Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
Your Rights Online

Edward Snowden and Laura Poitras Win Truth-Telling Award 123

An anonymous reader writes with news that Snowden has received the Ridenhour Truth-Telling award. From the announcement: "We have selected Edward Snowden and Laura Poitras for their work in exposing the NSA's illegal and unconstitutional bulk collection of the communications of millions of people living in the United States. Their act of courage was undertaken at great personal risk and has sparked a critical and transformative debate about mass surveillance in a country where privacy is considered a constitutional right." The award will be presented at the National Press Club. It is hoped that Snowden and Poitras will be able to appear remotely (Poitras is in effective exile in Berlin). In related news, the ACLU has indexed all publicly released documented leaked by Snowden. You can even full-text search them.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Edward Snowden and Laura Poitras Win Truth-Telling Award

Comments Filter:
  • To tell the truth
    My beard, forsooth
    Craveth proper soap
    E'er since me youth
    Burma Shave
    • Bradley Manning's clean shaven beard told the truth too forsooth !
      That sly rat! Adrian Lemo , ratted him right to good ol Guantanamo !!

      Dolaateral Cabbage
      • Don LaFontaine:

        "In a world, where Truth is forbidden... Where Justice - is a threat... and Treason means having the courage to do what's Right...
        Sometimes, there's a chance for one man to make a difference, and risk it all... So others can reach the summit and see the light."

        This summer, is the summer of.. Snowden.

        • Re:To tell the truth (Score:4, Interesting)

          by Jeremiah Cornelius ( 137 ) on Tuesday April 08, 2014 @02:48PM (#46696845) Homepage Journal

          WHY WE WILL NEVER LEARN [badattitudes.com]

          Thomas Polgar, the last CIA station chief in Vietnam, died in March at the age of 92. His obit is in today’s New York Times. And here's Polgar himself, remembering the fall of Saigon. As well as, in this brief aside, the war criminal Henry Kissinger.

          One day I had an opportunity to ask Mr. Kissinger what he thought of our intelligence. Not speaking of Vietnam, but generally. He was getting this big flow of intelligence from CIA world wide at the time. What did he think of the value of it? And he thought for a moment and then he said, "Well, when it supports my policy, it’s very useful." And I think we are here at the heart of the problem. It is that American policy is not formulated in response to what the intelligence shows. We first formulate the policy and then we try to find the intelligence to support it.

          It is interesting to speculate what might have happened if Truman had decided to let the country continue to bumble along, as it had somehow since 1776, without any "intelligence" agency at all. No Shah of Iran, hence no hostage crisis and no Ronald Reagan. No U2, hence no refreezing of the Cold War. No Bay of Pigs, hence no Cuban Missile Crisis. No arming of the Taliban, to teach those Russians a lesson. No Weapons of Mass Destruction, hence no The list goes on and on. The CIA stands in relation to the White House as the drug dealer stands to the addict.

  • by NotDrWho ( 3543773 ) on Tuesday April 08, 2014 @08:35AM (#46692723)

    It would go a long way towards making up for that embarrassment of giving Obama that award before he had even done anything.

    • by Anonymous Coward

      What for? He hasn't even killed a single person. Why should he qualify for the Peace Prize?

    • by Anonymous Coward

      It would go a long way towards making up for that embarrassment of giving Obama that award before he had even done anything.

      Well, at least nobody proposes giving Obama "Truth-Telling award" these days. But then it's close to half a century ago already that Tom Lehrer stated "Political satire became redundant when Henry Kissinger was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize."

      Maybe it needs to be renamed to "Peacemaker Prize" or "Peaciness Award" or something.

      • The so-called "Peace" prize is indeed badly named. Other famous war makers, H-bomb creator, mass killing authors and terrorists got it:

        Yasser Arafat, Shimon Peres and Yitzhak Rabin (1994)
        Mohamed Anwar al-Sadat and Menachem Begin (1978)
        Andrei Dmitrievich Sakharov (1975)
        Henry A. Kissinger and Le Duc Tho (1973)

        So perhaps Edward Snowden and Laura Poitras have better not to be awarded
        the Nobel.

        • In fairness the creation of the H-bomb has appeared to have done a great deal for peace - witness the fact that there hasn't been an open war between nuclear powers since its invention, despite many lingering resentments and incentives. Not to mention the horror that would likely have been unleashed had only one side succeeded in their efforts - you can't reasonably argue that either side could have backed away from the project without condemning themselves to a fiery defeat.

