4 ms·

Whistleblowers Dont Need Elite Credentials to Help Protect Us from Gov Overreach

72 points by DiabloD3 10y ago

squozzer 10y ago
Amen. But it may go a little deeper. One could argue that The Pentagon Papers leak advanced the agenda of a DC faction, namely the anti-Nixon crowd. I say this knowing most of the documents Ellsberg leaked came from the Johnson or maybe even Kennedy administrations. It doesn't matter, as people will conflate actions of various administration, especially when such conflation has a political use. Snowden's leaks advanced the agenda of a faction generously described as the tinfoil hat brigade, and no one else. Which may explain the umbrage taken by Mr. Gladwell. Both parties want Gitmo - probably to deal with future enemies, not current ones. Both parties want the NSA for the same reason. After all, it was none other than Hillary Clinton who said just a few weeks ago that her greatest enemy was not the Russians or even the NRA, but Republicans.
- exolymph 10y ago
  > Snowden's leaks advanced the agenda of a faction generously described as the tinfoil hat brigade, and no one else. This is false. Sure, conspiracy theorists used the leaks as fodder, but Snowden's bravery also brought a lot of government overreach to public attention. Ask organizations like EFF itself about people's interest in these issues pre- and post-Snowden.
pg_is_a_butt 10y ago
without elite credentials, those with elite credentials will work to discredit the whistleblowers by explaining the information made available to the plebeian was false and included as a test of their loyalty (which they failed). you're all idiots.
throw2016 10y ago
I think 'soft power' needs credibility and the increasingly desperate use of euphemisms and sophistry by those in power and their apologists instead of tackling the issues head on is evidence some in the state have decided to empower themselves at the cost of the people and long professed values. Who can resist uncontrolled and unaccountable power? But too many people have cottoned on to what is happening. It's only when the next attempts at global grandstanding and posturing about human rights, dissent and democracy is met by open mockery and derision that most will realize the sheer scale of the loss. In the interim no amount of lipstick is going to help, credibility once lost is almost impossible to regain, and foreign policy will have to rely on 'transparent propaganda' and brute force.

72 points by DiabloD3 10y ago

Amen. But it may go a little deeper. One could argue that The Pentagon Papers leak advanced the agenda of a DC faction, namely the anti-Nixon crowd. I say this knowing most of the documents Ellsberg leaked came from the Johnson or maybe even Kennedy administrations. It doesn't matter, as people will conflate actions of various administration, especially when such conflation has a political use. Snowden's leaks advanced the agenda of a faction generously described as the tinfoil hat brigade, and no one else. Which may explain the umbrage taken by Mr. Gladwell. Both parties want Gitmo - probably to deal with future enemies, not current ones. Both parties want the NSA for the same reason. After all, it was none other than Hillary Clinton who said just a few weeks ago that her greatest enemy was not the Russians or even the NRA, but Republicans.

exolymph 10y ago
> Snowden's leaks advanced the agenda of a faction generously described as the tinfoil hat brigade, and no one else. This is false. Sure, conspiracy theorists used the leaks as fodder, but Snowden's bravery also brought a lot of government overreach to public attention. Ask organizations like EFF itself about people's interest in these issues pre- and post-Snowden.

pg_is_a_butt 10y ago

without elite credentials, those with elite credentials will work to discredit the whistleblowers by explaining the information made available to the plebeian was false and included as a test of their loyalty (which they failed). you're all idiots.

throw2016 10y ago

I think 'soft power' needs credibility and the increasingly desperate use of euphemisms and sophistry by those in power and their apologists instead of tackling the issues head on is evidence some in the state have decided to empower themselves at the cost of the people and long professed values. Who can resist uncontrolled and unaccountable power? But too many people have cottoned on to what is happening. It's only when the next attempts at global grandstanding and posturing about human rights, dissent and democracy is met by open mockery and derision that most will realize the sheer scale of the loss. In the interim no amount of lipstick is going to help, credibility once lost is almost impossible to regain, and foreign policy will have to rely on 'transparent propaganda' and brute force.