Where Whistleblowers End Up Working 224
HughPickens.com writes Jana Kasperkevic writes at The Guardian that it's not every day that you get to buy an iPhone from an ex-NSA officer. Yet Thomas Drake, former senior executive at National Security Agency, is well known in the national security circles for leaking information about the NSA's Trailblazer project to Baltimore Sun. In 2010, the government dropped all 10 felony charges against him and he pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor charge for unauthorized use of a computer and lost his livelihood. "You have to mortgage your house, you have to empty your bank account. I went from making well over $150,000 a year to a quarter of that," says Drake. "The cost alone, financially — never mind the personal cost — is approaching million dollars in terms of lost income, expenses and other costs I incurred."
John Kiriakou became the first former government official to confirm the use of waterboarding against al-Qaida suspects in 2009. "I have applied for every job I can think of – everything from grocery stores to Toys R Us to Starbucks. You name it, I've applied there. Haven't gotten even an email or a call back," says Kiriakou. According to Kasperkevic, this is what most whistleblowers can expect. The potential threat of prosecution, the mounting legal bills and the lack of future job opportunities all contribute to a hesitation among many to rock the boat. "Obama and his attorney general, Eric Holder, declared a war on whistleblowers virtually as soon as they assumed office," says Kiriakou. "Washington has always needed an "ism" to fight against, an idea against which it could rally its citizens like lemmings. First, it was anarchism, then socialism, then communism. Now, it's terrorism. Any whistleblower who goes public in the name of protecting human rights or civil liberties is accused of helping the terrorists."
John Kiriakou became the first former government official to confirm the use of waterboarding against al-Qaida suspects in 2009. "I have applied for every job I can think of – everything from grocery stores to Toys R Us to Starbucks. You name it, I've applied there. Haven't gotten even an email or a call back," says Kiriakou. According to Kasperkevic, this is what most whistleblowers can expect. The potential threat of prosecution, the mounting legal bills and the lack of future job opportunities all contribute to a hesitation among many to rock the boat. "Obama and his attorney general, Eric Holder, declared a war on whistleblowers virtually as soon as they assumed office," says Kiriakou. "Washington has always needed an "ism" to fight against, an idea against which it could rally its citizens like lemmings. First, it was anarchism, then socialism, then communism. Now, it's terrorism. Any whistleblower who goes public in the name of protecting human rights or civil liberties is accused of helping the terrorists."
Nothing new (Score:5, Insightful)
It's a very effective method at discouraging effective and functional resistance against status quo.
Similar procedures were used against key people behind Occupy movement according to similar reports.
Re:Nothing new (Score:5, Insightful)
The phrase "Freedom isn't Free" doesn't just apply on the battlefield.
Re:Nothing new (Score:5, Interesting)
Except that they are specifically giving up their freedom. For the right cause. So this isn't about "cost of freedom", but "doing the right thing costing people their freedom" as in modern West, being poor is effectively a crime that limits your freedom greatly.
Re: (Score:3)
Right, and dying also limits your personal freedom. Your freedom, does come at the expense of those who are willing to personally sacrifice to varying to degrees to keep it.
Re: (Score:2)
You know, it's pretty sad that people like you are willing to pretend to be protecting the freedom, all while happily supporting the system which people who were actually protecting the freedom fought against. And then screaming abuse of "they protected YOUR freedom" at people like me who point out the fallacy, using ridiculous hyperbolic talking points to deflect attention from the subject.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, you seem to be completely mistaken.
"The system" is an arbitrary notion. Some systems can have positive effects. For example, I'd rather have a democratic system than the historically apparent de-facto social default of petty demi-feudal tyrants.
And I'd rather have a court based justice system, then a personally run petty revenge based justice system.
You can take that as generically accepting "The system", and all the things that aren't so-great if you want, but it's going have to be willful ignorance
Re: (Score:3)
Just because soldiers suffer for my freedom doesn't mean I want whistleblowers to suffer also.
Soldiers protect us from foreign enemies, Whistleblowers protect us from domestic enemies. They are both heros however, the attacks and wounds they suffer differ.
Re:Nothing new (Score:5, Insightful)
When is the last time the US military fought a battle for freedom? Hint: corporate profits != freedom.
