Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

USA Today Names Edward Snowden Tech Person of the Year

Posted by Unknown on from the things-to-do-before-you're-thirty dept.

An anonymous reader writes with an excerpt from the USA Today tech column: "...But until a lone information-technology contractor named Edward Snowden leaked a trove of National Security Agency documents to the media this summer, we didn't know just how much we'd surrendered. Now that we do, our nation can have a healthy debate — out in the open, as a democracy should debate — about how good a bargain we got in that exchange. For facilitating that debate, at great risk to his own personal liberty, Snowden is this column's technology person of the year for 2013."

50 of 228 comments (clear)

  1. USA Today by egr · · Score: 5, Informative

    And yet by the government he is named as traitor and fugitive.

    1. Re:USA Today by easyTree · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What are the corrupt power-mongering double-talking ghouls gonna do? "Oh yeah, we're the bad guy. Sue us" ?

      --
      Requiem for the American Dream
    2. Re:USA Today by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 5, Insightful

      . . . meanwhile, all USA Today employees can be sure that their emails are being read and their phones tapped.

      . . . you have the right of speech in America . . . and now the NSA and the FBI have the right of free listen.

      Oh, and USA Today can expect a tough audit from the IRS next year.

      I'm guessing that 2014 will be the year of "The War On Surveillance" . . . but like all other "The War On" wars . . . it is doomed to be lost.

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    3. Re:USA Today by Dutchmaan · · Score: 4, Informative

      Maybe you're confusing "person of the year" as something that means good guy or bad guy.. It doesn't. It just means someone that causes change or brings things to light or causes a big splash etc... someone who greatly impacts us.

    4. Re:USA Today by ackthpt · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And yet by the government he is named as traitor and fugitive.

      And thus he rode off into the files of History.

      History is full of people authority called scoundrels, but the people have loved them.

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    5. Re:USA Today by EdIII · · Score: 4, Informative

      it is doomed to be lost

      Which side?

      The only way we could possibly lose is with continued apathy and stupidity. If we lacked those attributes we could defeat them in six months. People act like encryption is impossible or something. Push open source hardware, aggressively replace firmware with custom builds, mitigate as many possible threats as you can, and use the strongest encryption wherever possible.

      Goooood news. With TAO being out in the open, and the US losing billions upon billions to its economy in the coming 12 months because hardware and software can't be trusted, you can bet your ass that the major players will be taking drastic action. Not as a PR job to the public citizen, no no no. It will be drastic action to convince me the person in charge of equipment purchasing that Cisco is still a good bet.

      Why should Cisco care? Why should I choose to utilize them for public infrastructure, secure MPLS between financial institutions, etc. when I know they have been backdoored by the NSA? Especially, when the NSA is actually the least of my worries, but other governments and entities that would do harm to my network?

      Kiss a huge amount of contracts goodbye. The worldwide consumers will most certainly be at least looking for other options right now.

      Remember, the name of the game is NOT to deny them access to your networks from a full frontal assault from the NSA, but only to do just enough to raise the costs associated with mass surveillance several orders. The NSA can't get the financial resources to be approved for several orders more than what their budget has.

      We can most certainly win.

      The problem is that we will not even try.

    6. Re:USA Today by daem0n1x · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Nobody gave them those powers. They just took them, and most people didn't give a fuck. The few that gave a fuck were rapidly silenced by the Corporate Propaganda Machine, a.k.a. The Media.

    7. Re:USA Today by fustakrakich · · Score: 2

      You are wrong. We reelect them despite what they do. It is the voters' fault for that.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
  2. If ever there was a "Conscience Award" ... by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Edward Snowden is a shoe in.

    Of the untold numbers of spooks working in / for NSA, Ed Snowden is the only one who has the conscience and the courage to reveal the dastardly unconstitutional secrets of the NSA.

    Thanks, Mr. Snowden, for what you have done for the country !

    --
    Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
    1. Re:If ever there was a "Conscience Award" ... by Bob9113 · · Score: 5, Informative

      Of the untold numbers of spooks working in / for NSA, Ed Snowden is the only one who has the conscience and the courage to reveal the dastardly unconstitutional secrets of the NSA.

