Almost no one has a problem with government surveillance that follows the rule of law and due process. The justification for complaining about Snowden's revelations is that the government was improperly searching people's information outside the law. In order to forward his argument that the policies were outside the law (which is frankly not well supported, as FISA courts and metadata requests went to the SCOTUS 40 years ago and have been repeatedly upheld) he unquestionably broke the law and his oath.
The policies and goals a government should enact are a matter of opinion. Whether or not it should act lawfully is not. That's why whistleblowing is a thing
No, this is what you do not get.
The justification for complaining about Snowden's revelations is that they were improperly searching people's information inside the law, because they are an arm of the governmental construct that makes it.
And whistleblowing having legal protections is a recursive argument to begin with:
"Why do we need to create this whistleblowing status?"
"Because often the individuals blowing whistles have far less power than those they are blowing whistles against. They face serious, often legal, repercussions for acting ethically."
"That seems fair. What circumstances do we want to protect whistleblowers in?"
"Well, when they speak out against corporations performing something illegal."
"What if they speak out against us performing something unethical, legally."
"I don't know about that; let's not include that in our legal definition of whistleblower."
"Yeah, that way anyone speaking out against us doing something unethical, legally, does not have protection from a far greater power than themselves, which is to our benefit."
Just stop trying to make your own definition of it. Whistleblowing is about blowing the whistle on illegal activities.
"Activist" is the word we use for people who speak out against legal activities.
Guys, have you considered talking about Snowden in the Snowden thread?
On the other hand, its nice to see a discussion without people getting crowded out by some of the standby posters in other DnD threads
SummaryJudgment on
Some days Blue wonders why anyone ever bothered making numbers so small; other days she supposes even infinity needs to start somewhere.
0
Options
ZampanovYou May Not Go HomeUntil Tonight Has Been MagicalRegistered Userregular
I did say it already but I'll say it again absent the monster doublequote tree that I just tried and failed to cut down XD
If the legal definition of a whistleblower is correct as earlier stated, then I agree he is not technically a whistleblower.
I just find that to be a bit on the semantics side, since he is performing pretty much the same function. People who find what he's done distasteful seem to be hung up on the fact that he's staying out of reach of the legal system while doing it.
I find this to be okay in this situation, since I am pretty confident that if he hadn't, we would never have heard about any of this shit. That it would have been practically impossible for him to do this the technically correct way due to the nature of the information itself combined with our current political climate.
The idea that the Patriot Act is the basis for what Snowden leaked is also not true. There are numerous examples of similar programs that pre-date the Bush Presidency. ECHELON, Carnivore, Squidgygate, etc.
What the Bush Administration did that brought outrage was do (electronic) surveillance domestically without a warrant, even a low threshold FISA warrant. The problem was not the surveillance but the violation of the law by not requiring warrants. Shit like "Spy Agencies Spying!" and "Searches Conducted After Warrant Obtained!" should not be shocking.
"What if they speak out against us performing something unethical, legally."
"I don't know about that; let's not include that in our legal definition of whistleblower."
"Yeah, that way anyone speaking out against us doing something unethical, legally, does not have protection from a far greater power than themselves, which is to our benefit."
OK
Many people think rape shields are unethical and in violation of Constitutional rights to face one's accuser. Should people who release that information be protected by whistleblower laws?
I did say it already but I'll say it again absent the monster doublequote tree that I just tried and failed to cut down XD
If the legal definition of a whistleblower is correct as earlier stated, then I agree he is not technically a whistleblower.
I just find that to be a bit on the semantics side, since he is performing pretty much the same function. People who find what he's done distasteful seem to be hung up on the fact that he's staying out of reach of the legal system while doing it.
I find this to be okay in this situation, since I am pretty confident that if he hadn't, we would never have heard about any of this shit. That it would have been practically impossible for him to do this the technically correct way due to the nature of the information itself combined with our current political climate.
whistleblowing and activism is a pretty important distinction: whistleblowing is unquestionably "right", since we're talking about somebody exposing breaches of the law. When it comes to stuff that's legal, well, then it's up for debate.
"What if they speak out against us performing something unethical, legally."
"I don't know about that; let's not include that in our legal definition of whistleblower."
"Yeah, that way anyone speaking out against us doing something unethical, legally, does not have protection from a far greater power than themselves, which is to our benefit."
OK
Many people think rape shields are unethical and in violation of Constitutional rights to face one's accuser. Should people who release that information be protected by whistleblower laws?
