SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
IT Pro Portal reports
In 2013, the former NSA contractor shocked the world by revealing the extent to which the US government is spying on its own citizens and indeed, people all over the world. Aided by investigative journalist Glenn Greenwald and filmmaker Laura Poitras, the documents that Snowden released have made the public re-think their position on privacy and national security.
While the Snowden files have previously been made available via Greenwald's personal website and the American Civil Liberties Union, now a University of Toronto graduate, George Raine, has created the Snowden Surveillance Archive to allow you to search all the documents released so far.
"This archive is a complete collection of all documents that former NSA contractor Edward Snowden leaked in June 2013 to journalists Laura Poitras, Glenn Greenwald, and Ewen MacAskill, and subsequently were published by news media, such as The Guardian, The New York Times, The Washington Post, Der Spiegel, Le Monde, El Mundo, and The Intercept," the archive reads. "The leaked documents and their coverage have raised significant public concerns and had a major impact on intelligence policy debates internationally over issues of freedom of expression, privacy, national security, and democratic governance more broadly."
The archive is made up of approximately 400 documents, including files subsequently published by the US government to help individuals understand some of the leaked information. Given that Snowden was in possession of more than 50,000 files, there are plenty of revelations and stories yet to come regarding NSA surveillance.
For now, however, interested parties can use the search software in order to trawl through the documents and we've provided a run-down of how to do just that below.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Anal Pumpernickel on Monday April 06 2015, @06:33PM
ignoring the $billions (possibly $trillions eventually) of damage to the USA
Maybe the US shouldn't conduct unconstitutional and unethical mass surveillance, then. You're blaming the messenger. That's if there's any damage; I've yet to see actual evidence.
and ignoring that the vast majority of the leaked stuff was totally 100% legit.
I'm sure you think that spying on innocent people just because they were born in a different country is completely fine, even if it's an ally country. Well, I think that people have rights, and I don't find mass surveillance acceptable. If you're a bootlicking authoritarian, you probably have no problem with it, though.
(Score: 1) by albert on Tuesday April 07 2015, @04:30AM
The possibly unconstitutional (iffy until the Supreme Court decides) stuff was a drop in the bucket compared to the rest. Most of the leaked stuff involved mass surveillance of foreigners, which is nearly the entire purpose of the NSA, CIA, NRO, etc. Don't be shocked if they are mostly doing their jobs.
It's not a matter of being authoritarian. It's a matter of being concerned for the future and recognizing that other countries are hostile to my own. Don't bring a spork to a gunfight.
(Score: 2) by Anal Pumpernickel on Tuesday April 07 2015, @04:50AM
The possibly unconstitutional (iffy until the Supreme Court decides)
Bullshit. It's not even close to iffy, regardless of what the Supreme Court decides.
The idea that the Supreme Court is always right is not only paradoxical, but it's merely a legal fiction born out of necessity. When they get it wrong (and they have), it's up to The People to do something. The Supreme Court cannot change reality.
Most of the leaked stuff involved mass surveillance of foreigners, which is nearly the entire purpose of the NSA, CIA, NRO, etc. Don't be shocked if they are mostly doing their jobs.
If that is truly their job, then their job is immoral. We shouldn't be conducting mass surveillance on innocents, and especially not ones in ally countries.
Just Following Orders is never an excuse.
It's not a matter of being authoritarian. It's a matter of being concerned for the future and recognizing that other countries are hostile to my own. Don't bring a spork to a gunfight.
In other words, "Someone might attack us at some unspecified point in the future, so all these innocent people's rights are null and void, because rights are inconvenient. I want safety, even if it means sacrificing liberties!" Now that is free and brave. Well done.
And yes, it is a matter of being an authoritarian, which you've shown yourself to be. The number of people here and elsewhere who blindly worship the government and see everyone not born in the same country as them as an enemy with no rights is disturbing.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by albert on Tuesday April 07 2015, @07:05AM
International relations are not based on holding hands around a campfire singing Kumbaya. Unless you are spying on somebody, you need to assume that they are not innocent, else you may get a nasty surprise. (Ukraine for example) Of course, if you are spying on somebody, then almost certainly you will **know** that they are not innocent.
Our supposed allies love spying on us. The more well-known ones are Israel and France, assuming you don't count China as an ally.
Those other people's rights are being protected (effectively or not) by their own governments, the same governments that are violating the rights of people elsewhere including in the USA. I assure you that Germany, protesting with such indignation, cares not for my rights.
I just looked up "authoritarian" to verify my understanding of the word, and nope. You'd get closer with patriotic, nationalistic, jingoist, maybe xenophobic, and obviously conservative. I don't have some fantasy that I'm a "citizen of the world" or that all cultures are valuable, and I accept that my welfare is impacted by the power that my country has at the expense of others. I certainly do like my freedoms at home, and I'll even admit that Holder/Obama did something right when cutting back on seizing cash. I could go for shutting down most SWAT teams, the BATF, land-grabbing eco laws, agencies that take away kids for being allowed outside alone... this is hardly the mindset of an authoritarian.
(Score: 2) by Anal Pumpernickel on Tuesday April 07 2015, @01:59PM
International relations are not based on holding hands around a campfire singing Kumbaya.
Straw man.
Unless you are spying on somebody, you need to assume that they are not innocent, else you may get a nasty surprise.
Have you ever heard of "the ends don't justify the means"? I'll gladly sacrifice safety for freedom from mass surveillance, even if it does work.
Our supposed allies love spying on us.
Then let's be the world's 'leader' for once and be more principled than them.
Those other people's rights are being protected (effectively or not) by their own governments, the same governments that are violating the rights of people elsewhere including in the USA.
But they're being violated by the US government, so it's not good enough.
I just looked up "authoritarian" to verify my understanding of the word, and nope.
Incorrect. You're a hardcore authoritarian who wants to infringe upon people's fundamental liberties for the sole reason that they happened to be born in a different country, all because you want to feel safe.
and I accept that my welfare is impacted by the power that my country has at the expense of others.
At the expense of the people you advocate the government steal money from in order to fund your endless wars and mass surveillance.
I certainly do like my freedoms at home
Ah, so do I. Let's try to get rid of mass surveillance, then.
this is hardly the mindset of an authoritarian.
You're an authoritarian when someone is 'unlucky' enough to be born elsewhere.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 09 2015, @06:11PM
Don't mind him, he just thinks we're living in the zombie apocalypse [slatestarcodex.com].