      Actually, two other guys did; William Binney and Thomas Drake. Unfortunately, they went through official channels, so they got harrassed and prosecuted by the government, and without the massive trove of documents Snowden exfiltrated, they were ignored and marginalized by the major media. Their experience is what convinced Snowden that he had no choice but to go outside.

      --
      Stop-Prism.org: Opt Out of Surveillance
    2. Re:If ever there was a "Conscience Award" ... by gweihir · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Indeed. But these two can now take some comfort in the fact that they allowed Snowden to see that official channels do not work. There never is only a lonely hero, there is always a need for some people to prepare the way. And humanity has never been kind or thankful to its heroes either. But I think Snowden understands that.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    3. Re:If ever there was a "Conscience Award" ... by maugle · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The NSA is a spy agency by charter. Spies can and do go beyond the letter of the law in order to fulfill their mission of protecting their country from its enemies... it would be shocking if they didn't.

      This is America. Nobody is supposed to be above the law, especially the government.

      Congress may not be concerned with the NSA's actions, but they've already proven themselves willing to trade away our freedoms wholesale so that they can claim to be "tough on terror" during the next election cycle. We need to hold their feet to the fire and make them reign in the NSA.

    4. Re:If ever there was a "Conscience Award" ... by YumoolaJohn · · Score: 3

      The NSA was acting within its constitutional bounds.

      Only if you ignore the constitution completely and instead choose to appeal to authority figures and believe government propaganda.

      he could have gone to a congressman

      Would that have resulted in the American people becoming aware of their government's crimes? The answer is, without a doubt, "no." I applaud the fact that Snowden let the American people in on the specifics.

    5. Re:If ever there was a "Conscience Award" ... by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 2

      But these two can now take some comfort in the fact that they allowed Snowden to see that official channels do not work

      They were beta-testers of whistle-blowing, performing important Q&A testing on the process so that the final release could make it out to the public without any major bugs.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    6. Re:If ever there was a "Conscience Award" ... by deconfliction · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That was beautiful. I only wonder if we'll see the day when Snowden, Manning and Assange are granted freedom. And when the inmates at GITMO are allowed to tell their stories in complete detail, and we are allowed to hear them.

    7. Re:If ever there was a "Conscience Award" ... by AHuxley · · Score: 2

      The color of law efforts to work around or in other ways use parallel construction have gone to an open US court.
      http://www.freedomwatchusa.org/court-declares-nsa-spying-program-unconstitutional-and-grant
      Other open US court rulings will follow as the issue moves up the US courts.
      The problem is the US unconstitutional aspect is very clear - legal precedents, 'interpreting", "events" do not undo the Fourth Amendment.
      The good part is the US legal system has to clear on what it will do. Will the Fourth Amendment protect freedom of speech, association, contact with the press, public expression of faith, political support, protest, charity work, travel, reading of books/web use... open courts, warrants under oath and cross examination of witnesses...?
      Further work before US courts will really be defining - no protection or total protection?
      No protection will subject any defendant to a closed conversation between a judge, their defence lawyer and the gov over discovered material.
      No option to cross examine, call witnesses, have the material made public, no real oath on how or where or when the material was collected, the chain of custody would start with documents been presented in court on the trail day..
      The legal US system would be reduced to a http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Chamber after a multimedia presentation for a select few cleared court officials.

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    8. Re:If ever there was a "Conscience Award" ... by l0n3s0m3phr34k · · Score: 3, Funny

      Shut up, big nose!

    9. Re:If ever there was a "Conscience Award" ... by Mitreya · · Score: 2

      To me, none of Snowden's revelations were particularly surprising. The NSA is a spy agency by charter.

      Weren't you surprised by a revelation that a single person working at NSA could get that much data and walk away with it?

    10. Re:If ever there was a "Conscience Award" ... by easyTree · · Score: 2

      It's seeming increasingly likely that the meek will all have been turned into food by the power-mongering ghouls.

