In a major way, it doesn't really matter whether Snowden released NEW

[Jackpine Radical]

information about the extent of US surveillance. (I think he did, but I'm not going to get into a pissing match to prove it.)

Personally, I didn't know anything about the extent of it, but I have generally been aware of the potential for my electronic communications to be stored & monitored, & have tried to conduct myself accordingly. I don't think I'm unique in that regard.

The important thing in my mind is that in the Before-Snowden era, nobody was talking about it; and a lot of people were either in denial or cognitive oblivion about the whole thing.

Now, Post-Snowden, we are paying attention. Politicians from the far right like (ick!) Sensenbrenner to the middle-left like Wyden (there is no far left) are up & screaming.

Our allies, fearful of their own citizens, are hypocritically jumping down our throats about it (never mind their own surveillance programs or their collaboration with us). The hypocrisy is of far less import than the amazing international scope of the brouhaha.

For anyone who values freedom, who deplores secret courts using secret means to secretly authorize secret surveillance activities, Snowden and his associates have been a potential game-changer. And it matters not a whit if they are heroes or villains. The fact is that we are all now talking about a whole pile of corruption that had previously been hidden from sight, secretly festering at the core of our rights as citizens of the world.

In the past, a few of us have been aware, to some degree, of many very bad things that we were unable to alert the public at large to. Nobody would pay attention. Now, Post-Snowden, the public at large has at last awakened to one element of the worldwide power-grab that the Masters of the Universe, and their government lackeys, are in the process of enacting.

For that, we are in debt to Snowden and his supporters.

[Scuba]

1. Great post, Jackpine, thanks.

[Shivering Jemmy]

2. I doubt it's a game changer

There is no political or popular will to make any substantive changes. And there is no technical way to stop ubiquitous surveillance. Stop up one avenue and pretty soon there is a new algorithm to fill in the gap via information fusion.

[chimpymustgo]

3. We'll see. The debate has certainly shone a light on our moral compasses.

We are discovering a lot about who we are as individuals, and as a nation. Perhaps we can still decide what we will be. Perhaps not.

[JDPriestly]

13. Our government should not be acquring this information no matter what.

And we need to require private companies to permit us to get access to the information they think they have about us -- a sort of Freedom of Information Act that requires all private companies to provide the information they collect on any individual or group of individuals either regularly or upon request.

That would control it.

And the agreements and regulations need to be international so that a company or the government cannot merely outsource this capacity.

The German people and certain other Europeans would agree with us on implementing such a program.

Full disclosure.

[Laelth]

4. I completely agree. k&r n/t

-Laelth

[Jackpine Radical]

5. Love your sig line.

[Laelth]

11. Thanks. I haven't changed it since the Summer of 2009.

I have occasionally been criticized for my sig. line, but I still hold to its sentiments. The President, in many ways, has been very, very good. In other ways, he has been very, very bad.

Many here can not accept nuance, nor can they tolerate nuanced thinking. As far as I am concerned, that's their problem, not mine.

Cheers!

-Laelth

[bread_and_roses]

14. And I love yours too

truer words....

[think4yourself]

6. Elegantly stated.

Snowden said his worst fear was that nothing would change as a result of his actions. Had he taken a traditional route, nothing would have. Much of this is not new information to those of us following closely. Drake, Bamford, Tice, et al blew the whistle, had their lives and careers ruined and absolutely nothing changed.
He is a hero and a whistleblower, Congress is actually debating the issue. Some may not agree with his means but it achieved the right end. Finally.

[marions ghost]

10. Q&A Time in Congress = Finally

Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.), the chairman of the committee, said he was surprised that the programs had been kept secret for so long.

“Do you think a program of this magnitude gathering information involving a large number of people involved with telephone companies could be indefinitely kept secret from the American people?” Goodlatte asked.

“Well,” ODNI general counsel Robert S. Litt said with a slight smile, “we tried.”

http://www.dni.gov/index.php -- Director of National Intelligence


--------------------------

"We tried."

[Blue_Tires]

7. In an indirect way, that's what really disturbs me....

Just how many people *didn't* seemingly know or care for all this time...(Of course the congresscritters all claiming to be "shocked" make me LOL)...The NSA apparatus wasn't built overnight, and almost all of their offenses have been committed in plain sight...

