Edward Snowden's Christmas Message: "A Child Born Today will Grow up with No Conception of Privacy"

[KoKo]

Snowden's 'Alternative' Christmas Message: 'Together We Can End Mass Surveillance'

'A child born today will grow up with no conception of privacy at all,' NSA whistleblower says on the UK's Channel 4
- Andrea Germanos, staff writer

https://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/12/25-0

Edward Snowden delivering an "Alternative Christmas Message" on Channel 4. (Screenshot)NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden has delivered an "alternative Christmas message" on the UK's Channel 4 in which he says that "a child born today will grow up with no conception of privacy at all," and that the kinds of surveillance outlined in Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four "are nothing compared to what we have available today."

Britain's Channel 4 has broadcast an annual alternative to the Queen's Christmas Day address to the UK since 1993.

Snowden gives this year's address in a video made for Channel 4 by filmmaker and journalist Laura Poitras's Praxis Films.

In the pre-recorded address to be aired on Christmas Day, Snowden says, "Recently, we learned that our governments, working in concert, have created a system of worldwide, mass surveillance, watching everything we do."

The kinds of surveillance Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four warned of "are nothing compared to what we have available today," and a child born today will "never know what it means to have a private moment to themselves, an unrecorded, unanalyzed thought."

The lack of privacy matter because it "is what allows us to determine who we are and who we want to be."

"Together, we can find a better balance, end mass surveillance, and remind the government that if it really wants to know how we feel, asking is always cheaper than spying," Snowden said.

In an interview published by the Washington Post on Christmas Eve, Snowden said, "For me, in terms of personal satisfaction, the mission’s already accomplished. I already won. As soon as the journalists were able to work, everything that I had been trying to do was validated. Because, remember, I didn’t want to change society. I wanted to give society a chance to determine if it should change itself."

"All I wanted was for the public to be able to have a say in how they are governed," the whistleblower told the Post. "That is a milestone we left a long time ago. "

You can watch the full video address on Channel 4 here.

http://www.channel4.com/programmes/alternative-christmas-message/4od

[NYC_SKP]

1. I heard this on the radio yesterday, thanks for posting! nt

[grahamhgreen]

2. Hero.

[BobUp]

3. I Probably Shouldn't Type This

but, I have no use for Snowden, he's basically been labeled a traitor, a betrayer, renegade, backstabber and many other things. I dislike him tremendously.

Why do I dislike him, and anyone like him?

As a military veteran, I was exposed to classified material during my enlistment term, and can say without any reservations that when a person makes or forges an agreement with whomever to keep confidential what you see and know about, that is not anything to be taken lightly. Snowden probably signed and agreed to a contract which he thoroughly violated, and violated the trust placed with him.

Now, I do not condone or support our government spying on it's own citizens. But I will say this, the government has been spying and investigating it's own citizens for eons. If we go back to the days when MLK was alive, we find that the FBI was trying to find dirt on him to use against him.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/26/nsa-martin-luther-king-jr_n_3995150.html


America has been a very ugly country with an ugly history.

When I enlisted, I signed an agreement to not discuss or divulge anything pertaining to military operations, OPSEC and COMSEC agreement. I took it seriously. To not take it seriously means you would be willing to undermine the freedoms we all enjoy.

The thing about this bad history is that the Patriot Act pretty much gave the government wider authority to spy on virtually anyone, anywhere. I don't particularly care for it, but traitors and spies need to be dealt with.

[woo me with science]

5. And the influx continues....

The influx of corporate propaganda-spouting personas is steady and unnatural:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4216987
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3189367

States that build surveillance machines also build propaganda machines.

[Zorra]

37. +1 "If it looks like a duck..." nt

[HangOnKids]

58. Bazinga! Lots of ducks flocking around these parts...... n/t

[sabrina 1]

38. So true. I was just thinking the same thing.

[woo me with science]

39. I notice that this thread was just locked:

I left DU nearly 3 years ago and it took me 3 days to remember why. [View all]
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4229105

I am not sure why, except for perhaps the prohibition about "whining about DU."

If that's the case, then I fully expect this thread to be locked, don't you?

