Skip to main content

The Washington Post has an entire story on a new poll on National Security Agency (NSA) whistleblower Edward Snowden that leads with the statistic that cases Snowden in the most negative light.

Americans increasingly believe that former federal contractor Edward Snowden’s exposure of U.S. surveillance programs damaged national security, even as the programs have sparked widespread privacy concerns, a new Washington Post-ABC News poll has found.
The WaPo poll asked if Snowden harmed national security by "disclosing NSA's intelligence-gathering efforts," rather the asking about what Snowden actually revealed: the NSA's wasteful and illegal conduct.

Moreover, the poll did not ask if NSA harmed national security by spying on entire innocent populations or wasting time invading the constitutionally-protected privacy rights of hundreds of millions of innocent Americans.

Given that the U.S. government has been using its many loud megaphones to announce that Snowden "harmed national security" since June, it is not surprising that too many Americans are swallowing the fear-mongering propaganda. However, despite spending considerable government resources looking for it, none of these outspoken government officials have been able to point to any actual, discernible harm to national security as a result of the Snowden revelations.

This is not the first time the government has been unable to supports its hysterical  claims of harm to national security. In the case against whistleblower Chelsea Manning, the government's claims of damage to national security were overblown to say the least:  

Reuters reported that internal reviews said that the release of diplomatic cables and "tens of thousands of military field reports from Iraq and Afghanistan" had "caused only limited damage to U.S. interests abroad, despite the Obama administration's public statements to the contrary."

"We were told [the impact of WikiLeaks revelations] was embarrassing but not damaging," a congressional aide told Reuters.

The government lobbed similar unfounded accusations at NSA whistleblower Thomas Drake, saying Drake harmed soldiers in the field. Drake was charged with  "retaining" at his home what turned out to be unclassified information. He also shared with a reporter unclassified evidence of massive waste, fraud, abuse and illegality at NSA.

WaPo's poll also revealed that - as a result of Snowden's revelations - most Americans believe NSA's dragnet surveillance intrudes upon their privacy rights, a statistic that no doubt resonates with many Members of Congress considering that there are now over 20 surveillance reform bills. The American public is seeing unprecedented transparency in national security policy thanks to Snowden's whistleblowing, yet the WaPo's polling questions play into the government's self-interested and unfounded claim that the surveillance state protects national security.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  "the fifth estate" propaganda against whistle blow (42+ / 0-)

    holywood to the rescue of the security state with a movie about Julian Assange

    do you remember the old days when we looked to the NYT as the gold standard of the media?

    In another telling scene toward the end of the film, former New York Times executive editor Bill Keller lounges comfortably in his posh office, talking about the newspaper's decision to sit on material that exposed warrantless wiretapping in deference to the Bush Administration. He also reveals the news company's nearly daily conversations with the US government, indicating this influential corporate newspaper's cozy relationship with the military and the CIA. This shows the crucial role corporate media plays in sustaining global networks of patronage and power.
    the article contrasts a documentary put out about wikileaks bytthe wikileaks team them with the hollywood film and its propaganda
    One could ask: Why are those in power so afraid of freedom of speech? What are the reasons for these attacks? These questions fundamentally lead us to a deeper question: Why is it important for us to be able to speak freely? For this, we must look at the reason the founding fathers of the United States placed free speech as the most fundamental cornerstone of the Constitution. The First Amendment is composed of several clauses, among them: freedom of religion and association, freedom of speech and press, and most vitally, the right to redress of grievances against one's government.

    The key to understanding the genius of this is to see how the elements of the First Amendment are interconnected like a fine tapestry. They are all in the same clause, and it is the First Amendment for a reason. Redress of grievances against government is the key idea to both freedom of speech and the press. Countering illegitimate authority with the adjoining freedom of speech and the pen is the pivotal right from which all others flow. If governments and corporations are able to determine who is allowed to speak, then there is no freedom.

    an excellent article

    WikiLeaks' "Mediastan"; The True Fifth Estate Bringing the First Amendment to the World

  •  It is interesting how polls are used. (24+ / 0-)

    We get push polls during elections that promote propaganda all the time.

