Slashdot Mirror


Snowden Says No One Listened To 10 Attempts To Raise Concerns At NSA

As reported by the Washington Post, Edward Snowden denies in no uncertain terms the idea that he failed to go through proper channels to expose what he thought were troubling privacy violations being committed by the NSA, and that he observed as a contractor employed by the agency. The article begins: "[Snowden] said he repeatedly tried to go through official channels to raise concerns about government snooping programs but that his warnings fell on the deaf ears. In testimony to the European Parliament released Friday morning, Snowden wrote that he reported policy or legal issues related to spying programs to more than 10 officials, but as a contractor he had no legal avenue to pursue further whistleblowing." Further, "Elsewhere in his testimony, Snowden described the reaction he received when relating his concerns to co-workers and superiors. The responses, he said, fell into two camps. 'The first were well-meaning but hushed warnings not to "rock the boat," for fear of the sort of retaliation that befell former NSA whistleblowers like Wiebe, Binney, and Drake.' All three of those men, he notes, were subject to intense scrutiny and the threat of criminal prosecution."

273 comments

  1. broken link by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Broken link is broken.

    1. Re:broken link by houstonbofh · · Score: 2

      Probably only in the US... ;)

    2. Re:broken link by Wolfrider · · Score: 1

      --Always remember Whitman, Price, and Haddad, last season's "winners."

      --
      .
      == WolfriderV6 == I'm willing to admit that *I just might* be wrong... Are you??
  2. Broken Link by faldore · · Score: 1

    Broken link is broken

  3. No href in story by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Your story is missing a href.

  4. The first fell in to one group by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    There was no second group.

    1. Re:The first fell in to one group by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There was no second group.

      If I told you what happened to the second camp, someone would have to kill both of us (and anyone else that read the reply).

    2. Re:The first fell in to one group by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      In my 15 years of Federal experience ... I find there are two types of people: Psychos who lead and Cowards who follow. Everyone else either quits or gets fired.

    3. Re:The first fell in to one group by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I used the work for a Town. Much the same story as well.

    4. Re:The first fell in to one group by i+kan+reed · · Score: 1

      Hypothetically, if this were a truly endemic problem, what would be a valid solution from waaaaaaay up at the policy level?

  5. Broken link: Here ya go by wjcofkc · · Score: 4, Informative
    --
    Brought to you by Carl's Junior.
    1. Re:Broken link: Here ya go by houstonbofh · · Score: 5, Informative

      Other than it says it was from the Washington Post... http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

    2. Re:Broken link: Here ya go by wjcofkc · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      I more than suspect they all read very similar. As far as I am concerned as long as the actual "link" is denies in no uncertain terms the idea that he failed to go through proper channels it's up for grabs. Get a grip.

      --
      Brought to you by Carl's Junior.
    3. Re:Broken link: Here ya go by NicBenjamin · · Score: 1, Interesting

      If he never tried to go through Congress he didn't try to go through channels. Their major job is to be a Check on the executive preventing overreach, whereas anyone he could actually talk to in the office's major job is to further Executive branch overreach. That is the entire point of having an elaborate system of checks and balances. Everybody (in both the Executive and the Legislative) is always supposed to be trying to oppress us, but they are supposed to be failing miserably because the other policy-making branch thwarts them.

      I don't necessarily blame Snowden for not knowing this. Americans tend to know what checks and balances are in theory, and have a decent ability to explain why the theory works, but if you try to get them to think of any of the implications of the theory (ie: if I'm in the Executive, and I think the boss is breaking the Constitution, I get Congress to check that shit) they have absolutely no clue. OTOH, the fact that he didn;t know this means his Crusade is doomed and everything will be swept under the rug.

    4. Re:Broken link: Here ya go by Xest · · Score: 5, Informative

      Well Fox News and the Daily Mail have a track record of lying about Snowden, The Daily Mail still makes claims that he's a Russian agent even though even the NSA themselves accept that he is not.

      As such, better to play itself and not waste time with those with a track record of lying about this particular topic no? especially when there's an alternative with a slightly better track record mentioned in the summary itself (and more interesting detail FWIW).

      So it may be up for grabs for you, but for myself and I suspect many other's it's far more preferable to have sources that don't have track records of actually outright lying about shit all the time, especially on the subject in question.

    5. Re:Broken link: Here ya go by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      If he never tried to go through Congress he didn't try to go through channels.

      Oh come on. Congress is wiretapped, corrupt, and stupid. Don't you read the news?

    6. Re:Broken link: Here ya go by Goose+In+Orbit · · Score: 1

      "The Daily Mail"

      would probably be a lot more sympathetic if he were, instead, a barely-legal female in barely-there clothing that their readership could bitch about (or perve over) despite their claims to be a "family newspaper"

    7. Re:Broken link: Here ya go by cusco · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If he never tried to go through Congress he didn't try to go through channels.

      So which congresscritter do you work for? That's the only explanation that I can imagine for such an absurd comment.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    8. Re:Broken link: Here ya go by cusco · · Score: 1

      slightly better track record

      Keeping in mind where Project Mockingbird was headquartered, of course . . .

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    9. Re:Broken link: Here ya go by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But to a Contard they're NOT lying like shit...

    10. Re: Broken link: Here ya go by Mabhatter · · Score: 1

      The issue is that the NSA AND important people in Congress KNOW EXACTLY what was going on.

      This was never a SECRET that such illegal wanton actions were taking place. a THAT is Snowden's mistake. He willingly joined up with them and got his ticket punched when even average internet pundits knew back in 2002 the spying on everybody was gearing up and the courts refused to make the executive present proof.

      Snowden hasn't produced anything we didn't already "know" was going on.. He's well-meaning, but entirely stupid as to his place in the system.

    11. Re: Broken link: Here ya go by NicBenjamin · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately this comment is mostly accurate. But it's not entirely accurate.

      Wyden knew this shit because they told him, but he was not actually allowed to tell anyone else about it. Which meant that the NSA could ignore and/or lie about the programs when he tried to hold them accountable in committee hearings, which in turn meant that none of the Tea Party-types in the House who could help him defund PRISM ever found out about it.

      If Wyden had a single email from Snowden saying "this program exists, and it sucks," then when Wyden asks those questions and gets stonewalled he is allowed to go on TV saying he knows he was stonewalled because he's got an email from an NSA contractor. Which means Amash can work with him on solving the problem.

    12. Re:Broken link: Here ya go by NicBenjamin · · Score: 0

      If he never tried to go through Congress he didn't try to go through channels.

      So which congresscritter do you work for? That's the only explanation that I can imagine for such an absurd comment.

      Are you denying the entire point of having a $multi-billion Congress is to check Executive over-reach, or are you claiming they suck at their jobs?

      I will agree they suck at their jobs, particularly the stopping-fighting-about-stupid-shit-so-the-fucking-bills-can-get-paid bit of their jobs. OTOH, it would have been really nice if one of the fights of the past few years was actually something they could win.

  6. Washington Post Link by Nuke+Bloodaxe · · Score: 5, Informative
    1. Re:Washington Post Link by rmdingler · · Score: 0, Offtopic
      No one listened to him according to that link's account either.

      Now they're paying attention.

      All he wanted was a little r...s...p...e...c...t.

      --
      Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

      Ernest Hemingway

    2. Re:Washington Post Link by callmetheraven · · Score: 1

      -1 Offtopic = libtard Obamabots with mod points.

      --
      You can have my SIG when you pry it from my cold, dead hands.
  7. The tighter you clench your fist, Lord Vader... by mellon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...the more star systems will slip through your fingers!

    Seriously, if this is true, it's a pretty good illustration of why tin-pot dictators throwing the book and the kitchen sink at whistleblowers are a far more serious security threat than the whistleblowers themselves.

    1. Re:The tighter you clench your fist, Lord Vader... by Stormwatch · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Whistleblowers are not a problem; they are the solution.

    2. Re:The tighter you clench your fist, Lord Vader... by ahabswhale · · Score: 0

      "Seriously, if this is true..."

      It's extremely unlikely this is true. Think about it...

      He's a sysadmin at the NSA, which means he's supposed to be maintaining their servers -- not looking through classified materials. So if he were to report to his superiors about his concerns with any of these highly classified programs, he'd be admitting to looking at information he should never touch. If he did anyway, he would have been shit-canned immediately and investigated. So, it sounds like a complete pile of horseshit to me.

      --
      Are agnostics skeptical of unicorns too?
    3. Re:The tighter you clench your fist, Lord Vader... by mclearn · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You can understand the nature of the programs you are maintaining without viewing the material they collect.

    4. Re:The tighter you clench your fist, Lord Vader... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And where's the justice for the people who ARE the problem?

      Where are the charges of perjury before congress? Of subverting the constitution of the united states? Arguably, of treason, given the massive damage done to the reputation and interests of the US by the actions supported by a few individuals?

      We know that individuals who have done one millionth of what the NSA has done have met harsh punishment at the hands of the law. Where's the punishment here?

      Ah yes, I forgot. Laws only apply to the "little people".

    5. Re:The tighter you clench your fist, Lord Vader... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Seriously? As a sysadmin, if I happened to see something dodgy while doing my daily routine work (imaging servers, checking logs, etc), I'd probably feel the need to say something, too. Just because you CAN see everything doesn't mean you're snooping for it.

    6. Re:The tighter you clench your fist, Lord Vader... by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      Yes, they dissolve readily.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    7. Re:The tighter you clench your fist, Lord Vader... by ahabswhale · · Score: 1, Insightful

      No you cannot. There would be no reason for him to know anything about these programs at all. He only needs to understand how various servers need to interact with each other, load requirements, etc.. Also, the DoD is pretty big on the whole "need to know" concept. When I was in the military and working with confidential information, this was stated over and over again. I'm pretty damn certain they wouldn't be cool with a sysadmin having such broad knowledge of their programs.

      I work at a place where the sysadmins are more than welcome to know any gory detail they want about the software but really don't know jack shit about it. Why? Because they don't really need to and they don't really care.

      --
      Are agnostics skeptical of unicorns too?
    8. Re:The tighter you clench your fist, Lord Vader... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      Tarkin. Lord Tarkin. Among other inaccuracies.

    9. Re:The tighter you clench your fist, Lord Vader... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Not everyone is dumb. Some people actually think and do care. He obviously understood the ramifications of what was going on and he reported it. No one cared and the programs still exist. Now he has leaked all this shit and WE ALL UNDERSTAND but not the NSA nor the GOVERNMENT.

      So what's your argument here? Put him in jail because he understood things he was not supposed to understand and then we're all fine? The programs don't really exist?

      Fine, put him in jail, but not before putting thousands if not tens of thousands of others in jail first - the ones who created and the ones who didn't report these systems.

    10. Re:The tighter you clench your fist, Lord Vader... by mellon · · Score: 4, Funny

      Damn, you're right. Too bad /. doesn't let me edit out my mistakes. Anyway, Tarkin's dead, so he's not going to complain.

    11. Re:The tighter you clench your fist, Lord Vader... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Even if he was able to learn enough to have concerns through his legitimate duties as a sysadmin, the NSA has some serious internal security issues if someone made it that clear that they did not agree with what the NSA was doing and yet kept him on their payroll.

    12. Re:The tighter you clench your fist, Lord Vader... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Agreed. Not to mention that Snowden himself, in a fit of narcissism, claimed that he took the job for the sole purpose of leaking information. I find it unlikely that someone under those circumstances would pursue legal whistle-blowing channels.

    13. Re:The tighter you clench your fist, Lord Vader... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

      I agree, and even if he did. His revelation of the surveillance of US citizens here within the country did need to be revealed. I don't think he did it the right way but it did need to be done.

      BUT!!!

      Everything he has revealed since then is not covered under the blanket of protecting the Constitution. The fact that we monitor or attempt to monitor foreign heads of state. Not a constitutional issue. Fully within the scope and mission of the intel community. That the Aussies or Brits have similar programs for their citizens, again not his place to reveal as a whistle-blower, again fully within the scope of the intel community mission.

      I defended him after the first revelations, I felt he was a whistle blower and while I disagreed with how and where he revealed his information I considered such actions and location acceptable precautions for what he was doing. But as always with these traitors, he wasn't satisfied with the 15 min of fame being a whistle-blower gained for him, he wanted more, so he stole over 1.7 million documents to ensure he had plenty to keep his name in the press as he sold our intelligence collection efforts to the highest bidders.

      The man is a traitor. If he were truly doing it just out of concern for protecting our rights as citizens, he would have stopped at the surveillance inside the US.

    14. Re:The tighter you clench your fist, Lord Vader... by buss_error · · Score: 2

      He's a sysadmin at the NSA, which means he's supposed to be maintaining their servers -- not looking through classified materials.

      That's a problem the NSA needs to look into. Unauthorized people seeing classified data is a problem.

      So if he were to report to his superiors about his concerns with any of these highly classified programs, he'd be admitting to looking at information he should never touch.

      Another problem for the NSA to look into.

      If he did anyway, he would have been shit-canned immediately and investigated.

      Third time's the charm, right? Right?

      So, it sounds like a complete pile of horseshit to me.

      Except so far no one is saying "yeah, we looked into his complaints, they were completely baseless."

      By the way, my tag line is the same tag line I've used for most of the years I've been reading Slash Dot.