I/m so tired of reading criticism of Obama on DU [View all]
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4226255

[sabrina 1]

45. Mmm, just read both of them. Both are Meta Threads, 'whining about DU' so yes, if that

is why they first one was locked, I would expect the second one to be also.

We'll see I suppose.

[woo me with science]

46. Yes, we will see.

[bvar22]

67. Some are more equal than others.

.

[woo me with science]

73. Well, desperate measures are called for

when everybody is onto the scam...

[20score]

7. It's been extremely obvious to every critical thinker that Snowden was right - from day one.

What his detractors have failed to realize (besides the fact that they are on the wrong side of a very important, era defining issue) is how bad Snowden makes them look by comparison.

I was in the military too. But following unconstitutional, immoral orders is a huge problem throughout history. Not the high ground it is pretended to be.

Thank you Snowden!

[FuzzyRabbit]

9. Many other people have "been labeled . . ."

Many other people have "been labeled a traitor, a betrayer, renegade, backstabber and many other things." Hare are the names of just a few of them: Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, Mahatma Gandhi, Martin Luther King.

Personally, I am against repression and secrecy. Plus, I don't think the mission of our armed forces should include spying on all American citizens. When Snowden signed up with the NSA he probably thought he would be working to safeguard America's freedoms, not subvert them.

[cprise]

16. What that tells me is

...you like the outcome of the conflict with MLK.

In any case, what the government has been doing to American civilians is unconstitutional. Its sad that you consider it such a time-honored tradition.

[Titonwan]

17. 23 posts?

I was in the military too, long ago. And I remember distinctly that the UCMJ states you do not have to follow an illegal order. It's bad enough you're a authoritarian, but you want to take all of our rights while yer at it.
The ONLY reason we're having this discussion is because of the brave action of a true American hero and patriot- Mr. Edward Snowden.

[BobUp]

24. Oh please

Define illegal. Let's go back in time to when Western Union allowed MI8 (black chamber) to monitor private communications. And it's continued to this very day. Are we shocked or surprised? We shouldn't be.

[WinkyDink]

34. So you liked that monitoring?

[valerief]

19. Ciao forever. nt

[Vashta Nerada]

22. I have no use for this post.

[Bobbie Jo]

29. And?

[WinkyDink]

33. I think you've got it arse-backwards. The "traitors and betrayers" are the men who flouted the

UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION.

[sabrina 1]

40. When you join the military and take an oath.

Here is the enlistment oath and the officers' oath:

The Oath of Enlistment (for enlisted):

"I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God."

The Oath of Office (for officers):

"I, _____ (SSAN), having been appointed an officer in the _____ (Military Branch) of the United States, as indicated above in the grade of _____ do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance tot he same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservations or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter; So help me God."

Surely you are not saying that if you witnessed something that violated the US Constitution you would remain silent about it? That would be a violation of that oath. I know it takes courage to speak out when one witnesses wrong doing, especially in the military, but like it or not, it is NOT anyone's duty to cover up for crimes against the Constitution and if they do they are in no position to criticize those who take that oath seriously and abide by it.

If Snowden took any oath it was to a Private Corporation, namely Booz Allen. No doubt he assumed he would be working for an ethical Corporation since they receive billions of dollars from the Federal Govt, OUR tax dollars.

But once he discovered that that they were violating the Constitution, not only should he NOT have broken that agreement, as a US Citizen he was OBLIGATED to do so. He had no obligation to put his job, or a Private Corporation before his country.

It does take a courageous person to do what he did. Most would probably choose to remain silent rather than lose their jobs or suffer the consequences they know they will suffer. Most of us would probably would be too much of a coward to do what he did. Which is why I am very grateful to those who have the courage he had.

[NuclearDem]

50. Sorry, but bullshit.

When I enlisted, I signed an agreement to not discuss or divulge anything pertaining to military operations, OPSEC and COMSEC agreement. I took it seriously. To not take it seriously means you would be willing to undermine the freedoms we all enjoy.

I enlisted too, and I actually served with AF ISRA, but this military secrecy = freedom nonsense is just appalling.

[JimDandy]

51. Oh puke. Really, that's all your ugly post deserves. n/t

On ignore.