    But pols IGNORE polling all the frickin' (except for their secret polls prior to election concerning their own fates) time so obviously they are really only meant for our consumption alone.

    It seems that all my life we have been bombing someone, teaching them a lesson. Every day I understand more deeply how violent we are. Violent to others and violent to ourselves. - Robert Olmstead

    by glitterscale on Thu Nov 21, 2013 at 06:02:18 AM PST

  •  I suppose time will tell… (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    gerrilea, thestructureguy, Tortmaster

    if Snowden has damaged our national security.

    There’s a common thread, though, that runs through this recent spate of “revelations”: They’re being perpetrated mostly by 20-somethings who don’t quite grasp that their actions have consequences.

    Just the other day, I read a terrific article exploring this topic, from November’s Esquire magazine:

    I Am Anonymous

    The article is an eye-opener that exposes the well-meaning naïveté of youth.

    How about I believe in the unlucky ones?

    by BenderRodriguez on Thu Nov 21, 2013 at 06:03:11 AM PST

  •  The stuff that really does keep us safe (15+ / 0-)

    isn't, or at least doesn't need to be, unconstitutional. Namely, acquiring and using a necessarily very limited and targeted (because the vast majority of the world's people aren't involved in terrorism) intelligence data set, gathered lawfully (because judges don't deny requests for legitimate surveillance) to intercept and prevent acts of terror before they happen.

    But that doesn't cost all that much money or require an army of analysts and spies you can direct from your Captain Kirk-like throne in NSA HQ, so where's the fun in that? Plus, it doesn't allow for the spying on and suppression of domestic dissenters and activists, and we just can't have that.

    "Reagan's dead, and he was a lousy president" -- Keith Olbermann 4/22/09

    by kovie on Thu Nov 21, 2013 at 06:21:47 AM PST

  •  National security is a bogus concept. (10+ / 0-)

    It used to be "national interest," but then that was questioned and it became obvious that only a small percentage of the population actually had/has an interest in the global exploitation that was being promoted under the umbrella of the "nation."  "Nation," is, of course, a bogus figment of the imagination to begin with, a larger secular version of the kingdoms, which historically claimed their authority from God, a pratice made easier by the fact that Jesus had abjured any interest in having a kingdom on earth.

    That Steven Colbert, an avowed Catholic, makes a point of referring to his audience as "nation," seems telling. It's a put-down which, of course, our Con friends, being humor deprived, don't get.

    One hopes that Condi Rice as National Security Advisor was the epitome of this bogus enterprise and that, along with Homeland Security, the trajectory of these megalomaniacal inventions is downward. The citizenry needs to understand that crime prevention effected by a third party is a bogus concept, even though crime instigated by a third pary, such as the Mafia or the Congress, is a reality. If triangulators are to be restrained, we first have to make people aware of how it works and recognize that at base it involves obedience that is coerced. So, any emphasis on obedience (including the imposition of secrecy and silence) should be a signal that something is amiss.

    The culture of obedience is not very different from culturing a virus and letting it spread, willy nilly, through the environment. Cultured obedience is corrosive and leads to a corrupt society.

    Obamacare at your fingertips: 1-800-318-2596; TTY: 1-855-889-4325

    by hannah on Thu Nov 21, 2013 at 06:23:51 AM PST

  •  Polls are pushed to manipulate and direct (12+ / 0-)

    public opinion, nothing more or less.  

    Manufacturing Consent.

    Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media

    25+ yrs later Americans are finally understanding the world they live in isn't the world they live in.

    -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

    by gerrilea on Thu Nov 21, 2013 at 06:34:09 AM PST

  •  This is a fallacy from the diary: (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    BenderRodriguez
    "... none of these outspoken government officials have been able to point to any actual, discernible harm to national security as a result of the Snowden revelations."
    Firstly, the Government wouldn't talk about specifics.  Secondly, that sounds like every eight-hour-plus vacation trip I took with my kids. After thirty minutes, there was the first obligatory, "Are we there yet?" In other words, give it time. Do you really think that terrorists, enemy nation states, criminal cartels and even friendly nations have ignored this information? My guesses as to the harm caused or to be caused:

    1. They know our playbook.  Terrorists now know a potential defect in the American system of spying. The FISA courts and the regulations require that analysts avoid US Person content at all costs. That means if an email contains US Person information, the analyst must put it in the lockbox with descriptors noting that it is US Person information and cannot be used. Then, that information is destroyed. A cagey terrorist would know to give his email a subject line and fill at least the first few and last few paragraphs with fake US Person information. For example:

    SUBJECT:  About the Big Ball Game!

