Slashdot Mirror
Snowden Gives Alternative Christmas Message On Channel 4
codeusirae wrote in with news that Edward Snowden gave an alternative to the UK's yearly Christmas message, speaking about his objections to mass indiscriminate surveillance by governments. The message aired on channel four at 16:15. Slashgear posted a transcript. Quoting: "Think about what this means for the privacy of the average person. A child born today will grow up with no conception of privacy at all. They'll never know what it means to have a private moment to themselves — an unrecorded, unanalyzed thought. And that's a problem, because privacy matters. Privacy is what allows us to determine who we are and who we want to be."
but snooping on phone calls and facebook is a tad far off from mind reading
Just think about it for a sec...
If an Iranian or Russian version of Snowden had defected to the [mighty] USA, we would be trumpeting our "superior" system and way-of-life as compared to "those other nations."
We would be saying we're glad to be living here where ther's the "rule of law" yada yada yada...
But because he was one of us, our government is instead labeling him as a traitor. Sadly, a good number of Americans don't see the hipocrisy!!
...and be surveilled on CCTV while they walk to/from the park on public sidewalks, and be surveilled yet again by cameras installed at the park.
Ed's point stands.
I appreciate what Snowden is saying, but perhaps fewer narcissistic platitudes and more documents on the front pages? Snowden isn't Jesus, the more he toots "It's not about me", the more it becomes about him
Jesus Fucking Christ, this man is going to spend the rest of his life, in extreme, rational fear for his life, and the lives of anyone he has ever, or will ever love. Cut the man some fucking slack you asshole.
> Jesus Fucking Christ, this man is going to spend the rest of his life, in extreme, rational fear for his life, and the lives of anyone he has ever, or will ever love. Cut the man some fucking slack you asshole.
Hopefully you're wrong. Hopefully he'll be caught and no longer be in fear.
It sounds like you are OK with his being imprisoned and/or tortured and/or executed, and the same for anyone who was ever close to him, and perhaps another love-hop from there because authorities believe it makes the crucifixion more effective?
Snowden appears to have done the right thing, for the right reasons. He served our best interests.
Then who is it about? Who is actually standing up and doing something about this?
The definition of a narcissist is someone who excessively admires his or herself. I don't see how sacrificing one's own career, income, relationships, freedom to travel, reputation, and subjecting himself to ridiculous criticism and smear campaigns is compatible with that definition.
Edward Snowden has made sacrifices on behalf of principles we should all be standing up for. That has little to do with self-love.
Watch the NSA Whistleblower Russell Tice videos on my website. Link provided in first post.
"they doing this to control people"
Link again: http://www.oregonstatehospital.net/d/russelltice-nsarnmebl.html
No, you really don't, as your comment below shows.
Really? What have you done lately? Perhaps you should stop trolling and consider doing something more productive.
If you are calling a man who's sacrificed his future for the future of others a narcissist for airing his opinions, then you are nothing more than a jealous little man with nothing of value to add. Please go away.
Snowden is in a precarious position at present. He has to rely on the good will of other countries to protect him from America, who quite possibly would give him the death sentence (or failing that imprison him for the rest of his life). By keeping himself in the minds of the global population he adds incentive to those protecting him; they get to be the 'good guy' by doing so. In short, this isn't narcissism, it is self preservation.
... with this country, isn’t there? Cruelty and injustice, intolerance and oppression. And where once you had the freedom to object, to think and speak as you saw fit, you now have censors and systems of surveillance coercing your conformity and soliciting your submission. How did this happen? Who’s to blame? Well certainly there are those more responsible than others, and they will be held accountable, but again truth be told, if you’re looking for the guilty, you need only look into a mirror. I know why you did it. I know you were afraid. Who wouldn’t be? War, terror, disease. There were a myriad of problems which conspired to corrupt your reason and rob you of your common sense. Fear got the best of you, and in your panic you turned to the now high chancellor, Adam Sutler. He promised you order, he promised you peace, and all he demanded in return was your silent, obedient consent.
Some children have baby monitors in their room from birth, gps trackers by the time they are toddlers if not before. They graduate to playing with an tablet that starts collecting information on them by 4 or 5, and a few more years after that and they've got a cell phone tracking nearly every move and social interaction.
Maybe not you or your children. But its absolutely true that full surveillance from birth is a thing now.
