If Only Ed Snowden Worked On Wall St. He'd Be Free From Prosecution Risk

from the sad-but-true dept

Here’s a post on Google+ from Rick Falkvinge that says it all in a single picture:

Yeah, this one belongs in the sad-but-true category. Hell, if he were on Wall St., perhaps he could ask for a bailout too.

Filed Under: ,

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “If Only Ed Snowden Worked On Wall St. He'd Be Free From Prosecution Risk”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
110 Comments
out_of_the_blue says:

Holy cow! Mike takes a swipe at Wall Street!

Once past 30, you begin seeing through the lies of The Rich.

To celebrate this turn toward my views — if it is — and if he’s always agreed with me that Wall Street is nothing but thieves, then his fault for not making that clear — anyhoo, I’m going to take a holiday from commenting tomorrow.

Pragmatic says:

Re: Re: Re: Holy cow! Mike takes a swipe at Wall Street!

What do you expect from a woman who actually believes that the Straw Man version of Mike she has created to bash is the real deal?

Mike doesn’t share her views, nor is he turning. Correct me if I’m wrong but he comes across as being reality-based, center-right, slightly libertarian. I can live with that.

tqk (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:2 Holy cow! Mike takes a swipe at Wall Street!

Correct me if I’m wrong but he comes across as being reality-based, center-right, slightly libertarian.

Well, except for that “center-right”, I agree with your assessment.

I wish people would just stop using that left vs. right BS. It’s a meaningless, empty concept which was only briefly useful centuries ago in France. Today it’s as useless as liberal vs. conservative. It’s either a crutch for those too lazy to bother understanding mildly complex, nuanced concepts (degrading the ideas they attempt to express), or a club used to bash political opponents with intentional ignorance.

While I’m at it, “slightly libertarian” is goofy too. Either you’re describing individual freedom and liberty or its opposite authoritarian, possibly even statist. Eschew intellectual sloth! I do. 🙂

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:3 Holy cow! Mike takes a swipe at Wall Street!

Not sure what you’re ranting about. He never said left vs right, he just said what Mike’s position appears to be. Just because you favor a particular area or are in a certain camp, doesn’t mean you are against the other side either.

That’s just pundit talk.

Center-right implies mild right leaning view point, not that he hates lefts. Sometimes you don’t have an entire essay to outline the nuances of your political belief spectrum.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:4 Holy cow! Mike takes a swipe at Wall Street!

No, categorizing everything as left vs. right is pundit talk. ‘Center-right’ implies a binary, pundit-like view of the political universe and it’s hilarious you’d not only endorse that kind of bullshit but simultaneously suggest that rejecting it is punditry.

tqk (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:4 Holy cow! Mike takes a swipe at Wall Street!

Not sure what you’re ranting about.

No kidding? I’d never have guessed.

He never said left vs right …

Learn to read. The post I replied to called Mike “center-right”, and my reply was questioning the use of that empty phrase. I know the US is pretty much addicted to it (as well as liberal vs. conservative), but try to fight it. They both make you look foolish. The world and ideas are more complicated those things can describe, and you’ll be better off (less easily manipulated) without them.

Niall (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:6 Holy cow! Mike takes a swipe at Wall Street!

Well, as a (European) centre/centre-left (so way left in US terms) I don’t detect anything in Mike’s posting that makes me twitch and reach for the (gun I never had, could never have and never want) the way that, say, the average Faux/Daily Mail poster does. Or even most US Paulbots ^H^H^H^H^H^H^H libertarians do.

I think Mike does an admirable job of keeping his personal politics out of here. That, or he does a wonderful job of being ‘slightly right of centre’ without all the frothing hatred and fear that seems to usually characterise their discussions.

Pragmatic says:

Re: Re: Re:7 Holy cow! Mike takes a swipe at Wall Street!

That’s why I said “Center.”

You’re right, Niall, the American Right is scary at the moment and “Conservative” now means “nut job” and “Tinfoil hat-wearer.” I remember a time when it meant “Not a moonbat who wanted to make it legal to [insert craziness here]” or “sensible, rational person.”

It’s the sensible rationality that draws me back here time and time again.

tqk (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:6 Holy cow! Mike takes a swipe at Wall Street!

Oh, FFS!