    Hey Arnold! Did you catch the big ball game this weekend? I was pulling for our team and could not believe what the coach did to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory ... blah, blah, blah Kardashian blah, blah blah Tony Stewart....
    ...
    ...
    Attack installation at dawn next Tuesday.
    ...
    ...
    Well, I hope you and Joan can make it over to the homestead next weekend for hot dogs and good American brewskis. Not that warm, dark Euro crap. Until then, take care.


    2. Encryption. Now that the terrorists know that encrypted messages will be first priority and that the NSA has some capacity to read encrypted information, the terrorists will use other means to communicate or find new encryption techniques. Thus, we lose potential intelligence advantages.

    3. The Tech Industry. Now we have people running around badmouthing the United States Tech Industry, which is not a huge boon to the United States. Of course, nobody mentions the alternative, as a computer built by a private company in Korea or Japan or Finland--without the protection of American privacy laws--might not be a viable option either, especially for American consumers. This is a perfect time for China and the Soviet Union to enter the software and hardware race with gusto.  

    4.  Yeah for Cocaine and Heroin Smugglers! What a vast treasure trove of knowledge you have been able to pick up and potentially exploit in the coming years. Now you know what to do about your encryption systems, (dump them!) and you know what to do about using U.S. Person information in your messages to further "sanitize" them.  

    5.  Harm to National Standing.  Everybody knows that every country is spying on every other country every day. So, this is weak tea for nationalistic calumny, but many nations don't need much of a push to hate America even more. To get one more day of print, Snowden had to embarrass the German Chancellor.    

    6.  What, if anything, did Snowden hand over to the Chinese and/or Russians?  Knowing the answer to that would at least be helpful. Not knowing will probably still cost the American taxpayer more money to change systems, devices, algorithms, etc. All that work that's been done? It's obsolete and will need to be upgraded

    7.  What has been taken from Greenwald?  We know that Greenwald was sending information around the globe by courier, and we know that one of his couriers was stopped by the British. Have others been stopped? Did we want the British to have that information? Why should our national secrets be in the hands of amateurs who make such silly mistakes?

    Finally, the aspect of the Snowden affair that I find most deeply disturbing and damaging is the way some people consider him a "whistleblower." That causes the greatest damage to our Government because it besmirches the thousands of actual whistleblowers trying to help the Government get better every year, it promotes a kind of wild west mentality regarding our nation's secrets, and it hides the actual, viable, functioning and important procedures for whistleblowing. I did not vote for Edward Snowden to make United States policy decisions. I voted for people who set up a whistleblower system, who provided a three-branch oversight of the NSA program, and who have somehow managed to have one Benghazi to the last administration's thirteen Benghazis and a 9/11.

    Rand Paul is to civil liberties as the Disney Channel is to subtle and nuanced acting.

    by Tortmaster on Thu Nov 21, 2013 at 06:52:22 AM PST

    •  That sure is a lot of guessing ^^^ (29+ / 0-)
      My guesses as to the harm caused or to be caused:
      I'm grateful that Snowden had the courage to do what he did.  And without guessing, we do know this for a fact:
      WaPo's poll also revealed that - as a result of Snowden's revelations - most Americans believe NSA's dragnet surveillance intrudes upon their privacy rights, a statistic that no doubt resonates with many Members of Congress considering that there are now over 20 surveillance reform bills.
      Edward Snowden deserves the Medal of Freedom Award.  Glenn Greenwald, too.  If Ben Bradlee can get the award, so can Greenwald.
      •  Thank you, gooderservice ... (0+ / 0-)

        ... for helping me to refute this untruth (or at least vaguely ambiguous strawman) from the diary above:

        Moreover, the poll did not ask if NSA harmed national security by spying on entire innocent populations or wasting time invading the constitutionally-protected privacy rights of hundreds of millions of innocent Americans.
        This is an actual quote from the article:
        Dueling concerns about privacy and national security are fueling a division over the NSA’s efforts: Forty-six percent say the agency “goes too far” in its surveillance activities, but just as many say its programs are “about right” (37 percent) or don’t go far enough (10 percent).

