Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Snowden Publishes "A Manifesto For the Truth"

samzenpus posted about 8 months ago | from the please-don't-throw-away-the-key dept.

Privacy 398

wjcofkc writes "In the turbulent wake of the international uproar spurred by his leaked documents, Mr. Snowden published a letter over the weekend in Der Spiegel titled, "A Manifesto for the Truth". In the letter, Mr. Snowden reflects on the consequences of the information released so far, and their effect on exposing the extent and obscenity of international and domestic surveillance, while continuing to call out the NSA and GCHQ as the worst offenders. He further discusses how the debate should move forward, the intimidation of journalists, and the criminalization of the truth saying, 'Citizens have to fight suppression of information on matters of vital public importance. To tell the truth is not a crime.'"

cancel ×

398 comments

First! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45324589)

First.

how long (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45324611)

will this stay on this board and not be deleted?

Re:how long (5, Interesting)

Runaway1956 (1322357) | about 8 months ago | (#45325099)

How long? I want to know how long until Snowden is given a medal by congress. He deserves a Gold Medal, at least as much as a Walt Disney, or Roberto Clemente, or a Danny Thomas. Browse the list yourself - some of the people who have been awarded a Gold Medal may have sacrificed more, or done more than Snowden. But Edward stands head and shoulders over a mere sports figure, or a Hollywood icon.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Congressional_Gold_Medal_recipients [wikipedia.org]

Re:how long (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45325535)

... until girlintraining starts ranting about Snowden?

in the U.S. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45324615)

...where we currently have a corporate/government cabal, it is, truth actually a crime, actually.

Re:in the U.S. (5, Insightful)

TWiTfan (2887093) | about 8 months ago | (#45324729)

truth actually a crime, actually

Only if it's truth that embarrasses the government and corporations that rule this country. You're free to tell all the benign truth you wish, citizen. You may also debate the merits of which of the two allowed parties is more worthy of your vote, that of Kang or that of Kodos.

Re:in the U.S. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45324757)

truth actually a crime, actually

Only if it's truth that embarrasses the government and corporations that rule this country. You're free to tell all the benign truth you wish, citizen. You may also debate the merits of which of the two allowed parties is more worthy of your vote, that of Kang or that of Kodos.

I knew it would not be long before the Trufers hopped on this thread.

Re:in the U.S. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45324821)

Since when did a healthy distrust of the government and corporations make one a truther?

Re:in the U.S. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45324871)

Since they started lying. Which was shortly after communication was developed. Join us. Become truthier.

Re:in the U.S. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45325523)

Are you a turfer then?

Re:in the U.S. (5, Insightful)

Joce640k (829181) | about 8 months ago | (#45324811)

I especially liked the part where they told him that he did it wrong, that telling the newspapers was bad.

The correct course of action was to call the people in power and let them know they're spying on the population.

Re:in the U.S. (4, Funny)

SJHillman (1966756) | about 8 months ago | (#45325185)

But would they spy on the call to themselves to let them know they're spying? And would they know they were spying on the call about spying on the call about spying on the call about spying on the call...

This has been another edition of Meta Monday.

Well that wasn't very long (5, Funny)

korbulon (2792438) | about 8 months ago | (#45324617)

More like a minifesto.

Re:Well that wasn't very long (1)

Austrian Anarchy (3010653) | about 8 months ago | (#45324799)

More like a minifesto.

Actually quite refreshing as manifestos go. For some reason most folk do not remember that the Communist Manifesto was much more that the ten bullet points found at the end of Chapter 2. The later Fascist Manifesto is a long-winded shameless ripoff of the ten bullet points too, but the sections were labeled and points numbered. Somewhere along the way Mr. Snowden did not find the manifesto template that was perfected before him.

Re:Well that wasn't very long (4, Funny)

gmuslera (3436) | about 8 months ago | (#45324983)

The alternative is most people saying "tl;dr", specially here.

Aww.. thats a shame.. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45324623)

Manifesto... thats the primary keyword for COMPLETE NUTJOB.

And there went his credibility... Just when he was starting to do some good.

Re:Aww.. thats a shame.. (4, Insightful)

TWiTfan (2887093) | about 8 months ago | (#45324675)

He's going to be portrayed as a complete nutjob by the American corporations/government and their press lackeys no matter WTF he calls it.

Re:Aww.. thats a shame.. (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45324895)

He's going to be portrayed as a complete nutjob by the American corporations/government and their press lackeys no matter WTF he calls it.