It wasn’t my intention to cause you anger. I was just stating my opinion. You chose the perfect username for yourself. You’re pragmatic to a fault. “Whatever works, damnit!” I, on the other hand, am an idealist. As Aristotle said, “Things as they could, and should be.” “Whatever works” isn’t good enough (for me; YMMV). I want things “done right.” In IT, I want to make problems disappear never to return. I don’t want a (pragmatic) quick fix that just gets me to tomorrow.

Try, “Somewhat conservative, but generally reasonable and as fair as possible.

See, to me, that says nothing. Compared to Frank Zappa, Jon Stewart is conservative, but compared to the Pope he’s a flaming liberal. To me (and “Your Mileage May Vary”, certainly), the left vs. right, liberal vs. conservative scales carry no meaning and are incapable of shedding any real light in a discussion. They’re as empty as marketroid buzzwords; much sound and fury, signifying nothing.

Would you say Edward Snowden is conservative? He looks that way to me, but look at what he’s done. Richard Stallman’s never done anything even remotely like what Snowden’s done, but Stallman’s a flaming liberal!

Left, right, liberal, and conservative are out of their depth when trying to describe ideas. That’s all I’m saying.

Anonymous Coward says:

Can you do better ? "Look at what this guy did"

All we are getting is

“but he did this” and “look at what this guy did”

You see 4 years olds saying things like that in the playground, not supposedly intelligent people, or even Masnick.

Snowden has not been to trial so how can you compare what a Court decided on one case, (totally unrelated), and what you “guess” they would do to Snowden.

The US HAS DONE NOTHING TO SNOWDEN, except lay charges and seek his presence in a court of law.

But this does not matter to Masnick, if he ever see’s what he perceives to be an injustice, he will compare it to NO JUSTICE, Snowden has received NO JUSTICE, because HE RAN AWAY, these other people went to court argued their case and received (possibly lighter punishments) for being honest and up front.

Snowden has done none of this, he is not game to face his accusers, and is hiding to avoid having to do so.

But you just keep up the “but look at what this guy did and got away with it” “Look at what he said, and they ‘punish’ Snowden.

Snowden has not been punished (yet) he has not faced a court, and he has rejected his opportunity of a fair trial.
That is Snowden’s decision, he chose to run away.

At least all the other people you are trotting out have been upright enough to face a court and confront the charges.

Rikuo (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re: Comment held for censorship

Hi, dipshit! Great to see you! (Get it? I can see your comment…thus NOT CENSORSHIP) Surely is a good thing to know that you’re being paranoid about the wrong people. If you’re so worried about censorship, why is it you’re railing against Mike and not someone else…oh I don’t know…the US government maybe? Ya know, a little thing they’ve done called spying on pretty much everyone in the entire world, but please…not like that matters to you. The only thing that matters to you is trying to smear Mike.

tqk (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:2 Comment held for censorship

Ya know, a little thing they’ve done called spying on pretty much everyone in the entire world …

You forgot the bit about walling off the entire Guardian site from the US military. That’s censorship (though certainly a pathetically poor implementation of it).

Bradley Manning opens eyes. The US authorities use duct tape to attempt to close them. Pathetic.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re: Comment held for censorship

I’d like to hear your theory as to how Mike could possibly single you out for censorship. In technical terms, that is, not in emotional “everyone hates me” terms.

I mean, out_of_the_blue is still able to comment. bob is still able to comment. We also have a few ACs that are critical and some times embarrass Mike that sill are able to comment.

Are we supposed to believe that Mike has found the mythical “magic wand” that allows him to block only certain content? Or should we simply jump to the more plausible conclusion: that you are a waste of carbon?

horse with no name says:

Re: Re: Re:2 Comment held for censorship

I’d like to hear your theory as to how Mike could possibly single you out for censorship. In technical terms, that is, not in emotional “everyone hates me” terms.

I mean, out_of_the_blue is still able to comment. bob is still able to comment. We also have a few ACs that are critical and some times embarrass Mike that sill are able to comment.

Honestly, I have not idea why Mike has put essentially an entire country on the “automatically moderate comments” list, but there ya go. He does it like that and that is Techdirt Censorship at it’s finest.