[goldent]

57. While I agree with some of what you say

I think that Snowden didn't realize what he was getting himself into. In particular, I don't think he realized that no country would want him after what he did (beyond the few countries that will take him for political purposes). So if he had a "do over" I think he would do things very differently.

[bvar22]

66. Oh?

[font size=3]"I have no use for Snowden, he's basically been labeled a traitor, a betrayer, renegade, backstabber and many other things". [/font]

...and those of us here at DU observed the dedicated effort of the Propaganda Machine to LABEL Snowden as these things.
Is THAT all it takes for you?

If FOX News "labels" someone a "traitor".... then thats good enough for you?

You better come to DU with a better game than THAT if you want to be taken seriously.


Massive Government Secrecy and Democracy can not co-exist.
Persecution of Whistle Blowers and Democracy can not co-exist.
Government Surveillance of the citizenry and Democracy can not co-exist.

What kind of a country do YOU want to live in?

[Cryptoad]

4. Snowdens Christmas Message should have been

the Age of Privacy is Dead and gone forever!

[woo me with science]

6. Thank you, Edward Snowden.

[LuvNewcastle]

8. Those are beautiful words.

I really hope it's not too late to turn the tide on the evils our government and others are committing against the people. I don't think voting will stop it; it's too entrenched. I believe it's going to take massive protests around the globe to end this shit. I hope people are able to put down the Cheetos, turn off the reality shows or their computers and do what needs to be done.

Don't read violence into this post; I'm not talking about violence.

[Enthusiast]

10. Zero privacy for citizens but ultra secrecy for the government and corporations.

This does not sound like a healthy condition. No wonder our nation is sick.

[woo me with science]

11. +100000

[Vattel]

15. well-said

[adirondacker]

59. Spot on. It has the stench of Authoritarianism which doesn't bode well for the Public. nt

[Enthusiast]

12. Recommended X 1000!

[ProSense]

13. 15 Current Technologies A Child Born Today Will Never Use

15 Current Technologies A Child Born Today Will Never Use (2012)
http://news.yahoo.com/15-current-technologies-child-born-today-never-142409696.html

Have a sad?

Together we can find a better balance, end mass surveillance and remind the government that if it really wants to know how we feel asking is always cheaper than spying.

The NSA wants to know how you're feeling!!!

[sabrina 1]

41. Why would they have to ask US? Don't they KNOW already?

[Eko]

14. Bit overblown in his statements isnt he?

1.'A child born today will grow up with no conception of privacy at all,'
First of all, to be able to see into the future is amazing, whatever. What is he saying that the governments will have cameras in bathrooms, showers, bedrooms? I have a "conception" of large intergalactic empires and they probably don't exist but I can still conceive of them. Somehow the government is going to take away our ability to conceive of things, yeah right.
2. "Recently, we learned that our governments, working in concert, have created a system of worldwide, mass surveillance, watching everything we do."
Everything we do huh? Everything?
3."are nothing compared to what we have available today," and a child born today will "never know what it means to have a private moment to themselves, an unrecorded, unanalyzed thought."
Once again I wonder at the ability of Snowden to see into the future that the government will be able to read our thoughts.

Don't get me wrong, I am against our government spying on us, but to make ridiculous fear mongering claims is pretty bad also.

[randome]

23. "What is he saying," you ask?

He's saying "Shit, I really fucked up and now I'm stuck in Russia and won't someone help me get the hell out of here??!!"
[hr][font color="blue"][center]"If you're bored then you're boring." -Harvey Danger[/center][/font][hr]

[sabrina 1]

42. I think he is wrong in terms of when this will happen. Children today are already learning not to

expect or that they have any privacy.

Facts are facts, and people ARE in fear of the violation of their rights. IF someone confirms those fears, with facts, they are doing the people a great service.

There is no need for him to see into the future. Are you saying he is lying and that the US Government is spying on every citizen? Because I don't think there is any more doubt about it now.

And once this got into a REAL COURT, not the 'secret court' that has been rubberstamping these violations of people's rights, not even issuing warrants until AFTER THE FACT, a REAL JUDGE elected by the PEOPLE, not appointed by Republicans, has now stated clearly that what the NSA is doing is a violation of the Constitution.

One thing I've noticed about Snowden's detractors, they have yet to accuse him lying.