Re: (Score:2)
What was the first one? All the way back to the Cuban invasion and the civil war I see only wars that were either started by the US fot profits or power, or were started because someone else started it (like WW2, where the US responded to a preemptive strike when the Japanese reacted like the modern US when they got hindered in their access to oil. And then Hitler declared war on the US too for good measure).
Re:Nothing new (Score:5, Interesting)
Relying on whistleblowers to "resist the status quo" is a stupid political strategy. The power of the NSA and CIA need to be limited, civil liberties and constitutionality need to be restored, by the people we vote for. But as long as sheep keep reelecting politicians who blatantly violate their campaign promises of transparency, accountability, constitutionality, and restoration of civil liberties, nothing is going to change.
You make it sound like a conspiracy. But there are millions of private employers; they just individually look at these people and decide that hiring them isn't worth the risk and hassle.
Re:Nothing new (Score:5, Insightful)
See, that's the beauty of the Western system, as compared to for example Russia. There, if private companies dump dissidents, it's "oh noes government's fault".
But in the land of the free? That's just private corporations exercising their freedom!
The only actual difference? Slightly greater plausible deniability that works on people like you. Apparently. Because you see, there's no "conspiracy". There's simply the system that is set to encourage not employing those who resist status quo. Conspiracy implies secrecy, and there's there little secrecy about this issue, as you yourself point out.
Re: (Score:3)
Private companies didn't "dump" these people. Private companies have nothing to do with these people, their choices, their legal troubles. Individual businesses simply decide individually that hiring these people isn't worth their trouble.
And a big part of that ca
Re: (Score:2)
They aren't sheep, they're wolflings voting to ensure their nation gets to be the Big Bad Wolf of nations. How could they possibly be otherwise, when the entire syste
Re: (Score:2)
If people wanted a hawk, Obama would have been the last person to vote for, given both what he said he stood for and his utter incompetence when it comes to foreign or military policy.
You make no sense.
Re: (Score:2)
It's a very effective method at discouraging effective and functional resistance against status quo.
Similar procedures were used against key people behind Occupy movement according to similar reports.
Somehow that makes me wonder what happens when we set up a corporation just to whistleblow on other companies. But then it would probably turn into a nasty bit of the complex where they just keep blackmailing other companies instead.
Re: (Score:3)
That's what wikileaks effectively did. They ended up cut off from entire worldwide payment and banking system almost entirely.
Re: (Score:2)
We big-government socialists knew that, not sure why you libertarians didn't?
Which libertarians? The working class ones or the ones who get to tell other people what to do?
Obligatory quote/s (Score:2)
The more you tighten your grip, Tarkin, the more star systems will slip through your fingers.
...and; People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people.
More to the point is that of course, all these disproportionate and draconian measures have ensured no whistle-blowing takes place. Good job, pat yourselves on the back and suck each other's cocks.
-nuff said
Re:Obligatory quote/s (Score:5, Funny)
Good job, pat yourselves on the back and suck each other's cocks.
I don't believe they are talking about that particular use of Whistleblowers.
Re:Obligatory quote/s (Score:4, Insightful)
It is. That's why it spies on them.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Man killed with polonium wasn't a dissident, but what US would have called a "terrorist" if operations he undertook against Russia were undertaken against it instead. That is active spy recruitment, channelling finance of military assistance to various separatist and anti-establishment groups in Russia and so on. If you call him a dissident, you'll have who reclassify a whole lot of people US calls terrorists today into "dissidents".
US has an active assassination program running RIGHT NOW killing people lik
Re:Obligatory quote/s (Score:5, Insightful)
Just amazing, such an incredible two-faced attitude toward whistleblowers. Alexander Litvinenko was about as clear cut example of a whistleblower as you can get. He was an FSB officer who leaked the reports that the FSB had ordered the assassination of Boris Berezovsky. He was was arrested for his leaks, but acquitted - but the government continued going after him after his acquittal, so he fled to the UK and was granted asylum. In the UK, out of reach of the Russian government, he continued writing books and giving interviews leaking more information, including claims of the Russian government's involvement in the murder of journalist Anna Politkovskaya and the Russian apartment bombings that both solidified public resolve for Russia to re-invade Chechnya and helped bring Putin to power.