        That's 46% who say the NSA goes too far, and 47% who say the NSA has it about right or should go further.

        Rand Paul is to civil liberties as the Disney Channel is to subtle and nuanced acting.

        by Tortmaster on Thu Nov 21, 2013 at 08:26:52 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  This is snark, isn't it? (21+ / 0-)
      The FISA courts and the regulations require that analysts avoid US Person content at all costs.
      This paragraph must be snark.
      Finally, the aspect of the Snowden affair that I find most deeply disturbing and damaging is the way some people consider him a "whistleblower." That causes the greatest damage to our Government because it besmirches the thousands of actual whistleblowers trying to help the Government get better every year, it promotes a kind of wild west mentality regarding our nation's secrets, and it hides the actual, viable, functioning and important procedures for whistleblowing.
      So how well has it worked for those "real" whistleblowers? Ron Wyden has been hinting for years that the NSA was out of control but even an effing senator doesn't have the power to stop them.

      You know what really annoys me? Cowards who give up their freedom in the hope of gaining a scintilla of security.

      look for my eSci diary series Thursday evening.

      by FishOutofWater on Thu Nov 21, 2013 at 07:31:00 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  There were ... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        BenderRodriguez

        ... 1,000+ Federal Government Whistleblowers providing information to the Office of the Special Counsel in 2012 alone. There were over 3,000 Whistleblowers who provided information to the Securities and Exchange Commission in 2012. Who knows how many Whistleblowers approached their respective agency's Inspector General. FishOutofWater, I haven't had time to poll all of those people.  

        That's a vigorous and important program, and to besmirch it the way you have done is detrimental to a strong Government.

        As for the first paragraph being snark, I guess you haven't read the court cases that have been disclosed revealing the layers of protection involving US Person Content. I know I'm missing a lot, but here are some of the protections that you've missed or are glossing over:

        1.   Attorney-General-Implimented Regulations.
        2.   In-House-Specific Regulations.
        3.   Threat of Firing or Criminal charges.
        4.   Civil Rights Protection Officers.
        5.   Audits by Inspector General.
        6.   Review by Court.
        7.   Availability of Appellate Review.
        8.   Congressional Oversight.
        9.   Whistleblower Plan and Protections.
        10. Application of the Constitution.
        What Snowden has revealed--at much potential peril to America--is that we have an effective three-branch system providing oversight to the NSA programs, and that there was one error in which approximately 3,000 pieces of US Person Content were mistakenly "opened," but that's not unlike the sorting machine at the US Postal Regional Center in Denver being out of calibration for an hour.

        Rand Paul is to civil liberties as the Disney Channel is to subtle and nuanced acting.

        by Tortmaster on Thu Nov 21, 2013 at 08:13:20 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  "No Good Deed Goes Unpunished" (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          DeadHead, gerrilea

          Old U.S. government proverb.

          USNRC's open door policy had an ironic interpretation by the staff.

          The punishment of whistleblowers has escalated in recent years, e.g. Thomas Drake et al. discussed by this diarist.

          look for my eSci diary series Thursday evening.

          by FishOutofWater on Thu Nov 21, 2013 at 10:42:47 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  So, to hell with privacy? (10+ / 0-)

      1. We know that the Government is illegally and unjustifiably sucking up a lot of information about a lot of people. Americans, foreigners, heads of state.
      2. We also know that there hasn't been a single terrorist captured because of all of this data gathering.
      3. We know for a fact that this information has been abused to spy on soldiers and politicians
      4. We know for a fact that data gathered under the extremely questionable tactics of the NSA has been shared with other agencies including law enforcement, in violation of civil liberties and in violation of the purpose for which the information was gathered (the so-called "war on terror")
      5. We know that the heads of the NSA have lied, repeatedly, about the usefulness and scope of these surveillance programs

      But yet with all these damning facts that point to extreme overreach by the government, lying and covering up the facts of these programs, you actually continue to simply blame Snowden for exposing all this and are defending these programs?

