Often with the best of intentions—protecting us from terrorists and potential terrorists—governments of both parties have overseen an unprecedented expansion of the surveillance state that bent America’s laws and violated some of its most cherished values. (Ryan’s piece recounts some of the relevant history.) Even now, after all of this year’s revelations, there is no assurance that anything very meaningful will be done to roll back the incursions and to protect the zone of privacy in which all (or most) of us would like to interact, and live.ADDED: Here's the Ryan Lizza article cited in that parenthetical: "State of Deception/Why won’t the President rein in the intelligence community?"
December 9, 2013
"It’s safe to assume that few people in the White House or the defense agencies would be happy to see Time pick Snowden as Person of the Year."
"But that’s just another reason why he deserves the honor," writes John Cassidy in The New Yorker.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
15 comments:
Tax audits all around!!
I've never been clear on whether Time's Person of the Year is supposed to be an honor or just a statement about who had the biggest effect on the world that year.
Hitler was a Person of the Year, but then again bin Laden wasn't in 2001. Maybe it's changed over the decades, too.
I've never been clear on whether Time's Person of the Year is supposed to be an honor or just a statement about who had the biggest effect on the world that year.
Hitler was a Person of the Year, but then again bin Laden wasn't in 2001. Maybe it's changed over the decades, too.
"The road to hell is paved with good intentions..."
With the best intentions to thwart Dear Leader's enemies, IRS agents started targeting conservative groups and auditing those who criticized Dear Leader.
One's good intentions, other's sinister ploys.
Time magazine? I thought it died. Oh that, my 86 year old mom still reads it. She's a gloria steinem liberal.
Snowden would be the choice if Time wanted to push a libertarian agenda. Snowden is a genuine hero and he would put Obama on the side of Wrong.
This can't be allowed to happen. Time doesn't want to be audited by the IRS or raided by the FBI.
Goodness, why would they care? Nobody reads Time any more. I didn't know it was still published, actually. I vaguely remember it being sold to Zuck for a $1. Or was that Newsweek being sold to Arianna Huffington's illegal maid for a half kilo of most excellent Humboldt bud? It's hard to keep track of lefty totems.
"I've never been clear on whether Time's Person of the Year is supposed to be an honor or just a statement about who had the biggest effect on the world that year."
The latter.
Why not the Obamacare law architect [a generic Dem] or the Obamacare website designer?
If Snowsen came out as gay that would lock it up. I know he would get Althouse's vote.
Whether he's a patriot or a traitor, no doubt Snowden is the most influential person of the year.
(Also, isn't it weird that a fugitive named Snow-den winds up seeking refuge in Russia?)
Actually I do feel Snowden should be 'man of the year'.
He has profoundly affected things.
It was easy access to Dutch gummint records of their citizens' names, addresses and religions that enabled the Nazis to round up the Dutch Jews with ease.
A nation that spies on its people in the name of national defense is a nation more worthy of destruction than preservation.
I'm fanatical about maintaining my privacy and secrets from gummint. In the old days, we who were cheating on spouses or calling a co-conspirator would drop a dime in a pay phone, preferably calling another pay phone.
That degree of privacy could be revived with better technology: I envision vanilla cellphones installed throughout the world, in every bar and taxi, that would hold only data needed to maintain the cell connection. All records--contact list, call history, personal IDs--would be kept in a removable 32GB card that would also hold pre-pay funds like a cash card to pay for the call. The card funds could be periodically replenished a la Paypal or Skype.
The only metadata available to snoops would be that needed for cell communications, totally stripped of personal data, except perhaps for a time stamp of the call.
Why would any legitimate news entity care what the White House or government agencies thought of their choices? Oh, sorry, forgot, there are no legitimate news entities.
I nominate the newly uninsured.
Post a Comment