There's an excellent reason for that, he is a chucklehead sex addict traitor who sold his country down the river for a ton of publicity, a small portion of it right here on Slashdot.

Oh, the US is such a great country it doesn't need such unseemly tactics as espionage, does it? We just need trust and understanding for our fellow man. Overwhelm the aggressive intentions of Al Qaeda, al Shabab, Hezbollah, Iranians, North Koreans, Chinese, and Russians through kindness and goodwill.

Nutjob.

Re:Aww.. thats a shame.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45324991)

Cold Fjord, please go.

-- Ethanol-fueled

Re:Aww.. thats a shame.. (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45325159)

It's like posting something in favor of gun control on a site lousy with NRA members... you're automatically assumed to be Nancy Pelosi.

Re:Aww.. thats a shame.. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45325457)

Hey mods, why is my post considered any more "flamebait" than those of Snowden supporters? I won't say that you can't handle the truth, but it's obvious that you can't handle give and take discussion.

On matters like this, every featured post has to support OUR point of view. Which is quite clearly the only POV held by intelligent, reasonable, thinking people who haven't been brainwashed by the government and large corporations. Like ourselves!

That's what a real forum is about.

- Slashdot

Re:Aww.. thats a shame.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45325557)

Turfer

Re:Aww.. thats a shame.. (1)

bill_mcgonigle (4333) | about 8 months ago | (#45324975)

wc tells me this 'manifesto' is 273 words.

That's at best an abstract, so using such words doesn't help and reflect poor usage (which surprises me - who added the word 'manifesto' anyway?). Snowden and his supporters should adopt the words that will do his cause the maximum benefit. Though I don't think we know enough to say for sure that he chose this word.

Re:Aww.. thats a shame.. (3, Informative)

Sique (173459) | about 8 months ago | (#45325577)

Please look up the meaning of the word "manifesto". It's a public declaration of your own goals and intents. Nowhere there is the requirement of at least 1000 words or seven pages or whatever your threshold seems to be.

To which all the U.S. politicians reply... (2)

TWiTfan (2887093) | about 8 months ago | (#45324633)

"Yeah, well here's our manifesto of everyone STFU, IF YOU KNOW WHAT'S GOOD FOR YOU!!"

Capitalism. (5, Interesting)

Joining Yet Again (2992179) | about 8 months ago | (#45324689)

Capitalism promotes selfishness.

Selfishness promotes control.

Control of information is a type of control.

Control of the government is another type of control.

So powerful people will control both.

And so the modern role of signals intelligence: to watch you, to separate the majority who are of no consequence, from the minority who run a serious risk of making a difference.

The solution is a scaling back of capitalism. And not a replacement with Soviet state capitalism, either, even though their surveillance had nothing on modern UKUSA.

Re:Capitalism. (5, Insightful)

MickyTheIdiot (1032226) | about 8 months ago | (#45324739)

The problem in the US is that the debate is controlled by idiots... and calling them idiots is being nice.

Every debate we have in the US right now becomes a false dilemma. "Scaling back" capitalism, or doing anything that falls in the middle ground between socialism and capitalism, simply gets a person labeled a "communist" or worse. So we can't have debates.

Our last two presidential cycles should have included debates about corporate power but they didn't. This is because we have a certain group of people controlling the agenda.

Re:Capitalism. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45324755)

So you are saying that less freedom is the solution to governments stealing our freedom?

Re:Capitalism. (4, Insightful)

Joining Yet Again (2992179) | about 8 months ago | (#45324825)

"Capitalism" and "freedom" are not synonymous, no matter what Ayn tells you.

Capitalism is an ideal, some elements of which may promote freedom in any given society.

Re:Capitalism. (4, Insightful)

MickyTheIdiot (1032226) | about 8 months ago | (#45324951)

It seems to me unfettered capitalism is pretty much a recipe to *reduce* freedom. Eventually you have a poor class that doesn't have the freedom to do anything at all and a rich class that can do anything. That ends up being a net loss.

Re:Capitalism. (4, Interesting)

Joining Yet Again (2992179) | about 8 months ago | (#45325063)

I would agree entirely. This is why the capitalism qua religion which has emerged since Reagan+Thatcher is so dangerous (and why China is laughing so so loudly).