And they don't seem to have a problem with Clapper, former CEO of Booz Allen, same Security Contractor that Snowden worked for, lying to Congress.

Because Snowden didn't lie. Clapper lied, but not Snowden.

[Eko]

80. See here now,

I created numbered points to give the "Snowden is a hero" crowd an easy way to present a rebuttal. Didnt happen. The guy is a fear mongering libertarian al la Rand Paul. Its not what he did but how he is doing it and it is discouraging to see progressives pushing his fear mongering against all logic. I'm disappointed, I dont mind being wrong, I just expected a better argument.

[BobUp]

18. Um, It's already too late, the horse left the barn long ago

<enter sarcasm> Too bad Snowden wasn't around in 1918, he could have blown the whistle on Western Union. <\end sarcasm>
Western Union allowed MI-8 to monitor telegraphic communications passing through the company's wires until 1929.
Jointly supported by the State Department and the War Department, the chamber persuaded Western Union, the largest U.S. telegram company, to allow government officials to monitor private communications passing through the company’s wires.

[sabrina 1]

44. Yes, it is too bad. We will always need Whistle Blowers because there will always be

those who will abuse their power.

Surely you are not saying that because something that was wrong happened in 1918 it is nothing to be concerned about now.

We had laws passed to prevent these things from happening.

And that is because there have been checks placed on this kind of abuse when the situation arises over time.

But this time, using 9/11 as an excuse for every violation of rights, these Private Security companies have been allowed to get completely out of control, until now.

And eventually there will be a correction again. And despite that, it WILL happen again, and again the people will have to reign in the criminals who violate our Constitutional Rights.

I hope you know that it is no argument against Snowden's revelations to point to something WRONG happening a century ago.

All that does is to show us we can never become apathetic.

As Ben Franklin said after signing the Constitution to a woman who asked what they had been doing

"We have given you a Constitution Madam, IF you can keep it."

Well, we like our Constitution. Without it this country would be over run by power hungry, greedy criminals who would serially abuse human rights. They manage to do it anyhow, periodically, such as in 1918 and several more times, during the Nixon era eg, and now, and if we want to keep it, we have to be vigilant and thankfully there are people like Snowden and Manning and Binney among others, who take Franklin's warning seriously.

[jazzimov]

20. Well, actually, when he says

"'A child born today will grow up with no conception of privacy at all" he is correct, but it has nothing to do with the government.

We give our information out for loyalty points, which gives the company permission to track our purchases and share this info with anyone they choose. We choose internet browsers and search engines which track our every movement on the internet. And, they are free to choose to share that info with anyone they want. We download programs and click the "I Agree" button without actually reading the TOS. We use our cell phones and sign contracts without reading them that give the wireless company to track every call we make and share that info with whomever they choose.

Yes, every move you make is being tracked - but not necessarily by the government: they need a warrant. Your every move is being tracked by private corporations - because you gave them permission to do so.

Yes, YOU gave them permission to track you. Because you were too lazy or too much in a hurry to read the fine print.

[BobUp]

26. Yes

You are absolutely correct. Banks, credit card, debit card issuers hold the same basic agreement to use your information whichever way they feel is necessary too, we signed "agreements" that only an attorney could even begin to comprehend.

A friend of mine told me a few years ago that corporations, banks and yes, even the government knows more about you, than you know yourself.

Snowden is only about 100 years late with his revelations. LOL.

Now that he's come out and exposed a fraction of how and what government does, our president is going to look into limiting what government can do in regards to spying and not spying. Like that'll get any traction with our legislators.

If Snowden would have used proper channels in trying to expose something, I'd have more respect for him.

For people who use the new electronic gadgets like IPhones, IPads, Tablets, laptops, etc. let it be known to you that electronic communications of any type, wired or wireless is the least secure way to transmit your messages and what you might want to purchase. The most secure manner of communication is either via mail or courier.

That's how the US Government tracked Bin Laden for the kill. He ceased using cell phones and began using couriers, but they caught up to him eventually.

[KoKo]

28. The Government doesn't Need a Warrant for Meta Data Collection

The ongoing Snowden Documents have revealed that.

I know you are a DU'er whose been here long enough to read enough about Snowden and the many articles about his Revelations posted not to post such a thing unless you didn't read or maybe you just have some other reason you are not willing to share?

