Rolling Stone: How two alienated, angry geeks broke the story of the year

[Logical]

Early one morning last December, Glenn Greenwald opened his laptop, scanned through his e-mail, and made a decision that almost cost him the story of his life. A columnist and blogger with a large and devoted following, Greenwald receives hundreds of e-mails every day, many from readers who claim to have "great stuff." Occasionally these claims turn out to be credible; most of the time they're cranks. There are some that seem promising but also require serious vetting. This takes time, and Greenwald, who starts each morning deluged with messages, has almost none. "My inbox is the enemy," he told me recently.

And so it was that on December 1st, 2012, Greenwald received a note from a person asking for his public encryption, or PGP, key so he could send him an e-mail securely. Greenwald didn't have one, which he now acknowledges was fairly inexcusable given that he wrote almost daily about national-security issues, and had likely been on the government's radar for some time over his vocal support of Bradley Manning and WikiLeaks. "I didn't really know what PGP was," he admits. "I had no idea how to install it or how to use it." It seemed time-consuming and complicated, and Greenwald, who was working on a book about how the media control political discourse, while also writing his column for The Guardian, had more pressing things to do.

"It felt Anonymous-ish to me," Greenwald says. "It was this cryptic 'I and others have things you would be interested in. . . .' He never sent me neon lights – it was much more ambiguous than that."

So he ignored the note. Soon after, the source sent Greenwald a step-by-step tutorial on encryption. Then he sent him a video Greenwald describes as "Encryption for Journalists," which "walked me through the process like I was a complete idiot."

More at:

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/snowden-and-greenwald-the-men-who-leaked-the-secrets-20131204

[gulliver]

1. Exactly. Angry and alienated.

That describes the story source and the target audience. The emotion is right there on the surface, but it is also beneath their thinking. That's why it's wrong.

[Logical]

2. But they are heros now. The public is seeing what the NSA is actually doing. It opened many eyes! nt

[SoapBox]

15. So the public now sees what Facebook, Google, etc. are now doing?

Let's see...Comrade Eddie, poor, poor, little Eddie took a course in India to "crack code" (or whatever) and then got a job where he could expose National secrets. And then released said secrets (which every nation was AND IS doing anyway) to the world PLUS the TERRORISTS...via Greenwald the Brazilian and a foreign newspaper. Oops...forgot that he the fled the country too!

Ya, a real hero.

If the NSA wants to get a court order to hear me talk to Mom's cardiologist, I invite them to do so.

Now, back to those TERRORISTS, foreign and domestic, how do we track and stop them?

Hmmmm...sounds like crickets from the Tin Foil/ Musket crowd.

...go back to exposing everything on Facebook.

[Logical]

22. LOL, where are the terrorists? Where? In the USA name the last terror attack! They have your ass....

so nervous that you 100% buy their shit.

[NuclearDem]

26. Because the NSA did such a terrific job stopping the Boston Marathon bombing.

They're totally on top of stopping terrorism.

[Diego_Native 2012]

39. I would point out that the authorities were

alerted to Tsarnaev long, long before he became the Boston Bomber and still couldn't do anything to prevent it. It would seem, that unless the FBI and DHS are not actually setting up the sting operation and spoon feeding the "radicalized suspect" both materials and motivation, they are incapable of stopping a single thing.

[merrily]

65. Surveillance is not for prevention, but for prosecution of the perps.

They want to get plea bargains and convictions (without the need for torture).

Showing a perp a film will generally yield a conviction.

Also to control peaceful demonstrators and the like.

They cannot possibly process all the crap they collect.

However, if a crime happens, or a demonstration or something similar is underway, they know the date or the approximate date and location.

I'd rather not be surveilled and let my killer (if any) go free than to live in a police state, but that's me.

[SomethingFishy]

50. Who put you in charge? You don't care if the NSA listens to your calls? Fine, I DO care.

Where on earth did you get the idea that YOU get to decide what is an invasion of privacy and what isn't? YOu want to invite the NSA to listen to your phone calls, knock yourself out. Don't include me in your "I'm not doing anything wrong so go ahead and treat me like a criminal" stance.

