5 ms·

The US Government's concern is that if Snowden gets off light other whistleblowers will step forward. That's the root logic behind the 'war on whistleblowers'.

by roc 13y ago

The US Government's concern is that if Snowden gets off light other whistleblowers will step forward. That's the root logic behind the 'war on whistleblowers'. Which strongly suggests "we ain't seen nothin yet." That's a big part of why Manning was treated so horribly and without any sense of proportion to what he did. It simply wasn't (all) about him. It was about the people who might be thinking of following in his footsteps.

Joeri 13y ago
Astute point you're making that if they're this concerned about additional whistleblowers, then there must be a lot out there that is worse than what we've heard so far. This isn't just about wiretapping, because that aspect couldn't be worse than we've heard so far.
- roc 13y ago
  Well, Snowden alleges warrantless wiretapping, but didn't have evidence of that. [1] A subsequent whistle-blower bringing proof that it wasn't just possible, but that it was done (routinely), would be worse. Particularly if they had proof of warrantless wiretaps done for bureaucratic/political reasons. [2] Similarly, if there was proof that no real effort is being expended to identify citizen data vs non-citizen data, it would be 'worse'. At least in the eyes of those who are following the traditional media account and are still giving the government the benefit of the doubt and buying their defenses. [3] [1] At least he hadn't presented any, thus far. Just a document outlining the technical capability of bulk copy and 'intercept' existed and his assertion that he could initiate those intercepts without any oversight, let alone legal basis. [2] Which is something alleged by another whistle-blower, but again, without iron-clad proof. Which is apparently what you absolutely have to have, for the mainstream media to pay any attention to the story. (And even then, they'll probably just talk about you, personally.) [3] Despite those defenses having to be walked back time and again for containing falsehoods and no corrected defenses being offered.
vijayr 13y ago
why is everything a "war" - war on drugs, war on this, war on that ...
- dspillett 13y ago
  Because it is a very string, stark, emotive word. It carries a lot of weight even sub-consciously, and makes it easier to get taken seriously (or taken as right). It makes it personal. Not just "something that could do to be fixed", or "right vs wrong" - it means "us vs them".
  - vijayr 13y ago
    may be so, but when it is overused, it loses it's seriousness, no?
    - dspillett 13y ago
      To an extent yes, though I think it is a concept that registers quite deep to the point where our reaction is at least partly instinctual (the old fight/flight response) to it'll not become totally ineffective.
- orthecreedence 13y ago
  It's part of the US propaganda machine. "War" is used to rally the population against something evil...an outside force that must be stopped.
- grecy 13y ago
  I was shocked when I worked in America at a kids summer camp, and every activity/game was "war this" and "war that". Kids in America are quite literally taught to go to war at every possible juncture, like it's a valid way to solve some conflict.
  - dllthomas 13y ago
    I don't remember being taught that. Edited to add: don't get me wrong, I'm not claiming you're lying, just that your experience doesn't necessarily generalize.
dllthomas 13y ago
Which is exactly why we need to lean hard on our government to pardon Snowden. Whistleblowers are the only real oversight these programs have[1], and the more we cow and break them the more abuses we will see. Sign the petition if you haven't (https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/pardon-edward-snowden/Dp03vGYD https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/pardon-edward-snow...), and don't stop there: write letters, make phone-calls, visit your officials' offices, get involved at the party level and see about pushing things there, give money to organizations like the EFF. If anyone else has other suggestions (or more details about how to do any of the above, or interest in coordinating any of the above), please add! [1] Congressional oversight is a joke when money is so important in politics and the only people who will know about the decision are the contractors who will be contributing to your or your opponent's campaign next cycle based on whether you let them keep the contract.
- dllthomas 13y ago
  You know what? Let's get together and do something about this. Precisely what, TBD at a meeting: http://www.meetup.com/Hack-Government-Bay-Area http://www.meetup.com/Hack-Government-Bay-Area Join if you're in the area, start a parallel group otherwise.
mark_l_watson 13y ago
I agree. BTW, I was very surprised to read an article this week (sorry, couldn't find the link) about how much harsher anti-whistle blower laws are in the USA than in other countries.