      --
      Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.
    15. Re:The tighter you clench your fist, Lord Vader... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am suspicious of this claim too. If he revealed what he had seen or even said something about anything classified that he didn't have a need to know, he would have been in trouble.

      Yes, there should be an independent 'secret' investigator general court that hears these cases and explains why the government has approved them. But, you don't need to make the information public to foreign governments, criminals, conspiracy therorists, libertarians, and terrorists to bring down the whole system because you have a personal problem.

      And yes, the NSA and DoD (among others) all need to get their act together and figure out how to deal with classified digital files instead of paper. It is pathetic that they aren't password protected and encrypted. It is also bad that these were on a network accessible by someone at the SysAdmin level. Have an archive, but have it off network, and require access from one team of people to get to old files. It shouldn't be hard to setup.

    16. Re:The tighter you clench your fist, Lord Vader... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He had worked in other capacities for intelligence agencies before, including as analyst.

    17. Re:The tighter you clench your fist, Lord Vader... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, puhleez. Maintaining systems without reviewing the backups and transactions, or understanding their network and software requirements, is voodoo sys-admin. And they *should* care, like a tailor cares about the fabric in the suit they make you and what size your desk jockey lardbutt is.

      Snowden also wasn't military. He was a civial contractor. The NSA *is not military*, because they're not not part of the DoD, their command hierarchy does not have military ranks, and they're not subject to various military codes of justice. They could not do their jobs if they were, because the US military codes of justice would do *not* permit the abusive domestic surveillance the NSA has been doing for the last few decades, and the personnel would face not just a civilian court. They would face court martial..

    18. Re:The tighter you clench your fist, Lord Vader... by AK+Marc · · Score: 2

      So, you are ordered to connect a port labeled "Sprint secret illegal wiretap" to a server.

      I don't know if I've ever worked somewhere where the email admin didn't read employee email for fun. Every email admin I know has done it.

      Any sysadmin that doesn't know what the servers he administers does, isn't a good sysadmin.

    19. Re:The tighter you clench your fist, Lord Vader... by sjames · · Score: 2

      YES, you absolutely can. Have you ever been a sysadmin? Do you have any powers of observation whatsoever?

      Sure, officially the sysadmins know nothing. Just like officially the postmaster never looks at a user's email at all, even when diagnosing the user's email problem. Gotcha!

    20. Re:The tighter you clench your fist, Lord Vader... by ahabswhale · · Score: 1

      Most of your post is irrelevant and off topic. As for the one part that isn't...

      The NSA is already on record as saying he never brought these issues up and they said this long before he came out with this allegation.

      --
      Are agnostics skeptical of unicorns too?
    21. Re:The tighter you clench your fist, Lord Vader... by ahabswhale · · Score: 0

      You don't just read email for fun at the NSA. Do I really need to explain this to you?

      --
      Are agnostics skeptical of unicorns too?
    22. Re:The tighter you clench your fist, Lord Vader... by ahabswhale · · Score: 1

      There's a big difference between being a sysadmin at the NSA where information is purely on a need to know basis and being a sysadmin at Target. It's a completely different world.

      --
      Are agnostics skeptical of unicorns too?
    23. Re:The tighter you clench your fist, Lord Vader... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      The NSA *is not military*, because they're not not part of the DoD,

      Since when? Last I checked the NSA was 90% Military staffed and definitely under the DoD.
      http://www.nsa.gov/about/leadership/index.shtml/
      Notice those funny stars on the man on the left's shoulders? Those indicate he is a General, specifically he is a four star general from the army. The NSA is definitely military.

    24. Re:The tighter you clench your fist, Lord Vader... by dbIII · · Score: 1

      If he did anyway, he would have been shit-canned immediately and investigated

      In a fictional place with those rules you imply maybe, but we don't know about the levels of access in the NSA or even exactly the scope of his job.

    25. Re:The tighter you clench your fist, Lord Vader... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You don't just read email for fun at the NSA.

      Clearly they do read email for fun at the NSA which is the major problem people like Snowden have with the NSA. Perhaps you meant to say that such activities were well regulated and logged so if Snowden or other sysadmins were doing it, then his superiors would know about it? Because if that's some sort of evil that deserves Snowden being fired...then the NSA needs fired, obviously, as we the people through a system of government never gave them a warrant--nor could we under how our Constitution is constructed--to engage in the scale of snooping on emails of Americans.

      Oh, sorry, I got side tracked. You were trying to smear Snowden, again?

    26. Re:The tighter you clench your fist, Lord Vader... by dbIII · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The NSA is already on record as

      The NSA is on record for lying to Congress.
      They are the boy that cried wolf. They can not be trusted to be honest with this issue if being dishonest is to their disadvantage. If an inquiry into the NSA shows he never brought these issues up then that's a different story.

    27. Re:The tighter you clench your fist, Lord Vader... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It depends on how he went about it. Without details we're speculating entirely. His claim may be bullshit, or the number of attempts may be exaggerated, or...

    28. Re:The tighter you clench your fist, Lord Vader... by sjames · · Score: 2

      Yes. At target you will never find yourself repairing the bridge of the Enterprise and betraying the trust of millions of Americans might carry an actual cost.

      Otherwise, probably not as much as you imagine. There is data, you necessarily know where it comes from and where it goes. You know how much there is.

    29. Re:The tighter you clench your fist, Lord Vader... by ahabswhale · · Score: 1

      I didn't arbitrarily define anything. The rules regarding confidential government information are well known and you can fucking google it.

      http://www.dtic.mil/whs/direct...

      --
      Are agnostics skeptical of unicorns too?
    30. Re:The tighter you clench your fist, Lord Vader... by ahabswhale · · Score: 1

      Seriously? Fuck off. I was responding to someone who said the NSA hasn't responded to these allegations. They don't need to respond because they did before he ever said anything.

      --
      Are agnostics skeptical of unicorns too?
    31. Re:The tighter you clench your fist, Lord Vader... by ahabswhale · · Score: 1

      Nice strawman.

      He doesn't need to know what the data contains or know the legal basis under which it's collected to do his job.

      --
      Are agnostics skeptical of unicorns too?
    32. Re:The tighter you clench your fist, Lord Vader... by Bite+The+Pillow · · Score: 2

      Very astute.

      Except he was tempted to start collecting files 3 years earlier, and didn't feel he had access to what he wanted. So there you have 3 years where he could raise concerns, anonymously or not.

      And obviously whatever time before that gave him reasons to consider copying. It doesn't make him sound like a snoop first. It sounds like he just started putting pieces together, verified, then began snooping.

      Whatever first set him off would easily have been reportable. And after getting brushed off 5 times, I would not fault him for taking an initiative for having something solid. But that didn't work.

      It's a lot easier to believe it was accidental, and then he tried reporting the right way. It is also easy to believe that there is no right way, because everyone wants to hide it, or stands by it. The simplest and most obvious explanation is the most likely, but we cannot conclude that, either.

      Unfortunately no one is going to say yes he reported it to me, unless they are up for reelection in a tight race and have pro security constituents. And then the risk of liberal blowback is still too high to gamble. So it is unlikely to be confirmed even if he names names.

      At this point, all you have is the initial predilection to trust or distrust, and your feeling guides your logic. When facts are scarce, emotion fills in the gaps. So I suggest you stay away from hard conclusions for now. And no, my text is not a conclusion. It certainly does not read like one.

    33. Re:The tighter you clench your fist, Lord Vader... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The man is a traitor. If he were truly doing it just out of concern for protecting our rights as citizens, he would have stopped at the surveillance inside the US.

      Fuck off shill.

      As a non-American, I say Snowden did the whole world a service by exposing the dirty scum who've been spying and manipulating us.

      The spooks have developed a network which is global in scope. It needs global responses to defend against.

      Snowden is a hero to the world, not just to the USA.

    34. Re:The tighter you clench your fist, Lord Vader... by ahabswhale · · Score: 1

      I guess I trust that Snowden is smart enough to know that if complained about stuff he wasn't ever supposed to know about that he would be in deep shit. He could be fired at the least and even brought up on charges of spying.

      --
      Are agnostics skeptical of unicorns too?
    35. Re:The tighter you clench your fist, Lord Vader... by AK+Marc · · Score: 2

      So you are saying that someone that doesn't understand the load on a server can maintain it optimally.

      Someone that doesn't know what the disk usage is can budget for expansion and backups.

      Do I really need to explain this to you?

    36. Re:The tighter you clench your fist, Lord Vader... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your claim the DoD is big on the whole "need to know" concept has been pretty well shredded this last year thanks in part to Snowden's leaks. It's been shown that, at the NSA at least, they have little idea what folks could access until they began tightening things up recently. How did Snowden get all this information if they're so anal about access control? You should read up on the work Snowden was doing for the CIA. That he wasn't simply a "sys admin" is pretty easy to verify (the government made those claims -- I'm sure they'd have no reason to downplay the role of a person who ran off with a bunch of classified info, though). He was given access that let him snoop around systems without leaving tracks. They obviously felt he had the right be where he was. "Need to know..."

      "When I was in the military..." Cause the NSA is run exactly like a regular ol' branch of the military. What you had was an authoritarian figure drilling orders into your skull because they were told to tell you what rules to follow. You've never had to look into a database or grep through logs and other data to figure out why the systems you're in charge of aren't working? Let me guess; you're also a Win admin managing MS Access db's? Sounds like you're trying to go on some high and mighty "they're the boss, I'm the peasant" rant.

      By by all means, keep your head down and never challenge authority. But don't make blanket statements about things you yourself claim you want no knowledge of.

    37. Re:The tighter you clench your fist, Lord Vader... by Sabriel · · Score: 2

      As an Aussie, I'll tell you that's bullshit. When your spooks are keeping it secret that they're doing an end-run around your Constitution by playing "let's swap" with our spooks, let alone lying under oath to your Congress about domestic surveillance programs, you bloody well do want to know what else they're up to abroad. "Trust, but verify" only works when you can actually trust them and you can actually verify them, and you can't do either. Your problem is you're too afraid to confront your government about it, and I can understand that, but that doesn't mean you get to demonise someone who has that courage.

      And I'll remind you that treason is when you betray your country, not the bunch of slimy sociopaths taking turns to rule/loot it. Go ask your senator just how many of his or her Congressional colleagues actually read the full text of the Patriot Act bill before voting on it. Doesn't matter whether it was for or against, and I don't give a damn whether they had D or R after their name, just whether they actually read the thing before they voted on such an important piece of legislation. Then come back here and tell me if you really believe they're upholding their oath of office.

      I love your country, but your government is all kinds of messed up.

    38. Re:The tighter you clench your fist, Lord Vader... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They are not a solution. They are an indicator that there exists a problem.

      Whenever you ask rational and honest people to commit crimes, you risk some of them to turn against you and do the right thing. Rather than trying to patch the problem by shutting them up, you should make sure that the tasks they are given are morally defensible. Giving non-military people orders without proper justification is almost always the wrong thing to do, and if you can't justify your order to them then can you really say that you agree with it yourself?

      If the NSA had been limiting themselves to moral actions then nothing Snowden could have leaked would have made the NSA look bad (given the proper context). Then it would be obvious that the NSA was the good guy, and it would be easier to gain the support of the people. Maybe the people could even be proud of the NSA, instead of having to feel as ashamed of it as they are for the CIA.

    39. Re:The tighter you clench your fist, Lord Vader... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pull your head out or your arse. People talk and being a sys admin doesn't mean that you only care about the infrastructure. hmm i'm maintaining a middleware system or a datawarehouse environment or a freaking portal front-end. Or perhaps he was maintaining a massive cluster which everyone knew was for storing meta data.

      The only sys admin's I've known that don't have a clue about what they are maintaining are retarded.

    40. Re:The tighter you clench your fist, Lord Vader... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whoa; rage much, bro? The point being made was the NSA lies. Their response, before, after, during the whole Snowden affair must be questioned.

      I know, I know. You're a good little soldier. You're happy to take orders and not care that the people in charge are hiding nefarious things that really do threaten national security. It isn't your job to care! Just to do as your told! I mean we have a bunch of guns and bombs right? Everything will be a-ok in Merica! Now run along, wrap yourself in that star-spangled blanky Uncle Sam gave you for your birthday. Only dreams now.

    41. Re:The tighter you clench your fist, Lord Vader... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That Snowden had been authorization to access secure computer systems, special access that did not leave the usual tracks, is also well known and you can fucking Google it.

      You're ignoring evidence and insisting on claiming Snowden was a bad soldier who was accessing shit he wasn't supposed to. It's a whale you're not going to be able to bag. Stop chasing it, ahab.

    42. Re:The tighter you clench your fist, Lord Vader... by sjames · · Score: 1

      What strawman? Do you deny the enterprise bridge exists at NSA? Does it not more strongly suggest 8 year old with an infinite allowance rather than a serious minded professional? Do you claim the NSA has gotten in more trouble than Target for their much larger betrayal?

      If anything, that was a snark, but with a strong subtext of calling the responsibility and maturity of NSA management into question.

      Meanwhile, Snowden sure has an awful lot of info for someone with no access to info. If it was really as tight as you claim, he wouldn't have any documents to publish.

      He has to know where the metadata comes from and where it goes in order to do his job, that is, making sure the system grabs the data and sends it where it's going.