You would have to ask him why he insist on censoring certain people. I think it just shows the same level of cowardly behavior he mocks others for.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:3 Comment held for censorship

out_of_the_blue, average_joe, darryl, hurricane head, you…

Wow, a country just for five people? Five people is essentially a country?

See, this is why no one believes your claim of how much time have you spent your life in China or Germany. If you think five people count as a country you’re hopelessly self-deluded.

horse with no name says:

Re: Re: Re:4 Comment held for censorship

You guys are clueless. I don’t know how Techdirt as censored other people, but I can tell you how I am being censored. Every post goes to “moderation” and requires that someone approve it before it gets posted. The cycle time on it is generally 24- 48 hours, usually making the comment meaningless by the time it comes out, the thread is long since past.

I have tried a number of different connections on different devices, using other posting names, assuring all cookies are removed, and so far, it appears that my entire country is blocked. The only way I can post (I tested) was via a proxy. So certainly it’s a country based / IP range based block, which is pure out and out censorship at it’s finest.

You guys should wake up. All the nice stuff that Mike talks about being against censorship and all that, and he does this sort of thing right in front of you. Why are you not outraged?

RD says:

Re: Re: Re:3 Comment held for censorship

“Honestly, I have not idea why Mike has put essentially an entire country on the “automatically moderate comments” list, but there ya go. He does it like that and that is Techdirt Censorship at it’s finest.

You would have to ask him why he insist on censoring certain people. I think it just shows the same level of cowardly behavior he mocks others for.”

Liar. You are making stuff up. You are not being censored (though, you SHOULD be, as far as I am concerned) nor is anyone. I have said some pretty horrific and scathing things here, and have never once had my comments held, delayed or removed, and I’ve been coming to this site for over 12 years.

There is the report button (which is NOT censorship) and your paranoid imagination.

horse with no name says:

Re: Re: Re:4 Comment held for censorship

Liar. You are making stuff up. You are not being censored (though, you SHOULD be, as far as I am concerned) nor is anyone. I have said some pretty horrific and scathing things here, and have never once had my comments held, delayed or removed, and I’ve been coming to this site for over 12 years.

RD, you are an idiot. Pay attention. If I write a post (including this one) it does not appear on the site at all – it’s held for moderation. It takes 24-48 hours for someone to bother to look at it, and about 90% of them never make it onto the site. When they do, it’s typically so late that it is no longer relevant.

As an example, I made the very first post in the doug englebart thread “horse with no name, Jul 3rd, 2013 @ 6:46pm”

yet, when I check Google cache for that thread “It is a snapshot of the page as it appeared on 5 Jul 2013 06:43:44 GMT” my comment does not appear – and there is no “block by the community thing”, because the community never saw the post. In this case, it took almost 72 hours for the comment to be “moderated”. In normal times when Techdirt is tossing up a dozen or more posts a day, that would mean my comment would have appeared when the post on page 3 or 4.

It’s censorship – but Mike doesn’t want to admit it and most certainly does not want to discuss it.

Pragmatic says:

Re: Re: Re:2 Comment held for censorship

To trolls, censorship is when we’re not huddled adoringly at their feet listening carefully to every froth-filled rant.

No one is automatically entitled to be heard, though Mike gives everyone, even the trolls, an opportunity to post here without having to log in. Yes, his hospitality gets abused, but as a favor to us, he lets us hide the posts we don’t want to see. That’s not censorship, it’s being sensible. Long live the report button!

U.S. Citizen says:

Patriot

Mr. Snowden confirms that which intellectuals knew to be true.

The citizens of this nation demand that our government operate under the framework of our constitution. Our government now fails to serve the citizens of this nation. What do the citizens of this nation do when the executive, legislative and judicial branches of government fail to protect us?

Our courts often punish the victims and reward the criminals.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: I get it now

or is it the other way around ?

If Ed Snowden was called something else, and he did not work for the NSA or a contractor of them, did not steal documents and did not provide them to a newspaper for personal gains, and did not run away to other countries, the US Government would still charge him as Ed Snowden and charge him for stealing NSA Documents ?

