 @ 9:50am
    
    Re: Re: I get it now
    Hilariously people will always be treated as having "personal gains" when they whistleblow regardless of who they are and where they're from.
    
    As usual your body is upside down. You think the gap in your posterior called the "anus" is your brain.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 4 Jul 2013 @ 7:40am
  
  Re: I get it now
  No, you still don't get the point.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 4 Jul 2013 @ 6:36am

'truer words are spoken in jest' as they say!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 4 Jul 2013 @ 7:32am

none of those responsible for the Global Financial Meltdown has been imprisoned, as far as i know. and that was Bankruptcy for many countries, causing millions of people to lose jobs, to lose homes, to lose everything! it's gonna take decades to recover from this! what Snowden has done is make the world aware of what the USA, with the help of the gutless fuckers in the UK, who daren't say 'no' to the USA!, have been doing! more than anything, it has proved to be very embarrassing for the USA as no one should have to or be allowed to spy on their own citizens let alone those of allies! he is gonna be a wanted man for life now, will never see family and friends again, other than from the inside of a jail but hasn't done anywhere near the damage that those in the financial industry have done and gotten away with! if any need hunting and jailing, i know who i would put in jail!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 4 Jul 2013 @ 7:42am
  
  Re:
  Do you even know who was responsible for the Global Financial Meltdown? I'll give you a hint: it starts with Green and ends with span's Fed.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 4 Jul 2013 @ 7:51am
    
    Re: Re:
    really?
    
    So, the banks were no party to the giant ripoff. I guess the ratings people are innocent also.
    
    Put down the pipe and step away from the table
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 4 Jul 2013 @ 11:18am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      And which actor in this market determines the rate at which banks lend money and, by extension, the size of the reward for risky lending? Hum? Anyone? I'll give you a hint: I could use the same hint here as above?
      
      TL:DR Stop blaming the individual dominoes instead of the hand that tipped them.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 4 Jul 2013 @ 11:54am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        The rate at which money is lent had little to do with the circlejerk that fucked global economy.
        
        Individual dominoes? wtf?
        
        Other than non enforcement of the laws, how - exactly - did the fed encourage such bad behavior on the part of the banks, ratings people and friends ? Please be specific.
        
        Banksters and cronies are laughing it up
        1) make lots of risky loans
        2) bundle them up in securities
        3) coerce good ratings
        4) sell to unsuspecting investors
        5) short stock in those who bought said shitty products
        6) get hand slapped and pay minuscule fine
        7) no one charged, held accountable
        8) no one goes to jail
        9) profit out yer ass
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- tqk (profile), 4 Jul 2013 @ 9:04am
  
  Re:
  he is gonna be a wanted man for life now, will never see family and friends again, other than from the inside of a jail ...
  
  That is not a fa�t accompli! Some of us continue to hope there's still some sense left in the USA (despite all the evidence to the contrary).
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 4 Jul 2013 @ 7:08pm
    
    Re: Re:
    No if he was willing to face a court and answer his charges, and stop running away he would be free in a relatively short time.
    
    But if he continues to choose to be on the lamb, and refuses to stand up for himself, and hide from the law, he will continue to be 'wanted'.
    
    Sure, if he fronted the court, returned to the US, did his time, then NO ONE WOULD WANT HIM.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 4 Jul 2013 @ 10:07pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Yes, allow himself to be raped by a broken system as the problems he exposed go unanswered. Brilliant. That solves everything.
      
      /sarcasm
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 5 Jul 2013 @ 2:44am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Yeah, wouldn't you wish that all your problems and people you disagree with would just walk into your little hands.
      
      Sorry, darryl, but humans in general are less gullible than solar panels. But keep on believing.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - tqk (profile), 5 Jul 2013 @ 8:39am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      
      Some of us continue to hope there's still some sense left in the USA (despite all the evidence to the contrary).
      
      No if he was willing to face a court and answer his charges, and stop running away he would be free in a relatively short time.
      
      Speaking of "evidence to the contrary", QED. People like you shouldn't be allowed to retain US citizenship. You haven't earned it.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Rikuo (profile), 5 Jul 2013 @ 11:49am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      "No if he was willing to face a court and answer his charges, and stop running away he would be free in a relatively short time."
      