As parents its an interesting conundrum choosing between the security of a toddler gps and the knowledge that doing so actively prevents your child from ever being properly alone or even possibly lost. And as parents, I feel that as terrifying as that is for both child and parent, the possibility of being lost is a NECESSARY part of growing up and being an independent responsible person. They need that sense of being able to get lost; even if they don't actually get lost.
We elected not to track the kids, and to give them more space than many of their peers have.
But I know of many families where the kids have no real privacy at all, ever. If they write in their diary, their parents will have read it. If they have a box they keep special things in their parents will have have rooted through it.
I wouldn't be above searching their room and belongings if I had a concern, but I'd have to have a genuine concern to do that invasion of privacy. I think all kids need *some* privacy, and increasingly more as they get older, and many do not get it.
But whenever they've gone outside to play and they've wandered off with friends or whatever and aren't where they are supposed to be and forgot to check in with us... well... I completely get the fear that rises up and leads some parents to go what i think is completely overboard.
He's not Jesus alright. For one, unlike Jesus, he actually exists and did something remarkable.
No, it isn't. Even in public places, you have some degree of privacy.
And mass surveillance is far, far different from some random person seeing you in a public place. I don't think they should even be compared. Privacy in regards to someone seeing you in a public place and privacy in regards to mass surveillance are two different things.
Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
"...because privacy matters. Privacy is what allows us to determine who we are and who we want to be."
Y'know, when I read that, for some reason the first thing I thought of was James Brown, the singer/composer/dancer. I watched a documentary about him once, and remember that as a child, he would go off by himself and be in his own head. I think that's where a lot of his creativity came from. Maybe I just identified with that and maybe a lot of people don't care. But yes, I think privacy matters.
Looked at from a different point of view, I remember reading, as a layman, about a hypothesis of Darwinism that many big changes in evolution came from isolated, what one might call protected, environments where something analogous to human activies of design and 'working out the bugs' could happen.
Isn't one of the 4 freedoms supposed to be 'Freedom from Fear'? I think there's always a little bit of fear, or at least anxiety, when you don't have privacy.
In theory, theory and practice are the same; in practice they're different. (Yogi Berra & A. Einstein)
Both Fox News and The Washington Post are reporting favorably on Snowden. Congress and the courts are acting on his revelations. He's changed the world a little, probably for the better.
Haven't you heard of SIgnals Intelligence? They don't need cameras and microphones to watch and hear you in your house. And they can read your mind with remote brain-computer interfaces, capturing the evoked potentials of your neurons, decoding the signals, to see what you see, hear, think, feel, dream, remember, and all your sensations and motor commands can be recorded, too. There is even a patent from1998 that covers all this.
In addition to that, if Signals Intelligence points their satellites at your house, they can capture the emissions from your electronics, TV, keyboards, and cellular devices, basically to see what is on your screens, what you type, and communicate through encrypted cellular signals, and more.
Tech links: http://www.oregonstatehospital.net/d/russelltice-nsarnmebl.html
NSA Whistleblower Russell Tice backs it up, at least the space weapons/capability issue in the videos there listed on the site.
They are reading your thoughts by monitoring all your telephone and Facebook communications, as well. He says what he means, this is what they're really doing.
There are whistle blower laws that would have protected him if he'd played by the rules. He chose to make a martyr out of himself.
I have to agree with the GP's post though; Snowden (or more likely the organization supporting him) is on a PR blitz to keep him on the front pages for as long as possible. It's getting old hearing the same story day after day.
Well, if someone fscking picked up the ball, there would be no need for him to speak up again. But just like the hush machine stifled all information about the totally non-working, systematically broken secret quasi-oversight, now the "is he a traitor" distraction is fully working and fscking nobody articulates what the consequences and vision of a life without privacy are. The closest to a serious comment I have seen is what Pamela Jones wrote before shuttering Groklaw.
Short of that: nothing. I can't believe that humanity is so totally broken that Snowden was the only person with a conscience in the NSA (well, there are quite a few documented to have been silenced), and now is basically the only person telling people what privacy is about.
It's time the fscking sheep started doing some thinking for themselves, or he'll be better off trying to convince Russians about the value of freedom, privacy, and democratic control.
U.S. citizens clearly don't understand its value any more and are satisfied sinking further and further into despondency.