      If the government could provide some proof that these programs worked it might be worthwhile to discuss continuing them but they've proven themselves untrustworthy so it's hard to believe anything they tell us.

      There needs to be accountability, real oversight, and we need a genuine system to protect privacy and civil liberties including extremely harsh punishments when the rules are not followed - then, and only then, should we be talking about defending these programs.

      We have Snowden (and other real whistleblowers) to thank for this knowledge. Stop blaming the messenger and stop defending an indefensible program.

      [Terrorists] are a dime a dozen, they are all over the world and for every one we lock up there will be three to take his place. --Digby

      by rabel on Thu Nov 21, 2013 at 07:54:31 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  No. Not exactly. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        BenderRodriguez

        "To hell with privacy" -- That's a strawman. I never said that or even implied that. I just noted that there's another side to the argument. The NSA provides important signal intelligence around the world and ensures that our communications remain private from other countries.

        "1. We know that the Government is illegally...." -- On the contrary, we know that what the Government has done is perfectly legal because of a 1979 United States Supreme Court decision providing that metadata can be obtained. You might not like Smith v. Maryland, 442 U.S. 735 (1979) but it has been the law of the land for more than 34 years.

        "2. We also know that there hasn't been a single terrorist captured...." -- Do we? I haven't heard about it, that's for sure, but I don't expect the Government to tell me about it either as it might compromise current operations. I do know that we've had one Benghazi under President Obama's watch, while under the previous administration we had 13 Benghazis and a 9/11. Moreover, under the current administration scores of al Qaeda leaders, including bin Laden, have been killed.

        "3. We know for a fact that this information has been abused to spy on soldiers and politicians." I don't know what you're talking about here. Can you give me a citation? If you're talking about the wiretapping under Bush, well, here's an article from the Daily Beast about that.  

        "4. We know for a fact that data gathered under the extremely questionable tactics of the NSA has been shared with other agencies including law enforcement...."  -- Yes, and it would be silly for the NSA not to hand over such information if it showed an ongoing crime or criminal enterprise. If you legally came into information showing or tending to show a crime has been, or is about to be, committed, shouldn't you turn that information over?

        "5. We know that the heads of the NSA have lied, repeatedly, about the usefulness and scope of these surveillance programs...."  --  What Clapper was given was the spy equivalent of the "Are you still beating your wife?" question. Any way he answered that question, he was going to get into trouble. If he said yes, then there'd be a media firestorm, and he might be subject to court martial for disclosing national secrets. Have you seen any of the correspondence between Wyden and Clapper? I've seen some of it that has been made public, and there's no doubt that Wyden knew what was going on. In one of the letters, Clapper even says to Wyden, (paraphrased), you knew about this program, and you knew it was constitutional.

        Finally, I'm all for a better system, but it shouldn't be a witch hunt, and it should ensure that America is protected from danger. If you think the Constitution should be amended or that Smith v. Maryland overturned, that's fine, but I dissent.

        Rand Paul is to civil liberties as the Disney Channel is to subtle and nuanced acting.

        by Tortmaster on Thu Nov 21, 2013 at 08:54:50 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Heck, I'm ready for a witch hunt and some tar (0+ / 0-)

          and feathering.

          Your #1 and #4 are outright lies.

          http://www.techdirt.com/...

           The agents would work with local police to concoct a reason to pull the truck over, and voila, drugs found. But, most importantly, at no point would the fact that such information was used to lead to the stop be revealed, and that's unconstitutional. If you're accused, you're supposed to have access to all of the evidence being used against you.

          http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

          "The NSA aren't supposed to spy on U.S. citizens!" Gierach complains. This has repeatedly shown to be exactly what the NSA has been doing with the release of information from former consultant Edward Snowden. His allegations are that the NSA has been spying for reasons of national security on citizens of the U/S. Gierach says, "they are only supposed to be keeping records of whom is calling who and when, but not recording the calls."