But better late than never, and it is a huge step in the right direction...Right now I'm wishing for another 'Snowden' to do spill the beans about privacy invasions by corporate/financial institutions because that's going to blow everybody's mind...I also hope there is a similar national 'awakening' on environmental issues in the very near future...

[marions ghost]

20. The NSA apparatus was built

with the knowledge of some in Congress. Not too many, it looks like.

But still--it was built without the right questions EVER being asked.

The technospeak seems to have gone whooshing over their heads and they capitulated to vague notions of "security reasons."

This NEVER should have gotten this far. And much of it is still secret.

[Blue_Tires]

23. I'd contend all of congress knew about it and is trying to cover their asses

or at least they had the ability to know about it and were too ignorant/indifferent because they were too busy meeting with lobbyists, jerking off at their little meaningless subcommittees, fundraising, planning their re-election campaigns, fighting for their media spotlight on Faux or Press the Meat, attending all the beltway society parties, etc. etc...

[Jackpine Radical]

24. At a higher level, it doesn't really matter

how many in Congress knew, as long as they permitted the whole thing to grow & metastasize without ringing the bell. Whether it was a dozen or so on an Intelligence Subcommittee or the whole bunch of them, their knowledge meant nothing; the monstrosity was proceeding apace.

[Go Vols]

29. I think they knew too

article from 3.15.2012

The heavily fortified $2 billion center should be up and running in September 2013. Flowing through its servers and routers and stored in near-bottomless databases will be all forms of communication, including the complete contents of private emails, cell phone calls, and Google searches, as well as all sorts of personal data trails—parking receipts, travel itineraries, bookstore purchases, and other digital “pocket litter.”It is, in some measure, the realization of the “total information awareness” program created during the first term of the Bush administration—an effort that was killed by Congress in 2003 after it caused an outcry over its potential for invading Americans’ privacy.

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/03/ff_nsadatacenter/all/

[questionseverything]

30. the aclu's newest law suit says

The First Amendment guarantees the public a qualified right of access to those opinions, because judicial opinions interpreting constitutional and statutory limits on governmental authorities— including those relevant to foreign-intelligence surveillance—have always been available for inspection by the public and because their release is so manifestly fundamental in a democracy committed to the rule of law.

The government’s contrary view—that legal opinions of an Article III court controlling the constitutional rights of millions of Americans may forever be denied to the public, even if any legitimate interest in secrecy has expired or can be accommodated—is wrong. Indeed, if the government succeeds in depriving the public of the tools necessary to understand the laws passed by its elected officials, it will have eroded the foundations of our democracy. The government’s theory affects more than the public’s right to this Court’s opinions; its reasoning would likewise deny the public a right of access to the opinions of courts sitting in review of those opinions, whether issued by the Court of Review or even the Supreme Court of the United States. That result would defeat democratic oversight and undermine public confidence in our legal institutions.

////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

so no one knows everything yet

supporting the aclu is one way we can fight back

[marions ghost]

26. Yes but how much did they really know?

--Did they really comprehend the implications, based on what was sketched out to them? Did they just chalk it up to "Security," without imagining the EXTENT of the surveillance...you'd think the cost would be questioned if nothing else. But Alexander gets everything he wants.

The rationalization might have been, "at least there's one arena that's functioning well" (a little TOO well, as it turns out). While, as you say, they returned to their regularly scheduled program.

I'm not letting them off the hook in saying this. They have failed us miserably. But I think some of that is because they were kept in the dark and THEY trusted too much. I'm sure that some do regret that stupidity. I'm sure that others knew quite well what was happening and were complicit.

[WillyT]

8. HUGE K & R !!! - THANK YOU !!!

[navarth]

9. Agree. nt

[KoKo]

12. And, if it can bring renewed attention to other reports about massive suveillance

that never got "legs" then he has provided a framework that didn't exist before to start a dialog about how "We, the People" can take back control over an out of control Government.

Here's an example posted on DU today of a shocking story about NYC and Wall Street using taxpayers money to fund a huge security center to visually monitor the people who might be a threat to them. In 2011 it got little attention...but, reading it now it fits in with the dangers of the massive and growing Security Industry using our tax money for "private" security for Wall Street Bankers.

2011: Wall Street firms spy on protesters with police in tax-funded center

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023286585

[Jackpine Radical]

15. The issue is Snowdenballing.

Heh.

[whttevrr]

16. Secret Courts allow us to...

Keep our Democracy Secret.

DUH!

Safety through Obscurity?