Re:Capitalism. (4, Interesting)

bill_mcgonigle (4333) | about 8 months ago | (#45325113)

Eventually you have a poor class that doesn't have the freedom to do anything at all and a rich class that can do anything.

Actually that's the empirical result of the current fascist [econlib.org] policies in the US. Of course, authoritarian socialists call this 'capitalism' to try to re-frame the debate as one between fascism and socialism, but since fascism is a flavor of socialism, socialism actually has the burden of proof vs. capitalism.

Let's try doing away with corporations first, and then we can have the debate about which is working better. I suspect capitalism will win, but it will always fail if governments pick the winners and losers, because that destroys the basis of capitalism, which is information flow based on money. From an information theory perspective, socialism has several bottlenecks that will always result in a sub-optimal solution, but so does fascism.

And that's just the utilitarian perspective, for those who wholly discount freedom and are indifferent to violence. Since the socialists/fascists have taken control of the money supply, minimum wage has fallen from an inflation-adjusted $22/hr to $7 per hour (in 2013 dollars), so they have quite a lot to answer for if they want to claim superiority on class distinctions.

Re:Capitalism. (2)

Joining Yet Again (2992179) | about 8 months ago | (#45325329)

but since fascism is a flavor of socialism, socialism actually has the burden of proof

Since eggs should be opened at the little end, big-endians actually have the burden of proof.

Re:Capitalism. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45325409)

Couldn't come up with a real response, so you resorted to ridicule. How typical.

Re:Capitalism. (2, Insightful)

Joining Yet Again (2992179) | about 8 months ago | (#45325511)

Illustrating how the opponent's argument is unsound is a real response.

Next time, should I write more than I need to?

Re:Capitalism. (2)

Hillgiant (916436) | about 8 months ago | (#45325473)

We casually accept tyranny from our employer that we would never accept from our government. And in this economy, it is not practical to abandon an employer over our rights because (a) other employers are just as bad, and (b) they ain't hiring.

Re: Capitalism. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45325481)

Not if you weight freedom by dollars instead of by people.

Re:Capitalism. (1)

theshowmecanuck (703852) | about 8 months ago | (#45325461)

I know... we should adopt German style socialism! Wait a minute. No, never mind, scratch that.

It's a shame (5, Insightful)

darrellg1 (969068) | about 8 months ago | (#45324705)

that this will go to waste. No mainstream media in the US will report this, and if they do, it will be spun into a negative light. Now we got posters on here, the Guardian, and other sites that are obvious shills or just plain dumb.

Re:It's a shame (0)

Sarten-X (1102295) | about 8 months ago | (#45324743)

You mean the ones who disagree [c2.com] ?

Re:It's a shame (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45324749)

I agree the fans are just plain dumb but how is that constructive?

Re:It's a shame (2)

TWiTfan (2887093) | about 8 months ago | (#45324769)

I saw it mentioned this morning on CNN. Of course, being the good government lick-boots they are, they were mocking it and parading out politician after politician to deride it.

Re:It's a shame (1)

bill_mcgonigle (4333) | about 8 months ago | (#45325009)

I saw it mentioned this morning on CNN.

So, is this manifesto a good thing or a bad thing [mediaite.com] ?

Re:It's a shame (1)

darrellg1 (969068) | about 8 months ago | (#45325277)

Exactly my point. I'm still confused how my comment got marked Troll though, unless people either thought I was being snarky or didn't read the whole thing. I'm in full support of Snowden.

Re:It's a shame (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45324777)

I trust FOX news will publish a sane and balanced view of the manifesto.

Re:It's a shame (2)

Runaway1956 (1322357) | about 8 months ago | (#45325305)

You mean "fair and balanced". I've never heard anyone on Fox claim to be "sane".

Re:It's a shame (1)

Runaway1956 (1322357) | about 8 months ago | (#45325173)

I disagree. Even if all of us in the US were completely blocked from reading Snowden's words - he is something of a celebrity outside the US. The fools in Washington continue to be exposed and embarrassed over stuff as stupid as spying on Merkel. Snowden helps to solidify discontent outside the US. It all makes a difference, in the long run.

I really don't believe the TSA or any other intel agency is going to have free rein to do as it damned well wishes in the future. Whatever else may be true of presidents and congress critters, it is also true that none of them enjoy being embarrassed publicly.

Yes it is (5, Insightful)

Sarten-X (1102295) | about 8 months ago | (#45324709)

To tell the truth is not a crime.