      --
      Requiem for the American Dream
    11. Re:If ever there was a "Conscience Award" ... by l0n3s0m3phr34k · · Score: 2

      Many of us understand the idea of countries spying on each other, even if it's "bad" it's pretty much a fact of political life. The problem is that US citizens are supposed to be outside of the NSA's jurisdiction. If this was the FBI instead...it would be pretty crappy, make people mad, but is at least within their sphere. The NSA knows their not supposed to be collecting our info, do it anyway, and lie repeatedly about it. That's the problem here.

    12. Re:If ever there was a "Conscience Award" ... by gordo3000 · · Score: 2

      I think you need to legal lesson on the difference between the US and a common law country. Legal precedent means nothing in so much as the law is concerned. It is ONLY a guide for how other people have decided in a similar situation and at ANY TIME a judge can rule in a way that is completely against previous precedent (see the entire civil rights era for a long series of these rulings).

      The only law in this country is the written law and, as criminal law goes, the only proper group to make any statement about it is a jury in a courtroom, and at times a judge in some limited circumstances (this isn't the Japanese system).

      Anyways, it has made the american people aware of our government's crimes. There is a ruling that specifically says their actions are unconstitutional, i.e. violating the highest law of the land. There is another ruling that says it is ok because it is a tool that only works if you have mass surveillance (which basically can be interpreted is that you only need to follow the constitution unless you break it on a large enough scale). This will go up the courts and most likely we will have a ruling by the supreme court on this (the only court, constitutionally, that matters).

    13. Re:If ever there was a "Conscience Award" ... by deconfliction · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Gitmo is full of really dangerous and nasty people who were most likely plotting to murder innocents for the cause of religious zealotry.

      That is a load of complete and utter bullshit. If I wanted to spend 5 minutes netsearching mainstream sources I could easily refute that. GITMO is filled with political prisoners, that have long since paid for their crime. Even if every one of them had Osama Bin Laden's bloodlust to kill innocent U.S. citizens, freeing them all would still be an enhancement to the long term security and liberty of U.S. citizens. Holding the GITMO detainees as we have, and I might add 4 years beyond Obama's day 1 in office signed pledge to get them the hell away from GITMO, ... holding them there is an absolute stain on the nation of the United States of America the likes of which only the terrabytes of revelations of Snowden can compete with.

    14. Re:If ever there was a "Conscience Award" ... by lagomorpha2 · · Score: 4, Informative

      He seems to have dropped a little weight - I guess being targeted by those the run the 'land of the free' amusement ride takes its toll :S

      It's actually pretty normal for Americans to lose weight after living in Europe for a few months. Probably a combination of diet and there not being a social phobia of having to walk more than 30 feet.

  3. Consequences more for World - USA by jkrise · · Score: 4, Insightful

    In my view; the revelations have far more impact for nations in the World other than the USA (you know; such nations do exist; and are home to 20 times more people than in the US). But when the Internet is controlled largely by the US; and these revelations indicate even more erosion of other nations' peoples' rights; the debate must include the entire World. One fears that just like the US Presidential debate; the implications for the rest of us will be ignored totally.

    --
    If you keep throwing chairs, one day you'll break windows....
    1. Re:Consequences more for World - USA by l0n3s0m3phr34k · · Score: 2

      And something tells me that the US will soon loose control over the net because of this...along with billions of dollars as companies abandon US companies, throw our hardware away, and will refuse to have it inside their country...and the biggest reason is the fact the NSA has been shown to spy on other countries and then use that information for the US's financial advantage.

      In fact, I'll bet that soon having said equipment will cause the companies insurance rates to rise to compensate for the known security holes contained within, and the fact that it is fiduciary unsound to use equipment that has been shown to allow competitors to spy on said financial dealings. This coming blowback will hurt the US far more than the NSA's collection of text messages ever will. When Cisco, Dell, MS, etc find their contracts not renewed because of non-trustworthy and knowingly exploited holes that they purposely put in there...even though we all knew they had been like that for a long time until now a CFO could just write it off as some "conspiracy theory". Now there could easily be shareholder lawsuits when some NSA spy turns over SAP's future software roadmap they grabbed to Microsoft, because they can prove SAP should have known better and where not being fiduciarily responsible.