There are whistle blower laws that would have protected him if he'd played by the rules. He chose to make a martyr out of himself.
Right... he was supposed to count on this commander in chief's attitude toward whistleblower laws to protect him and those he loved-???
http://www.policymic.com/articles/57017/obama-removes-promise-to-protect-whistleblowers-from-old-campaign-website
"
(previously on Obama's website): 'Protect Whistleblowers: Often the best source of information about waste, fraud, and abuse in government is an existing government employee committed to public integrity and willing to speak out. Such acts of courage and patriotism, which can sometimes save lives and often save taxpayer dollars, should be encouraged rather than stifled. We need to empower federal employees as watchdogs of wrongdoing and partners in performance. Barack Obama will strengthen whistleblower laws to protect federal workers who expose waste, fraud, and abuse of authority in government. Obama will ensure that federal agencies expedite the process for reviewing whistleblower claims and whistleblowers have full access to courts and due process.'
While the connection between such blatant hypocrisy and its intentional "removal" from the internet remains speculative, the coincidence is too great to ignore. Moreover, it is hard not to recall George Orwell's 1984 and the Ministry of Truth's epic programs to rewrite history in an attempt to save face.
"
Jesus guys, come down a bit please. WTF would he be tortured? WTF would his siblings be bothered other than being harder for them to get security clearances?
Coincidentally enough, the answer to your question should be 'bloody obvious on this day, particularly with the first word you chose to use. Even for the non-believer, Jesus was a good reminder about modes of government intimidation. The authorities and masses couldn't get Jesus to un-say what he had already said. But they sure could terrorize the populace into preventing anyone from standing up to them again.
What do you expect? He's becoming a cultural icon instead of just a government whistle-blower; he's being re-made by the public-at-large as the poster-child for surveillance on this planet. Under that sort of pressure do you think that you could remain unchanged by it, and more to the point, retain your humility? Most people would not, humans being humans. Ignore the "tone" of what he said there, and just concentrate on the message, because he's right: Corporate culture and governments are indoctrinating the newer generations to believe that privacy is something sought after only by criminals and others who are doing something to be ashamed of, and that it's right and normal to "share" everything about your life with everyone. I can't even begin to imagine how much this is going to damage the psyche of humanity over the long term because it is not normal or natural to live that way.
Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
Funnily enough, I think Putin put it the best. After all, he's an old intelligence operative himself.
"He's a strange man. He threw away his life, a good life, just to push for an idealist goal. I don't agree with him, but I respect his conviction".
How the fuck is this insightful? Snowden is a goddamn hero who is tellign it like it is. Frankly the anti Snowden BS posters are the ones that need a good hard kick in the balls.
In his line of work, it is the price of doing what he did.
And he was a very courageous and public-spirited man for doing it.
I for one, would not have the courage and selflessness to make such a sacrifice.
Compare what he did with the thousands of morons running around at the moment killing themselves and others in the name of some sort of god.
Stick Men
There are whistle blower laws that would have protected him if he'd played by the rules.
Funny indeed. If he'd played by the rules, the American people, in all likelihood, would still be ignorant of what their government is doing. When the government is violating the constitution and people's rights, I think the people need to be the first to know. Forget idiotic rules.
Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
> There are whistle blower laws that would have protected him if he'd played by the rules. He chose to make a martyr out of himself.
Ellsberg (the guy who leaked the Pentagon Papers [which revealed the fact that multiple Administrations lied to the American public and Congress to get into the Vietnam War, and then lied again to covertly expand its reach]) *strongly* disagrees with you:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/daniel-ellsberg-nsa-leaker-snowden-made-the-right-call/2013/07/07/0b46d96c-e5b7-11e2-aef3-339619eab080_story.html
and
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2013/08/03/208602113/pentagon-papers-leaker-daniel-ellsberg-praises-snowden-manning
This America is not the America our parents grew up in. Things have changed, largely for the worse.
Here, Ellsberg speaks directly on his opinion about the NSA documents that have been revealed to the public and the impact of the programs that they reveal:
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/jun/10/edward-snowden-united-stasi-america
Please carefully read the documents that have been released so far, the articles that I have linked to, and the discussion surrounding these issues. While you're doing that please do try to forget all about the messenger and focus on the messages that have been brought to your attention.