      The bulk of that data would strongly suggest that something rotten was going on.

      The fact that he could access everything would in itself suggest something wasn't right. Part of a sysadmin's duty is assuring that the system is secured. A time-honored way to do that is to try accessing data you're not supposed to have and see what happens.

    43. Re:The tighter you clench your fist, Lord Vader... by dbIII · · Score: 1

      Yes but their response was dishonest, thus worthless - hence my point above.

    44. Re:The tighter you clench your fist, Lord Vader... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...the more star systems will slip through your fingers!

      Is that from some movie? It's a pretty good line.

    45. Re:The tighter you clench your fist, Lord Vader... by indeterminator · · Score: 1

      "Seriously, if this is true..."

      It's extremely unlikely this is true. Think about it...

      He's a sysadmin at the NSA, which means he's supposed to be maintaining their servers -- not looking through classified materials. So if he were to report to his superiors about his concerns with any of these highly classified programs, he'd be admitting to looking at information he should never touch. If he did anyway, he would have been shit-canned immediately and investigated. So, it sounds like a complete pile of horseshit to me.

      Either way, this kind of issues should roll uphill, not downhill. If the people in charge can let a Snowden slip, how many more have they let? How many more will they? Someone is trying to avoid their responsibility.

      The fact that Snowden was able to get out with the info, suggests the thing is mismanaged. Why was he given access to all this super-classified information, and who's responsible? What was a contractor doing in a super-classified government organization anyway? What Snowden managed to prove, either from the leaked content, or from the fact that there was a leak, is that no one is watching the watchers.

      It doesn't matter how you look at it, in the end, it's a complete management screw-up.

    46. Re:The tighter you clench your fist, Lord Vader... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What do you do if you have a meadow riddled with molehills with the grass turning yellow and not growing?

      The obvious thing is to curse the moles, dig them out and kill them. The problem is that moles don't harm grass. Grubs do. Moles eat grubs and consequently will move where the grubs are.

      The current administration is purporting to protect the U.S.A. by routing out the moles.

    47. Re:The tighter you clench your fist, Lord Vader... by duckintheface · · Score: 1

      Leia directs this to Wilhuff Tarkin, not Lord Vader. Tarkin is a Grand Moff of the Galactic Empire and is in charge of the Death Star.

      So the quote is:

              "The more you tighten your grip, Tarkin, the more star systems will slip through your fingers."
              Princess Leia

      --
      "He took a duck in the face at 250 knots." -- William Gibson, Pattern Recognition
    48. Re:The tighter you clench your fist, Lord Vader... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...the more star systems will slip through your fingers!

      Seriously, if this is true, it's a pretty good illustration of why tin-pot dictators throwing the book and the kitchen sink at whistleblowers are a far more serious security threat than the whistleblowers themselves.

      Tarkin. It was Tarkin, not Vader.

    49. Re:The tighter you clench your fist, Lord Vader... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's corruption, and your country suffers from it, from its very TOP, to it's lowest BOTTOM.

      Being too fat and lazy and happily watching reruns of Honey Booboo means it's systemic. Idiocracy wasn't a prediction of the future.....

      As for the top, it's the old 'more money, more power, etc...', and it will continue until they get bored of that and then they will eat you alive, maybe with some fava beans and a nice Chianti. :)

    50. Re:The tighter you clench your fist, Lord Vader... by callmetheraven · · Score: 1

      tin-pot dictators

      like Obama

      --
      You can have my SIG when you pry it from my cold, dead hands.
    51. Re:The tighter you clench your fist, Lord Vader... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seriously? Fuck off. I was responding to someone who said the NSA hasn't responded to these allegations.(1) They don't need to respond because they did before he ever said anything.(2)

      1) Are you talking about your reply to buss_error? buss_error didn't say that the NSA hasn't responded - he said that no one from the NSA has admitted & downplayed that this happened.
      2) Since their answer depends on how much we already know, they should probably issue another statement now that Snowden has called them on their... "claims".
      3) Whose side are you on, anyways? Yes, there are sides, and yes, you must pick.

    52. Re:The tighter you clench your fist, Lord Vader... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wilhuff Tarkin was a Grand Moff, not a Lord.

    53. Re:The tighter you clench your fist, Lord Vader... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When I was in the military and working with confidential information, this was stated over and over again. I'm pretty damn certain they wouldn't be cool with a sysadmin having such broad knowledge of their programs.

      It's called the DOD-Q clearance. Equivalent to the TS but with no "need to know" requirements.

      I held a DOE-Q and was cleared due to our jobs of penetration testing. It's impossible for us to know ahead of time what is on a particular system or what it is used for, and likely was only used as a "stepping stone" into other systems... But since our trail is audited, and we had the opportunity to potentially see the data on a stepping stone system, we needed to be cleared.

      Pen testing isn't the only work where this may be the case, and I would guess system administration could possibly fall under the same set of problems, and so that clearance could be the solution there too.

      For reference, those with a Q still refer to it as "top secret" level to avoid confusion, as it is similar in every other way.

  8. The NSA could not admit wrongdoing. *CAN not. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    He exposed a situation that HAD TO BE ignored "for the good of the surveillance effort and thus, the country" - had they admitted it, it would have to be shut down.

    Instead they've managed to kind of slide on the issue of legality, nobody is taking it up with the SCOTUS successfully because "nobody has grounds" to sue without being able to prove damages (due to the secrecy, catch 22 et al) so basically, the NSA strategy of "ignore it until the next war or administration" seems to be successful at least in keeping the sword of judicial damocles off their heads.

    What use is whistleblowing if they're able to ignore the law and the 9 robed wizards don't wish to enforce the law? None. "Checks and balances" is now "blank checks"

    1. Re:The NSA could not admit wrongdoing. *CAN not. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Furthermore, once you've realized this IS NOT the first time the US intelligence agencies have LIED to protect themselves "and the country by extension",
      (Pearl Harbor, USS Maddox, JFK, RFK, USS Liberty, Iran/Contra, 9/11, Iraq, UBL etc etc) and that this "protect the quo, for the nation" attitude has supplanted
      the checks and balances *and truth* that USED to run our country prior to the cold wars of monkey business...

      how do you hold your head up and wave the flag, knowing all that? An honest man can't.

    2. Re:The NSA could not admit wrongdoing. *CAN not. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Erm, dude, the protect the country thing has been around a lot longer than the mid-1900s. Lincoln used protecting the Constitution (and the country by extension) to justify quite a bit of bloodshed. "The country belongs to the people..." he said, until some people decided they did not want any part of it. Then he blew them up. The Founders, after the Constitution was ratified, killed and persecuted a large number of English crown supporters who simply wanted to be left alone at that point. But of course these 100s of simple farmers and business owners would likely assemble into a giant army capable of destroying everything (with no support from England, FWIW). So we'd better confiscate their property and hound them until they're forced to flee the lands they were born and raised on. We must protect our new Constitution after all (and the country by extension).

      There are plenty of other examples. Let's not continue to romaticize our past. i know it's easy; none of us have a direct connection to it. Plenty of old people around to grouse and spin relatively more recent events. Not so many from further back.

    3. Re:The NSA could not admit wrongdoing. *CAN not. by Sique · · Score: 1

      [...] in keeping the sword of judicial damocles off their heads.

      As it is the Sword of Damocles, and it was hanging on a single hair of a horse's tail above Damocles' head, the correct metapher would be the judical Sword of Damocles.

      --
      .sig: Sique *sigh*
    4. Re:The NSA could not admit wrongdoing. *CAN not. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure, but what's a metapher?

  9. sounds like challenger where it takes a big event by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 2

    sounds like challenger where it takes a big event to get the PHB's to under stand what the issues really are.

  10. why wait? by clecol · · Score: 0

    Why would he wait this long to say that he went through all the right channels to voice his concerns? I think he might have had a few more people on his side if he would have said this from day one.

    1. Re:why wait? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      He hasn't waited to tell anybody. He's been saying it all along. Don't confuse the manner in which the news is reported as a reflection of reality.

      This was reported now because he put his comments in an easily citable letter to the European Parliament.

    2. Re:why wait? by Aighearach · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Plus, he only claims to have talked to some coworkers/supervisors. What he didn't do was go where a whistleblower is supposed to go; for example he could have gone to Senator Wyden who is on the Intelligence Committee and had publicly raised concerns about these programs. If you're part of a secret program and need to "blow the whistle," you're not blowing it from the inside. You have to go to the people doing the oversight, which here in the US are elected members of Congress.

    3. Re:why wait? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Even Ellsberg went to congress. Shoulda woulda coulda, if he was truely serious about this he would have documented his attempts to communicate this up the chain (retained emails, etc...).

      What I find hard to believe is him being overtly against the mission of his employers and still retaining access to the computer systems for which had access to all the top secret+ information on it. Anyone with a Top Secret clearance who starts acting "funny" won't keep their clearance for long.

      Also how did he get hired at BA if he had been pulled off assignment for tampering with the computer systems when he was working for the CIA? He got relieved from his duty position but still managed to get access to a contractor which should have contacted his former employer....

    4. Re:why wait? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      Senator Wyden has already demonstrated his incompetence to address, if not his active support of, such illegal programs. And by reporting it in the USA, Snowden would have been easily dropped in a deep, deep pit with no hope of testifying.

    5. Re:why wait? by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I think he might have had a few more people on his side if he would have said this from day one.

      He would also have a lot more credibility if he named names instead of saying he warned "10 officials". Which ten? Why not name them? Does he think they deserve protection?

    6. Re:why wait? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What is it with the constant disbelieving of Snowden?

      Of the things that we now know the truth or falsity of, everything he has said so far has been true, while most of what the NSA has said has been a lie. Learn from experience, people.

    7. Re:why wait? by Jiro · · Score: 4, Informative
    8. Re:why wait? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If he names them, there will be people screaming that it is irresponsible to out national security workers.

    9. Re:why wait? by Weirsbaski · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I think he might have had a few more people on his side if he would have said this from day one.

      Maybe he anticipated how they would try to play the game?

      Snowden: I have docs showing ...
      NSA: no you don't
      Snowden: here they are
      NSA: ok, but you should've worked within the system
      Snowden: I told 10 people in the system
      <--- where we are today
      NSA: no you didn't
      Snowden: here's who I told and when ...
      NSA: ok, but <another attempt to change the focus to Snowden...>

      --

      I am not a sig.
    10. Re:why wait? by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      He wasn't an employee, so some means of escallation weren't available. And whistle blowing by effectively going to the board of directors to blow the whistle about the lower middle-management is a bit off-putting. And, based on my personal experience, doesn't work anyway, once you commit job suicide by going above the head of everyone above you. But in my case, I was already on my way out. The company was bankrupt within the year.

    11. Re:why wait? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Probably because the NSA has already whitewashed the issue from the inside, asking the people if Snowden raised concerns or not. I keep being reminded of a funny situation on the PBS Newshour where the asked a group of Chinese college students in China if they knew anything about the Tiananmen Square incident. Which I'm certain it's possible not a single one of them knew a thing about it--the Chinese government's censorship can be quite successful--, it's a pretty well know truth that the Chinese government is not above punishing a person and their family for damaging China's image and it's very unlike the PBS Newshour was going to do a follow up to even find out if any of said students or their families turned up "missing".

      If Snowden's statements are at all true about his co-workers and supervisors that they didn't want to rock the boat or otherwise be associated with shutting down an unlawful surveillance program, I can't imagine them ever remotely acknowledging any involvement with Snowden's efforts to unveil the truth of the NSA's programs. Naming names doesn't do much because it's clear nearly everyone at the NSA follows this status quo. When the NSA gets caught doing the sort of spying like Russia, it's but a morale issue of the negative image employees might feel from outsiders. It's little different to the way people on Wall Street act about the financial crisis--they only care enough not to be associated with Wall Street to get laid. You don't join the NSA but to spy, possibly unlawfully, on people--unless you're a mole who things the NSA is up to no good*. You don't join Wall Street except to fuck over as many people as you can financially for your own, possibly financial, benefit.

      Really, the whole argument trying to put the onus on Snowden of all people is sick.

      *Yea, I'm basically speaking of Snowden. It's that nice paradox that basically only a mole would ever have the conscience to enter such an organization and opt to out the evils to the public and not merely partake in them like everyone else in the organization. So, that must make the mole evil because they have their own agenda (you know, unlike all the other people who joined just on a lark). Never mind the clear evils they outline to the public which weren't orchestrated or caused by Snowden but an ongoing problem of the system which people in the system willfully perpetrate and perpetuate. Yep, somehow, it's still all Snowden's fault. Good intention NSA employees my ass. You do realize that the Geneva Convention specifically excludes spies, right? Perhaps James Bond has brain washed you into just how dirty spies were once regarded? To be honest, that imagine change doesn't make spies any less of the rats they always were.

    12. Re:why wait? by ljw1004 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Snowden's not the one short on credibility. That honor goes to the NSA.

    13. Re:why wait? by gIobaljustin · · Score: 1

      If someone would have a problem with the fact that he might have just leaked the information without consulting the 'proper' sources, then they're idiots. The People deserve to know when the government is abusing its powers in horrendous ways such as this, and I say he should not have gone through the 'proper' channels first if he did, as he risked being taken out of a position where he could leak the information to the people.