          This crap started under Bush.

          http://www.zcommunications.org/...

          As for the spying on soldiers maybe you missed this news report?

          http://www.nbcnews.com/...

          And who said anything about Clapper????

          http://www.dailykos.com/...

          This week, we learned that millions of Americans have had their email address books and contact lists gobbled up by NSA bulk digital surveillance. This comes on the heels of NSA director Keith Alexander admitting that he lied to Congress about the principal justification for the NSA's ability to engage in bulk surveillance: stopping terror plots.

          You're misdirection IS revealing.

          -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

          by gerrilea on Thu Nov 21, 2013 at 11:36:39 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  "Give it time" is your answer? NO, prove these (13+ / 0-)

      leaks caused harm.  That's how our "system of law" works.  YOU have to prove harm.

      Since when do we prosecute people for future possible crimes? WE DON'T!

      Your diatribe denies some fundamental historical facts that have already been established.

      1.  Terrorists didn't use the internet to plan and execute the attacks on 911 or the attacks on the World Trade Center in the 1993 or the 50 or more attacks worldwide over the past 10 yrs!

      The owness is upon you to prove that the internet has been used in terrorist attacks on this nation.

      OH wait, our own government lies about that too!

      The "true whistleblower" meme is disgusting.  We now know our government is sweeping up all data AND has continuously lied about it.

      The very definition of whistelblowing. Revealing criminal acts by our government.

      What part of this is so hard to comprehend?

      As for the rest of your total government propaganda, I don't believe the likes of you anymore.

      2.  Encryption- Since when is my personal data public property?  Why did our government shutdown Lavabits?  If I'm under investigation for a crime, go to a damn court, get a court order and then investigate me.

      3.  Another fake "cold war"??? You can't be serious.  China & Russia are in the positions they are in BECAUSE of our own actions.  Funny how that works!

      4.  The fake drug war doesn't mean shit!

      If it really did mean anything, then those genius Pentagon Planners should be held accountable for not foreseeing the results of our invasion and occupation of Afghanistan for the past decade!

      International Intervention in Afghanistan Has Led to Heroin Resurgence

      5.  Our government should be more worried about what We The People think of it and not the rest of the world.

      Oh wait, they do!

      25 More Ridiculous FBI Lists: You Might Be A Terrorist If . . .

      6.  Meaningless speculation being used to discredit the man and divert attention away from the actions of our government.

      Snowden is a hero and whistleblower that had to abandon our country to reveal the truth to us.

      As for the "costs to the American taxpayer".  Changing over systems wouldn't cost shit, stop acting in an illegal and unconstitutional manner.  Can't handle the rules of the road we wrote out for you???  Get another job!

      7.  You've truly lost your perspective:  When we actually have a legitimate actor in our Fourth Estate, you claim the information he had wasn't ours to know and that a foreign government, at our request, should violate this AMERICANS rights?

      Did you take Orwells' 1984 as a business model and not a warning???  Our government acting to circumvent the very document that created it.  What doublespeak!

      Hell, let's revive the Alien and Sedition Acts and just execute anyone that talks badly about our actions!

      Oh shit, we did that already, didn't we?

      Anwar al-Awlaki was killed because he published a magazine critical of the US!

      Attorney General Holder: Due Process Doesn't Necessarily Mean a Courtroom

      And yes I'm a tad angry at reading this crap on an allegedly "progressive" website, one that I've been a member of for over 9 yrs.

      -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

      by gerrilea on Thu Nov 21, 2013 at 08:28:19 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Bob Woodward - leaks to support policy (11+ / 0-)

    Senator Rockefeller - most important leaks by administrations to support their policy

    Bob Woordward as exhibit A

    http://digbysblog.blogspot.com.br/...