Yes, it is. You may have some moral justification, but it can still be a crime. In the US, telling the truth about intelligence techniques to real and potential enemies is a crime, even if you also tell the public. Snowden broke the law, and is now a criminal evading law enforcement, but he satisfied his own conscience.

Re:Yes it is (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45324805)

To tell the truth is not a crime.

Yes, it is. You may have some moral justification, but it can still be a crime. In the US, telling the truth about intelligence techniques to real and potential enemies is a crime, even if you also tell the public. Snowden broke the law, and is now a criminal evading law enforcement, but he satisfied his own conscience.

Interesting view. You do realize that in this case, 'potential enemies' refers to the entire population of the US?
One might ponder the aims of such a government.

Re:Yes it is (1, Informative)

ZouPrime (460611) | about 8 months ago | (#45324989)

The US government isn't pissed about Snowden because "the entire US population" learned about their foreign eavesdropping operations, but because foreign intelligence agencies did.

Re:Yes it is (4, Insightful)

aaaaaaargh! (1150173) | about 8 months ago | (#45325165)

The US government isn't pissed about Snowden because "the entire US population" learned about their foreign eavesdropping operations, but because foreign intelligence agencies did.

Contrary to what you think, they are pissed about both, and more so about the US population because it consists of their voters ...

Re:Yes it is (2, Insightful)

ZouPrime (460611) | about 8 months ago | (#45325299)

You think people are going to vote Republicans because they are pissed at the NSA?
The Patriot Act was voted under a Republican president.

Re:Yes it is (5, Insightful)

canadian_right (410687) | about 8 months ago | (#45325175)

Pretty much all foreign intelligence agencies already knew about what the NSA was up to; the USA government IS upset because Snowden informed the USA general public.

What the NSA was and is doing wasn't a big secret among governments. Many of the governments now complaining about being spied on cooperated with the USA to gather and share much of this information. Yes, they might be pissed that the USA crossed a few lines here and there, but they knew the USA was spying on everyone.

Re:Yes it is (1)

ZouPrime (460611) | about 8 months ago | (#45325289)

The fact that the NSA was spying foreign nationals wasn't a big secret indeed, considering it's the very reason of the organisation existence. But then, it wasn't a big secret in the US either.

The details of actual operations is a completely different matter. To take the most obvious example, the Germans certainly didn't know Merkel cell phone was compromised for so long, or they would have reacted before. Same thing for the Chinese targets Snowden disclosed. The Chinese knew the US were very interested in what they were doing, but it obviously doesn't mean they knew about the actual targets or the actual vulnerabilities use to compromise them. And that's where the big loss is for the NSA.

Re:Yes it is (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45325489)

I am not so much pissed about what the NSA was, is, and will continue to be doing.

I am much more pissed by the fact that my own (non-US) government appears to be puppeteered by our non-US secret service which in turn is in bed with the NSA.

I seem to recall one of the earlier ppt snapshots showed one of the espionage centers was located slap bang in the middle of Sudan (Khartoum), so I guess the Sudanese secret service is in bed with the NSA, the GCHQ, our secret service, and the Sudanese secret service.

I am pissed that there is zero democratically elected parliamental control over all this internationally inter-linked secret service stuff.

I am also pissed that most people fail to realize this.

Re:Yes it is (4, Interesting)

Runaway1956 (1322357) | about 8 months ago | (#45325369)

Well - we're back to the age-old complaint about government. Government is SUPPOSED to represent the people. Most Americans who care enough to have an opinion actually approve of Edward Snowden. The clueless and the apathetic just don't give a damn, and they'll go along with whatever government tells them.

Re:Yes it is (1)

naasking (94116) | about 8 months ago | (#45325555)

The US government isn't pissed about Snowden because "the entire US population" learned about their foreign eavesdropping operations, but because foreign intelligence agencies did.

Ha, keep telling yourself that. They all knew.

Re:Yes it is (5, Insightful)

Bill_the_Engineer (772575) | about 8 months ago | (#45325001)

You do realize that in this case, 'potential enemies' refers to the entire population of the US?

You may be surprised to find out that is not actually the case. A vast number of the US population demanded that we should give up some of our civil liberties in exchange for great security.

I argued against the idea but the political environment immediately after the 9/11 attack demanded that the government do everything possible to protect its citizens no matter the cost in money or civil liberties.