      --
      Thank you Dave Raggett
    14. Re:why wait? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are top level national security workers supposed to be secret information? Is there harm to the NSA if the public know that high level agent Joe Bloggs is an official who heard Snowden's plea and failed to act on them to change the system?

    15. Re:why wait? by tinkerton · · Score: 1

      Maybe he anticipated how they would try to play the game?

      I don't think that's the explanation. He's been trying to play things pretty straight. He's said before that he's used internal channels and now he's only being more explicit. There's also a downside into dragging in other people. They didn't want to stick their necks out , certainly not if they predicted -rightly- a serious backlash. This is normal-person-behavior. It's 'not daring', and that's very different from 'not caring'.
      So why should he shine the spotlight on them unless there's a very good reason?

    16. Re:why wait? by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      You don't have to be an employee to use the method I just mentioned as the correct one. Jebus.

    17. Re:why wait? by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      What part of
      "And whistle blowing by effectively going to the board of directors to blow the whistle about the lower middle-management is a bit off-putting. And, based on my personal experience, doesn't work anyway, once you commit job suicide by going above the head of everyone above you. But in my case, I was already on my way out. The company was bankrupt within the year."
      Did you miss?

      You didn't address the difficulty in doing it, and just doing it is career suicide, yes, even for a "protected" whistle blower. The risk is less to flee the country and steal classified material. Whistle blowing rarely works, and nobody has come up with a reasonable way for him to do it. Yes, including the one method you mentioned.

    18. Re:why wait? by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      Ellsberg is an American Hero, but that doesn't make him the moderator of heros or of leaking.

      Lots of us are still saying, "Snowden is no Ellsberg." And no, Ellsberg isn't going to change my mind on that. Why not? Because Ellsberg isn't a demi-god. He's a hero because of the actions he took in the past. His actual statement just sounds like he is a older and more cynical now. Probably values his freedom more now, after having nearly lost it and having a rich life to reflect on that, than he did when he was young and motivated by Principle.

    19. Re:why wait? by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      It went right over your head. Look at what you're asking me to address, and then click/scroll back to my actual comment. And you'll see I'm not addressing the "difficulty" of going to management, precisely because I'm advocating NOT doing that, and instead complaining to OVERSIGHT, which is Congress. And has none of that difficulty.

      And it is certainly not "career suicide" in comparison to leaking to the press and being a wanted fugitive sheltering in Neo-Soviet Russia.

    20. Re:why wait? by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      What he didn't do was go where a whistleblower is supposed to go

      And where is someone supposed to get the whistleblower manual? You think you are so sure what the process is, can you point to a document that those in in the government would take as relaible (i.e., not some blog about where whistleblowers "should" go)? I'm guessing you are presenting opinion as fact. It's your opinion of where whistleblowers should go, and your opinion that it's common knowledge. Both opinions are unsubstantiated and likely wrong.

      And you'll see I'm not addressing the "difficulty" of going to management, precisely because I'm advocating NOT doing that, and instead complaining to OVERSIGHT, which is Congress.

      Oversight (governance) *is* management. Oversight is roughly analogous to a board of directors. That you don't know that, and thus misunderstood my comments doesn't change reality.

      And it is certainly not "career suicide" in comparison to leaking to the press and being a wanted fugitive sheltering in Neo-Soviet Russia.

      Yes, it is. His career with the NSA, and possibly in that field, would be dead with a whistle-blow to the wrong person. Doing what he did, he'll likely make more money every year for the rest of his life, than had he successfully whistle-blown within the system, regardless of who he alerted. That's career suicide like winning the lottery is career suicide if you quit when you win $100,000,000.

    21. Re:why wait? by Aighearach · · Score: 1

      I love the way you ask a question I already answered, speculate as to the answer as if it is unknown... and then quote it! Yeah, you're engaging in an intellectually honest exchange... NOT.

  11. Psst, wanna buy a bridge ? by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 5, Funny

    You know those filters used to remove American's data from surveillance? Those were there to PROTECT our privacy.

    So what exactly is Snowden complaining about? Why would the US government have classified filters if their objective was privacy violations?

    He really didn't think his cunning plan all the way through. That's the problem you get with mouth-breathing libertarians, like the kind that infest white-male nerd sites.

    First of all, I may be a nerd but I ain't a "White Male".

    Second of all, Slashdot never advertises itself as a "White Male Site".

    Thirdly, I got a bridge to sell, wanna buy it ?

    --
    Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
    1. Re:Psst, wanna buy a bridge ? by tinkerton · · Score: 1

      Thirdly, I got a bridge to sell, wanna buy it ?

      That is interesting. Not that I'm a potential buyer but I still would like to hear how you ended up with a spare bridge on your hands :)

    2. Re:Psst, wanna buy a bridge ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      https://twitter.com/shanley/st...

      Seems a lot of people are upset that the leaks weren't done by a black lesbian with headmates too. :(

  12. Re: The tighter you clench your fist, Lord Vader.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Being a sysadmin often involves doing more involved work than just maintaining a file host for other people to put their bits on.

  13. Complete load of crap by tomhath · · Score: 3, Funny

    Basically he says that he told his supervisors that, in his opinion, a spy agency shouldn't be spying. To back up that opinion he states that he doesn't know of any good that has come from the intelligence collection. And now he wonders why people at the spy agency where he worked told him to go back to his desk and do his job.

    1. Re:Complete load of crap by vux984 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Basically he says that he told his supervisors that, in his opinion, a spy agency shouldn't be spying.

      So if a general decides to annex kansas and a soldier objects you are going to post that he "basically told his supervisors that in his opinion a military organization shouldn't be conducting military operations." and his opinion should be ignored.

      Yeah, good grasp of the situation. The NSA is a spy agency, with specific objectives. Their activities were so far removed from those objects that they are completely unjustifiable, and a collossal waste of effort and money.

    2. Re:Complete load of crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fascist pig. I bet you read 1984 and thought: I want that. Psychopath.

    3. Re:Complete load of crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Try harder Agent smith

    4. Re:Complete load of crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Basically he says that he told his supervisors that, in his opinion, a spy agency shouldn't be spying.

      So if a general decides to annex kansas and a soldier objects you are going to post that he "basically told his supervisors that in his opinion a military organization shouldn't be conducting military operations." and his opinion should be ignored.

      Yeah, good grasp of the situation. The NSA is a spy agency, with specific objectives. Their activities were so far removed from those objects that they are completely unjustifiable, and a collossal waste of effort and money.

      Isn't Kansas already a part of the U.S.? ... Or did I miss something in history class

    5. Re:Complete load of crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yes. That's the point the GP was making: the NSA was spying on the US when their mandate was to spy only on foreigners.

    6. Re:Complete load of crap by gIobaljustin · · Score: 2

      Basically he says that he told his supervisors that, in his opinion, a spy agency shouldn't be spying.

      A spy agency, which is part of the government, shouldn't be violating people's fundamental rights, nor should it be violating the very constitution that it's supposed to be bound to. A mere straw man.

      But hey, I guess we shouldn't tell murderers not to murder, or act outraged when they do. Because that's what it's all about, right?

      --
      Thank you Dave Raggett
    7. Re:Complete load of crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Basically he says that he told his supervisors that, in his opinion, a spy agency shouldn't be spying.

      So if a general decides to annex kansas and a soldier objects you are going to post that he "basically told his supervisors that in his opinion a military organization shouldn't be conducting military operations." and his opinion should be ignored.

      Yeah, good grasp of the situation. The NSA is a spy agency, with specific objectives. Their activities were so far removed from those objects that they are completely unjustifiable, and a collossal waste of effort and money.

      Isn't Kansas already a part of the U.S.? ... Or did I miss something in history class

      you missed something.

  14. Who should face prosecution? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    From the article: "Both Obama and his national security adviser, Susan E. Rice, have said that Snowden should return to the United States and face criminal sanctions for his actions."

    Perhaps the Obama administration could set an example of following US law by appointing a special prosecutor to investigate the legality of the recent revelations? It's always good to practice what you preach!

    1. Re:Who should face prosecution? by callmetheraven · · Score: 1

      Above: Obama's amazing fail power, it can mod an AC post +5 insightful on /.

      --
      You can have my SIG when you pry it from my cold, dead hands.
    2. Re:Who should face prosecution? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perhaps the Obama administration could set an example of following US law by appointing a special prosecutor to investigate the legality of the recent revelations? It's always good to practice what you preach!

      Perhaps his failure to do so shows who is really running things.

  15. The root of the problem lies with ... the people ! by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    And where's the justice for the people who ARE the problem?

    Before we can get justice we need to look for the root of the problem ...

    Who are the one keep electing those assholes into Washington D.C. ?

    We, the people.

    Who are the one letting the government destroying the liberty of the country ?

    We, the people.

    What kind of justice you are after ?

    After all, we do deserve the very kind of government that we keep on electing.

    --
    Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
  16. well, they LISTENED alright by turkeydance · · Score: 1

    and heard. HURA.

  17. Cost effectiveness by whoever57 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Perhaps the criticsm of the NSA should focus on the very poor use of resources. Billions of dollars are used to spy on US citizens with no benefits, while the administration appears to have been caught completely unprepared for the events in Crimea.

    Perhaps a re-allocation of those resources would be beneficial to US interests.

    Unless, of course, the real reason for the spying on US citizens has nothing to do with terrorism and everything to do with suppressing free speech and legal dissent.

    --
    The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
    1. Re:Cost effectiveness by mellon · · Score: 1

      You say "the real reason" as if there could only ever be one reason for doing something...

    2. Re:Cost effectiveness by FrostDust · · Score: 1

      the administration appears to have been caught completely unprepared for the events in Crimea.

      How do you know that the events in Crimea aren't occurring the way the US administration wants?

    3. Re:Cost effectiveness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How do you know that the events in Crimea aren't occurring the way the US administration wants?

      Are you telling me that the US administration is a Russian sockpuppet? Because it looks very much like Russia just took over Crimea without much opposition.

    4. Re:Cost effectiveness by gIobaljustin · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Perhaps the criticsm of the NSA should focus on the very poor use of resources.

      No. We must focus on the fact that they're infringing upon our freedoms. As soon as you make it about efficacy, you start to seem as if you're saying it would be okay if the programs were effective, and that is simply not true. The US is supposed to be the land of the free and the home of the brave, so freedom should reign above all.

      --
      Thank you Dave Raggett
    5. Re:Cost effectiveness by tukang · · Score: 1

      Or maybe the gov't genuinely believes these programs are necessary and the parties profiting from these programs are good snakes oil salesmen. After all, the gov't spends tens of billions each year, so you can bet whoever is at the receiving end of that will do whatever they can to keep the cash flowing. Never attribute to malice that which can be attributed to stupidity.

    6. Re:Cost effectiveness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or maybe the gov't genuinely believes these programs are necessary and the parties profiting from these programs are good snakes oil salesmen.

      s/oil/and/

      Start learning Parseltongue.

    7. Re:Cost effectiveness by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You say "the real reason" as if there could only ever be one reason for doing something...

      Unless you work for the NSA how could you possibly know any different, also there's nothing grammatically wrong with his statement.

  18. All I hear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    is BLAH ... BLAH ... BLAH ...

  19. Re:The root of the problem lies with ... the peopl by Immerman · · Score: 5, Interesting

    >After all, we do deserve the very kind of government that we keep on electing.

    Only if there's a viable alternative. At present we have two parties that are both owned, for the most part, by the same people, and kept in power by gerrymandering and the systemic weakness of first-past-the-post elections. Given the realities on the ground it's no wonder that the third party candidates tend to be extremists and nutters that don't actually expect to get elected - no responsible individual would choose "third-party politician" as a career path unless they had a size large ace up their sleeve.

    --
    --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
  20. snowden's got your Signals Intelligence leaks here by strstr · · Score: 2

    Satellite and radar warfare. Used against the American people and non-terrorists populations globally.

    http://www.wikileaks-forum.com...

  21. Re:sNOwden Listen to this by Agent+ME · · Score: 1

    Nice try, NSA.

  22. Re:The root of the problem lies with ... the peopl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I don't vote you insensitive clod...and I'm mad as hell and I'm not gonna take it anymore!

  23. But, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    If you don't vote Republican, those darned Libruhls are dun gonna make yer kids gay!

    If you don't vote Democrat, you're a fucking bigoted idiot!

    And if you vote Libertarian, you're some kind of anarchist lunatic!

    After all, we do deserve the very kind of government that we keep on electing.

    No, no, it's the fault of those people, don't you see? If only we didn't have to deal with that other party!

    1. Re:But, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pardon, we libruhls do not make yer kids gay. We tell them that it's okay to be gay, and let nature take its course. Huge difference.

    2. Re:But, but... by philip.paradis · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That whooshing sound is your cue that you're too stupid to vote.

      --
      Write failed: Broken pipe
  24. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  25. Re:The root of the problem lies with ... the peopl by Jeremi · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Who are the one keep electing those assholes into Washington D.C. ?

    We, the people.

    You're right, of course, but on the other hand any process that involves collective decision-making by 130 million people is bound to act more like a one-move-per-year version of Twitch Plays Pokemon than any kind of particularly rational decision-making.

