boingboing — 2014-04-28T16:24:28-04:00 — #1
imb — 2014-04-28T16:33:53-04:00 — #2
Hillary is part of the machinery.
jandrese — 2014-04-28T16:39:35-04:00 — #3
I love the talking point of "Why didn't he stay in the US so we could turn him into another Chelsea Manning?", as if that question didn't answer itself.
For keeping control of his message and keeping the media engaged, Snowden did exactly what he had to do. These people are angry because he's not letting himself and the problem he exposed be swept under the rug.
rknop — 2014-04-28T16:44:49-04:00 — #4
The saddest thing about all of it is the number of people horrified by the NSA revelations and disgusted by what she's saying... who will vote for her in the next election because they're even more horrified by the Republican.
There's no hope for the future in this country.
jeddak — 2014-04-28T16:46:09-04:00 — #5
We owe it to the next generation to ensure that fifty years from now, public school textbooks portray Edward Snowden as a hero. Justice.
jandrese — 2014-04-28T16:49:32-04:00 — #6
It has been interesting to see the Republicans, especially in the house, twist on this issue. On one hand they have their god given mandate to attack Obama and the Democrats at every opportunity. On the other hand they're up to their necks in this CIA domestic spying issue and can't afford to have it turn on them.
Hence the only mild at best outrage from Washington itself, and relatively light coverage from the domestic media of what should be one of the most sensational stories since the Pentagon Papers.
sr105 — 2014-04-28T16:56:48-04:00 — #7
Why does he even need a passport? Can't the destination government allow him in without one?
sr500xa7 — 2014-04-28T17:12:07-04:00 — #8
There wasn't any debate going on. The government never acknowledged that this kind of activity existed until it became impossible to deny.
xzzy — 2014-04-28T17:18:28-04:00 — #9
Not without the US throwing a hissy fit and threatening any country that grants him travel or access.
nomelitas — 2014-04-28T17:23:40-04:00 — #10
Unfortunately, Snowden is in the wrong and so are many ill-informed people that blindly support him. They know not the clearance or classification systems, and would rather wish that everything was in the open - even if that meant more harm than what Snowden that already has caused(which is not a null quantity) to the US and its citizens. It doesn't matter who says it.
If anything, the NSA has been more transparent in decades than Snowden has been during this ongoing unmitigated information security disaster. We can openly check what the NSA has done, but we have to take Snowden at his untrustable word that he hasn't already given information to Russia & China to secure his safe passage. Never mind that once the stolen information is put in the open, it is also in the hands of foreign enemies to the US - people that would harm both Snowden supporters and those who support the United States of America.
The only hero(es) in this will be the people that bring Snowden's escapades to an end - however that may be done. Hopefully it is done through the court system, since an evidence-based conviction is far more preferable to other solutions. Such conduct may not be popular amongst those who support Snowden, but it will save the country.
The only thing that history will write down is that some people called him a hero, but all his work will have been undone within a couple of administrations - as proven by Reagan.
nomelitas — 2014-04-28T17:27:46-04:00 — #11
Justice will be when he faces the court system for his deeds(or worse), like any other person that has leaked national secrets.
Count me as one of the many that will end up countering such attempts to dress up his betrayal of country.
nungesser — 2014-04-28T17:31:06-04:00 — #12
I think that 'fact checking' her speech by repeating some well-rehearsed half-truths is a poor way to go about things.
noneeeed — 2014-04-28T17:33:55-04:00 — #13
We can openly check what the NSA has done
Really? They wouldn't be a very god intelligence agency if that were the case.
noneeeed — 2014-04-28T17:34:34-04:00 — #14
I think that simply stating that an article is full of half-truths without elaborating is a poor way to go about things.
chellberty — 2014-04-28T17:37:10-04:00 — #15
Clinton: "When he emerged and when he absconded with all that material, I was puzzled, because we have all these protections for whistleblowers."
oh STFU hilldog this administration has reopened cases against whistleblowers at the same time saying "lets look forward not back" when pressed about prosecuting the bush administration for war crimes.
Don't let this conservative grifter near the presidency.
nungesser — 2014-04-28T17:40:00-04:00 — #16
It's not my job to write an article pointing these things out. If BoingBoing readers want to lionize Mr Snowden, they can be smart enough to know when the author of this article is rehashing well-trodden FPF/EFF talking points that don't tell the whole story.
jardine — 2014-04-28T17:44:30-04:00 — #17
imb — 2014-04-28T17:44:48-04:00 — #18
People may have been ill informed as you say because the NSA was working in secret. Transparent you say? Go to the interview where the talking head can't even bring himself to use the word, "truth".
The security disaster is that the NSA made the internet unsafe and caused to it to have MUCH LESS security. And for all of it, they have little to nothing to show for it.
And did you start a new puppet account? Because with only 2 comments on Snowden, you sound remarkably like someone else who always showed up, but doesn't seem to any longer.
pauldavis — 2014-04-28T17:46:04-04:00 — #19
We can openly check what the NSA has done
Fascinating. How would we do that?
openfly — 2014-04-28T17:48:06-04:00 — #20
curious what extra bits of information and divergent perspective you are referring to?
next page →