This isn't the reductio ad absurdum one might think it is. There's no way to make things apply only to the things you like.
it's a legit question how big data surveillance should be considered compatible with the implied right to privacy, if there is one, to be read in the fourth amendment - it is however not really a question that Congress is prepared to weigh in on, in terms of offering a credible programme that would deter abuses, and likewise we're all pretty much sitting around waiting for SCOTUS to feel empowered to make the appropriate distinctions
I love the clothing in Day Z standalone. Not just because it was silly with everyone walking around with the same old stupid skins, but also because like, I worry about repairing my boots or getting enough warm clothing and shit. And when I walk into a house I, I'm finding some clothes and a tin of beans. It feels much less silly.
0
Options
syndalisGetting ClassyOn the WallRegistered User, Loves Apple Productsregular
The idea that the Patriot Act is the basis for what Snowden leaked is also not true. There are numerous examples of similar programs that pre-date the Bush Presidency. ECHELON, Carnivore, Squidgygate, etc.
What the Bush Administration did that brought outrage was do (electronic) surveillance domestically without a warrant, even a low threshold FISA warrant. The problem was not the surveillance but the violation of the law by not requiring warrants. Shit like "Spy Agencies Spying!" and "Searches Conducted After Warrant Obtained!" should not be shocking.
I think you're drawing a mistaken distinction here unless I missed something
I'm pretty OK with people fleeing the wrath of their vengeful governments. Oh, he doesn't get to call himself [insert phrase]? Pfft, whatever. I'd take that route over solitary any day of the week.
No shells for it. I have the .22 dissassembled in my backpack, in case I have to shoot anything. I guess the shotgun could be useful for... intimidation?
yeah it's pretty useless. Hoping to find some shells.
Posts
pokey and mini-polearm
Fail.
Should be Sharpy and Stabby.
Scimitar: the arabic answer to Machete.
Check out my site, the Bismuth Heart | My Twitter
I think being a criminal should be illegal. Think about it.
There would be adventure.
Just stop trying to make your own definition of it. Whistleblowing is about blowing the whistle on illegal activities.
"Activist" is the word we use for people who speak out against legal activities.
What did you think
On the other hand, its nice to see a discussion without people getting crowded out by some of the standby posters in other DnD threads
If the legal definition of a whistleblower is correct as earlier stated, then I agree he is not technically a whistleblower.
I just find that to be a bit on the semantics side, since he is performing pretty much the same function. People who find what he's done distasteful seem to be hung up on the fact that he's staying out of reach of the legal system while doing it.
I find this to be okay in this situation, since I am pretty confident that if he hadn't, we would never have heard about any of this shit. That it would have been practically impossible for him to do this the technically correct way due to the nature of the information itself combined with our current political climate.
PSN/XBL: Zampanov -- Steam: Zampanov
I would appreciate the absurdity of wearing my pinstripe hotpants to business meetings.
What the Bush Administration did that brought outrage was do (electronic) surveillance domestically without a warrant, even a low threshold FISA warrant. The problem was not the surveillance but the violation of the law by not requiring warrants. Shit like "Spy Agencies Spying!" and "Searches Conducted After Warrant Obtained!" should not be shocking.
QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
I started listening to it but had to do something else. I liked the first few songs though.
Please no guys.
it ends at home
skippy come back to me
*baby come back plays in the background*
Many people think rape shields are unethical and in violation of Constitutional rights to face one's accuser. Should people who release that information be protected by whistleblower laws?
QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
wouldn't be the first time a thread topic got dragged into chat
people are being generally civil and reasonable though
What an eyesore!
it's okay, we're near the end
twitch.tv/tehsloth
whistleblowing and activism is a pretty important distinction: whistleblowing is unquestionably "right", since we're talking about somebody exposing breaches of the law. When it comes to stuff that's legal, well, then it's up for debate.
It's a very solid album
it's not pleasant.
Check out my site, the Bismuth Heart | My Twitter
:winky: ?
This isn't the reductio ad absurdum one might think it is. There's no way to make things apply only to the things you like.
QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
neti-pot, bro
Brain eating parasites.
I love the clothing in Day Z standalone. Not just because it was silly with everyone walking around with the same old stupid skins, but also because like, I worry about repairing my boots or getting enough warm clothing and shit. And when I walk into a house I, I'm finding some clothes and a tin of beans. It feels much less silly.
NYC water has very tiny crustaceans in it.
Do not want shrimp in my brain meats.
Let's play Mario Kart or something...
I think you're drawing a mistaken distinction here unless I missed something
PSN/XBL: Zampanov -- Steam: Zampanov
No shells for it. I have the .22 dissassembled in my backpack, in case I have to shoot anything. I guess the shotgun could be useful for... intimidation?
yeah it's pretty useless. Hoping to find some shells.