      You mean like Manning, who is only now in the middle of a trial, THREE YEARS after being arrested?
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - That One Guy (profile), 5 Jul 2013 @ 6:17pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Not to mention the odds of either of them (Manning or Snowden) receiving anything even remotely resembling a fair trial, rather than a show trial where the outcome has been determined in advance are so low as to be practically non-existent.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 5 Jul 2013 @ 9:36am
  
  Re:
  So, who's at fault. The government for turning a blind eye to the (legal) abuses and encouraging them, or the people who agreed enter in a terrible contract? Fuck it, let's just jail everyone because in many ways, it's all of our fault.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 5 Jul 2013 @ 9:49am
    
    Re: Re:
    I doubt the impact of bad mortgages going under would have been as devastating worldwide had the banks not bundled them and sold them as grade A instruments to unsuspecting investors across the globe.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 4 Jul 2013 @ 8:27am

Repost
I am reporting this comment because the article where I just posted it was a little ways back. In the article about protests today, someone suggested burning the flag. I disagree. A better suggestion is to fly it inverted. The people of this country are under attack from their government. The inverted flag is a sign of the distress that this attack has caused. Burning is a different message. The inverted flag is what is appropriate.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- tqk (profile), 4 Jul 2013 @ 9:12am
  
  Re: Repost
  The inverted flag is what is appropriate.
  
  Good point (your whole post, not just this bit of it). For most of its existence, despite its many "hiccups" down through the years, the USA has been a beacon of hope to the entire world. I very much hope to see its people win this one against the forces of tyranny currently in its midst.
  
  Happy Fourth, USA. Now buckle down and get to work! :-)
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Niall (profile), 5 Jul 2013 @ 4:48am
    
    Re: Re: Repost
    Hiccups, like 1776 to 2013?
    
    Oh, and Happy Get-rid-of-Useless-Colonies Day! :) Hope you have glorious weather.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - tqk (profile), 5 Jul 2013 @ 8:48am
      
      Re: Re: Re: Repost
      Hiccups, like 1776 to 2013?
      
      No, like what what they allowed it to do to Latin America (Bay of Pigs, Chile's Salvador Allende, United Fruit Co.), Viet Nam, "The War on *", and that sort of thing. I never suggest they've been angels, but the original premise behind their Declaration of Independence was spot on.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 4 Jul 2013 @ 7:20pm

This shows only ONE THING
That you simply have NO IDEA what so ever what was the cause and effect of the Global Financial crisis, caused primarily by the sub-prime mortgage market and credit default swaps.
you really need to actually find out what is going on and do some serious analysis of your own country and its finances.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 5 Jul 2013 @ 5:23am

Snowden a "Juicy Morsel" for the Russians
Juicy Morsel, that is what Russia said about the possibility of getting their hands on Snowden.

All the Governments who are considering offering Snowden asylum are doing so solely on the basis of what THEY can GAIN from getting their hands on Snowden.

Snowden is now just as much as an embarrassment as much as he intended to embarrass the US.

The massage he wanted to convey is long forgotten, and is rarely if ever mentioned. There is little agree or belief that it is unconstitutional. It's also very difficult to impossible to reference this to the 4th amendment.

That from it's reading, phone meta-data does not fall under your property or possessions.

Snowden has run out of options, it's appears no country wants him, and after Assanges example, no Country will see enough political gains to warrant taking him on.

I do find it odd that Masnick and co. have decided to compare what the US HAS NOT DONE to Snowden to what they have not done with others.

Nor is Snowden "stateless" as he claims he is, this claim he is making is therefore A LIE.
Having your passport revoked does not revoke your citizenship, he is still legally a US citizen, he has a state (the US) he just does not want to go there.

He also rejected an offer of asylum in Russia, because he would have to cease releasing documents. He chose to continue to break the law as opposed to seeking asylum.
He wants to use the documents he has as a bargaining chip, except no one wants to deal with him. Basically HE'S SCREWED.

At least he's learnt one lesson off assange, how to fuck it up, and make himself the subject of the story, not the message. I for one, have no sympathy for someone who does stupid things, and CONTINUES to do them in the face of all reason.

I hope he enjoys the next 10 years at a Russian airport. They should make a movie about it.. (oh wait)..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- The Real Michael, 5 Jul 2013 @ 6:08am
  
  Re: Snowden a "Juicy Morsel" for the Russians
  "The massage he wanted to convey is long forgotten, and is rarely if ever mentioned. There is little agree or belief that it is unconstitutional. It's also very difficult to impossible to reference this to the 4th amendment."
  
  Actually you're wrong. The NSA's unconstitutional spying program is constantly brought up all over the place.
  
  "That from it's reading, phone meta-data does not fall under your property or possessions."
  
  Aggregating swaths of personal info from private companies without probable cause is a violation of the Fourth Amendment, as is collecting all your e-mails, text messages and audio/video communications.
  
  "Nor is Snowden "stateless" as he claims he is, this claim he is making is therefore A LIE.
  Having your passport revoked does not revoke your citizenship, he is still legally a US citizen, he has a state (the US) he just does not want to go there."
  
  Considering what happened to Assange, Hastings, Manning and others, can you blame him?
  