And he was killed for that. By polonium. Traced straight back to a nuclear power plant in Russia via a British Airwaves jet from Moscow.
Now, let's just say that Litvinenko was just speculating wildly or BSing about everything he said about Russia. That doesn't change the fact that for whatever reason, he was asssinated by polonium traced straight back to nuclear power plant in Russia via a British Airwaves jet from Moscow.
But to you, a guy writing negative things about Putin makes him terrorist recruiter and that was justified? Seriously?
Re:Obligatory quote/s (Score:5, Informative)
Hahahaha! [transparency.org]
Stop it, you're killing me! [rsf.org]
All too funny. [worldjusticeproject.org]
Russia hardly even tries any more to pretend that their media isn't a bunch of scripted reports with paid actors or that they're remotely a free, fair democracy. Heck, in the last election, Chechnya had 99.59% turnout with 99.82% voting for the "Butcher of Grozny". Some precincts were apparently so eager to vote for him that they had 107% turnout. Really impressive on Putin's part! ;) It's amazing that they can still find useful idiots like you to defend them.
Re: (Score:2)
Russia hardly even tries any more to pretend that their media isn't a bunch of scripted reports with paid actors or that they're remotely a free, fair democracy.
But the US keeps pretending just that, even though most people know the media is completely compromised.
Transparency (Score:4, Insightful)
How's that transparent government working out?
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Transparency (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Transparency (Score:5, Funny)
Campaign Obama: promises change - President Obama: changes promise
He has altered the deal. Pray he does not alter it any further.
Re: (Score:3)
"Transparency" and "openness" are just a politician's way of saying "I need you to vote for me, but the second I'm in office I'm going to be just as much a shitheel as the last guy."
Re:Transparency (Score:5, Insightful)
Something happens between the election and the inauguration that changes a president's entire ethos.
Makes you wonder what happens when they brief the incoming president on The Big Secret Stuff. Do you think they find out "holy shit there really are terrorists and/or aliens everywhere we're barely keeping at bay," or do you think a man with no name just hands the president a picture of JFK's head getting blown off from the perspective of the grassy knoll and says "here's your new talking points?"
Re: (Score:2)
Apologies to Bill Hicks [youtube.com].
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Well, there it is.
The powers behind the MIC, the weapons manufacturers, are billionaire sociopaths. These people care only about their own money and power and will start wars on false pretenses resulting in terrible death and destruction, kids with their limbs blown off, dead soldiers, starvation, panic, whatever, just to make more money selling bombs. Do you think they would have any qualms about threatening a president? Do you really think they're going to let their plans depend on something as silly as t
Exact Opposite of the Obama Campaign Message (Score:5, Insightful)
If I remember correctly, before and after entering office, Obama vowed to improve government transparency and protecting whistle blowers. While in sections, such as with ARRA, government transparency was increased, the remainder of the government was obscured further.
Re:Exact Opposite of the Obama Campaign Message (Score:4, Insightful)
Yes, he promised us the most transparent government ever. It's not his fault though, it's all those hard drives, you know, they just... Gosh, they keep crashing. Whoops.
Re: (Score:2)
No, no, I think you simply misread [artinfo.com] his campaign literature.
Re: (Score:3)
What do mean? Obama's government is incredibly transparent! You can't see anything at all!
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
And whistleblowers were persecuted more harshly than ever:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/peter-van-buren/silencing-whistleblowers_b_4895847.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/26/obama-whistleblower-website_n_3658815.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jason-ditz/obama-insider-threat_b_3588818.html
And this is a joke:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/07/07/obama-whistleblowers_n_5564965.html
It encourages whistleblowers to voice their concerns through channels instead of leaks.
Well duh! Of course these pe
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Obama has also prosecuted more whistleblowers than all other Administrations combined. Last count I saw was seven by Obama, three by all previous Presidents.
Yes, I know that Obama isn't the one issuing the orders to prosecute. But he IS the one who can issue the order to stop prosecuting them....
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
That's what people get for believing that ANY leader EVER wants people in his organization releasing embarrassing information to the public about said organization.