Re:Yes it is (2)

Runaway1956 (1322357) | about 8 months ago | (#45325395)

Thumbs up, Bill. There were so very damned few of us who were jealous of our rights. The lemmings flocked into line, to approve of everything the Stasi wanted. They couldn't be bothered to listen to the voice of reason.

Re:Yes it is (1)

oodaloop (1229816) | about 8 months ago | (#45324827)

So what is the legal alternative to his whistleblowing? How should he have his concerns addressed regarding unconstitutional surveillance?

Re:Yes it is (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45324929)

The US government has a ombudsman program that allows people to "blow the whistle" on programs or individuals that abuse their power. It can be done without the need for the full blown espionage and having to take up residence in a long time adversarial country and take a job working for the foreign government.

Re:Yes it is (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45325031)

When you report the crime of a nation to that nation, you lose. period.

Re:Yes it is (4, Informative)

davecb (6526) | about 8 months ago | (#45325065)

Regrettably, ombudmen generally aren't allowed to challenge the board of directors, only report individual managers' or groups' misbehavior to the board, who then decide.

It's a fast path to management, but it only works if the people it goes to are not the ones who've created or signed off on the misbehavior.

Commons committees used to be the better alternative to ombuds in government, as they were lawmakers themselves and could change the law out from under a misbehaving executive. Alas, here in Canada they've been reduced to collections of trained seals, and in the U.S. to deadlocks.

--dave

Re:Yes it is (4, Insightful)

Pav (4298) | about 8 months ago | (#45325313)

Persue things internally like Binney or Drake to get hammered and threatened before they were forced to go public? Worked for them didn't it. How about the Plames? It's sad that the only proven endangerment of operatives in any of the past years of leaks was Cheney taking political revenge against the wife of a dissenter. I'd imagine if anyone raises a concern these days anywhere in government there would be more efficient mechanisms to discredit and dispose of them... seems to be an Obama specialty. I personally know a whistleblower who tried internal mechanisms - the well oiled process saw a psychologist label her mentally defective before she was efficiently terminated. This was not the US government but a local council.

Re:Yes it is (2)

footNipple (541325) | about 8 months ago | (#45325081)

- Talk to a lawyer
- Perhaps make contact with the house intelligence committee and give them 90 days to respond
- If no response, make contact with attorneys in UK, France and/or Germany

There were many proper and very effective ways to deal with a crisis of conscience in this matter. Snowden chose not to do this because he thinks he is special.

Re:Yes it is (4, Insightful)

Clsid (564627) | about 8 months ago | (#45325155)

You really haven't worked with government before. Sorry to be so blunt man, but you are being too naive.

Re:Yes it is (5, Insightful)

aaaaaaargh! (1150173) | about 8 months ago | (#45325243)

If Snowden had followed your advice, he would have been arrested immediately and then charged with treason, espionage and/or theft of classified data.

Even his lawyer would have been gagged by secret courts under the Patriot act and nobody would have ever heard of any of this except as a little side note ("cranky former contractor in clinch with US government about handling of classified data").

Re:Yes it is (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45324835)

The problem is that for all we know only 10% of the data he release could be considered whistle blowing on the US, while the 90% is data that does more harm than good. Of course his fans will only concentrate on the 10% and pretend that all of his intentions were good.

Re:Yes it is (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45325265)

Thanks for making up meaningless statistical claims that support your own subjective point of view of the matter. That's always a valuable contribution to /. debates.

Re:Yes it is (5, Insightful)

fox171171 (1425329) | about 8 months ago | (#45324839)

To tell the truth is not a crime.

Yes, it is. You may have some moral justification, but it can still be a crime. In the US, telling the truth about intelligence techniques to real and potential enemies is a crime, even if you also tell the public. Snowden broke the law, and is now a criminal evading law enforcement, but he satisfied his own conscience.

Why is it that truth about a crime is a bigger crime than the original crime itself?

Re:Yes it is (1, Interesting)

Sarten-X (1102295) | about 8 months ago | (#45325161)

The surveillance causes some embarrassment and a loss of trust. Enemies being able to evade the surveillance can cause death.

...Not that the death is particularly likely, mind you, but aiding an enemy is considered by the law to be more heinous than breaches of privacy.

Re:Yes it is (4, Insightful)

intermodal (534361) | about 8 months ago | (#45325551)

The way they define "enemy" these days is one of the more damning revelations he made. Most of 'em aren't enemies at all.