    Add to that the amount of money and effort that is regularly channeled towards manipulating the voting public towards the ends desired by those with resources to do so, and it's impressive that the system works even as well as it does.

    But I wouldn't blame the system's deficiencies on individual voters -- the fact is that any individual or like-minded community of voters could in fact do a better job for their particular needs, but at the national level, at least, coherent communities of voters tend to largely cancel each other out, leading to unpredictable results. Which I suppose leads us to the argument that more power should be delegated to lower levels of government rather than the Federal level...

    --


    I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
  26. Re:The root of the problem lies with ... the peopl by VortexCortex · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Before we can get justice we need to look for the root of the problem ...

    As a cyberneticist I have analyzed the problem using Information Theory as applied to the flow of information between multi-scale complexity information pools (of which everything from atoms to brains to agencies to governments can be classified).

    The root of the problem is information disparity. Secrets themselves. The larger and more complex the information pool the more important it is for other pools to be fully aware of its internal state in order to maintain autonomy.

  27. re: spying on US citizens by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    must b tru...i saw it on good wife 2nite;-)

  28. Whooosh ! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I can't help but hearing a very loud " Whoooosh !! " noise.

    Wonder why ?

    1. Re:Whooosh ! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Obviously because his joke went flying way over your head.

  29. Re: The root of the problem lies with ... the peop by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You can have all the information available, but if folks have no problem with what the NSA is doing and have no problem being spied upon because they think it keeps them safe and they think "if you do nothing wrong, then you have nothing to worry about", then what?

  30. Re:The root of the problem lies with ... the peopl by BradMajors · · Score: 2

    The majority of the people believe the TSA is necessary because that is what they have been told.

  31. Re:The root of the problem lies with ... the peopl by sjames · · Score: 1

    The problem is that we keep getting a 'choice' between death or bungee. Quit blaming the victim and look in to that problem.

  32. Re:sNOwden Listen to this by penix1 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    sNOwden decided to make our nation look completely idiotic in the eyes of the world , decided to put its citizens at risk further...

    I would say those that dreamed up the spy program, implemented it, got it sanctioned and enshrined in law and defend it made our nation look bad in the eyes of the world. All Snowden did was leak it's existence. If you don't want the US made to look bad, then maybe the US shouldn't be doing things that make them look bad.

    --
    This is a sig. This is only a sig. Had this been an actual sig you would have been informed where to tune for more sigs.
  33. Not to mention that the parties themselves cheat. by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 4, Interesting

    At present we have two parties that are both owned, for the most part, by the same people, and kept in power by gerrymandering and the systemic weakness of first-past-the-post elections.

    Further, the people in control of the major parties themselves cheat when someone not of their faction tries to go the primary/caucus root. They change rules in midstream, miscount, break meeting rules, physically attack supporters of opponents, pass out bogus delegate slates, and a host of other dirty tricks.

    For a list of the things the Republican have done to just one challenger in the last two cycles, check out the archives of any of the several sites where Ron Paul supporters congregate. (For example, The Daily Paul.)

    The Democrats do this as well. (The riots in Chicago in 1968 were largely a public reaction to the party machine repelling a primary effort by Gene McCarthy, popular with the antiwar movement, in favor of Hubert Humphrey. The Paul/Romney nomination battle was eeriely similar.)

    --
    Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
  34. Re:The root of the problem lies with ... the peopl by phantomfive · · Score: 3, Insightful

    That's our fault too. Try getting people to vote for a third party, even here on Slashdot, and they'll start giving you arguments that amount to, "the wrong lizard might get in."

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  35. Re:The root of the problem lies with ... the peopl by phantomfive · · Score: 4, Insightful

    People who don't dig more deeply into the issues than "that's what we were told" deserve the worst of all governments. We are very lucky, presuming your assertion is correct.

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  36. Re:The root of the problem lies with ... the peopl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What a bunch of victim blaming bullshit. Please continue spreading your cheeks for the prison-industrial complex. You may feel responsible as a voter too stupid to make a difference. Personally I've gone above and beyond my call of duty during the Ron Paul Revolution only to watch those efforts fail under the weight of the "Get out the (uninformed) Vote!!!11" campaign of the federal political machine.

  37. Astroturf? by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 5, Interesting

    What is it with the constant disbelieving of Snowden?

    One of the things Snowden exposed was systematic disinformation campaigns by the spooks to achieve various political goals, including the discrediting of their own critics.

    Perhaps these comments are examples of such a program in action?

    --
    Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
    1. Re:Astroturf? by Vitriol+Angst · · Score: 2

      Snowden's evidence of MANY instances of wrong-doing at the NSA is merely more evidence that he is picking on them.

      It's really great that he keeps spooning out the damning evidence every other week. Instead of being honest, they keep jumping from one position to the next -- and then the next document release proves the lie to the position they staked out.

      It's like Snowden is Global Warming and "did the scientists factor in that the Sun is hot?" is the latest talking point. There's going to have to be a new term for "getting owned". We are so lucky to get a hero who is this savvy.

      --
      >>"ad space available -- low rates!!!"
  38. Re:The root of the problem lies with ... the peopl by penix1 · · Score: 2

    The fact is that Dems. and Reps. *both* are very sensitive to opinion polls.

    Umm... No they aren't or they would pay attention to the polls that rate Congress in the single digits to lower teens.

    --
    This is a sig. This is only a sig. Had this been an actual sig you would have been informed where to tune for more sigs.
  39. Re:The root of the problem lies with ... the peopl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    "We," the slashdot audience are a bit different than "we, the people." We represent a small subset of the voting populace.

    So, "we" get the government "they" deserve.

    Yes, we can get even more involved. And yes, that will do some good. But we simply cannot control the minds of the other voters, as that isn't how it works. If "they" aren't buying what "we" are selling, there is only so much "we" can do.

  40. Re:The root of the problem lies with ... the peopl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    That's of course assuming that we can even elect a government official who both isn't corrupted into being another member of the existing system, and can actually have a voice without being a part of that apparatus.

    It's not "we the people" who are the problem, it's the political wing of the country. They don't represent us, they represent themselves. The more you study it, the more obvious that becomes. Many of them even think they're doing good for many people when they're really just supporting the infrastructure they were voted in to "fix".

    No, it's not a problem that simply voting in someone else can solve. And it's not something that even a large number of people can change easily. The Tea Party, for all their frustratingly incoherent and impractical principles, are the only evidence you need. They were quickly co-opted and become just another arm of the machine they wanted to fix.

  41. Re: The tighter you clench your fist, Lord Vader.. by AvitarX · · Score: 1

    What's the argument for treason? I say this because I'm worried that the arguments for treason that people use are so weak as to include both Snowden and Manning.

    --
    Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
  42. Re:The root of the problem lies with ... the peopl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > Before we can get justice we need to look for the root of the problem ...

    No. We. Don't. This "go after the big fish" is exactly how street gangs manipulate police, and prosecutors, to leave them alone while terrorizing their neighborhoods. And it's exactly how small-scale con artists, industrial polluters, abusive bureaucrats, and spammers stay in business. They're not deemed "big enough" to prosecute, and are instead left in place as an endemic problem. Expose them directly, which is easy to do if you simply bother to verify the many reports, and you can strip the funding collected for their activities and the power garnered by their leaders.

  43. Re:The root of the problem lies with ... the peopl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Well, go out and tell them differently.

    Sitting at home complaining about what the people "have been told" is unproductive. You have to actively argue that what they were told is wrong, not just point out that it was told to them.

    If you can convince people with influence -- even if that influence is on a small scale -- that you have the better argument, you get a lot of leverage.

  44. I wish that were true by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think you give too much credit to the security scrutiny that goverment agencies perform. They are run by regular people that take shortcuts, use global passwords, etc. It's not suprising to me that someone with knowledge of how the IT infrastructure is structured could manage to reap information from it. The need to know thing is something that sounds great in movies. Not everything you see on TV is true.

  45. The proper channels... by russotto · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...are those connected directly to /dev/null. There was no "right way" (in the eyes of the US Government) for Snowden to do anything about these programs, because (again in the eyes of the US Government) these programs are perfectly fine.

    To object to the way Snowden did things, suggesting there was a better, effective, way of doing it that he somehow overlooked, is pure disingenuousness on the part of President Obama.

    1. Re:The proper channels... by Wansu · · Score: 1

      ...are those connected directly to /dev/null.

      Bernie Maddoff's competitors tried going through proper channels for a decade. They complained bitterly that his results were mathematically impossible, that it must be a ponzi scheme. Nobody listened. And now it has come to light that JP Morgan Chase laundered money for Maddoff for decades.

      --
      Wansu, th' chinese sailor
  46. Re:The root of the problem lies with ... the peopl by dbIII · · Score: 1

    Who are the one keep electing those assholes into Washington D.C. ? We, the people.

    Personally I think not enough of you people are getting off your arses to vote - hence more arseholes get in. If US politics had more of a level playing field instead of being a game for the rich and obsessed there may be a bit less foul play.

  47. Re:sNOwden Listen to this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I would say those that dreamed up the spy program, implemented it, got it sanctioned and enshrined in law and defend it made our nation look bad in the eyes of the world. All Snowden did was leak it's existence. If you don't want the US made to look bad, then maybe the US shouldn't be doing things that make them look bad.

    I'd mod this comment up as much as I could if I wasn't an AC.

  48. Re:Snowden, yet another lie. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He had no legal avenue? Huh? That is a lie. Every U.S. citizen has a legal avenue -- regardless of who you are.

    You're wrong! Time to rethink your distorted view on reality:

    "Under the Espionage Act, you're not allowed to come into court and say ‘I was justified in disclosing this information’," Greenwald said on CNN’s The Lead. "There is no whistleblower exception in the Espionage Act."

    http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2014/jan/07/glenn-greenwald/greenwald-nsa-leaker-snowden-has-no-whistleblower-/

  49. Re:The root of the problem lies with ... the peopl by Immerman · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Not entirely - a great deal of the problem is our parents, and their parents (,and ..., but you get the idea). Once duopoly seizes control of a first past the post system it becomes increasingly difficult to oust them. Especially when the lizards are busy demonizing each other as hard as they can and adopting positions so extreme that their "opponent" need not worry about losing votes to a non-lizard.

    The one ray of hope I see is that over half the population doesn't vote at all in any given election, properly leveraged even half of them could throw an election to a dark horse, the question is how to do so. I have a couple ideas -
    - Organize festivals near polling places to encourage non-voters to come out for the food/music/etc, then encourage them to "Vote out the Sock Puppets" as long as they're in the right place anyway.
    - Start a truly new party, something different enough to actually catch people's imagination. Perhaps a direct-democracy party with serious penalties for candidates that don't do as their constituency tells them. After all we've got plenty of different "proof of concept" direct democracies in the world - there's no reason we have to overthrow the government to institute them for real, we could instead implement it as a new faction within the existing system.

    --
    --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
  50. I remember the Drake story by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    I remember the Drake story. The US Government basically ignored its own constitution, the District Attorney changed from prosecutor to persecutor, and he was told to either shut up or face 40 years in jail. Similarly, his home phone was bugged, people followed him, the IRS was knocking on his door every day, his family faced challenges (one was at college, had to meet with the dean on trumped up charges). The government went *WAY* over the line, and did not seem to mind (and he was only interested in keeping the 'guaranteed constitutional' parts of 'THIN THREAD' within the program). His boss and several others insisted that they ignore the 'spy on Americans without judicial oversight' part and it went well beyond 'you are fired'.

  51. and the 2nd was!?!?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The responses, he said, fell into two camps. 'The first were well-meaning but hushed warnings not to "rock the boat," for fear of the sort of retaliation that befell former NSA whistleblowers like Wiebe, Binney, and Drake.' All three of those men, he notes, were subject to intense scrutiny and the threat of criminal prosecution.

    And WTF was the 2nd camp?

  52. Yeah, right... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    That would carry a lot more weight if he hadn't lied on his applications, by his own admission, specifically to gain access to protected information, the contents of which he could not have known, only to immediately sell that information to America's frenemies. I had a lot more respect for this guy before he started talking.

    1. Re:Yeah, right... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Evidence that he sold any information?

      Here's a first-person account of Snowden from one of his co-workers at the NSA:

      http://www.forbes.com/sites/andygreenberg/2013/12/16/an-nsa-coworker-remembers-the-real-edward-snowden-a-genius-among-geniuses/

      Choice quote from the article:

      "Snowden’s former colleague says that he or she has slowly come to understand Snowden’s decision to leak the NSA’s files. 'I was shocked and betrayed when I first learned the news, but as more time passes I’m inclined to believe he really is trying to do the right thing and it’s not out of character for him. I don’t agree with his methods, but I understand why he did it,' he or she says. 'I won’t call him a hero, but he’s sure as hell no traitor.'"

    2. Re:Yeah, right... by gIobaljustin · · Score: 1

      That would carry a lot more weight if he hadn't lied on his applications, by his own admission, specifically to gain access to protected information, the contents of which he could not have known, only to immediately sell that information to America's frenemies.

      Why sell it when it's being released to the public? Furthermore, anyone with a brain has known that the NSA has been doing this evil shit for years. Snowden just provided further evidence. That you think he couldn't have known the NSA would have such documents (even after working for it a while) makes you an idiot.