Anyone who ever tells you "I'm cool with the people who work for me embarrassing me and undermining me" is FUCKING LYING. Period. End of story. YES, YOUR GUY TOO! YES, GANDHI AND MOTHER TERESA TOO!
Obama declared a war on whistleblowers? (Score:3)
"Obama and his attorney general, Eric Holder, declared a war on whistleblowers virtually as soon as they assumed office," says Kiriakou.
Obama is certainly not any better than his predecessors, but I have to wonder if he is any worse. Valery Plame was on G. W. Bush's watch, for example.
Re:Obama declared a war on whistleblowers? (Score:5, Informative)
Re: Obama declared a war on whistleblowers? (Score:3)
Obama's whistleblower protection initiatives don't seem to be doing the job.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Valery Plame was on G. W. Bush's watch, for example.
Valerie Plame was not a whistle blower.
Nor was she prosecuted (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Worse - she was put in danger by releasing her association with the CIA.
the new (Score:4, Interesting)
yeah...i feel for this guy. i can relate.
in this day and age, pretty much anything you do that could potentially show that you are not a good little robot that sits up and says "more, please" when corporations and law enforcement slap you around goes on your record and eliminates you from enjoying that sort of upper middle-class life. how wonderful for the law-n-order types...no so much for independant souls.
it's happening all around us in real time...the Goodell story, Ray Rice...hashtag mobs become judge and jury for a few days and completely destroy lives.
now I get it...in this case it's different but corporate HR departments are just hashtag mobs of 1.
Re: (Score:2)
Future wars (Score:5, Funny)
Well...
egrep ".*ism$" /usr/share/dict/words | perl -MList::Util=shuffle -e 'print shuffle();' | tail -n 10 ... tells me that the next ten things that the US is going to wage war against are:
Factionalism
Occidentalism
Aerotropism
Briticism
Rebaptism
Establishmentarianism.
Freemasonism
Achronism
Henotheism
Selenotropism
I look forward to the War on Henotheism. Make up your minds, there's either one god or there's multiple! If you don't pick between the existence of one god or multiple, then the Henotheists win!
(Side note: Slashdot, stop playing content critic with your "Filter error: That's an awful long string of letters there")
Re: (Score:2)
I read that as the war on Hedonism. I was almost upset there for a moment.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Now, if it were antidisestablishmentarianism, I could get behind that.
Re: (Score:2)
Existentialism is the enemy. Existentialism has always been the enemy.
Re: (Score:2)
The war on Freemasonism has already been done:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
The war on Establishmentarianism should be fun!
Re: (Score:2)
Except that sort -R isn't available on older versions of coreutils.
Re: (Score:2)
And List::Util isn't in my installation of perl. sort -R works, though.
Re: (Score:2)
Looks like fun, can I join in ? /usr/share/dict/words
perl -e 'print((sort{rand()<=>.5}grep(/.*ism$/,<>))[0..9]);' <
They are doing it wrong ... (Score:4, Interesting)
Manning tried to impress an actual hacker and the hacker dude didn't want any part of it.
Snowden grabbed the goods and and made headlines across the planet.
Why in Sam Hill do whistle blowers have to step into the spotlight with their incriminating evidence?
There are lots of ways to drop that crap off and be quiet about it.
The system is training for that, you know. It's the next logical step.
Want to expose a wrongdoing?
Wear the cloak of AC.
Re:They are doing it wrong ... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:They are doing it wrong ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
anonymous tips are almost worthless.
do you have any idea how many of those authorities receive daily?
without someone willing to testify and be "the face" of the situation, prosecutors have no real case.
Re: (Score:2)
Snowden could have also anonymously died shortly afterwards. Take for example:
Journalist Gary Webb - was working on stories about the CIA and Columbian drug cartels when he suddenly decided to shoot himself in the head with a shotgun... and then shoot himself in the head again just to make sure.
Karen Silkwood - was blowing the while on something related to health issues at a nuclear processing facility. She was driving to a reporter with documents when she decided to take sleeping pills and drive into a t
Re: (Score:2)
No one EVER thanks a whistleblower (Score:4, Insightful)
It may be a moral good, even a moral necessity to do it. But you're *never* rewarded for it, even under the best of circumstances (all these bullshit whistleblower bounty programs are just for show). And at worst, you'll end up in prison or dead.