  "He also rejected an offer of asylum in Russia, because he would have to cease releasing documents. He chose to continue to break the law as opposed to seeking asylum."
  
  As opposed to the US government whose job it is to defend and protect the Constitution, then goes about setting up various administrations in order to violate it?
  
  "At least he's learnt one lesson off assange, how to fuck it up, and make himself the subject of the story, not the message."
  
  The mainstream media are the ones distracting from the message, not Snowden.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 5 Jul 2013 @ 7:16am
  
  Re: Snowden a "Juicy Morsel" for the Russians
  "The massage is long forgotten"
  
  Nice Peter Sellers reference.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 5 Jul 2013 @ 8:10am
  
  Re: Snowden a "Juicy Morsel" for the Russians
  You know, for all the whining you make of Masnick pointing the NSA's flaws and overlooking Snowden's, you're very keen on ignoring everyone's flaws but Snowden's.
  
  Hey, darryl, guess what - they recently cancelled big spying plans in Australia! Imagine that! A den of thieves, where George Orwell's works are public domain, under no surveillance! Makes your solar panel dick sad, innit?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 5 Jul 2013 @ 8:09am

Wanna see how scared Mike is of criticism?

Try posting this phrase: Mikey's ****** Greatest ****** Hits

But leave out the ******'s.

It will be caught by the moderation filter because Mike scared of you using that phrase.

Awesome.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Rikuo (profile), 5 Jul 2013 @ 8:51am
  
  Re:
  Scared? How would three random words like that scare Mike? What do they mean? Is it an obscure reference to something? Or maybe...just maybe, a comment with just those words is being held simply because the spam filters have seen some idiotic dipshit try to enter comments with just those three words, over and over and over and over again, and thus, automatically learned not to allow it, with no human input.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 5 Jul 2013 @ 9:33am
  
  Re:
  Hilariously, if you wanted to make a point you could have continued gathering your evidence (such as it is) and just posted it. But no, you had to continue showing the class how you still have the brain and maturity of a four-year-old, and how you're so, so proud of it. That's really helping your case, there!
  
  Did momma overdose you on breastmilk as a kid, leading you to have this obsession with Masnick lactating?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 5 Jul 2013 @ 9:33am

I came here for intelligent commentary, and instead I get memes based on ignorance. Thanks Mike. WTF?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 5 Jul 2013 @ 9:53am
  
  Re:
  Perhaps you could enlighten us, since we are all ignorant.
  Otherwise we are left to think you are another nutbag mouthing off.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 5 Jul 2013 @ 4:51pm
    
    Re: Re:
    Enlighten you about what? Quite the circle-jerk you have going on.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 5 Jul 2013 @ 9:06pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Claimed to be seeking intelligent commentary, made juvenile remark and contributed nothing - not unlike you.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 6 Jul 2013 @ 9:03pm

Kennith Ley and Burnad Madoff
Would probably disagree with your stupid posts.

Mb>"What do the citizens of this nation do when the executive, legislative and judicial branches of government fail to protect us?"

It is not their job to protect us, it is their job to UPHOLD THE CONSTITUTION AND THE LAWS OF THE REPUBLIC.

Period.

_____________________________

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

ENSURE DOMESTIC TRANQUILITY

PROVIDE A COMMON DEFENSE
Establish Justice

So basically your wrong.

Learn your own Constitution before you try to trash it, it just makes you look like an idiot..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 7 Jul 2013 @ 12:15am
  
  Re: Kennith Ley and Burnad Madoff
  Ah, right, use a scammer in Bernard Madoff to defend your position. That puts you on such a moral high horse, darryl!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 7 Jul 2013 @ 5:26am
  
  Re: Kennith Ley and Burnad Madoff
  The aim of establishing the Constitution was supposed to do those things and by upholding the Constitution, the government was, by extension supposed to do those things which is what their oath was taken to do. Instead they are violating the Constitution and claiming that these ends are necessary for the means. This is claim that all tyrannical governments make to attempt to justify their actions. If the law is outdated and needs to be changed, the appropriate response of government is to change the law, not violate it, try to hide it, and then make excuses to defend their actions when they are exposed. If the 4th amendment to the Constitution is outdated or flawed, the appropriate response would be to amend the Constitution, just as happened with Prohibition.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 7 Jul 2013 @ 5:33am
  
  Re: Kennith Ley and Burnad Madoff
  https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130605/18192323331/dhs-finally-releases-2011-report-civil-libert ies-impact-suspicionless-electronic-device-searches-says-agent-hunches-trump.shtml#c573
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Thomas (profile), 7 Jul 2013 @ 2:19pm

Absolutely!
Wall Street gets away with anything because the bribe the SCOTUS, Congress, the White House, and government agencies to leave them the hell alone.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]