General Discussion

are those who are constantly trying to say snowden is this that or the next thing...

But if you are unhappy that the conversation isn't focused on surveillance, perhaps you should start talking about surveillance if there's any part of it at all that bothers you.

Meanwhile, many think it has gotten the conversation going:


http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/11/us/poll-shows-complexity-of-debate-on-trade-offs-in-government-spying-programs.html?pagewanted=all

James R. Clapper, the director of national intelligence, was forced to admit publicly that his previous assurance in Senate testimony that the N.S.A. was not collecting data on millions of Americans was false. A fact sheet was withdrawn after two senators charged that it contained errors. And officials who testified about terrorist plots uncovered with the help of the N.S.A. programs got the details of some cases wrong. "

The Snowden disclosures, meanwhile, have prompted a flood of discussion, including Congressional hearings, research organization panels and newspaper editorials and opinion articles, both supportive and critical of the security agency. At least five federal lawsuits have been filed challenging the programs.

But he has succeeded in opening the government spying’s trade-offs between civil liberties and security to the broadest and best-informed public debate in many years, even as intelligence officials are horrified at the exposure of their methods and targets.

Gregory F. Treverton, former vice chairman of the National Intelligence Council, said he found Mr. Snowden’s leaks “reprehensible.” But he said there had been nothing in the past quite comparable to the recent national discussion on government eavesdropping and data collection.

A former judge of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which oversees eavesdropping orders and programs in secret, said he thought the debate was overdue.