  4. We all know that already by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What are the corrupt power-mongering double-talking ghouls gonna do? "Oh yeah, we're the bad guy. Sue us" ?

    They do not need to tell us.

    We already know.

    --
    Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
  5. Re:Edward Snowden is a god damned TRAITOR by Trepidity · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Edward Snowden is a big a danger to the US today as the Soviet Union was 4 years ago.

    No argument there...

    --
    10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
  6. Re:This could be avoided by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Do they still serve those cockmeat sandwiches?

  7. Re:Edward Snowden is a god damned TRAITOR by mcgrew · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Bullshit, the traitors are those in government ignoring the constitution and illegally spying on the citizenry. It needs to stop now.

    --
    Free Martian Whores!
  8. Re:Edward Snowden is a god damned TRAITOR by MrBigInThePants · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The internet being what it is I am rendered unable to decide whether this is sarcasm, irony and/or a troll.

    So I decided to investigate what else you have written in an attempt to solve this mystery. I don't know as yet WHY I did this as I really don't give a flying fuck what your motivations are so that mystery will have to wait until I see my therapist next.

    You have many posts listed as flamebait etc but also many listed positively.

    So it appears you are very good at generating strong reactions from others. Unfortunately this does not really answer my original question.

    However comments such as this: "lol Euro-weenies always finding an excuse to lick boot"

    and this: "Conviction should be quashed and a full "royal" apology from the inbred German layabouts in Buckingham palace."

    Lead me to finally decide that, based on a balance of probabilities, you are indeed a troll in this instance but, unlike other species of troll, actually possess the capability to write sensible and thought provoking comments. This does not make your trolling here better, but worse.

    So shame on you.

  9. Next in news. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    "USA Today was raided by the Internal Revenue Service of the U.S.A. today."

  10. The press and the people... by wbr1 · · Score: 4, Insightful
    ...are divided as usual, but many seem to applaud what he did. I do.

    The government however is not divided that I can see. They want his ass on a platter. Strung up, drawn and quartered with his parts sent to the four corners of Scotland as a message. This is telling in this day and age of 'partisan' bickering to keep the masses distracted with largely inconsequential issues. Patriotism is not serving in office. Or recording every bit of data you can weakening our country, technology and economy in the process, to supposedly protect us. It is not giving lip service to the constitution, while you wipe your arse with it by your actions.

    It is about standing up. It is about saying wait, this is NOT what MY country is supposed to be. It is about being able to stand up to a Tory, or a Tea Partier, or a Donkey and saying "fuck you, give me my rights, give me my liberty, or give me death", to paraphrase Patrick Henry. It is not in cow towing to the powers that be, but resisting the ever reaching yoke of the powerful.

    But we don't stand by and large. We listen to Fox news and MSNBC talking heads and nod. We scream at our football games or hope to see a blurred nipple slip on TMZ. We laugh at cat memes and snapchat sext our co-workers while the spouse is away. We wonder at the changes in the climate then get into our unneeded and wasteful SUV.

    What happened to our spine? The one that beat the brits? The one that helped show Germany and Japan where they could put it when they wanted to remake the world into their bleak image? Why are we more interested in goatse, and goth chicks and godzilla than righting our government? Why can 10 random people not discuss issues without at least 1 to 2 people completely derailing any progress? Why do we continually bend over while those in power plum our innermost depths to their own ends?

    I wish I knew the answers. I though many of these thoughts as a teen 20 years ago. Then I had the optimism to think that we were on the brink. That we would stand, that a revolution was imminent. That the way things were would be changed and we had the power to do it. I was cynical then, but had hope. Now I think I am a defeatist. I would like more than just a few people to prove me wrong. The Snowdens of the world are currently the exception that proves the rule. Why is this?