Anonymous Coward says:

none of those responsible for the Global Financial Meltdown has been imprisoned, as far as i know. and that was Bankruptcy for many countries, causing millions of people to lose jobs, to lose homes, to lose everything! it’s gonna take decades to recover from this! what Snowden has done is make the world aware of what the USA, with the help of the gutless fuckers in the UK, who daren’t say ‘no’ to the USA!, have been doing! more than anything, it has proved to be very embarrassing for the USA as no one should have to or be allowed to spy on their own citizens let alone those of allies! he is gonna be a wanted man for life now, will never see family and friends again, other than from the inside of a jail but hasn’t done anywhere near the damage that those in the financial industry have done and gotten away with! if any need hunting and jailing, i know who i would put in jail!!

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re: Re:

And which actor in this market determines the rate at which banks lend money and, by extension, the size of the reward for risky lending? Hum? Anyone? I’ll give you a hint: I could use the same hint here as above?

TL:DR Stop blaming the individual dominoes instead of the hand that tipped them.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:2 Re:

The rate at which money is lent had little to do with the circlejerk that fucked global economy.

Individual dominoes? wtf?

Other than non enforcement of the laws, how – exactly – did the fed encourage such bad behavior on the part of the banks, ratings people and friends ? Please be specific.

Banksters and cronies are laughing it up
1) make lots of risky loans
2) bundle them up in securities
3) coerce good ratings
4) sell to unsuspecting investors
5) short stock in those who bought said shitty products
6) get hand slapped and pay minuscule fine
7) no one charged, held accountable
8) no one goes to jail
9) profit out yer ass

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:

No if he was willing to face a court and answer his charges, and stop running away he would be free in a relatively short time.

But if he continues to choose to be on the lamb, and refuses to stand up for himself, and hide from the law, he will continue to be ‘wanted’.

Sure, if he fronted the court, returned to the US, did his time, then NO ONE WOULD WANT HIM.

tqk (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re: Re:

Some of us continue to hope there’s still some sense left in the USA (despite all the evidence to the contrary).

No if he was willing to face a court and answer his charges, and stop running away he would be free in a relatively short time.

Speaking of “evidence to the contrary”, QED. People like you shouldn’t be allowed to retain US citizenship. You haven’t earned it.

Anonymous Coward says:

Repost

I am reporting this comment because the article where I just posted it was a little ways back. In the article about protests today, someone suggested burning the flag. I disagree. A better suggestion is to fly it inverted. The people of this country are under attack from their government. The inverted flag is a sign of the distress that this attack has caused. Burning is a different message. The inverted flag is what is appropriate.

tqk (profile) says:

Re: Repost

The inverted flag is what is appropriate.

Good point (your whole post, not just this bit of it). For most of its existence, despite its many “hiccups” down through the years, the USA has been a beacon of hope to the entire world. I very much hope to see its people win this one against the forces of tyranny currently in its midst.

Happy Fourth, USA. Now buckle down and get to work! 🙂

Anonymous Coward says:

This shows only ONE THING

That you simply have NO IDEA what so ever what was the cause and effect of the Global Financial crisis, caused primarily by the sub-prime mortgage market and credit default swaps.
you really need to actually find out what is going on and do some serious analysis of your own country and its finances.

Anonymous Coward says:

Snowden a "Juicy Morsel" for the Russians

Juicy Morsel, that is what Russia said about the possibility of getting their hands on Snowden.

All the Governments who are considering offering Snowden asylum are doing so solely on the basis of what THEY can GAIN from getting their hands on Snowden.

Snowden is now just as much as an embarrassment as much as he intended to embarrass the US.

The massage he wanted to convey is long forgotten, and is rarely if ever mentioned. There is little agree or belief that it is unconstitutional. It’s also very difficult to impossible to reference this to the 4th amendment.

That from it’s reading, phone meta-data does not fall under your property or possessions.

Snowden has run out of options, it’s appears no country wants him, and after Assanges example, no Country will see enough political gains to warrant taking him on.

I do find it odd that Masnick and co. have decided to compare what the US HAS NOT DONE to Snowden to what they have not done with others.

Nor is Snowden “stateless” as he claims he is, this claim he is making is therefore A LIE.
Having your passport revoked does not revoke your citizenship, he is still legally a US citizen, he has a state (the US) he just does not want to go there.