Re:Yes it is (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45325291)

Why is it that truth about a crime is a bigger crime than the original crime itself?

I don't think the GP said anything about which one is bigger, but there are sayings about that: two wrongs don't make a right; the ends don't justify the means...

Yes, those sayings can also be applied to the NSA, but again, that doesn't give us/Snowden carte blanche to do anything and everything we want to take them down.

Well, not unless you want to give up on that rule of law thing. Soap box, ballot box, jury box, ammo box. When you reach that last one, you're basically saying the rule of law has failed and violence is needed to restore order.

Re:Yes it is (2)

melikamp (631205) | about 8 months ago | (#45325359)

Why is it that truth about a crime is a bigger crime than the original crime itself?

It is because the bigger the crime, the better it pays. The Chinese figured this one out a long time ago:

Steal a hook and you hang as a crook; steal a kingdom and you are made a duke. ~Zhuangzi

Re:Yes it is (1)

Vitriol+Angst (458300) | about 8 months ago | (#45325483)

To tell the truth is not a crime.

Yes, it is. You may have some moral justification, but it can still be a crime. In the US, telling the truth about intelligence techniques to real and potential enemies is a crime, even if you also tell the public. Snowden broke the law, and is now a criminal evading law enforcement, but he satisfied his own conscience.

Why is it that truth about a crime is a bigger crime than the original crime itself?

I wouldn't know for sure, but I suspect there are a lot of ID10-t errors of judgement and backbone in this country. This is a non-partisan "do you understand that transparency is required for a Democracy to function?" moment. It's really galling in that we've got countless examples of how an informed public responds well and delivers more bad guys than cover surveillance, and we've got numerous examples of intelligence failures DESPITE collecting everything along with the kitchen sync. Looking at everything, no matter how useless the information is a huge distraction.

These NSA fans and the people they support read too many spy novels and think that treating all humans as if they had rights with dignity and respect is a suspicious activity.

Re:Yes it is (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45324913)

In rebuttal': http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Andrews_Drake

Thomas Andrews Drake (born 1957) is a former senior executive of the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA), a decorated United States Air Force and United States Navy veteran, and a whistleblower. In 2010 the government alleged that Drake "mishandled" documents, one of the few such Espionage Act cases in U.S. history. Drake's defenders claim that he was instead being persecuted for challenging the Trailblazer Project.[4][5][6][7][8][9] He is the 2011 recipient of the Ridenhour Prize for Truth-Telling and co-recipient of the Sam Adams Associates for Integrity in Intelligence (SAAII) award.

On June 9, 2011, all 10 original charges against him were dropped. Drake rejected several deals because he refused to "plea bargain with the truth". He eventually pled to one misdemeanor count for exceeding authorized use of a computer;[10] Jesselyn Radack of the Government Accountability Project, who helped represent him, called it an act of "civil disobedience."

Re:Yes it is (1)

cavreader (1903280) | about 8 months ago | (#45325053)

This happened over 12 years ago but today people are acting like the outing of the recent SIGINT capabilities is groundbreaking news. Almost as shocking as the governments around the world claiming they had no idea the US had such capabilities.

Re:Yes it is (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45324963)

"Snowden broke the law"

Considering he hasn't stood trial you can't really say he's broken the law. And whilst he may be evaiding Law Enforcement, it doesn't make him a criminal.

Just thought I should remind the great nation of America about the whole "Innocent till proven guilty" concept of law. It's right up there with habeas corpus... oh never mind.

Even to the voters (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45325029)

" even if you also tell the public"

Even to the voters? Even to the Congress? How can we have a democracy in that situation.

NSA comic interpretation of the law is not a protected thing, it's a matter of importance for the public and the lawmakers.

Re:Yes it is - No it isn't (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45325209)

Another case of someone who thinks "the US" is that mythical Columbia representation of perfection, forever right and true. There is no crime from reporting another crime. There's no catch-22 either, it's pretty straight-forward - first offender, i.e. the US government, is the only offender. And Snowden, by reporting the crime (s) could never be committing a crime himself, as any NDA, bureaucratic or religious oath he took with his employers was immediately moot after the employers failed to abide to the ruling laws under which such agreement was made.

The laws exist exists to protect the people. One is not protecting the people while completely disregarding these laws, just by acting under classified cover and using fast-triggered "defensive" basis. Unlike such methods, laws were cooked and amended for hundreds of years to prevent surreptitious institutions from corrupting the system.