You blame our Surveillance State on our clicking through an agreement and NOT SIGNING IT when we need to be able to Access the Internet for Job Work or Social Reasons?

[bvar22]

74. "Nothing to do with the government"?

Now THAT is BOGUS.

Yes. Some people give some info to private corporations,
as you point out WITH their permission.
Corporations also collect massive amounts of marketing data just by observing little things like what TV channels one watches.

Where you drove off the road and into the ditch is when you posted (and posited) that ,
" it has nothing to do with the government. "

Corporate spying does NOT preclude Government Spying.
To say that because Corporation collect data on Americans, Government Spying on the citizenry does NOT exist
is pure diversionary nonsense.

[LovingA2andMI]

21. Thank you Edward Snowden...

You are a true American Hero for telling us what OUR so-called Democracy Principled was and is doing to us.

[madrchsod]

25. "no conception of privacy"

ok... i suggest that you start with your friends in russia.

[sabrina 1]

47. Do you know why he is in Russia? You know he was not planning on going to Russia?

He is there because the US Government made sure he stayed there. Russia was a stopover flight but the US Government took away his passport, forcing him to remain there.

Why do you think the US Government WANTED him to remain in Russia? A lot of people have been asking that question.

I'm afraid you'll have to come up with some other way of snarkily attacking him because the 'Russia' one only raises questions about the US Government forcing him to remain in Russia. Got any idea yourself about why they do such a thing?

[goldent]

55. Snowden is free to return to the US

His passport is not valid to travel, but he can go to the US embassy in Russia, explain he is an American citizen w/o a valid passport, and they will help him get back home. This is done all the time. Of course, upon arrival in the US the FBI would immediately take him into custody, but that is a different matter.

[sabrina 1]

64. Why did they US Government force him to remain in Russia?

What was their purpose? I just saw someone claim here that HE chose Russia as a destination, that is patently false.

And no, he is NOT free to return to this country. Well, if he wants to end up tortured like Chelsea Manning, kept in isolation 'for national security reasons' for years etc. He has a much freedom as the Chinese dissidents who have sought and asylum in this country, who are wanted in their own country.

The inhumane treatment of Whistle Blower, Chelsea Manning guaranteed that future Whiste Blowers from now on will have no choice BUT to seek asylum elsewhere.

[goldent]

69. The US Justice department invalidated his passport to try to stop and capture him

Of course, the nearly all of the rest of the world didn't want him anyhow, so he was pretty much stuck. And President Obama publicly called for Russia to turn him over. So Snowden is very much free to come to the US, but of course he will have to defend himself in court. I have to admit, I don't think his chances are good. I think it would have been possible for him to be very careful about what he leaked, and maybe get acquitted. But he what he did was beyond the pale. I wonder how much the newspapers manipulated him.

[sabrina 1]

77. Wrong, again. He already had a destination, two actually, where he was offered asylum. So why again

did the US force him to remain in Russia?

And why was his passport rescinded? That was a gross violation of his rights, without due process, an authoritarian act mostly only done in countries where there is no rule of law, no due process. Another violation by a Government that is increasingly out of control when it comes to people's rights.

I see you are backing off from the false claim that HE chose to go to Russia. He did not, period.

Btw, have they rescinded any of the Bush War Criminals' passports yet? Even that would be a step forward.

How about the Crooked Bankers who collapsed the World's Economies? Any of them have their passports rescinded so we can find out what they did with all of our money?

It is reprehensibe for any Democrat to oppose Whistle Blowing especially when the crimes are so serious.

[goldent]

78. I think the justice dept handled him in a pretty normal way, given what he was suspected of n/t.

Last edited Thu Dec 26, 2013, 09:22 PM - Edit history (1)

edit for typo

[kelliekat44]

27. Really? I had no conception of privacy growing up either. What does that mean? nt

[WinkyDink]

35. It means you are either 12, or you don't know what you're talking about.

[HangOnKids]

54. BAM!

Right in the kisser.

[Windy]

30. until he explains why he went to china and russia first

after leaking the info, I can't support him and certainly don't and won't consider him a hero because he didn't have the courage to stay and fight to make change in this country. Kind of like playing "ring and run" as a child.

