Snowden's Big Truth: We Are All Less Free 583
chicksdaddy writes "In the days since stories based on classified information leaked by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden hit the headlines, a string of reports and editorials claim that he had his facts wrong, accuse him of treason – or both. Others have accused journalists like Glen Greenwald of The Guardian of rushing to print before they had all the facts. All of these criticisms could be valid. Technology firms may not have given intelligence agencies unfettered and unchecked access to their users' data. Edward Snowden may be, as the New York Times's David Brooks suggests, one of those 20-something-men leading a 'life unshaped by the mediating institutions of civil society.' All those critiques may be true without undermining the larger truth of Snowden's revelation: in an age of global, networked communications and interactions, we are all a lot less free than we thought we were. I say this because nobody has seriously challenged the basic truth of Snowden's leak: that many of the world's leading telecommunications and technology firms are regularly divulging information about their users' activities and communications to law enforcement and intelligence agencies based on warrantless requests and court reviews that are hidden from public scrutiny. It hasn't always been so."
Bruce Schneier has published an opinion piece saying that while Snowden did break the law, we need to investigate the government before any prosecution occurs. (Schneier's piece is one in a series on the subject.) Snowden himself said in an interview today that the U.S. government has been pursuing hacking operations against China for years.
Channeling XKCD: (Score:5, Funny)
"And yet the Tea Party thugs were demanding government "do whatever it takes" post-9/11... "
You knew about the Tea Party in late 2001? What else did you know about that was still in the future? Lemme guess, you knew about Katrina and didn't warn us? You bastard!
Re:Snowden is fucked (Score:5, Funny)
If it's genuinely gotten so bad that it takes an expert to understand the plain words of the constitution, we're screwed anyway.
It doesn't! Many laws are not that hard to read.
Our brave officials have gotten to redefining very plain words in the constitutions/laws in general.
"Spying" is not really "spying"
"Meta-data" is not "data"
"Imminent" danger means "there might or might not be a danger in the future"
"Militant" means "anyone we killed by drone"
"Terrorist" means "someone we don't like"
"Whistle-blower" means "traitor"
Oh, and many of those re-definitions are classified, so it takes years (and a whistle-blower) to even find out that they already happened.
Re:Not news for the observant folks.... (Score:5, Funny)
This is what happens when a government declares 'War' on an idea, or other abstract.
Spanish Inquisition
Hmmm. I wasn't expecting that.
Re:Channeling XKCD: (Score:2, Funny)
"And yet the Tea Party thugs were demanding government "do whatever it takes" post-9/11... "
You knew about the Tea Party in late 2001? What else did you know about that was still in the future? Lemme guess, you knew about Katrina and didn't warn us? You bastard!
I hate to burst your snark bubble, but every day since 9/11 is post-9/11. I took a post-9/11 shower this morning.
Re:Not news for the observant folks.... (Score:5, Funny)
This is what happens when a government declares 'War' on an idea, or other abstract.
Spanish Inquisition
Hmmm. I wasn't expecting that.
Nobody did, really.