This is a lot more than telling the truth - it's getting out of the closet of being a mastermind criminal puppet. He just decided (by himself because he has the right to do so) that the paradox and loophole his employers try to create was not strong enough to make him a criminal too.

Re:Yes it is (2)

Runaway1956 (1322357) | about 8 months ago | (#45325345)

No - Snowden is a "fugitive" and a "refugee" evading a Gestapo-like intelligence community. He is not, and will not, be a "criminal" unless and until a trial is held to determine the criminality of his actions. It is for this reason that Russia granted him political asylum. Political arrests are so Cold War Era.

Re:Yes it is (4, Insightful)

sl4shd0rk (755837) | about 8 months ago | (#45325349)

Snowden broke the law, and is now a criminal evading law enforcement

Technically, yes, but technically so did the NSA; do we get to hold them to your same breed of logic? Snowden didn't leak pictures of the next supersekrit wizzbang gadget, or post Adobe Photoshop code on pastebin. He witnessed a system so out of control that there are no laws or legal system to contain it, or bring it back into balance. This isn't a matter of breaking an NDA agreement. Egregious breaches of the law need to be reported and the people who report them need to be given the freedom from legal consequence while those responsible need to be brought to trial.

unabomber (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45324745)

Awfully short for a manifesto.

Also: the Unabomber's manifesto was much more interesting

Re:unabomber (0)

Bob_Who (926234) | about 8 months ago | (#45325231)

The unibomber's stuff was much more explosive ... than an NSA Snow(den) job.

...and you lost! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45324761)

Manifesto. This is what transcends you from someone who may or may not have a point directly to lunatic/homicidal maniac.

Never write a manifesto. Write letters, essays, op eds, blogs, whatever you like. But the instant that you label it a manifesto, you're done. Snowden just lost most of his cred with me.

Re:...and you lost! (5, Insightful)

Sarten-X (1102295) | about 8 months ago | (#45324893)

The Declaration of Independence is a manifesto. It just wasn't titled as such.

A manifesto simply explains the motivations and reasoning behind actions. It's a common trait of psychopaths and sociopaths, because they feel that their actions are completely logical, but the rest of society just needs a good explanation to wake up and rally to their cause.

Snowden doesn't need to explain his motivation to recruit followers, as the public outrage over surveillance is already quite significant. This seems to be less of a manifesto, and more of a reflection.

Truthfesteroo Moscow! (0, Offtopic)

Bob_Who (926234) | about 8 months ago | (#45324775)

I wonder if it will be written in German or Russian...or in prison English.

Perhaps a Truthfesteroo with Pussy Riot and Assange and (Ms.) Bradley Manning would be a fun......overseas, that is.

I'm glad they spoke out, but it sure sucks to be them right now. Its sucks for a lot of folks right now. So let's Truthfesteroo!

Re:Truthfesteroo Moscow! (1)

Runaway1956 (1322357) | about 8 months ago | (#45325475)

So, you lump everyone who speaks out against government as being the same? Manning was a punk ass little shit, trying to "get even" with people he didn't like. Pussy Riot maybe has some valid points, but they fail to make those points very intelligible, instead choosing to shock people with outrageous behavior. Assange is at least a reasonable comparison with Snowden. Assange stands against ALL government secrecy, ours, the UK's, Russia's, China's - all secrecy. Yes - comparing Snowden to Assange is reasonable. I think Snowden might be the better man of the two, but it's a close call.

The Emperor's New Clothes (1, Interesting)

udachny (2454394) | about 8 months ago | (#45324883)

Hans Christian Andersen did not tell a fairy tale to little children, he told a political story about a system of lies and a whistle-blower but in his story the kid did not end up prosecuted. Guess what, Andersen wasn't familiar with the modern American Empire.

Re:The Emperor's New Clothes (2)

DaveV1.0 (203135) | about 8 months ago | (#45325225)

No, "The Emperor's New Clothes" is not "a political story about a system of lies and a whistle-blower". It is a story about yes-men and making people afraid to tell the truth lead to bad decisions by leaders.

Re:The Emperor's New Clothes (1)

Bob_Who (926234) | about 8 months ago | (#45325269)

Fractured Faerie Tales indeed.

Where are Boris and Natasha?