You do realize you have a better chance of getting hit by lightning.. TWICE than you do of being killed in a terrorist attack right? You do realize you have a better chance of dying of cancer, or a heart attack, or being killed in a mass shooting, or dying from high blood pressure, or being killed in a car wreck right? But hey that's no reason to keep you rights as a citizen, there's terrorists under your bed! Tap my phone!

[Phlem]

58. ....

[merrily]

64. We don't have constitutional rights against Google, Facebook, et al.

Too bad you don't value the Bill of Rights or the rule of law.

Some of us do, though. Not only that, we have, well, rights, to value them.

[Titonwan]

70. Eddie crack code

and I don't care! Sing it! Let's see just how dark our government really is.
You know, I usually have to go to a reichwing blog to hear people say 'comrade' when describing someone...

[mike_c]

3. THAT, in a nutshell, is why universal government surveillance is a good thing....

Not.

[sabrina 1]

4. Like millions of other Americans you mean. Rather than 'apathetic and blinded by partisanship'??

Anyone who is NOT angry and alienated at this point is either asleep or willfully ignorant for whatever reason.

All heroes are angry and alienated, historically, or have been referred to that way.

It sure isn't the apathetic and willfully blind who have ever stopped corruption and law-lawbreaking in government.

Thank the gods for the Angry and Alienated.

[JEB]

8. You voiced my feelings perfectly.

[cantbeserious]

10. +1

eom

[gulliver]

19. It's not good for people to respect mere anger and alienation.

Heroes may feel angered and alienated, but the angered and alienated aren't heroes. I definitely don't thank anyone for them. It is the rare one that is a true hero. Most are just killing their own ability to think.

I don't actually know yet who exactly Snowden and Greenwald saved from anything. Their contribution seems to be that they struck a blow against something that other people seem to feel is fearful and actually exists. I guess it is an oligarchic, stifling, all-pervading, soulless, bureaucratic government "beast" of some kind. Sort of like Lord of the Flies meets Brazil.

Yup, I don't see it. And I sleep in the dark.

I would rather have the Obama/Democrat style "police matter" approach to global security than the Bush/Republican "just bomb it" approach. I wish we were in a world where we wouldn't need either, but we have all these people whose alienation and anger make them see monsters under the bed and shining heroes to lead the fight against them.

[cantbeserious]

20. It Is Clear To Me That One Has Not Actually Read The Article - Many Of The Questions Are Answered

That one would defer to "Authoritarians" of any stripe, Obama included, for refuge is also telling.

Many, including myself, do not share that point of view.

[Maedhros]

52. Concern Troll is concerned.

Film at eleven.

[sabrina 1]

73. Like I said, anyone who cares about this COUNTRY rather than individual parties, is angry and

certainly would want to alienate themselves from the enormous corruption we have witnessed over the past decade or so.

Maybe if we had seen some investigations of War Criminals eg, rather than the persecution of those who reported them, or of Wall St Criminals, rather than the American People being forced to save their rear ends, people would have more faith in the fact that the Government too, was rightfully angry to see such massive crimes being committed on the pretext of 'fighting terror'. Especially since we are told, see Feinstein, that we are in MORE danger now than ever and must continue this phony 'WOT'. Of course it is an incredibly profitable 'war' for a few privileged and protected individuals.

Seeing the single digit approval ratings for Congress and the over 50% ratings for Whistle Blower, Snowden with the public approving of being informed of what their government is up to, the People, who are supposed to be considered in the running of their government, have spoken.

I'm happy to have the information we have been provided with by Whistle Blowers, and deeply concerned that there are no investigations of the CRIMES, which in any decent Democracy would have happened long ago, but rather an attempt to demonize those with the courage to inform the people of how their tax dollars are being spent. That SHOULD be Congress' job. But clearly only a tiny fraction of that branch of government can be depended on to do so.

Anger is an appropriate reaction to massive crimes. Dismissing the hundreds of thousands of deaths of human beings for political reasons is extremely inappropriate. Dismissing the deliberate crimes that led to the collapse of the world's economies, the destruction of millions of lives, and the profiteering that caused it, is an extremely inappropriate reaction to such a massive crime.