  •  Dems less critical of NSA than any other group (19+ / 0-)

    link to article mentioned in tweets at the end

    tweets from Glenn Greenwald

    Glenn Greenwald ‏@ggreenwald 1h

    Extreme hackery: Democrats, who shrieked endlessly about NSA during Bush, now most pro-NSA group of anyone  

    Glenn Greenwald ‏@ggreenwald 1h

    "Democrats, protective of the Obama administration, are less critical of the NSA" than every other group  

    Glenn Greenwald ‏@ggreenwald 1h

    "Obama has just a 35 percent approval rating for handling NSA surveillance  activities, with 53 % disapproving"

    http://www.langerresearch.com/...
  •  This is propaganda (5+ / 0-)

    plain and simple.  Come on, hypnotized Americans, don't question the NSA.  Move along - nothing to see here.

    11:11 being mindful and keepin' it real

    by Raggedy Ann on Thu Nov 21, 2013 at 07:23:03 AM PST

  •  The public also believed Iraq had WMD (11+ / 0-)

    http://en.wikipedia.org/...

    The propaganda machine is still in place.

    Daily Kos an oasis of truth. Truth that leads to action.

    by Shockwave on Thu Nov 21, 2013 at 07:37:49 AM PST

  •  Mrs Radack with all respect (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    kovie, caul, The Jester, FishOutofWater

    How can the Washington Post be objective about the NSA ,when the owner of Amazon ,who own the Washington Post ,built  part of the NSA database infrastructure for the government

  •  I call BS on the whole idea -- (7+ / 0-)
    caused only limited damage to U.S. interests abroad
    The U.S. has no such interests. The banksters, Imperialists, 1% and US haedquartered multinationals might, but the US does not, we the people, do not. You cannot harm that which is illusory.

    That, in its essence, is fascism--ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power. -- Franklin D. Roosevelt --

    by enhydra lutris on Thu Nov 21, 2013 at 08:57:21 AM PST

  •  Always a silly claim. Any enemy or bad guy worth (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    PhilJD

    ... worrying about  is smart enough to understand and realize the things Snowden exposed were likely going on.

    AQ does not communicate in the open, they use direct person to person, and steganography to hide messages in ways even our super computers can't breach.... yet.

    Likely the drug Cartel's and most organized crime operations are doing the same now.

    The only ones left to be spied on effectively by the NSA's methods, are ordinary citizens and idiots.

    Yet "The Machine" still lashes out against those who dare to call a duck a duck. Since they are actually impotent and incompetent, and lashing out and striking back is all they have left to do.

    They FAILED in their primary task, yet want to keep the money flowing before anyone notices it's a waste of $300+ Billion a year in waste and fraud that is the DHS.

  •  National Security (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    native, aliasalias, gerrilea

    has become the double speak words the global 'owners of the place' use to hide their skullduggery. Whose security or nation are they talking about? Not the American people's or our nations security.  Absurd play on irrational nationalism that's purpose is to confuse us into believing that the powerful global pillagers, the real enemies of our 'security' are working for our 'national interests'. They aren't. Democracy and the real security of people everywhere is a threat to their 'world as we find it'. Hard to understand why people are so afraid of the other be it the Chinese or 'terrist's who are gonna kill yer family' instead of obvious villains of the piece who threaten all humans and the planet itself.    

  •  Jesselyn (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    allenjo, FishOutofWater, gerrilea

    Thank you for your work in keeping this all too important topic up in front of everyone's awareness. An America that loses her freedoms is not what we want the future to bring. Keep pushing back.

  •  Well, the last time I looked (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    FishOutofWater, gerrilea

    most polls said that people viewed Ed Snowden as a whistleblower who provided a public service, rather than as a problem or a danger.

    It's important to look at polls, over time, rather than just one poll.

    Also, WaPo is such a conservative tool lately--have you seen what they said about Social Security?--that I don't trust them much.

    I tried to go online to find a similar bear head...but when I searched “Big Bear Head” it gave me a San Diego craigslist ad entitled “Big Bear needs some quick head now” and then I just decided to never go on the internet again.--Jenny Lawson

    by SouthernLiberalinMD on Thu Nov 21, 2013 at 12:22:30 PM PST

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site