General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsYour eyelids are getting heavy... Soon you will fall into a deep sleep...
When I snap my fingers you will forget all about the central issue of abuse of state power, and concentrate only on what a bad man Snowden (Manning, Assange...) is.
whatchamacallit
(15,558 posts)randome
(34,845 posts)Without being able to personally check out the NSA process ourselves, we are left with his character. How believable is he?
"I'm not going to hide" and yet he runs to Hong Kong.
So far, in the character department, he's not doing too well by me.
[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]
Progressive dog
(6,918 posts)It's easy to ignore the issue of Snowden's character then.
sibelian
(7,804 posts)It's significant.
Savannahmann
(3,891 posts)That does seem to be what is going on.
whatchamacallit
(15,558 posts)all the cult of personality types on this board.
Junkdrawer
(27,993 posts)http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2983152
As I say on that last thread, not 100% sure yet. Doubt I'll ever be. But....
whatchamacallit
(15,558 posts)Junkdrawer
(27,993 posts)A citizenry thats constantly on guard for secret, unaccountable surveillance is one thats constantly being remade along the lines the state would prefer. Foucault illustrated this point by reference to a hypothetical prison called the Panopticon. Designed by utilitarian philosopher Jeremy Bentham, the Panopticon is a prison where all cells can be seen from a central tower shielded such that the guards can see out but the prisoners cant see in. The prisoners in the Panopticon could thus never know whether they were being surveilled, meaning that they have to, if they want to avoid running the risk of severe punishment, assume that they were being watched at all times. Thus, the Panopticon functioned as an effective tool of social control even when it wasnt being staffed by a single guard.
....
http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2013/06/07/2120141/why-the-nsas-secret-online-surveillance-should-scare-you/
Now, consider this from DemocracyNow this morning:
AMY GOODMAN: Whats wrong with that?
TIM SHORROCK: Whats wrong with that is that its a for-profit operation. Many times, you haveinside these agencies, you have contractors overseeing other contractors, contractors, you know, giving advice to the agency about how to set its policies, what kind of technology to buy. And, of course, they have relationships with all the companies that they work with or that they suggest to the leaders of U.S. intelligence.
And I think, you know, a terrible example of this is, you know, a few months ago, I wrote a cover story for The Nation magazine about the NSA whistleblowers that youve had on this show a few timesTom Drake, Bill Binney and the other twoand, you know, they blew the whistle on a huge project called Trailblazer that was contracted out to SAIC that was a complete failure. And this project was designed, from the beginning, by Booz Allen, Northrop Grumman and a couple other corporations who advised the NSA about how to acquire this project, and then decided amongst themselves to give it to SAIC, and then SAIC promised the skies and never produced anything, and the project was finally canceled in 2005.
....
http://www.democracynow.org/2013/6/11/digital_blackwater_how_the_nsa_gives
sibelian
(7,804 posts)GOATS.
Did you know that one of his eyebrows is slightly higher than the other?
Your priorities, sir, are idiosyncratic TO. SAY. THE. LEAST.
awoke_in_2003
(34,582 posts)Autumn
(45,120 posts)Guess they are going to die now because I just can't be mistaken for Snowden.
LWolf
(46,179 posts)backscatter712
(26,355 posts)Aerows
(39,961 posts)wants to give you one, since they hang out on our message board while our country sucks so much.