[2banon]

43. Like maybe Thomas Paine.. the originator of our cherished but shredded Bill of Rights.. eom

[merrily]

63. I did not know that. That's ironic, given that he was a relatively recent immigrant

from the land of George III.

Makes sense, though, because our Bill of Rights echoes a lot of things the Brits had come to from the Magna Carta (1215 C.E.) forward.

[cantbeserious]

9. So, It Is Wrong For Americans To Have No Confidence In Oligarchs, Corporations And Government

How presumptuous of you to make that decision for the rest of us.

[cantbeserious]

16. A Principled Position - From The Article - Greenwald chose a third path.

Snip ...

"I decided to wage war against this system and institutional authority that had tried to reject and condemn me," he says. "It was like, 'Go fuck yourselves. Instead of having you judge me, I'm going to judge you, because I don't accept the fact that you're even in a position to cast judgments upon me.'"

Snip ...

Taught to him by his paternal grandfather

Snip ...

"The most important thing my grandfather taught me was that the most noble way to use your skills, intellect and energy is to defend the marginalized against those with the greatest power – and that the resulting animosity from those in power is a badge of honor."

Snip ...

[JDPriestly]

48. It is amazing. Snowden -- barely more than a kid with no high school diploma, no college degree,

but, like George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Paine and so many other heroes before him, he understood the political peril and the injury to human rights that these overly broad NSA programs present for not just Americans but the world.

At the same time, many who post on DU totally miss the fact that their very freedom to express their thoughts here are what Snowden is defending.

I begin to think that those who so vociferously defend the NSA work for it or gain some personal profit from its programs. It is just unreal, it is impossible, that a person who thinks about political expression, the importance of personal freedom and the marketplace of ideas could possibly support the NSA's program. It is a danger to DU. It is a danger to the internet. It is a danger to the United States (yes, this NSA program poses a grave danger to the United States, possibly greater than most of the terrorists themselves) and a danger to the world.

Stop terrorism, we must. But we should not stop the internet and free expression on the internet in the process. That's what continuing the NSA programs will do. Stop free expression and the internet. That will happen eventually, probably during your lifetime.

[RC]

72. I find that scary.

...many who post on DU totally miss the fact that their very freedom to express their thoughts here are what Snowden is defending.

They can not see past their own myopic world view, fueled by the idea that this is somehow just a game and they are rooting for their home team, by standing up for the NSA, against all us traitorous 'Snowden lovers'. Our own history is lost on them.

[JDPriestly]

77. Thanks.

[riderinthestorm]

75. +1. Agreed nt

[merrily]

69. And productive. As opposed to those who are merely angry and alienated.

And it's not wrong because of their emotions.

That's silly.

[jsr]

5. Shining light on cockroaches.

[lark]

11. That's so authoritarian

Think you are on the wrong website. If ratting out government malfeasance is being a cockroach, we need a hell of a lot more cockroaches.

[jsr]

24. I wasn't referring to Snowden & Greenwald

Read my posting history.

[lark]

76. My bad

Sorry I misunderstood.

[deafskeptic]

27. Your post is K&R n/t

[niyad]

37. pretty sure the poster did not mean snowden and greenwald.

[Snarkoleptic]

6. Now that this is in place, I fear it will only ever expand.

[niyad]

36. that graphic explains it perfectly

[Logical]

61. True nt

[hueymahl]

78. I absolutely LOVE your signature GIF!!!

Where did that come from, if you don't mind me asking?

[Snarkoleptic]

79. sorry to say I don't recall where I grabbed it.

Right click, save to your desktop and, optionally, save to photobucket.com

[amerxp]

7. Thank you very much for this article.

Until Snowden released his info, no one was truly aware of the extent of the surveillance. In order to justify this massive spying , the so-called Intelligence Agencies declared that everyone was guilty until proven innocent. Then they convinced anyone who bothered to ask that their ham-handed skirting of the 14th Amendment was for "national security". Whatta crock!
Thank you, Edward Snowden.