I'd argue what's getting old is NOT hearing the story of "Top NSA brass arrested, tried as enemies of the state."
There's a game which must be played. Expecting people to focus on the message without paying attention to the messsenger is unrealistic and stupid. Snowden as a face for the NSA revelations is a good move. I can't fathom why you would object to Snowden being on the front pages rather than something of less importance, which is pretty much anything else for the US.
would have protected him if he'd played by the rules
Funny how "the rules" only become important when the abusers are exposed. Since they ignore "the rules" whenever it suits them, there's no place for complaining about others doing the same. In any case, the rules of integrity, decency, patriotism, being a free people, and a dozen other things were followed to the letter.
This posting is provided 'AS IS' without warranty of any kind, implied or otherwise.
But I don't think you can really claim unqualified totalitarianism unless there is actual repression tied into it, especially political repression
Latest example of several that are on record: NSA used to squash the political movment: Occupy Wall Street. So your right, it is now possible to make a claim for unqualified totalitarianism in this country.
The majority of posts, on /. of all places, slamming Snowden for "blah blah blah, PR, narcissist, looking to make money off this."
This guy has effectively destroyed his own life, and the lives of those around him, to tell us, the plebs of the world, the truth that our Governments have been hiding from us.
And you're tearing a strip off him?
I am failing to see the difference between distributed mass surveillance and a centrally operated one.
You honestly don't see the difference between the government installing surveillance equipment everywhere in public places that gives them the ability to 'be' in many places at once and collect all the data with a high degree of certainty and some random person who may or may not have a camera recording you and then perhaps uploading the footage to Youtube? Even if someone happens to record you, there is little reason they'd bother uploading the video unless something interesting happened. The government, however, collects the data to get a list of targets they can harass.
The differences are pretty clear to me, and I don't see why you would fail to see them.
Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
There are whistle blower laws that would have protected him if he'd played by the rules. He chose to make a martyr out of himself.
Fool. That isn't how whistleblower laws work, not even in theory, let alone practice, especially in the intelligence industry.
And he did try to play by the rules; his superiors made it abundantly clear to him (repeatedly so) that his opinion on the matter was not solicited, and furthermore, endangered his career.
It's getting old hearing the same story day after day.
Until naive, delusional fools like yourself can't see the problem we're facing, it should be repeated constantly and continuously until you get the fucking message.
Because he stayed on duty after starting leaking until he was arrested.
That made it right to torture him, did it? Do you not see how that proves his point?
It was you who wrote, and I quote "I don't think you can really claim unqualified totalitarianism unless there is actual repression tied into it, especially political repression". I have given you many references to one specific well documented example where the NSA was involved in the identification and takedown of key leaders of a political movement. Perhaps you should have said something like: "I don't think you can really claim unqualified totalitarianism unless there is actual repression tied into it, especially political repression, unless it is a minor political movement, or a fringe political movement - it is OK to repress those they dont count."
Your posts here strongly smell of socially destructive Right Wing Authoritarianism, chiefly:
Authoritarian submission — a high degree of submissiveness to the authorities who are perceived to be established and legitimate in the society in which one lives.
Authoritarian aggression — a general aggressiveness directed against deviants, outgroups, and other people that are perceived to be targets according to established authorities.
Conventionalism — a high degree of adherence to the traditions and social norms that are perceived to be endorsed by society and its established authorities, and a belief that others in one's society should also be required to adhere to these norms.
All it takes is 1% of surviving owners placed within state or federal structures. And you don't have too look very far. Just look at prominent politicians from South Carolina and their beliefs. Somehow slavery legacy still lives on.
Well, you don't get much more prominent as a politician than US Senator, so let's look* at Senator Tim Scott, R-SC. He certainly looks like he's descended from slaveowners rather than slaves, right?
Also, Senator Scott took office after his predecessor resigned to take a different job; in South Carolina the Governor appoints a new Senator in this instance. Governor Nikki Haley, R-SC, who appointed Scott, is also a fairly prominent South Carolina politician. (After all, she's the governor.) Haley's parents immigrated from India; she isn't descended from slaveowners either.
You're talking out you ass about descendants of slaveowners. It's an easy rhetorical trick, but it's very clearly false.
*For those that aren't going to click the link, it goes to a Google Image Search showing pictures of Senator Scott, who is an African American.