[KoKo]

31. But he has in the Guardian and Elsewhere. Have you not read?

Most has been posted here on DU...or do a Search.

[Windy]

72. Oh I have read his so-called excuse. I don't buy it

He is no hero. A hero stays to fight.

[2banon]

36. Interesting "Until he explains" He has explained..it just that you're not interested.

just repeating robotic meme.

[sabrina 1]

48. You need to ask the US Government why they forced him to remain in Russia. You surely know

that he had no intention of going to Russia?? The US Government, for some unknow reason and I would like THEM to explain this, FORCED him to remain in Russia which was merely a stop over point for him on his way to somewhere else.

They took away his passport forcing him to stay there.

Until they explain WHY they would do such a thing, I can't figure out what their motive was, can you?

They could waited until his plane took off from Russia if they didn't want him there. But they didn't, they chose Russia for him, he did not make that choice.

He IS a hero and it doesn't matter whether some people can't yet see that. Same thing with previous heroes during their time also. But history tends to straighten these things out and when our Constitutional Rights are violated it is the duty of anyone who knows it to report it to the people. That takes a lot of courage. I am glad there have been so many people who have that courage, but most of us do not.

[hueymahl]

52. Great Response

Had not thought to turn the whole "he fled to russia so he is bad" line back on itself. That is exactly what happened. Russia was never intended to be long term, but he was forced to stay their by US.

[2banon]

32. thanks koko!

[KentuckyWoman]

43. I still don't get the drama about all this.

When cable first got popular in the late 70's the whole country was talking about the government using it to watch us through the TV or at the very least track our watching habits. When home computers came out we developed a certain tolerance to our online activities being tracked. With cell phones even the folks who used to take the battery out of the phone to keep the government from evesdropping don't do so anymore. We've accepted so many road cameras that anyone who's ever picked their nose in the car has a photo stored in some government database. Most of us shop using a credit card in places that keep inventory with UPC. We knew on day 1 everyone who could would data mine the heck out of that. Security cams are so plentiful we long ago tuned them out.

Snowden has brought all this back to a conversation but this isn't exactly anything new.

[sabrina 1]

49. YOU may have accepted 'all this' but most people I know do not. What you are saying is

that when a government routinely violates people's rights the people should just get used to it???

Sometimes it takes YEARS, Decades, even more, before people finally stand up and say 'no more'. Before that happens yes, people try to get on with their lives because they know they do not have the power to end abuses and they become like abused spoused eg, they just 'live with it'.

But now it appears with Snowden's, and others', he is not the first since Bush began these abuses, that the people have finally had enough and they want laws passed to reign in these abuses.

The very fact of what you say, that people became complacent for a while, is why the abuses have escalated.

As a German Professor said when asked why the German people didn't rise up against the abuses sooner: 'it happened incrementally, you were uncomfortable with some of the things that were happening, you discussed it among your colleagues, but nothing was big enough to cause everyone to rise up an oppose it, you were waiting for that, but by then, it was too late'.

That is exactly what you are describing, apathy because it wasn't big enough to get every one on board to try to stop it, some, many HAVE been 'uncomfortable with it'. And so it got worse and worse and you may not have noticed, but people WERE upset, Civil Liberties Orgs have been trying to stop abuse of the new technology for a long time.

People like Ron Wyden and Udall among others, were upset and warning the people that 'if they knew what was really going on they would be very upset'.

And now it is completely out of control, because people, many reluctantly, accepted it.

And this is why 'all the fuss'. More and more people are getting more and more 'uncomfortable' with it.

And I don't know if this the 'big enough' event to finally get something done about it, but it is the biggest one so far and yes, people are very, very upset.

[KentuckyWoman]

60. Oh I agree some pull back is needed.

But Snowden and the media in general is acting like this is a new thing. It isn't and saying so is a little bit pointless drama. If you or I or anyone else wants to be effective at moving the pendulum back in our favor sticking with reality is helpful.

[6000eliot]

53. He's about 15 years too late for this prediction.

[Number23]

56. Yep. And most smart people already know that.

[FarPoint]

61. Snowden makes me nauseated.

He just did things the wrong way....in my opinion. He is neither a hero or a leader of anything.