[lark]

12. Hi and welcome to DU!

[cantbeserious]

14. Snowden Did Humanity A Favor - History Will Record

eom

[Logical]

21. +1000! n-t

[niyad]

34. welcome to du

[Enthusiast]

13. Kicked and recommended a whole bunch.....nt

[Jefferson23]

17. Highly recommend..and thanks. n/t

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

18. But..but..everybody knew about it...that's why our "transparent" gov't was keeping it secret.

And, their pursuing Snowden because "everybody" might find out what "everybody" already knows.

And, why their calling CYA press conferences to explain that the revelations are a non-story.

"The welfare of the people in particular has always been the alibi of tyrants, and it provides the further advantage of giving the servants of tyranny a good conscience.”
-Albert Camus (1913-1960)

[sendero]

23. Anyone that can read this..

... understand what Snowden did and why and still be against him, DOES NOT UNDERSTAND the most BASIC PRINCIPLES on which America was founded, why everything about our justice system is governed by STRICT and UBIQUITOUS RULES because the FOUNDERS knew a simple inexorable fact that seems to escape morons, that any excess power given to a government or king WILL BE ABUSED.

[Logical]

25. +1000! n-t

[G_j]

29. nailed it

[Cali_Democrat]

55. The Founding Fathers are overrated

Buncha white men, many of whom who had no issues with enslaving people.

I'm sorry, but I refuse to lick their feet.

[sendero]

56. Yes.

.... now you are smarter than Washington et al. Ok, go with that argument and prove my point.

[Cali_Democrat]

60. Go back to the founding of this country

and ask African Americans what they think of the folks that enslaved them.

Now you want folks to praise those same people that had no qualms about enslaving people?

Fawk that.

Not gonna lick their feet. Just not gonna do it.

[sabrina 1]

74. John Adams not only never owned a slave he considered it a great 'evil'.

The only reason the FFs did not include Jefferson's demand, yes, Jefferson's, to end slavery in the Declaration of Independence and removed it from that document, was because they needed the Southern States to kick the British out which was the first order of business at that point, before they could begin to address anything else.

But it is a Right Wing false accusation against many of those who took part in the founding of this country to continually drop this right wing defense of Bush during the Bush years, whenever he was accused of violating the Constitution. I remember it well, as soon as we pointed out the Constitutional Violations to Bush supporters, out came the 'so, you support people who supported slavery'. That broad brush of everyone who was alive back then. Not surprising for THEM, but very surprising coming from our side.

Abigail Adams' correspondence with her husband makes clear that the New England FFs found slavery to be an appalling evil.

I'm surprised that you of all people, who often reminds us of the 'constraints' on the President making it impossible for him to do many of the things he wants to do, such as not to cut SS, or to include the PO in the HC Bill, is so unaware of the constraints of the FFs who were actually risking their lives, in order to free this country from British Rule.

I am sure, now that you have thought about it and refuse to make any excuses for leaders not doing the right thing, you have changed your mind regarding all the excuses you routinely have made for the current government when they do not do the right thing.

Otherwise there is a HUGE inconsistency here.

[JDPriestly]

59. Have you read the John Adams/Thomas Jefferson correspondence?

[countryjake]

30. kickety

[840high]

32. kick

[adirondacker]

31. It's an Excellent read for anyone willing to spend the time. Thanks! nt

[Wilms]

33. ^

[niyad]

35. k and r, with MANY thanks.

[SpcMnky]

38. Good read, thanks for sharing!

Would love to work with their new company.

[ronnie624]

40. Lots of quotables from Snowden.

Snowden has been vague about when he decided to leak, but he has been very clear on what compelled him to act. "It was seeing a continuing litany of lies from senior officials to Congress – and therefore the American people – and the realization that Congress . . . wholly supported the lies," he said. "Seeing someone in the position of James Clapper – director of National Intelligence – baldly lying to the public without repercussion is the evidence of a subverted democracy."

[center]*****[/center]
"You can't stare down a spy agency without being prepared to burn your life to the ground over the smallest grain of truth, because truth is the only thing they are afraid of. Truth means accountability, and accountability terrifies those who have gone beyond what is necessary."