    --
    Silence is a state of mime.
    1. Re:The press and the people... by shadowofwind · · Score: 3, Insightful

      People were more aggressive and less risk adverse in the past, and not as self-absorbed, but for the most part were never willing to stand up for what was right. For example, when Thomas Paine was in prison in France, the founding fathers left him hung out to dry. Nobody stood up to stop the genocide against Native Americans. There was a regional power struggle between the north and south US, which had different cultures, but poor southern white men did essentially nothing to help black men. America fought Germany because Germany declared war on the US, not because they were willing to fight Fascism, and the US did very little to help Jews escape. America fought Japan because they were pissed about Peal Harbor, not because of what Japan was doing in China. Very much of the domestic opposition to the war in Vietnam came from people who wanted to stay home, enjoy benefits of birth control pills, penicillin, and smoke weed, not because they had a more principled objection. I could go on.

      I think its possible to understand a lot about "why this is", but we've got to be willing to give up our own vanity, and face the possibility that our ideals not only will not but can not be realized in anything like the form and time-frame that we may have hoped for. Our problems go very, very deep, its not like humanity just went off the tracks a few decades ago or even a few thousand years ago. Study animal behavior closely and you'll see that its all fucked up to, in pretty much the same ways. Maintaining idealism in the face of this takes an incredible patience, and a kind of courage. If we value courage, here's something to prove ourselves on maybe.

    2. Re:The press and the people... by jazroc · · Score: 2
      I would like to attempt to take your points a bit further...

      You mentioned that "we don't stand up". As I see it, there is a lack of inherent and true empathy for each other and certainly no strong sense of union... as if we were all living under the same "roof". Why? It seems that it's by design, in part, and also a consequence of our own selfish tendencies as the short-lived self-aware (mostly) animals that we are.

      A few things that are important, in my opinion, to consider around the fundamentals of our system (not just government... but that will weigh-in heavily):

      - We are taught to believe that our vote counts

      -- This doesn't really seem possible without proper checks and balances in place... and when you add-in that elections are largely driven by money... how could the vote count above a regional level? It's not whether you CAN buy an election... we openly encourage it. (Citizens United decision is only another brick in that already massive wall)

      - We celebrate heroes and individual achievements over "fanfare for the common man"

      -- In sports when there is a goal, the person that last touches the ball gets all the credit. We all realize that's not possible without the rest of the team, but we still celebrate and idolize the person with the ball over the others, by and large.

      -- In business... CEO's get massive compensation in comparison to their actual contribution to the bottom line itself. Too many examples to list.

      - Our attention span is under attack

      -- Instant gratification over true comprehension

      -- 30 second sound bytes are enough for many people to form a lasting impression and opinion on almost any subject

      -- There's so much data coming to us, constantly, that it's almost guaranteed we'll forget REALLY important information

      -- We've proven we're easily distracted by the next shiny object in line. Sandy Hook could be at the top of the headlines and it only takes a celebrity passing, a scandal in pop culture or a new iDevice to divert our attention and muddy the waters of change.

      All those things you mention... the lack of spine and the former achievements and ideals established by the foundational architects... those folks didn't live in this tiny, fast-paced and commercialized world that still puts more emphasis on terrorists than asteroids, more stock in self-worth than philanthropy. In those days (pre-tech surge) the people around you REALLY mattered and had a great deal of impact on your chance for survival. Now, we are all walled-off in our huMan caves.

      IMHO, even though it's very dark to think so, we as co-inhabitants of this tiny rock will only stand together again when we face something threatening that is quite severe for everyone at once. It may not last (note previous asteroid reference) long, even then. In the USA, we tend only to "care" when we have had the chance many, many times already and there is simply no other option left... and then even after we have missed that chance.

      I probably shouldn't have started this without having the energy to finish... but I have had many of the same questions my whole life, not just recently. I don't see today as anything but the likely outcome as it appeared to be decades ago. Us "rich" folks on the planet are so very selfish. Our time is short and we think of ourselves as SO important... when we are simply a blip. We are so preoccupied with short term goals and outcomes.

      I'm going to keep dreaming, jamming and hoping... and working within my own circle of influence. Best I can offer the planet right now, I think.