by roc 13y ago

Joeri 13y ago

Astute point you're making that if they're this concerned about additional whistleblowers, then there must be a lot out there that is worse than what we've heard so far. This isn't just about wiretapping, because that aspect couldn't be worse than we've heard so far.

roc 13y ago
Well, Snowden alleges warrantless wiretapping, but didn't have evidence of that. [1] A subsequent whistle-blower bringing proof that it wasn't just possible, but that it was done (routinely), would be worse. Particularly if they had proof of warrantless wiretaps done for bureaucratic/political reasons. [2] Similarly, if there was proof that no real effort is being expended to identify citizen data vs non-citizen data, it would be 'worse'. At least in the eyes of those who are following the traditional media account and are still giving the government the benefit of the doubt and buying their defenses. [3] [1] At least he hadn't presented any, thus far. Just a document outlining the technical capability of bulk copy and 'intercept' existed and his assertion that he could initiate those intercepts without any oversight, let alone legal basis. [2] Which is something alleged by another whistle-blower, but again, without iron-clad proof. Which is apparently what you absolutely have to have, for the mainstream media to pay any attention to the story. (And even then, they'll probably just talk about you, personally.) [3] Despite those defenses having to be walked back time and again for containing falsehoods and no corrected defenses being offered.

vijayr 13y ago

why is everything a "war" - war on drugs, war on this, war on that ...

dspillett 13y ago
Because it is a very string, stark, emotive word. It carries a lot of weight even sub-consciously, and makes it easier to get taken seriously (or taken as right). It makes it personal. Not just "something that could do to be fixed", or "right vs wrong" - it means "us vs them".
- vijayr 13y ago
  may be so, but when it is overused, it loses it's seriousness, no?
  - dspillett 13y ago
    To an extent yes, though I think it is a concept that registers quite deep to the point where our reaction is at least partly instinctual (the old fight/flight response) to it'll not become totally ineffective.
orthecreedence 13y ago
It's part of the US propaganda machine. "War" is used to rally the population against something evil...an outside force that must be stopped.
grecy 13y ago
I was shocked when I worked in America at a kids summer camp, and every activity/game was "war this" and "war that". Kids in America are quite literally taught to go to war at every possible juncture, like it's a valid way to solve some conflict.
- dllthomas 13y ago
  I don't remember being taught that. Edited to add: don't get me wrong, I'm not claiming you're lying, just that your experience doesn't necessarily generalize.

dllthomas 13y ago

Which is exactly why we need to lean hard on our government to pardon Snowden. Whistleblowers are the only real oversight these programs have[1], and the more we cow and break them the more abuses we will see. Sign the petition if you haven't (https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/pardon-edward-snowden/Dp03vGYD https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/pardon-edward-snow...), and don't stop there: write letters, make phone-calls, visit your officials' offices, get involved at the party level and see about pushing things there, give money to organizations like the EFF. If anyone else has other suggestions (or more details about how to do any of the above, or interest in coordinating any of the above), please add! [1] Congressional oversight is a joke when money is so important in politics and the only people who will know about the decision are the contractors who will be contributing to your or your opponent's campaign next cycle based on whether you let them keep the contract.

dllthomas 13y ago
You know what? Let's get together and do something about this. Precisely what, TBD at a meeting: http://www.meetup.com/Hack-Government-Bay-Area http://www.meetup.com/Hack-Government-Bay-Area Join if you're in the area, start a parallel group otherwise.

mark_l_watson 13y ago

I agree. BTW, I was very surprised to read an article this week (sorry, couldn't find the link) about how much harsher anti-whistle blower laws are in the USA than in other countries.