      But it's not a problem, anyway. Government thugs should have their evil activities leaked.

      --
      Thank you Dave Raggett
  53. Re:The root of the problem lies with ... the peopl by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 1

    All you need to do is write and call your congressmen regularly. They're self-interested enough to defend their reelection chances if they're getting enough flak for their votes. But, since Americans don't give a fuck (and the polls prove it), most bureaucrats have made the prudent and pragmatic decision to push domestic spying rather than risk an unseen breach and be the fall guy.

    --
    I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
  54. Re:Snowden, yet another lie. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, to be fair, he had a legal avenue. But it was called "Do not pass Go. Do not collect $200".

    The whole idea of going to superiors in this case is ridiculous on its face. The NSA and CIA have been actively obstructing Congressional intelligence committees, and as has been recently disclosed, actually spying on them. Presumably to figure out how much information Congressmen possess, so the agencies won't be caught in too many more barefaced lies.

  55. Blaming the victims ?? by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Quit blaming the victim and look in to that problem.

    Dear Sir,

    If those asshole has fooled us, the People, once , yes, I agree with you, that We the People are the victims.

    But how many times the assholes have fooled us, and how many times We, the People keep on electing them back into Washington, D.C. ?

    Already how many times, Sir ? And how many ***MORE*** times are We, the People, willingly to be fooled ?

    Does this come to mind, Sir?

    Fool me once, shame on you.

    Fool me twice, shame on me

    --
    Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
    1. Re:Blaming the victims ?? by sjames · · Score: 1

      How many times has there been a choice with a chance in hell of winning that wasn't one of the assholes?

      Many Americans aren't fooled. They vote while holding their nose. They vote for the crook to keep the racist out, etc.

    2. Re:Blaming the victims ?? by indeterminator · · Score: 2

      Here we go again, can't vote for them because they have no chance of winning.

      You need to start voting for the third guy anyway, it's the only way to break the cycle. if no one votes the thirds guy, then no one thinks he has a chance. Enough people have to go first, and make it look possible.

      The part where you're being played, is the part where they make you think that every election you fail to vote an established party, your country is DOOMED, forever. The best part is you keep falling for it every time.

      The trick is not to have the new party to win (having a new party to assume total control is a bad idea), but to get them enough votes to scare the established parties to change how your voting works, so they get to keep a share of power relative to their share of votes, even if they would become the third party at the next election.

    3. Re:Blaming the victims ?? by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 2

      How many times has there been a choice with a chance in hell of winning that wasn't one of the assholes?

      Tell you a little secret, Sir.

      When the non-Assholes decide to NOT become a candidate and run for an election (from county level to the federal level, under whatever ticket, yes, could be even under the republican/democrat tickets), all the choices the voters have left *are* the, ... and guess what? The Assholes !!

      Why only thinking of "writing the politicians" ?

      Why only thinking of casting your vote for the "third party" ?

      Why not participate in full - yes, in FULL - as a candidate ?

      So ... how many of the non-Assholes were running as candidate last time around ?

      How many non-Assholes will run in the upcoming election ?

      True, we may not win. But unless ***we do something***, the political arena will be filled with them assholes.

      Want to change the game ? Change the rules of the game !

      --
      Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
    4. Re:Blaming the victims ?? by neiras · · Score: 2

      They vote while holding their nose. They vote for the crook to keep the racist out, etc.

      Voting while holding your nose? Please. It's all about picking the right political brand so that you feel validated in your peer group. Americans want to be on the winning team and beat the "other guys".

      If your choices are "crook" and "racist", your system needs breaking.

    5. Re:Blaming the victims ?? by dkf · · Score: 1

      Does this come to mind, Sir?

      Fool me once, shame on you.
      Fool me twice, shame on me

      I'd like to add to that:
      Fool me every two years, politics as usual!

      --
      "Little does he know, but there is no 'I' in 'Idiot'!"
    6. Re:Blaming the victims ?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But how many times the assholes have fooled us, and how many times We, the People keep on electing them back into Washington, D.C. ?

      The problem seems to be that Congress is a mob, and a mob is stupid and dangerous. Each individual congress person seems to be very smart, ethical, and in touch with his district. Or with the minority in his district who actually vote. If you talk to people, they will (presumably) say they're very pleased with the work their guy is doing for them - it's just all those other assholes who make a mess of it. Congress is big enough to diffuse the blame for its bad behavior onto "the other guy," leaving incumbents to be re-elected forever.

    7. Re:Blaming the victims ?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > They vote for the crook to keep the racist out, etc.

      Ah, the classic Edwin Edwards vs. David Duke gubernatorial race in 1991. Well done, sir!

      Speaking of that election, I recall the following quote from an opinion piece (can't remember what it was called):

      "Given the choice between David Duke and Edwin Edwards, Louisiana voters move to Ohio."

    8. Re:Blaming the victims ?? by mcvos · · Score: 1

      How many times has there been a choice with a chance in hell of winning that wasn't one of the assholes?

      If everybody was to stop voting for assholes, the chance of a non-asshole winning would be pretty good.

    9. Re:Blaming the victims ?? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      The problem with voting for a third party is that you risk letting the least desirable of the two main parties get in. Depending on your views you probably think you will be better/worse off under the Democrats/Republicans and so are unwilling to sacrifice 4 years of that.

      What you want is some kind of system where you can cast second and third choice votes. Put your first choice in for the third party, but when they don't win your vote is transferred to your second choice which will be the Dem/GOP candidate. No risk to you by voting for the third choice, and even if they don't win they can still see how many supporters they have and build up from there.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    10. Re:Blaming the victims ?? by Ardyvee · · Score: 1

      Seems like a sensible idea, to be honest. At least you could then let them know, (and it should be recorded) that you don't like any of them but voted anyway for the one that seems less bad to you.

      --
      I don't care if I'm wrong. I only care about everyone obtaining something from the discussion.
    11. Re:Blaming the victims ?? by sjames · · Score: 1

      So, where are you running?

    12. Re:Blaming the victims ?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A place to start may not be with a third party. Start by never voting for an incumbent, ever. Even if he'd doing a good job. Never vote for the incumbent. What will that do, you ask? If Incumbents don't ever get elected, there will be less money entering the campaigns. Money won't go to the incumbent, because he won't get elected. Money won't go to the challenger, because only a fool puts money into changing the odds on a sure bet. Of course, this won't stop all the problems. The lucrative sinecure at the end of the term bought with favorable legislation won't go away, but many problems might.

      Once that happens, other things can happen.

  56. info only by no-body · · Score: 1

    This is a Snowden video interview:
    http://www.isidewith.com/news/...

    I don't know if that has been posted here before nor if the claim that NONE of US media have published this or if it was removed from YouTube shortly after publishing.
    For what it's worth. Informative for sure, seen as it stands.

  57. Re:The root of the problem lies with ... the peopl by pspahn · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Start a truly new party, something different enough to actually catch people's imagination. Perhaps a direct-democracy party with serious penalties for candidates that don't do as their constituency tells them.

    I gave this some thought a few years ago. I could build a simple application that would allow constituents to vote on any random congressional bill. I would then use this as my primary campaign strategy. "Don't vote for me, vote for you." I would vow to vote the way my constituents wanted me to. Pretty damn simple, really.

    I started to think further, and that it's kind of a problem I don't have the perfect political background. People would dig up dirt on me and that's not too fun. Then I thought, why would it matter? They're not voting for me, they're voting for themselves!

    I think there are definitely some congressional districts that would like this type of approach, but probably not many. I think it would be an interesting thing to do, though, simply for the potential advancements to democracy thanks to the digital age. Hell, the number of signatures needed to run is not really that many. Maybe I'll do it, but probably better for someone with more financial freedom than myself to give it a shot.

    --
    Someone flopped a steamer in the gene pool.
  58. Re:Probably because they weren't privacy violation by jcr · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Lay off the boot licking, sunshine. The heavy metals aren't good for your central nervous system.

    -jcr

    --
    The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
  59. Re:The root of the problem lies with ... the peopl by rtb61 · · Score: 1, Troll

    Sensitive to opinion polls. Seriously after the Ukraine crap and the "Fuck the EU" statement, when the truth has been exposed, the US government just stands right up and waffles the bullshit they planned regardless of the truth of a conspiracy to overthrow a foreign government already having being exposed and US mainstream media carries the exact same bullshit as if it was the truth (even when the last few remaining US politicians question it and have a government official spout more bullshit right in their faces).

    The US government doesn't care about anything other than campaign dollars, the NSA keeping politicians own personal dark secrets so they can get elected and their offshore bank accounts in tax havens. Opinion polls only have meaning when you have a political landscape of truth and lies will stand out, when you have a political landscape of complete and utter bullshit lies are the norm and the truth stands out for rarity. Obama, Kerry and crew just blatantly and hypocritically standing up and shamelessly publicly lying when the truth was all out there to see, the only measure of truth in their statements being all those 'er's and 'um's in the public statements as their minds had extreme difficulty reconciling what was coming out of their mouths at the direction of totally corrupt US three letter agencies with the truth hidden in their own minds.

    It has become pointless for people like Snowden and Manning to challenge their government with the truth because it is well and truly apparent everything coming out of the US government is bullshit, mass marketed corporate inspired public relations bullshit and is becoming universally accepted as such. The only saving grace is they have been such a bunch of fuckups they screw up the results of all their wild schemes, plots and conspiracies. The only real problem for the rest of the world is how to create some distance between themselves and the US, as the US slowly but inexorably self destructs under all that corporate driven bullshit, pulled in too many directions at once and torn apart, psychopathic capitalism at it's finest.

    --
    Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
  60. Nuremburg defence. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I vas just followink orders!

  61. Re:The root of the problem lies with ... the peopl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Brilliant idea! Maybe you can leverage the book and movie rights?

  62. one word: slavery by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "
    this "protect the quo, for the nation" attitude has supplanted the checks and balances *and truth* that USED to run our country prior to the cold wars of monkey business...

    how do you hold your head up and wave the flag, knowing all that? An honest man can't.
    "

    If you want a real answer in one word- slavery. It didn't used to be all roses. Oh, and women not being able to vote without being technical 'criminals' in the eyes of U.S. legal code proper. ... Do remind people of past abuses, but don't numb them in a sea of futility. Focus the pressure on the ones in the room with cookie crumbs all over their hands.

  63. Next time they will listen by skiminki · · Score: 5, Insightful

    and the whistleblower candidate will be properly flagged, monitored, caught in action, and silently jailed before he/she manages to release anything to the public.

  64. Re:The root of the problem lies with ... the peopl by rastos1 · · Score: 1

    The fact is that Dems. and Reps. *both* are very sensitive to opinion polls.

    The problem *is* We the people.

    The problem is that in order for democracy to work, the public has to be educated, informed and act rationally. The current system does not really make an educated society a high priority goal and it absolutely works hard against informed and rational decision making at poll booth.

  65. Re:The root of the problem lies with ... the peopl by gIobaljustin · · Score: 1

    And if they're worthless and idiotic enough to believe whatever they're told, what hope do we have that things will change for the better and stay that way?

    --
    Thank you Dave Raggett
  66. Re:The root of the problem lies with ... the peopl by gIobaljustin · · Score: 2

    'Victims' aren't people who keep voting for the same two parties over and over. How do people live with themselves when they vote for evil, even if it's a 'lesser evil'? It would make me want to vomit.

    --
    Thank you Dave Raggett
  67. Re:The root of the problem lies with ... the peopl by gIobaljustin · · Score: 1

    What a bunch of victim blaming bullshit.

    The real victims here are those like me who don't vote for republicans or democrats. Want to know who's not a victim? People who vote for evil. They're getting exactly what they deserve, and the rest of us are getting something abominable.

    --
    Thank you Dave Raggett
  68. No one? by MobSwatter · · Score: 1

    I'm pretty sure they listened, just not in the way Snowden would have been comfortable with. They likely began researching Snowden's contacts and potential exit points, along with entire distant family. With understanding of today's technologies, it is unlikely that Snowden even today is 'alone', and if they truly wanted him turned off, it would have already happened.

  69. Re:The root of the problem lies with ... the peopl by mwvdlee · · Score: 1

    In order for a democracy to work, the public has to have a choice.
    The US two-party system pretty much guarantees the public has very little choice.
    Similar like having an economy with only two competitors pretty much guarantees consumers get shafted.

    --
    Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
  70. Re:The root of the problem lies with ... the peopl by sjames · · Score: 1

    So you recommend voting for the greater evil? Or not voting (and getting chewed out for being 'lazy')?

    There's those who choose to go a bit more extreme, but they tend to end up surrounded by FBI and SWAT, often on trumped up charges.

  71. That... by 101percent · · Score: 4, Funny

    I guess he is the only person they weren't listening to.

    1. Re:That... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know you're joking, but it's worth pointing out that their system was never designed as a proactive measure, but a reactive one. Now that they've decided they dislike Snowden, they can dig up whatever they'd like.

  72. Misdirection by dbIII · · Score: 1

    Come on now. We do not know the scope of his work so please do not pretend otherwise, especially by misdirecting with irrelevant links.

  73. Re:The root of the problem lies with ... the peopl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who are the one keep electing those assholes into Washington D.C. ?

    We, the people.