He also rejected an offer of asylum in Russia, because he would have to cease releasing documents. He chose to continue to break the law as opposed to seeking asylum.
He wants to use the documents he has as a bargaining chip, except no one wants to deal with him. Basically HE’S SCREWED.

At least he’s learnt one lesson off assange, how to fuck it up, and make himself the subject of the story, not the message. I for one, have no sympathy for someone who does stupid things, and CONTINUES to do them in the face of all reason.

I hope he enjoys the next 10 years at a Russian airport. They should make a movie about it.. (oh wait)..

The Real Michael says:

Re: Snowden a "Juicy Morsel" for the Russians

“The massage he wanted to convey is long forgotten, and is rarely if ever mentioned. There is little agree or belief that it is unconstitutional. It’s also very difficult to impossible to reference this to the 4th amendment.”

Actually you’re wrong. The NSA’s unconstitutional spying program is constantly brought up all over the place.

“That from it’s reading, phone meta-data does not fall under your property or possessions.”

Aggregating swaths of personal info from private companies without probable cause is a violation of the Fourth Amendment, as is collecting all your e-mails, text messages and audio/video communications.

“Nor is Snowden “stateless” as he claims he is, this claim he is making is therefore A LIE.
Having your passport revoked does not revoke your citizenship, he is still legally a US citizen, he has a state (the US) he just does not want to go there.”

Considering what happened to Assange, Hastings, Manning and others, can you blame him?

“He also rejected an offer of asylum in Russia, because he would have to cease releasing documents. He chose to continue to break the law as opposed to seeking asylum.”

As opposed to the US government whose job it is to defend and protect the Constitution, then goes about setting up various administrations in order to violate it?

“At least he’s learnt one lesson off assange, how to fuck it up, and make himself the subject of the story, not the message.”

The mainstream media are the ones distracting from the message, not Snowden.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Snowden a "Juicy Morsel" for the Russians

You know, for all the whining you make of Masnick pointing the NSA’s flaws and overlooking Snowden’s, you’re very keen on ignoring everyone’s flaws but Snowden’s.

Hey, darryl, guess what – they recently cancelled big spying plans in Australia! Imagine that! A den of thieves, where George Orwell’s works are public domain, under no surveillance! Makes your solar panel dick sad, innit?

Rikuo (profile) says:

Re: Re:

Scared? How would three random words like that scare Mike? What do they mean? Is it an obscure reference to something? Or maybe…just maybe, a comment with just those words is being held simply because the spam filters have seen some idiotic dipshit try to enter comments with just those three words, over and over and over and over again, and thus, automatically learned not to allow it, with no human input.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re:

Hilariously, if you wanted to make a point you could have continued gathering your evidence (such as it is) and just posted it. But no, you had to continue showing the class how you still have the brain and maturity of a four-year-old, and how you’re so, so proud of it. That’s really helping your case, there!

Did momma overdose you on breastmilk as a kid, leading you to have this obsession with Masnick lactating?

Anonymous Coward says:

Kennith Ley and Burnad Madoff

Would probably disagree with your stupid posts.

Mb>”What do the citizens of this nation do when the executive, legislative and judicial branches of government fail to protect us?”

It is not their job to protect us, it is their job to UPHOLD THE CONSTITUTION AND THE LAWS OF THE REPUBLIC.

Period.

_____________________________

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

ENSURE DOMESTIC TRANQUILITY

PROVIDE A COMMON DEFENSE
Establish Justice

So basically your wrong.

Learn your own Constitution before you try to trash it, it just makes you look like an idiot..

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Kennith Ley and Burnad Madoff

The aim of establishing the Constitution was supposed to do those things and by upholding the Constitution, the government was, by extension supposed to do those things which is what their oath was taken to do. Instead they are violating the Constitution and claiming that these ends are necessary for the means. This is claim that all tyrannical governments make to attempt to justify their actions. If the law is outdated and needs to be changed, the appropriate response of government is to change the law, not violate it, try to hide it, and then make excuses to defend their actions when they are exposed. If the 4th amendment to the Constitution is outdated or flawed, the appropriate response would be to amend the Constitution, just as happened with Prohibition.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Ctrl-Alt-Speech

A weekly news podcast from
Mike Masnick & Ben Whitelaw

Subscribe now to Ctrl-Alt-Speech »
Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...
Loading...