Why we need a radical like Rand Paul (1, Insightful)

MikeRT (947531) | about 8 months ago | (#45324947)

Or Kucinich. Only a radical like Paul or Kucinich would have the ideology and the stones to order the FBI to dismantle the DEA's special operations division and treat every employee of the same as a probable criminal conspirator who conspired to systematically perjure themselves to win cases in federal court. You won't get this from a "mainstream guy" because moderates are moderates almost invariably because they either stand for nothing or have the intestinal fortitude of a freshly butchered lamb. One of the best articles I've ever read on moderates and why moderates have such a pernicious history in American politics is "The Paranoid Center" [reason.com] by Reason.

Re:Why we need a radical like Rand Paul (2)

Bob_Who (926234) | about 8 months ago | (#45325371)

Thanks, for that link, MikeRT.

Like I've heard said: "Everything in moderation, including moderation."

Its time to bust out of this social stupor - Where is the outrage, America? Bipolar is better than comatose.

Truth is a pathless land (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45325037)

-- Jiddu Krishnamurthy

Check out on his writings.

Now he can continue the effort in Russia (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45325163)

Since Edward Snowden is a martyr for the truth, he can continue the effort in Russia, at his new job.

I'm sure his Russian benefactors are entirely committed to transparency and will back him all the way as he dumps details of their espionage activities. After all they have a such a huge, world renowned tradition of enforcing human rights and openness.

NOT

How the fuck would he know? (2, Insightful)

DaveV1.0 (203135) | about 8 months ago | (#45325201)

Seriously, he worked for the NSA, one agency in one country. How the fuck would he know who the worst offenders of international and domestic surveillance are? There are hundreds of countries with multiple spy agencies. He had access to some of the information about one and maybe some information about a few more. And, he thinks this qualifies him to make judgments about the internal and external surveillance apparatus of EVERY OTHER COUNTRY HE HAS NO INFORMATION ABOUT, including Russia, China, and North Korea? Really?

Lack of information about the internal and external surveillance apparatus of a country doesn't mean that country doesn't have an extensive and intrusive surveillance apparatus. It just means Snowden doesn't have information about that country. He literally doesn't have enough information to make that claim.

theres a drone with his name on it (1, Troll)

peter303 (12292) | about 8 months ago | (#45325341)

Might as well get all his thoughts published while he has a chance.

I thought as a condition... (2)

Virtucon (127420) | about 8 months ago | (#45325497)

Of asylum he was supposed to stop with all of the publication of information. [reuters.com]

A pledge not to publish more information that could harm the United States was the condition under which Putin said Snowden could receive safe harbor. "Edward assured me that he is not planning to publish any documents that blacken the American government," Anatoly Kucherena, Snowden's Russian lawyer said.

I guess we can all assume that Snowden is just a media whore looking for attention and to be honest, I think a good portion of the information being "leaked" is in fact made up. The last set of slides about the Google Data Center interception information was a sketch. Although we now know some of this information is valid, I'm starting to think that some of it is contrived. Certainly when dealing with espionage issues the notion of counter-espionage and disinformation campaigns [dailykos.com] come to into play. That way we all get confused as to actually what the US government is doing and how it's doing it. In the end we get confused about they said this and they said that and then we jump straight into the HealthCare.gov website fiasco and how Americans will lose medial insurance policies they've had and will have to get more expensive ones with higher deductibles starting in 2014. That and the government shutdown are great ways to spin this story to the back pages. Conspiracy Theorists in 10 years will look back and probably say that Snowden worked for the NSA all along and was actually spying on the Russians for the US.

YASS (2)

cptnapalm (120276) | about 8 months ago | (#45325521)

Yet Another Snowden Story. Somebody call me when Slashdot returns. I'm exceedingly tired of the Snowden Network.

There is no such thing as "truth" (2, Interesting)

vikingpower (768921) | about 8 months ago | (#45325541)

As much as I may hold Edward Snowden in esteem - and that is a lot of esteem, actually - I tend to get all prickly and uncomfortable when the word "truth" is used in such a pontifical way as in the "manifesto". There is no such thing as absolute truth, although Mr. Snowden seems to tacitly imply and quietly assume so. There is your truth, your way of experiencing things - and there is mine. What we call "truth" is the sum vector of all these tiny vectors.

Mr. Snowden had better used a word such as "information" or "openness". I am reminded of 2 Russian words, whose meaning lies in this direction, that became rather famous: glasnost and perestrojka.

WDYT ?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...