My (tongue-in-cheek) thinking was that if all children grew up believing that they were evil, then they wouldn't trust themselves with power. And if that were the case, then we wouldn't be in the present situation with government officials so convinced of their own goodness and trustworthiness that they can't understand how they might be doing something wrong.
The NY Times should have cooperated and hoped for a chance encounter with the NSA. The NSA came for me once and I'm much happier now. When it's time, the NSA will come for you too.
I made a Choose Your Own Adventure scenario that puts people in a blow-the-whistle-or-leak situation similar to Snowden's.
I thought this would help people understand that whistleblowing is NOT a viable option, that it is actually a DANGEROUS option that often leads to prosecution or unemployment. But I think most people who play through the game get pissed off when they see that whistleblowing leads to some pretty undesirable consequences. Is there any way to convince people that this is true?
Spying on leadership is a concern to people like us, but the Average Joe can't understand its effect. If you want to change his opinion, then you need a sensational story about the NSA spying on his wimmin.
We have 12 years of evidence now that leaking state secrets does nothing to help terrorists. What helps terrorists is constantly warning the public that terrorists are coming to get them.
This is spot on. The NSA is in its own bubble, and oversight is failing because the watchers are in the same bubble. They believe the same garbage that the NSA believes and no one in their bubble is questioning it. The only way to achieve real oversight is to involve the public.
Basically, life is a Choose Your Own Adventure and the NSA is being evil without realizing it. It's about time someone told them.
This is why it's so important for whistleblowers to be FREE, and not locked up like Manning was with no access to the press - so when bullshit like this comes from the government, he can defend himself.
Exactly. The impact of leaks is very easily undermined if the leaker can't defend himself in the public arena. Snowden was smart to flee.
Re: Re: He needs to learn the difference
An interesting variation on the security vs. liberty trope.
My (tongue-in-cheek) thinking was that if all children grew up believing that they were evil, then they wouldn't trust themselves with power. And if that were the case, then we wouldn't be in the present situation with government officials so convinced of their own goodness and trustworthiness that they can't understand how they might be doing something wrong.
Ah, so the TSA is selling indulgences. $85 and your soul will be absolved of terrorism.
Obama also refers to the leaks as "allegations" in that quote.
First time I've ever seen that.
We should teach children that they're evil from a young age. Problem solved.
Guardian...! New York Times...! ProPublica...! EVILDOERS BEWARE! They cannot be stopped! Together they form the hero known as... Free Press Man!
The correct response was
Lady Gaga: You can parody "Born this Way" if I can cover "Yoda."
These are my lee's favorite posts too.
The NY Times should have cooperated and hoped for a chance encounter with the NSA. The NSA came for me once and I'm much happier now. When it's time, the NSA will come for you too.
Privacy for me, not for thee.
Re: If you're not doing anything illegal, huh?
I get your point, and I think it all boils down to this: metadata is as useful to an enemy as it is to an ally.
I made a Choose Your Own Adventure scenario that puts people in a blow-the-whistle-or-leak situation similar to Snowden's.
I thought this would help people understand that whistleblowing is NOT a viable option, that it is actually a DANGEROUS option that often leads to prosecution or unemployment. But I think most people who play through the game get pissed off when they see that whistleblowing leads to some pretty undesirable consequences. Is there any way to convince people that this is true?
Rest assured, Eric Holder will investigate the actions of Eric Holder and report back to Eric Holder.
People should hire humorists to handle copyright issues. They cost less and achieve more.
Spying on leadership is a concern to people like us, but the Average Joe can't understand its effect. If you want to change his opinion, then you need a sensational story about the NSA spying on his wimmin.
We have 12 years of evidence now that leaking state secrets does nothing to help terrorists. What helps terrorists is constantly warning the public that terrorists are coming to get them.
This is spot on. The NSA is in its own bubble, and oversight is failing because the watchers are in the same bubble. They believe the same garbage that the NSA believes and no one in their bubble is questioning it. The only way to achieve real oversight is to involve the public.
Basically, life is a Choose Your Own Adventure and the NSA is being evil without realizing it. It's about time someone told them.
Anonymous wrote:
Exactly. The impact of leaks is very easily undermined if the leaker can't defend himself in the public arena. Snowden was smart to flee.Glenn Greenwald Responds to Widespread Lies About Him (on Cato, Iraq War, and more)
So the Independent has a Second Source for the NSA leaks and they don't want us to know it.