Re: (Score:2)
Kids aren't afraid to speak up and protest [dailykos.com] against the government trying to mandate the history classes to omit teaching anything about the past that glorifies those in the past that blew the whistle or did any sort of patriotic action that would, today, go against the status quo. Maybe you have a point, but what's the use of that point in tod
Re: (Score:2)
I would rather live free. Maybe focus on that instead of thinking up excuse to die for?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Obama promised to encourage whistleblowers (Score:4, Insightful)
Can someone explain? (Score:2)
How is it logical that he loses his job and now he can't get any job?
I can understand probably government is off limits for him, and if he goes to a big company maybe the background check would keep him from a job. But there have to be plenty of small businesses who would be willing to hire him, and certainly if he just goes looking for anonymous low brow work, well that shouldn't be a problem, no?
This article seems to suggest if you piss off Uncle Sam, he'll force you into homelessness....
Re: (Score:2)
If you show up at McDonalds asking for a job and the most recent experience on your resume is a 150K job with the government, the Pimply Faced Youth doing the hiring is going to gloss right over.
Let's say the Mr. Whistle does get by the the initial screening and becomes a serious candidate. As the company is doing due diligence like reference checks and background checks, it is very easy to tank someone's chances. I'm not talking about nefarious shadow men showing up making dire innuendo. The 'secret' qu
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah but that's the thing.
When I got hired to wash dishes in college I showed up and they asked me if I had a social security card, then told me to start working.
I did maybe ten other jobs with similar requirements (warm body that can lift stuff and clean). All of them were a breeze.
There's no resume asked for with certain jobs. I'm not surprised his career in government is over. I am surprised it's over for McDonalds.
Re: (Score:3)
Quite logical, really. These days, HR will do a background check on *anybody* they hire. All you need is an Internet connection, after all. When the whistleblowing comes up, the HR guy decides, "He's a trouble-maker. I've got dozens of other resumes. I'll pick somebody who's not a trouble-maker."
Re: (Score:2)
I sold you and you sold me
There lie they, and here lie we
Under the spreading chestnut tree
Re: (Score:2)
There are conspiracy theories swirling about a "Do Not Hire" list that will flag otherwise innocent people in a background check if they're on the government's naughty list. It's possible at least...but what are the odds that EVERY job this guy applied to ran a check that could be exploited?
Re: (Score:2)
A secret "Do Not Hire" list seems a bit much. Because we haven't heard of it, it would imply a huge number of levels of people involved who were keeping the secret, including the little old lady at the corner store who wouldn't let the guy in as a bagger.
Re: (Score:2)
The little old lady wouldn't have to know about it. She sends in a background check for the bagger, it comes back saying Something Bad because he's on the government's naughty list, and the little old lady doesn't hire the guy and yet doesn't have any idea a Do Not Hire list exists.
Re: (Score:3)
It's like having a PhD and a felony conviction, all rolled into one.
Comment removed (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Given he is still in prison, no he isn't yet learning any of that yet.
Re:more info on Kiriakou (Score:5, Insightful)
Amazing. Not only do we prevent them from working, we also prevent them from collecting food stamps so that they are further incentivised to resort to theft. Then if they get caught we put them in prison where they get the free food, clothing, and shelter we didn't want to give them before they resorted to theft.
Re: (Score:2)
The original definition of a felon was person who committed a crime punishable by death. Now it includes things like spitting your gum on the sidewalk and jaywalking. Peeing in a bush next to a bar isn't a felony but will make you a lifetime sex offender if you are caught....
Re: (Score:2)
You have to plead guilty or get buried in debt, and then when you are broke, somehow defend against new charges.
Face it; Whistleblowers will be found guilty. And the longer they wait to "sign the papers" the more the Prosecutor will force them to defend expensive and spurious charges.
These Whistleblowers are all national treasures, yet they must sacrifice their futures so that the rest of us can sit on our asses and pretend to have a Democracy for a few more years.
limited employability anyway (Score:2)
Leaving government for the private sector usually involves a great deal of soft corruption: employers who want inside connections, inside knowledge, and lobbying power; obviously, these people can't bring that to the table. Beyond that, they may not have that many skills employers want.