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/snowden-and-greenwald-the-men-who-leaked-the-secrets-20131204


He's a very smart, principled individual, and there's no evidence that he or Greenwald are libertarians, as some of their detractors here maintain.

[Logical]

41. So true. n-t

[randome]

42. I wonder if he'll ever specify what lies he's talking about.

Was it Clapper's testimony to Congress that occurred after Snowden leaked?

Just like Snowden says he 'saw things' but he won't ever specify what that means.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

[ronnie624]

44. He didn't say it happened before.

He said it was evidence of a subverted democracy.

"Just like Snowden says he 'saw things' but he won't ever specify what that means."

I don't know what you are saying here. Some elaboration would help.

False testimony to Congress on NSA surveillance programs

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_R._Clapper#False_testimony_to_Congress_on_NSA_surveillance_programs

[Logical]

46. thanks for the link

[Luminous Animal]

45. Excellent article. K&R

[WillyT]

47. K & R !!!

[marmar]

49. k/r

[goldent]

51. The problem with Snowden and Greenwald

is that it went from releasing info on some potentially illegal/unconstitutional activities in the US, to releasing anything and everything. This is when I lost respect for them, and see them as being on the other side.

[Logical]

53. You are wrong. Foreign governments needed to know what we are doing also. We dont trust them and...

they should not trust us.

[goldent]

57. "We dont trust them and they should not trust us"

Exactly, this was the status quo and will remain so. All Snowden did was rub their faces in it. Germany especially got its face rubbed in it, when it can out they were "third tier" when it came to trust by the US government - juicy gossip in the world of diplomacy.

[mike_c]

54. we are all "on the other side" now....

In the surveillance state, we're all potential enemies.

[ronnie624]

62. They didn't just release "anything and everything".

According to this article and others I've read, all of the documents are meticulously archived, and strictly vetted and redacted. Snowden has maintained all along, that his goal was to provide transparency, while making certain that no one but he was implicated in the theft of the documents, and that no legitimate intelligence sources were jeopardized. The only place I hear the claim that he released documents willy-nilly, is from his most strident detractors, and they can never produce evidence that anyone was physically harmed by their release.

A lot of people have made a seriously flawed cost/benefit analysis, in trading a portion of their liberty, in exchange for perceived security. Most terrorism experts, the world over, say that the Global War on Terror actually decreases security, by increasing the probability of a successful terrorist attacks. It also sets a bad example to other countries, who might now believe that they too, have a right to act unilaterally and preemptively in attacking others, in clear violation of international law. It also provokes greater distrust among countries who might be skeptical of the motives of the US, thereby increasing the general level of tension and hostility in the world, right at the very moment when we, more than at any other time, need to be cooperating to secure the long-term future of our civilization and even our species.

And that is on top of the fact that the threat from terrorism is minuscule, to begin with. There is NO WAY, that the actual physical threat from terrorism, merits the tremendous amount of resources and energy devoted to a Global War on Terror. You are tens of thousands of times more likely to die from heart disease or cancer or from a plane crash that doesn't involve terrorism.

The resources wasted on the GWOT would be better served developing alternative sources of energy that wont destroy our biosphere.

[merrily]

66. I think only 1% of the stuff Snowden collected has been released.

[ronnie624]

68. And the editor-in-chief of the Guardian said,

"I would not expect us to be publishing a huge amount more."

[Hissyspit]

71. Releasing anything and everything?

Snowden apparently had strict rules for Greenwald and Guardian about what could be released. And reports are that only 1% of his files have been published.

What are you talking about?

[merrily]

67. God, I miss the rule of law.

Snowden is a hero to me.

Greenwald less, because he got a scoop, the dream of all journalists. He did not have to give up his job, as Snowden did. To the contrary, he did very well in his chosen career financially. He did not have to give up his whole life as Snowden did, so I am not sure what sacrifice he made.

Not that I am not grateful to Greenwald, but I think Snowden is a hero over this and Greenwald got lucky over this.