  11. Re:This could be avoided by easyTree · · Score: 3, Informative

    I understand you can get those on the outside, if you're missing them :P

    --
    Requiem for the American Dream
  12. USA Today reported on NSA's spying in *2006* by globaljustin · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Ironic, then that it was USA Today who first broke the story about NSA warrantless wiretapping and phone metadata collection ***in 2006***

    NSA has massive database of Americans' phone calls

    From that article, again, this was REPORTED BY USATODAY IN 2006:

    The National Security Agency has been secretly collecting the phone call records of tens of millions of Americans, using data provided by AT&T, Verizon and BellSouth, people with direct knowledge of the arrangement told USA TODAY.
    The NSA program reaches into homes and businesses across the nation by amassing information about the calls of ordinary Americans — most of whom aren't suspected of any crime

    Snowden is a dupe at best...he's probably being blackmailed...but assuming the best, any way you look at the situation, he was duped by high-level criminals or foreign governments, or both, into doing this.

    He's probably being blackmailed. He's not a free man in Russia. All the reports indicate he's essentially in jail when not being paraded in front of reporters.

    Again...this info was reported by USA Today itself...in 2006...Snowden just gave operational details.

    The "national conversation" about privacy could have happened w/o Snowden releasing that info. We US citizens could have demanded more transparency w/o Snowden releasing this info...

    Because...we already knew it was happening. Snowden told us it was called 'Prism'

    Even Senator Ron Wyden was sounding alarms on the Senate floor, before Snowden's document release....this from 2011: Senators Say Patriot Act Is Being Misinterpreted. Remember the PATRIOT ACT people?

    One last time, as my first link shows, the USA Today reported on the NSA phone meta-data program with significant details **in 2006**

    --
    Thank you Dave Raggett
    1. Re:USA Today reported on NSA's spying in *2006* by Baloroth · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Ironic, then that it was USA Today who first broke the story about NSA warrantless wiretapping and phone metadata collection ***in 2006***

      And they had... what evidence, exactly? "Inside anonymous sources" is not the same as thousands of pages of documentation. That old article had very few details, no proof, no names, and nothing that actually proved anything whatsoever. Snowden showed what was actually going one, that it was illegal, and exactly how far it went.

      --
      "None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license." --John Milton
    2. Re:USA Today reported on NSA's spying in *2006* by EdIII · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I don't think you or the OP of this particular thread gets it at *all*.

      It's not that we now know about the NSA and what they were doing. We most certainly did.

      It's that we have FUCKING PROOF.

      In 2006, I was saying much the same things. I had high hopes for Obama because I honestly thought he was going to give us justice over some of that telco bullshit. Of course not. I was naive.

      What Snowden has done, and deserves a Nobel Peace Prize for, is give me CREDIBILITY.

      Now when I have a calm, not so agitated, san tin-foil conversation with somebody now about security, I get taken seriously.

      I'm being asked right now what it would take to raise the level of security for several companies. What chat software could we use that is heavily encrypted? What should we be doing to vet hardware?

      Most of it is of course executives wanting their conversations to be discrete so it can't be used against them, but that is progress nonetheless...

      At the very least now when I talk about mass surveillance I don't see rolled eyes and skepticism. I have their attention.

      Thanks Snowden.

    3. Re:USA Today reported on NSA's spying in *2006* by l0n3s0m3phr34k · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Personally, I feel Obama should give his Nobel to Snowden. He deserves it far more, and is risking his life to let the world know what's going on. And I'm in the same boat too...finally the "it's not paranoia when they really are after you" has been proven to be true to the rest of the population.

    4. Re:USA Today reported on NSA's spying in *2006* by WOOFYGOOFY · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's proof enough that Snowden matters that we're talking about this now and we weren't in 2006.

  13. Congratulations! Peace prize next! by Zibodiz · · Score: 5, Insightful

    He deserves all the recognition we can give him. Whether he did things the right way or not, he did what he thought he should do for the good of Americans, even though he knew it would result in his becoming a refugee in another country, or possibly imprisoned and tortured here in the states. He didn't do it for money, and I doubt he did it for fame; he did it because his conscience told him he had to. He is a patriot who deserves to be treated as one. Here's to hoping he gets a Nobel Peace Prize.

  14. I remember when... by ApplePy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Back in my day, the *Russian* spooks defected *to* the *USA*.

    Now get off my lawn!

    Except that's damnably creepy when you think about what a change that is.