Emigrate or die (Score:2)
Look what happened with Snowden (Score:4, Insightful)
They got caught with their dicks in the cookie jar, and still (still!) they blame the kid who called them out for it.
Don't fool yourself with ideologies and policy statements and fancy speeches. It's all Bullshit. Democrats = Republicans = Cunts. Power likes to suck itself off and *hates* it when someone gets in the way. Somehow we all know this, but sometimes we need to see it to really believe it. Did many of those who voted for Obama really think the government under his administration would not only be caught spying on US citizens, but that he himself would actively defend it, and that he would use his underlings to spend more effort on the Snowden witchhunt and character assassination than looking into the NSA overreach wrongdoing? It's disgusting behavior, but not wholly unexpected for any reasonably diligent student of political history.
The only people worse than those trying to acquire power are those trying to retain it.
Yes (Score:2)
Obama called Starbucks and tole them not to hire him.
Please.
write a book about their experience (Score:3, Insightful)
By being a whistleblower they have displayed to the world that they have a lot of risk taking abilities. Now that they have appeared on slashdot, they should consider writing a book about their experiences. The hesitation, the resistance they faced at their work-place, then the moment... They can then sell the rights to their story to movie studios too!! That's the way forward to high risk takers such as whistleblowers. Make it all or loose it all!! They can then go around delivering lectures about their experiences, their book. Go independent, I mean!!
Start a web site? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Except that a 'smart tech company' has to sell their products somewhere. And if it becomes known that they hire whistleblowers, corporate America will shun them.
How Secrets Are Kept (Score:2)
And yet, when I talk to people about shady things that it looks like to government has done or is doing, I am told that if such a thing were happening someone would talk. Someone with a conscience would come forward and expose the shady operation.
Well, not necessarily. As we see here, there is a high cost to coming forward. If what you are coming forward about is classified, expect to go to prison as well (with the bonus of perhaps not being able to prove your allegation because it is all classified). P
If WBs reveal crime, opposition to WBs promotes it (Score:3)
If we were serious about ending criminal acts in the US government, we would:
1) create a fully independent office inside the government to investigate and prosecute wrongdoers, with powers no less than congress' Special Prosecutor (i.e. equal to the presidency)
2) offer whistleblowers generous retirement benefits for life (to escape retribution)
3) give them blanket immunity from prosecution
4) prosecute the gov't wrongdoers all the way up the chain of command, *starting* at top executive levels
But the US government does the opposite. That's the very definition of racketeering and organized crime.
Yep... (Score:2)
Re:Don't Need Them (Score:5, Funny)
As a whistle blower myself, I found that the trick is to do diaphragm exercises. Lots of people focus too much on the muscles in the mouth, but the real airflow comes from the lungs. Also, get yourself a real competition-grade whistle, not a cheap piece of Chinese-made junk. I personally am fond of the late Soviet militiary whistles - not only do they have a distinctive sound, but the titanium pea is extremely efficient at transforming air pressure to sound with little resistance.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That's a good idea. Another idea would be that the ACLU (or similar organization) could create a "whistleblower stipend fund" so that whistleblowers could be taken care of whether they could find a job or not.
Re: (Score:2)
Has this kind of situation been documented? Because it would seem to me like a lot of resources for the government to use, out of spite, against just one person, with little benefit in return.
Re: (Score:2)
I wouldn't be quick to judge from these people. Much f what they are saying makew no sense.
Can't get a Job at Starbucks? Toy's R Us? Because of Obama?
Could you imagine the fall out?
Re: (Score:2)
How people can miss this one truth of government I'll never know. They all tend to find an "enemy" to focus the peoples hostilities on, and if there isn't one they invent one.
This is a good thing to remember when the news is telling us about the bad guy du jour that we must go fight against. Whatever they are telling you, it's bullshit. We may not know what the truth is, but whatever they are telling you on TV isn't it.
Re: (Score:2)
The NSA guy
He probably knows how pointless anonymity is.
Screw terrorists. If you challenge the government-industrial complex, every resource of the intelligence community will be brought to bear in order to find you.