    So your solution is to stop voting? Any one that pose a threat to the system will be weeded out before they become serious candidate. You been fucked by both party before. There is no solution.

    Your only way out is to become seditionist. Stop caring about patriotism, national security or the children; cheer for the terrorists, the murderer, the paedophiles. Because when the state is your enemy, enemies of the state are the closest things you have to allies.

  74. Re:sNOwden Listen to this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    . If you don't want the US made to look bad, then maybe the US shouldn't be doing things that make them look bad.

    Yeah, because you ain't doing anything wrong, you should have nothing to hide.

    Except that the peoples running the NSA are not peasants; they are sovereign and unlike us, they have rights. These peoples can only lose their powers if you stop to be afraid of the terrorists. Your only way out is to become seditionist. Cheer for the terrorists, mock the victims. And more importantly, ignore the idiots that tell you it is disrespectful, immoral or un-american to do so. Because when the state is your enemy, enemies of the state are the closest thing you have to allies.

  75. Re:sNOwden Listen to this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I your nation did not want to look completely idiotic, maybe it should have decided not to act completely idiotic. Blaming the messenger solves nothing.

  76. Re:The root of the problem lies with ... the peopl by gIobaljustin · · Score: 2

    So you recommend voting for the greater evil? Or not voting (and getting chewed out for being 'lazy')?

    *sigh* Really? While you were listing all the things I could possibly recommend, you seem to have neglected the possibility of voting for third parties, as 'useless' as people think that is. Still, it's more worthwhile than voting for known evils, it's more rational (if you want to increase the probability that things will change), it's more principled, and it sends a message to the two major evils if enough people do it.

    --
    Thank you Dave Raggett
  77. don't believe snowden anymore... by SuperDre · · Score: 0

    Well how can you believe such statements from snowden anymore... a while ago he said he was taking the job with the contractor so he could have access to the NSA servers for trying to get information out.. Now he suggests he saw the violations only when he was working at the contractor.. Also he told people he didn't use login's from other co-workers even though it was proven he did.. So how can you believe someone like him anymore, the man willingly signed a NDA-contract knowing he wouldn't abide it anyway, there is IMHO a big difference between him and someone who went into the job not knowing about the problems but found them out and went through the proper channels to try to get some attention..
    Personally I really don't believe Snowden even tried the proper channels, and all he wanted was some fame, but in hindsight he didn't saw this coming where he might even be tried for treason..

    1. Re:don't believe snowden anymore... by gIobaljustin · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Now he suggests he saw the violations only when he was working at the contractor..

      He was promoted to a position where he could obtain those documents.

      the man willingly signed a NDA-contract knowing he wouldn't abide it anyway

      Such petty contracts mean nothing in comparison to the constitution (which the US government is supposed to be bound by) and freedom.

      Personally I really don't believe Snowden even tried the proper channels

      The "proper channels" aren't actually proper, though. The only proper channel is leaking the unconstitutional and evil activities of the government to the American people.

      --
      Thank you Dave Raggett
    2. Re:don't believe snowden anymore... by Tempest451 · · Score: 1

      For all the information he leaked, the only thing he didn't leak was the names of the people he tried to report this to. I wouldn't either if it were my intention to infiltrate the NSA from the start.

  78. No to Direct-democracy by pablo_max · · Score: 1

    While I agree with you that we must find a way to get the ass-hats out of here, I do not agree with direct-democracy. In fact, direct-democracy is absolute evil.
    Direct-democracy is a system designed for a small majority to crush the basic rights of a minority. Direct-democracy is mob-rule by a fancier name.

    I also do not really agree with big punishments for not doing what their constituencies tell them. Why? Because voters are stupid greedy animals. Think about it, voters are why we are in the situation we are in now! They cannot be trusted to serve the best interest of society.
    A better idea, in my opinion at least, would be punishments for not serving the best interest of society they are elected to govern. Corruption should carry massive punishments. Depending on the scope, as far as life in prison or a firing squad.

    1. Re:No to Direct-democracy by gIobaljustin · · Score: 1

      What is the "best interest of society"? That's vague, and it sounds like another form of mob-rule, only without as much input from the mob. Individual liberties will be sacrificed left and right for the "greater good," and that's exactly what we're seeing here: Government thugs infringing upon people's fundamental liberties under the guise of safety. That cannot be allowed.

      --
      Thank you Dave Raggett
    2. Re:No to Direct-democracy by Immerman · · Score: 1

      And the captured political body we have now is a way for a *very* small minority to crush the basic rights of the overwhelming majority. Direct democracy has it's pitfalls, but it would seem to be a major step up from the present situation. One of the reasons I like the idea of implementing it as a political party rather than a government overhaul is that it's easy to change away from if it proves destructive, and easy for alternate implementations to be tested.(relatively speaking - amending the constitution is not an easy process)

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
  79. Aha! by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 1

    First off, I get what you are saying and it seems pretty obvious to me.

    But now for the hard and funny until you think about it, then you have to laugh so you don't cry.

    Here it is:

    And is your post part of such a program?

    Where does the dis-information begin/end?

    No I don't think you are, the shill accounts are rather obvious to stop, no real posting history, no jokes, no human observations, just shill posts. But when the lying has spread so far, how does a normal person know what is true and what isn't anymore.

    And if you ask, why would they do that? So ordinary people give up because they just can't deal with it anymore. The feeling I am having for the last year.

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

  80. Re:The root of the problem lies with ... the peopl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    After all, we do deserve the very kind of government that we keep on electing.

    "The people get the government they deserve." Retards get a government full of retards to represent them no less.

  81. Re:The root of the problem lies with ... the peopl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    People who don't dig more deeply into the issues than "that's what we were told" deserve the worst of all governments. We are very lucky, presuming your assertion is correct.

    Huh. Your government representatives are having a substantial part of their paychecks paid by the entertainment/military/industrial complex. While the rest is provided by tax money, tax payers don't get to tell the representatives what to do. Access to the tax payer meatpots depends on successful election campaigns, those are usually paid by the entertainment/military/industrial complex. So even while the bulk of the payments for the government comes from tax payers, control over it is granted almost exclusively by the entertainment/military/industrial complex. The entertainment complex has a larger influence on voting than voter-friendly policies would have. So voters are not really an overly interesting demographic.

    Now let's take a look at what kind of a government we have. An effective legal defense is expensive, and expenses are not paid back. There is a purportive right to a jury trial, but unless you are in the upper ten percent of income in the country, you won't be able to afford one. Instead, the prosecutor rather than judge and jury puts out a verdict compatible with his career (which depends on "guilty" verdicts) and gives it to you under the vise of a "plea deal", meaning that either you get what he wants, or he'll make sure to ruin your life. And he is in a position to do so.

    Police can (and will) break your bones at a whim and put you in the slammer for five years for "resisting arrest" or similar charges. There is no country in the world that has either a larger number of prison inmates or a larger ratio of its population in prison than the U.S. has.

    Even though "due process" is a money-based corrupted mockery of justice, the U.S. still entertains torture and internment camps where people are detained without what the U.S. calls "due process" for decades. The U.S. also casts death penalties via a "kill list", again without due process, and executes people and any bystanders (or only bystanders, depending on how bad the intelligence was) on foreign ground via drones.

    The U.S. leads war on multiple continents against multiple opponents. It's one of the few countries refusing to join weapon bans against booby traps, splinter bombs, landmines and other niceties. It boycotts and sabotages attempts of limiting terminal climate changes, partly employing its secret services for that.

    So I contest the "very lucky" part of your claim. It is clear that you are on a solid downward spiral to get what you deserve.

  82. Re:The root of the problem lies with ... the peopl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Let's get rid of the papers, they create this feedback loop that just further amplifies the problem 100x everytime.
     

  83. Re:The root of the problem lies with ... the peopl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    After all, we do deserve the very kind of government that we keep on electing.

    "The people get the government they deserve." Retards get a government full of retards to represent them no less.

    In other words ...

    Blind leading the blinds

    Yep, that sounds pretty much like the United States of America alright !

  84. Re:The root of the problem lies with ... the peopl by taiwanjohn · · Score: 1

    Dems. and Reps. *both* are very sensitive to opinion polls.

    Horseshit.

    Universal background checks: 90% approval (85% of Republicans; 80% of NRA members) = VOTED DOWN
    "Public Option" healthcare: 75% approval (over 60% of Republicans) = DOESN'T EVEN GET A VOTE
    Minimum wage increase: 70~80% approval (over 50% of Republicans) = DEAD IN THE WATER
    (The list goes on and on...)

    Dems and Reps *both* are very sensitive to MONEY.

    --
    XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve your problem, you're not using enough of it. --AC
  85. Obama Attempting to Divert Attention by Nehmo · · Score: 1

    Obama knows Snowden made an effort to use official channels. But even if Snowden didn't, that's only a small debate about Snowden's methods. The central issue is the behavior of the NSA and that of the government around it. *How* the public learned about the NSA crimes is irrelevant to the big picture.

    --
    (||) Nehmo (||)
  86. Re:The root of the problem lies with ... the peopl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Agreed, and for those that say "both parties are as bad as each other", I'd say "tell them to invest in schools and education". The US isn't known for it's great education system, and as a result, you've had generations of dumb-ass rednecks that know nothing and defend it blindly. If they were a tinsy bit better educated, they could at least question what it is they're defending. The clever ones might then propose alternatives.

    The US has declined over generations. It could recover, over generations, if there was some effort to do so. If you're too lazy to take the long road, then it's time to take up your much cherished arms and shoot a few politicians until you get your particular militia in charge. The thing is, that's all too scary, so you'll probably end up voting for the worst idiot you can find on the ballot sheet and then whinge about it on slashdot.

  87. Re:The root of the problem lies with ... the peopl by MartinSchou · · Score: 1

    I could build a simple application that would allow constituents to vote on any random congressional bill. I would then use this as my primary campaign strategy. "Don't vote for me, vote for you." I would vow to vote the way my constituents wanted me to. Pretty damn simple, really.

    Sort of. But - how do you ensure that only voters in your district can vote? How do you ensure that people aren't coerced into voting in certain ways? How do you convince your constituents that their votes remain absolutely secret?

  88. Re:The root of the problem lies with ... the peopl by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

    I could build a simple application that would allow constituents to vote on any random congressional bill.

    If it were simple it would be vulnerable to all kinds of ballot stuffing, under-age people voting and other issues that would discredit any results. As the US has discovered running a credible, secure ballot is not trivial or cheap.

    In any case, do you really want to be forced to vote for the death penalty as punishment for not believing in angels because some bunch of inbred Fox News watching morons organized through their church and voted for it? Direct democracy doesn't work which is why most countries only have a limited form of it. Switzerland just voted to completely fuck themselves over by that route, because basically the majority of people are too dumb to rule themselves.

    --
    const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
    SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  89. Re:sNOwden Listen to this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It doesn't look like you need Snowden's help to look completely idiotic.
    Also, uppercasing the "NO" in his name, is that actually a thing? Like "haha, I found 2 letters in his name that mean something somewhat negative, I'm so cunning!"...

  90. Re:The root of the problem lies with ... the peopl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    It's been done in Australia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senator_Online

    They got 0.06% of the vote.

  91. Re:Not to mention that the parties themselves chea by Zontar_Thing_From_Ve · · Score: 1

    For a list of the things the Republican have done to just one challenger in the last two cycles, check out the archives of any of the several sites where Ron Paul supporters congregate. (For example, The Daily Paul.)

    Yes, by all means ask Ron Paul supporters, who see conspiracy everywhere, if there has been a conspiracy against their boy.

  92. Re:The root of the problem lies with ... the peopl by Immerman · · Score: 1

    >how do you ensure that only voters in your district can vote?
    Dongles, challenge response keys, or one-time pads could all be options. One vote per dongle per issue, and they could be traded regularly at "democracy parties" if non-technological anonymity is desired. Of course there's a financial burden there, but there's no reason you couldn't charge modest membership fees to cover the necessary supplies and technological infrastructure, especially if you can keep it below a few beers a year, and you can verify districts when folks sign up/renew.

    > How do you convince your constituents that their votes remain absolutely secret?
    *Lot's* of different techniques that have been proposed and tested for this one, though mostly geared more for elections. In a direct democracy it may also be less of an issue. After all you're not handing power to somebody, you're telling them specifically what to do. Of course there may still be repercussions for getting found out voting for higher tax rates for your boss or for voting "wrong" on issues that are highly contentious for your community, so it would probably still be a good idea.

    --
    --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
  93. Re:The root of the problem lies with ... the peopl by Ardyvee · · Score: 1

    Of course, the fact that if nobody buys what you are selling, there isn't much you can do does not mean you should stop trying. Even if it isn't much, something will get through. Somebody will change their mind. Maybe that somebody will be able to reach further than what the /. crowd would have reached. If you don't try and get more involved, however... well..

    Note: I am not in USA

    --
    I don't care if I'm wrong. I only care about everyone obtaining something from the discussion.
  94. Re:The root of the problem lies with ... the peopl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There are lots of problems with a simple Majority Rule. We need lawmakers to write laws that are constitutional, so there are less ridiculous laws that get dismissed by the courts. We need laws that protect the rights of all of us, so minorities aren't persecuted. Etc etc, a simple majority vote isn't enough - you have to put some thought into which positions you support and stand by those principles.