          • It's ironic that the H-bomb has indeed stopped war on the scale of WW2 since it's development but today the advances in missile defense could very well do the opposite. Any country sitting on a nuclear stockpile of missiles would lose their ultimate defense if the missiles are rendered useless against a robust missile defense system. The defense systems are only going to get better and it won't be long before orbital defense platforms get added to the mix regardless of any treaty about weaponizing space.

            • Weapons for Peace! Defenses for War! I think you win this weeks prize for appropriate use of the word irony, and here it is only Tuesday.

              On the plus side hasn't China been doing some serious research into surface-to-orbit weapons? That should be useful for eliminating orbital defenses, and I'm sure the other Powers are stealing the technology as fast as it's developed. Regional defenses will be a separate issue, and yeah, I don't really see any way to counter them, except via the old tried-and-true missi

    • Parent is trolling...it's about getting people to comment not making a point...

      Sure, Obama received the Nobel Prize, and his critics can assuredly be relied upon to...um...criticize it...but the above comment is pure TROLL

      the fact that it has been modded "interesting" means that users are modding for their personal political beliefs not to foster discussion

      if this is "interesting" then you're an idiot

    • It would be more embarrassing if they gave Obama the award after he did anything.

  • by NormAtHome ( 99305 ) on Tuesday April 08, 2014 @08:38AM (#46692735)

    Since the Supreme Court refused to rule on the latest challenge http://jurist.org/paperchase/2... [jurist.org] we don't know if it is or isn't. In my opinion the original judge who said "that the program is likely unconstitutional" was correct, so the program continues to operate and probably faces years more worth of legal challenges.

  • Exiles my arse. Poitras and Applebaum engage in self promotion by giving themselves the artificial "street cred" of self-declared exiles. Oh how hard it must be to blog from Berlin coffee shops while on the lam from the evil US government.
  • Suppose that I am a whistleblower or leaker, and the FBI wants to discuss the matter with me. Why can't I just send a telepresence machine to talk to them? If they have questions for Assange or Snowden, can't they just use Skype?
    • Don't be ridiculous. If you do that how are they supposed to drag you off to a windowless cell afterwards?

      • That's my point. If $GOV wants to talk to $HUMAN, they can do so in a mutually safe manner.
        • But what's in it for $GOV? Any time there is a significant power imbalance you can be virtually guaranteed it will be exploited, it's the natural order of things. You're not one of those Godless Pinko Muslim Commies that thinks governments should be bound by silly things like "human rights" and "the rule of law" are you?

          • What's in it for $GOV is that they are safe from $HUMAN, same as the other way round. It's impossible to have a civil conversation when anyone can use truncheons in places of arguments. If that's the case, I suggest having a refereed boxing match first, and then a conversation later.
            • But $GOV is not credibly threatened by $HUMAN, and so long as $GOV is the only one bringing truncheons to the conversation they're unlikely to complain about the situation. It's possible that $HUMAN could pose a risk of assassination or revolution - but the first is a perpetual concern that every politician in history has faced, iron-fisted or otherwise, and sufficiently invasive surveillance of the population offers a plausible preemptive defense against revolution.

              Basically, to get out of this hole we've

  • ... that someone who lied and manipulated people is given a 'truth telling' award.

    I guess it's OK to lie when you are getting what you want because the voices in your head are telling you it's the right thing to do.

  • Constitution. If it were there, we would not be having the problems we are currently having.

  • Risked everything. Gained nothing.


    • by geekoid ( 135745 )

      Gained nothing? I'll be the movie and book will make him some many while continuing to stroke his ego.

      • yeah I'm sure having a film about yourself will gain you comfort when you have to live in hiding in a country that is unlike your 1st, 2nd or 3rd choice of places to live in for the rest of your life.

        I'm sure he;ll be in the history books and that too might be a nice to have but he's still living in hiding and that will make life shit so I'd still say that's gaining nothing.
        • by geekoid ( 135745 )

          he isn't living in hiding. we know right were he is.
          He has a job, and if a book or movie makes him money, then Russia will be a fine place to live.

  • How come the US has so many exiles for supporting the constitution? Shouldn't supporting the constitution be legal instead of a threat to ones life and liberty?

Each honest calling, each walk of life, has its own elite, its own aristocracy based on excellence of performance. -- James Bryant Conant