Ever hear of that?

[Jackpine Radical]

17. "Ever hear of that?"

Of course not, silly. It's secret.

[whttevrr]

18. CRAP!!

Don't tell anyone I blabbed!

[Jackpine Radical]

21. I hear Nossink

[freedom fighter jh]

19. Yes. nt

[Fantastic Anarchist]

22. Good post, Jackpine! K&R

[leftstreet]

25. DURec

[baronjake]

27. Well, blogs and talking heads are talking some about it but

but really most Americans appear to be talking about Zimmerman and how to get by in the current economy. I think Eddie is a legend in his own mind. I hear Greenwald has a book coming out next year. Nice of him to cash in.

[ProSense]

28. Here's the problem,

"Now, Post-Snowden, we are paying attention...For that, we are in debt to Snowden and his supporters."

...to claim that Snowden's actions helped to focus attention on an issue is one thing. It's another thing entirely to claim that "we" should be "in debt" to him.

I don't buy into the notion that the only way to have focused attention on the issue was by leaking classified information in the way that he did, via distortions that tried to portray the program as something it was not, and then maintaining that he revealed "criminality."

Snowden's motives have always been suspect. While the debate is welcomed, his actions are still suspect. The fact that he created a circus with his international adventure, sparking international incidents, and injecting himself into the story throughout, shows that his motive was not a debate about the NSA domestic programs. His actions were idiotic and self-serving.

I'll repeat this point.

Bush's illegal spying was exposed in 2005 by Thomas Tamm. FISA has always been controversial and challenged by civil liberties groups and some lawmakers (http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023009232). Criticism of Snowden's actions that led him to reveal U.S. state secrets to other countries and find himself stuck in Russia have nothing to do with anyone's opinion of the ongoing debate about NSA domestic program.

Don't expect people to overlook Snowden's actions overseas simply because there is an ongoing debate and renewed focus on the program. Not going to happen.

Snowden is a delusional and self-important clown. He and Greenwald (and their supports) have done everything to help make the story about them.

First, Greenwald announces that he has enough information to bring down the U.S.

Snowden follows by declaring he's immune to torture.

He's applying for temporary asylum in Russia.

Doesn't get any more bizarre than that. Well...

Edward Snowden Declares Himself Torture-Proof
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023275112

If Snowden's case as a whistleblower is so strong, why is he afraid to face the consequences?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023236549

Putin: U.S.-Russia Relations Greater Than Snowden

Russian President Vladimir Putin made it clear Wednesday that he holds his country's relationship with the United States in higher esteem than he does former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden, Reuters reported.

When a reporter asked if the Snowden case would negatively affect a September summit between the U.S. and Russia in Moscow, Putin responded that "bilateral relations, in my opinion, are far more important than squabbles about the activities of the secret services," according to Reuters.

"We warned Mr. Snowden that any action by him that could cause damage to Russian-American relations is unacceptable for us," he added, as quoted by Reuters.

http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/putin-us-russia-relations-greater-than-snowden

"Personally, I didn't know anything about the extent of it, but I have generally been aware of the potential for my electronic communications to be stored & monitored, & have tried to conduct myself accordingly. I don't think I'm unique in that regard."

Knowing the "extent" of the program is not justification for Snowden's actions, especially those that compromised U.S. state secrets.

Not knowing the "extent" is not the same as not being aware of the concerns.

Wyden on Senate floor: FISA’s ‘general warrants’ are like the ‘Writs of Assistance’ the founding fat
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022081086

Senator Wyden (D-Ore.) calls for oversight of agencies that might be monitoring Americans
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022081177

PATRIOT Act Being Used to Keep Super Duper Government Spy Operation Top Secret
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002440614

House votes to renew controversial surveillance law
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014228212

Obama signs FISA extension..5 more years.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022111527

There is clearly a disagreement about the program, but it was authorized by Congress. The "extent" of the program maybe in question, but there is still nothing illegal about it. That fact, together with fleeing the country and revealing U.S. state secrets, is why Snowden will not be considered a whistleblower.

Members of Congress have oversight of the program. It's good they're awake now, but I doubt that bodes well for Snowden.

Sen. Tester Calls On Snowden To Return To America To ‘Face The Music’
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023281426

[ronnie624]

32. Lol. n/t

[Th1onein]

33. Lol!

My goodness, Prosense. REALLY?

[deurbano]

31. Great post!