  95. Choose one... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Here are the candidates on most national ballots:

    • Rectum
    • Anus

    Given those choices, it's unsurprising that an Asshole gets elected.

  96. Is it only me that sees the NSA emulating the KGB? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is it only me that see the parallels between what the NSA is doing in the USA and what the KGB did in the Soviet Union? Remember in the post Mikhail Gorbachev Soviet Union, all the leadership were from the KGB. Essentially the Soviet Communist party was denigrated sock puppet status. The KGB ruled the Soviet Union. And of course the KGB security aristocracy couldn't rule effectively. Am I the only one seeing the NSA doing the same thing? That is what Edward Snowdon told us. That is why the NSA administration didn't listen to E.S. concerns. The NSA leadership knows what their goal is.

  97. Re:The root of the problem lies with ... the peopl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The problem has nothing to do with whom we have elected. There are no real choices there (seriously, how different do you think things would have been if you had voted for a different president?)

    The people who are causing these problems are *not* elected - they are *appointed* and hence their selection is not under direct voter control.

    So why were these people appointed? Why have they been given so much leeway? It is because we the people ran around like frightened children at the first mention of "terrorism". Its because all of you stood up after 9/11 and said "WAR"! Its because all of you go hide under your beds at the first mention of the idea that there is risk in life. This is what gave the black hats in our country the license to take away your liberties and destroy the principles of this country.

    Learn some history - this is the McCarthy Era all over again. Now the 'communists' that are on the verge of destroying us are 'terrorists'. But it is all the same drill. Accuse someone of being a 'communist', er, I mean, 'terrorist' and suddenly they have no civil rights/liberties. Suddenly we can tell people that they cannot fly on an airplane because someone put them on a list. Suddenly people are snooping into every aspect of your private lives because "there might be a terrorist" somewhere. It's McCarthism all over again and what is sad is that people don't see it because they don't bother to learn even recent history.

    So the issue is not who you are voting for - it is what your fear is giving them license to do.

  98. Actually... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've tried voting for Nader (whenever the option was available in my local elections ballot), doesn't seem to work. But I'll keep trying, maybe :)

  99. Re:The root of the problem lies with ... the peopl by spacepimp · · Score: 1

    "In order for a democracy to work, the public has to have a choice."

    Democracy is a mob rules scenario. It isn't about choice, and never has been. The Constitutional Republic I live in was designed to prevent the problems of Democracy. Laws and the Constitution were to prevent parties from over influence and were kept in check by laws first, and to prevent the ignorant masses from ushering away those rights at the behest of some corrupted party.

    When did American become a Democracy in your eyes? When I was a child the pledge of Allegiance was to the Republic. There was never a mention of Democracy and or this two party system we have ill conceived today.

  100. Re:The root of the problem lies with ... the peopl by sjames · · Score: 1

    One might have thought voting for a ficus or a dead candidate would have sent a message. The fact that fictional characters routinely get 10% or the vote should be a message.

    Sure, they can vote 3rd party. They probably should. Then one of the big two will win and Taco Cowboy et al will claim that they got the government they deserved because they voted the clowns in.

  101. Re:The root of the problem lies with ... the peopl by gIobaljustin · · Score: 1

    The fact that fictional characters routinely get 10% or the vote should be a message.

    Fictional characters usually don't stand for much of anything, and it's probably not a single fictional character getting the votes, either.

    --
    Thank you Dave Raggett
  102. Re:The root of the problem lies with ... the peopl by callmetheraven · · Score: 1

    They were quickly co-opted and become just another arm of the machine they wanted to fix.

    No, we weren't. Evidence: If we had been the Lamestream Propaganda Media wouldn't be spewing hate at us 24/7.

    --
    You can have my SIG when you pry it from my cold, dead hands.
  103. Re: The tighter you clench your fist, Lord Vader.. by callmetheraven · · Score: 1

    Currently treason is defined as: "Not supporting Obama". The irony is rich.

    --
    You can have my SIG when you pry it from my cold, dead hands.
  104. Re:The root of the problem lies with ... the peopl by sjames · · Score: 1

    They send one message loud and clear. "I would prefer Donald Duck to any of you bozos".

  105. Re:The root of the problem lies with ... the peopl by taiwanjohn · · Score: 1

    While I ponder why the parent got modded down, here are some citations to support those claims...

    Universal background checks
    "Public Option" healthcare
    Minimum wage increase

    Admittedly, I was just "guesstimating" the numbers above from vague memory, but as the links here show, I'm right in the ballpark on all of them.

    It would be nice to see a lucid argument, rather than just getting down-modded reflexively.

    --
    XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve your problem, you're not using enough of it. --AC
  106. Re: The tighter you clench your fist, Lord Vader.. by Mabhatter · · Score: 1

    The upper members of both chambers of Congress APPROVE of what the NSA is doing. They have ACTIVELY BLOCKED the president from cleaning up any of this mess even though these are "executive" agents. Remember, the GOP allowed Bush to unilaterally expand the spying operations under Executive Orders (more than Obama) even when the VP was writing every passing Congress bill for six years straight. That wouldn't have happened without BOTH SIDES agreeing not to interfere.

  107. Re:The root of the problem lies with ... the peopl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Your comment is utter bullshit.

    Electing means something if we are given a real choice, which we are not.

  108. Re:The root of the problem lies with ... the peopl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Pfffff

    One intelligent person in a crowd of idiots is like a pebble trying to block a river. The one can have the greatest ideas the world has ever seen but is vastly outnumbered by those whose only care in the world is their current Facebook status, or what time ( insert some god-awful reality show here ) comes on. These are the people politicians love. Remember kids, the dumber the population, the easier they are to control.

    Some crazy political issue pops up ? Just flood the news with celebrity scandal or, since they practically own the news anyway, just quit mentioning it until it goes away. ( Not all that long since most have short term memory anyway )

    I wish the NSA documents were still coming out on a weekly basis. They seem to be tapering off and the entire thing will be a long forgotten memory within a year at the current pace. . . . .

    Is why we would have to replace all of Congress to have any hopes of improving it. One person vs the corrupted mass that sits there now is a pointless endeavor.

  109. Re:sNOwden Listen to this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    sNOwden ...

    Good job making yourself look completely idiotic.

  110. Heart of the problems: by geral+sosbee · · Score: 1

    RE: http://lissakr11humane.com/201... The United States of America is on a global murder spree headed by fbi/cia/dod/nsa icluding threatening and overthrowing governments and assassinations all in favor of USA's plan for world inhumane domination. http://www.sosbeevfbi.com/part... fbi's Cointelpro operative seeks to discredit this combat war vet (& fbi whistleblower) by claiming that vet's service makes him a murderer and possibly a mass murderer. http://sosbeevfbi.ning.com/pro... ELF: http://www.sosbeevfbi.com/high... Synthetic Kidney Stone: http://www.sosbeevfbi.com/part... http://online.liebertpub.com/d... Dilemma http://www.sosbeevfbi.com/dile... Cointelpro: http://neworleans.indymedia.or... http://www.indymedia.org.nz/ar... Ad: http://www.sosbeevfbi.com/Reso... http://www.sosbeevfbi.com/holl... http://neworleans.indymedia.or... http://www.sosbeevfbi.com/fbic...

  111. LOL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wish I had mod points for this.

  112. Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Quit giving this loser press.

  113. Re:Not to mention that the parties themselves chea by houghi · · Score: 1

    Those two parties are inside a box. Even the whole govenement system is inside the box. Perhaps people need to start thinking outside the box. If you do that every 200-250 years, you are still way below average.
    If the type of governement you have does not work, perhaps the type of governement doesn't work for you and it needs to be changed.
    Perhaps a system where the majprity has all the power is not a good enough system as it lays too much importance on the power.

    To me politics is not just doing what the one majoority wants, but try to find what the REAL majority wants.
    Instead of doing something where it is 50% is happy (e.g one part memmbers) you can get to something where 60% or even 70% is happy. Perhaos not all of your party, but still some of the other party.

    Once you are in governement, you should govern ALL the people, not just those from your party

    --
    Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
  114. Meh. Snowden is an obvious KGB agent. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The tell tell sign is he ran to russia.

  115. Re:The root of the problem lies with ... the peopl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The fact is that Dems. and Reps. *both* are very sensitive to opinion polls.

    Except Republicans only care about opinion polls coming from conservative christians and faux news viewers, and Democrats only care about opinion polls from everyone else. You have to influence two very different groups of people (and a bunch of really crazy idiots) to realistically have any impact.

    And actually, it is extremely easy (and truthful) to blame "the other guys", when "the other guys" advocate a broken worldview and policies that have been proven not to work. Giving tax cuts to the rich, for example, has been proven to damage the economy, while raising taxes correlates to a stronger economy and more jobs. Some conservative policies actually do make sense, and would be better than liberal policies in some situations, but when the "conservatives" are realistically "regressives" and the image they present to the public is that they're a bunch of selfish, self-centered, money-is-all-that-matters, reality-has-a-liberal-bias loonies, its impossible to take anything they say seriously.

  116. Re:The root of the problem lies with ... the peopl by Immerman · · Score: 1

    How about on the second election in which they back candidates? The tenth? Every new movement tends to fall on its face repeatedly before someone gets it right enough to have a chance.

    --
    --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
  117. Re:Not to mention that the parties themselves chea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So do something about it.

    Join one of those parties - whichever one you think has more potential to go 'your' way. Turn up to meetings. Make friends. Get yourself known. Talk to legislators, lobbyists, visiting bigwigs. Learn something.

    Sure, money speaks in politics. But you know what speaks even louder? People who are willing to turn up, week in and week out, to do the legwork/phonework/mailing/tracking that their party wants done. That's what wins elections - 'money' is, largely, a way of paying people to do that, but if you contribute your time and expertise for 'free', you can command leverage over and above your own market value.

    Don't discard "the system" until you've at least tried to use it. It is the way it is for a reason, and a lot of people have got a lot of use out of it.

  118. Re:The root of the problem lies with ... the peopl by jwhitener · · Score: 1

    Direct voting like we mean you'd likely only get the the most radical people involved. And what is allowed to be brought to a vote is an even bigger issue. 99% of your constituents might want single-payer healthcare, but they'll never get a chance to vote for it with the current political climate in Washington.

  119. Re:The root of the problem lies with ... the peopl by JazzLad · · Score: 1

    Only as a whole. All congressmen suck except for mine* - he's the only one who is fighting for the little guy.



    *regardless of who I am or who my congressman is

    --
    "If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear." - Every fascist, ever
  120. unconstitutional laws by Immerman · · Score: 1

    I would like to see any new law have to be vetted by the supreme court - with explanations as to *exactly* why it was ruled unconstitutional if it's blocked of course, and a full discussion of potential problem issues that they can't quite justify blocking it over - let them paint a road map for future challenges. Too many laws make if difficult if not impossible for someone to claim proper standing to challenge them - and why should some poor sap have to chase his cause for decades through successively higher courts to have the potential for change?

    --
    --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
  121. Re:The root of the problem lies with ... the peopl by Immerman · · Score: 1

    There are alternatives - one I'm playing with is a form of fluid representational democracy based on the ability to transfer your vote in cases where you don't choose to participate - though it does seem to require weakening anonymity at least slightly.

    Say you transfer your vote to your pastor, a politically active professor, or that guy at the bar who always seems to have a really insightful comment to make on political issues. There's no reason they need to know *who* the votes came from, just that they have a pool of votes they can cast in addition to their own.

    Then any time you don't don't vote on an issue your vote transfers to them, and they can choose to cast it in your stead so long as they're willing to do so publicly (to dissuade the cynical "say one thing, vote another" types). Let someone accumulate a few hundred or thousand "default votes" and they start becoming a political force to be listened to and courted. Let some of them form an alliance and you get powerful voting blocks in the hands of a few personally-selected individuals. Potentially you could even allow multi-level representation where your selected "spokesman" default-transfers their "voting pool" to yet another individual (again, fully in the public eye). And they are kept honest by the fact that the rug can be pulled out from under any of them at any moment by their "constituency" anonymously transferring their votes to someone more deserving. Or simply broadly overruling their vote on specific issues.

    And yes, you'd have issues with political climate for bill proposals, at least at first - though if the movement caught on I suspect DD representatives would have enough backing amongst each other to bring things to a vote, at least on issues that are truly popular. Of course there's no guarantee that any non-DD representatives would vote for it - but with a truly popular issue and an increasingly popular DD party they could be putting their careers on the line not to.

    --
    --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
  122. Re:Not to mention that the parties themselves chea by Immerman · · Score: 1

    50.000000001% is a "real majority". The word you're looking for is supermajority.

    Other than that, a fine sentiment.

    --
    --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
  123. Re:The root of the problem lies with ... the peopl by phantomfive · · Score: 1

    Maybe. If you voted for Obama in the last election then I hold you personally responsible.

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  124. Re:Probably because they weren't privacy violation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What filters? The only one I know of is the 4th amendment, and it doesn't seem to be working. I believe that was part of his complaint, and it appears they classified what was going on at the NSA because it's illegal to search my papers and effects (e.g. call history) without probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. If you're into government spying and control, I'm sure we can get together a fund to send to you North Korea. I hear the have quite the police state.