    --
    That I'm right, and you don't like it, doesn't mean I'm a troll.
  15. Read moar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It's called documentary evidence: Hersch is "certain that NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden "changed the whole nature of the debate" about surveillance. Hersh says he and other journalists had written about surveillance, but Snowden was significant because he provided documentary evidence. "Editors love documents. Chicken-shit editors who wouldn't touch stories like that, they love documents, so he changed the whole ball game,"" http://www.theguardian.com/media/media-blog/2013/sep/27/seymour-hersh-obama-nsa-american-media

  16. Re:This could be avoided by EdIII · · Score: 3, Funny

    The ketchup dispensers are serving lube and salt'n'pepper bags have been replaced with condoms.

    Condoms? That's like eating a sandwich with the saran wrap still over it....

  17. Enough of these government shills by CuteSteveJobs · · Score: 4, Insightful

    LOL all these "anonymous cowards" posting pro-government public relations. If they're tonguing government's balls why would they need anonymity? I smell government public relations all paid for with your taxpayer dollar.

    Way to ignore another story and the FISA finding that the government was breaching the Constitution. http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/12/16/judge-nsa-surveillance-fourth-amendment/4041995/ http://news.firedoglake.com/2013/08/22/fisa-court-ruled-nsa-program-unconstitutional-said-nsa-misled-them/ That you're ignoring these smacks of a shill. The right and left are united on this. On the other side are government workers like yourself living a parasitic existence off the hard-working taxpayer.

    > Snowden is a sellout who took what he had and likely ran to the highest bidder with the info.
    Not a shred of evidence do you have. Now get a real fucking job, you piece of shit government shill.

  18. We haven't surrendered by erroneus · · Score: 2

    That's the thing that I can't get past. We haven't surrendered anything. We haven't "traded" security for liberty. We haven't made any bargains of the sort. All of these "erosions" on our freedoms and rights have been perpetrated against us without our will and without our knowledge. They have lied and cheated and stolen from us our birthrights as humans as recognized and defined to us under the US constitution. And without the revelations, the world would still be living under the huge, thick blanket of lies.

    Are we all expected to blame ourselves for "voting someone in"? This goes back futher than many people know and isn't tied to any one president or any one political party. We keep wanting to simplify everything to the point that we simply can't and do not want to understand the full scope of the disillusionment we are experiencing.

  19. Re:Correct! by timeOday · · Score: 2

    In theory. Remind me who was Time's Person of the Year in 2001? Osama Bin Laden, naturally?... no, it was Rudy Guliani. And here is a USA Today article from beforehand on their connundrum, on the difficulty of making the obvious pick. So, it's pretty clear Snowden isn't considered as radioactive as Bin Laden, anyways.

  20. Re:Correct! by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ... who was Time's Person of the Year in 2001? Osama Bin Laden, naturally?... no, it was Rudy Guliani.

    Remember that this choice was made a little less than four months after 9/11, and the popular reaction to the event was so bad that women in California were ordering their dogs to attack people who "looked Muslim" at freeway rest areas. Time is published from New York City, ground zero for the bulk of the attacks.

    I suspect they figured that if they gave Osama the title there'd be another building brought down - by New Yorkers with sledgehammers.

    --
    Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
  21. Re:Edward Snowden is a god damned TRAITOR by fido_dogstoyevsky · · Score: 2

    To all you idiots out there, if you've got nothing to hid then you have nothing to fear. Edward Snowden is a big a danger to the US today as the Soviet Union was 4 years ago. He should be executed without trial.

    Thank you for that brilliant insight into your psyche, Mr. Mussolini - by the way, your black shirts are ready at the cleaners.

    Respectfully fixed that for you.

    --
    It's NOT a conspiracy... it's a plot.
  22. Re:Edward Snowden is a god damned TRAITOR by Dutch+Gun · · Score: 2

    if you've got nothing to hid (sic) then you have nothing to fear.

    There are two great responses to this oft-repeated mantra:

    I've got nothing to hide from those I trust.

    or

    I'm not doing anything wrong in the bathroom, but that doesn't mean I want the world to see what I do in there.

    The desire for privacy doesn't imply any sort of wrongdoing.

    --
    Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.