[sabrina 1]

65. I am nauseated too, but not those who have had the courage to inform the American people

of the corruption and real threat to their rights and freedoms present within our system of Government, I am nauseated that our 'security' is still in the hands of peope like Bush Loyalist, Clapper and all the other Bush appointees at the NSA. I am nauseated that Bush policies are not only still in place but have even been enhanced, when we worked so hard to end them. I rememmber the outrage of Democrats on forums like this against people like Clapper and against Bush policies so it's odd to see anyone here now defending them.

What would have been the 'right way' to expose this massive corruption of our system of justice?

We already know what happened to the Whistle Blowers who DID use the system in place for Whistle Blowers. So that option is out from now on for any Whistle Blower.

So since that route was already corrupted, at least in two cases, and we all saw what happened to Chelsea Manning for doing her duty and reporting war crimes etc, I'm curious to know what other 'right' way there is available to Whistle Blowers in this country??

[FarPoint]

70. The way Snowdwen exposed the NSA problem was also incorrect.

Where he went to hide out is a sign of being traitor to America. He is no hero....yes the exposure needed brought to the forefront....how you ask? I don't know since it's not my cross to bear.

How much data he stole appears to be more than what was needed to expose the NSA spying tactics. How many top secret "secrets did he give to China and Russia? Who will they sell them to....Iran, Taliban or Al Qaeda...you think? There is more covert issues with Snowden. A true hero would return and face charges...that is what a real activist-hero would do to expose wrong doing and to evoke change...

Example; Nelson Mandela....he didn't hide out....he stuck with the goals.

[CrispyQ]

62. This:

"All I wanted was for the public to be able to have a say in how they are governed," the whistleblower told the Post. "That is a milestone we left a long time ago. "

[Quantess]

63. K & R

[gulliver]

68. Thank you for my freedoms, Edward Snowden!

Now my children will know what privacy is. They will be able to determine who they are. They will now be able to be who they want to be. The public will now have a say in how they are governed. Where would we be without you?

[Uncle Joe]

71. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, KoKo.

[BobUp]

75. Thread is a good read

thanks for taking the time to make me your pinata.

I agree with some here who state Snowden is not a hero, I agree, a hero stays and fights, a coward runs away and goes into hiding.

About security clearances;
I believe I signed something similar to this document when I enlisted and entered the career field of communications.
http://www.fas.org/sgp/isoo/new_sf312.pdf

I believe everyone who is to be granted a security clearance must sign this agreement.

I'm old school. When I began my career field in the military, we were always taught to whatever you see or hear, do not discuss what you're privy to outside of these doors. I took my contract with Uncle Sam seriously.

In the com center I was assigned to, we had civilian employees working alongside of military members and I am positive we all signed similar, if not identical agreements.

What is lawful, what is unlawful, that is the question.

Earlier in the thread, I pointed out that government wiretapping and interception of civilian communications began with the telegraph and teletype, back to 1918 and possibly earlier than that, we might never know.
Like I stated before, it's a bit late to be outraged or upset that our government spies on it's citizens, if we wanted to stop it, the movement to do so is only about 100 years, too late.

[BlueCheese]

76. Apparently one needs to volunteer to face a firing squad at dawn to be a true hero.

Or allow oneself to be thrown into a Supermax for the rest of your days, enduring a living death for the next sixty years, never to be heard from again. Charles de Gaulle, the Dalai Lama, and everyone else who ever fled to exile are quislings and traitors.

Giving up a comfortable lifestyle in Hawaii to warn your fellow Americans about the massive overreach of their government is a coward's way out. Becoming persona non grata in your own country for the indefinite future is for the infirm and doddering. Making enemies of the most powerful government in the world, and all its allies, is for the weak and witless.

Or so we are being asked to believe.

[KoKo]

79. It's still Christmas..Time of Peace and Hope...and Snowden Gave it to US...

after the long days of dark.

So...I am kicking this in honor of Snowden's "Truth to Power" to "Light Up Our World" and reveal the DARK that has engulfed us in these past DECADES of American Travail with our "Democracy/Republic Experiment!

It's all we can do ...but, we WILL NOT GIVE UP! 's

[whistler162]

81. F for history knowledge!