Answer to an Unpublished Comment

My points in my post aren't Yeah NSA and Down with Glenn Greenwald,  they are:

1.  There is no such a thing as a guarantee of privacy online

Even if the United States government wasn't collecting any of the information that it has been exposed as collecting, THOSE ARE COMMUNICATIONS BETWEEN PEOPLE IN THE UNITED STATES AND OUTSIDE OF THE UNITED STATES, MANY OF THOSE TO COUNTRIES WITHOUT ANY SUPPOSED CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTION OF PRIVACY AT ALL.  It is The World Wide Web,  your messages are already going through countries in which governments practice a far more extensive level of direct spying on people who live in those countries.  THOSE GOVERNMENTS COULD DIRECTLY COLLECT YOUR E-MAIL AND OTHER COMMUNICATIONS AND GLENN, THE GUARDIAN AND THE ENTIRE COMBINED PRO-SNOWDEN TWITTERSPHERE-BLOGOSPHERE-U.S. MEDIA AIN'T ABOUT TO STOP THEM OR EVEN SLOW THEM DOWN.

If you believe that the 4th and 5th and every other amendment in the United States Constitution, applied in a way that would make the shade of Louis Brandeis smile, is possible with online communication you are living in a fools paradise.

Ironically, the one venue of remote communication that is as fully protected as possible is THE U. S. MAIL as long as it stays within the United States.  Good old, union member handled, in many cases union member delivered, snail mail has as full protection as you're going to get anywhere. Of course it's not anywhere near as fast and easy and convenient but it's not going to be ROUTINELY ROUTED THROUGH OTHER COUNTRIES LIKE THE ONES THAT EDWARD SNOWDEN SOUGHT SANCTUARY FROM THE U.S. GOVERNMENT IN WHICH NO ONE HAS ANY REAL LEGAL GUARANTEES OF PRIVACY TO SPEAK OF.  And even the U.S. Mail isn't an absolute guarantee of privacy.

Geesh, all of these so, so, sophisticated tech-age people so naive about these things.  You'd probably have a better chance of stumbling across security if you scribbled your information on the wall of a men's toilet in a sleazy bar.

2.  Edward Snowden's fleeing to two very far from democratic countries with both a vital interest in the information that he took with him and the technical ability to take it from him, frankly, STINKS.

Especially considering the guy was working for A SPY AGENCY CONTRACTOR.   Why two of the countries with the greatest interest and that technical and legal ability to get it from him as he slept?   Pure stupidity and coincidence would be hard put to get him to those two particular places.  And why, if he were really interested in not being detected, did he do everything he could to not only be detected but to be presented in the media as a hero to the people who have become sort of a Snowden cult.

If there's one thing that I'm relatively certain of, if he'd requested it and gradually leaked information to him from a far more out of the way venue in another country LIKE BRAZIL WHERE GREENWALD LIVES,   SNOWDEN COULD HAVE DEPENDED ON GLENN GREENWALD TO PROTECT HIS PRIVACY IF HE HAD INSISTED ON IT.  It is one of the most bizarre features of this that, by his own course of conduct and that of the journalist he leaked it to, Snowden freely and, it seems to me, eagerly gave up his own privacy for the purpose of becoming an international celebrity.  If he valued it so much, you'd think he would have done more to keep it.   All of which makes his decision to go to Hong Kong and then Moscow not only incomprehensible as a planned getaway but peculiarly like what I can understand as a sort of sales trip itinerary, given what he took with him on it.

I began entirely on the Snowden-Greenwald side of this, thinking of it as another Bradley Manning case but as their behavior and claims have developed, it's looked like something very different to me.  Manning is a far more heroic figure.  He was truly tortured by the deaths he was witnessing which he knew were being covered up.  His big mistake was that he gave the information to a source that didn't do much to protect him. How Julian Assange handled it did a lot to lose him my respect.

These two incidents have really put me off the celebrity leaker phenomenon, about the only person who seems to deserve the most respect is the one whose ass is in the most serious sling.  Manning has my complete sympathy and support,  others involved, not so much.  I'm not opposed to forcing the NSA to operate more openly and with more protection than the current FISA process.  For a start I'd like better judges involved with FISA because I don't trust the reported identity of the current judges involved.  But this argument, based in its breathtaking naivety and the dodgy conduct of Snowden and the less than stellar journalism of Greenwald, isn't going to do it.

I'd like to review Greenwald's archive to see what he might have said about the Judith Miller case.  In her case I held that she was the witness to a crime, in the leak of Valerie Plame's identity by members of the Bush II regime and that even journalists have no protection that allows them to conceal crimes.  If Greenwald was in another country when he received the leaks, that makes it somewhat different in terms of legality but I don't really see the act as being all that different, though the motives could have been.   I don't know what else Snowden might have on those hard drives he's got with him that even Greenwald might not know about and which could, conceivably be sold for a large price.  Does Greenwald have that much faith in his source that he believes he has everything Snowden has?

AND I HAVEN'T EVEN MENTIONED THOSE POINTS ABOUT INFORMATION COLLECTING AND SELLING BY PRIVATE CORPORATIONS A LOT OF THAT FREELY THOUGH UNKNOWINGLY SURRENDERED BY THE SAME PEOPLE WHO ARE IN A DAILY SWIVET OVER THESE ISSUES.   You've almost certainly done that if you are reading this.  If you didn't, I for one would like to know how you protected your privacy because I'd like to be able to do that. 

I ALSO HAVEN'T GOTTEN INTO HOW MUCH IT STINKS THAT PRIVATE CONTRACTORS HIRING PEOPLE WITH SNOWDEN'S CV TO HANDLE THE MOST SENSITIVE LEVEL OF U.S. GOVERNMENT INFORMATION HAVE BECOME THE NORM BECAUSE OF THE REPUBLICAN'S FETISH FOR  PRIVATIZATION AND FEEDING OFF OF THAT ENORMOUS RESOURCE THEY CREATED ONCE THEY'VE LEFT "PUBLIC SERVICE".  As far as I'm concerned, that should constitute treason if anything in this case should.  

Update:  I didn't say Snowden's travels and conduct made sense as a sales trip as planned by a genius.  If there's one thing that is obvious,  Edward Snowdon isn't the brightest pebble on the beach.

Update 2:   If you want more about the myth of online privacy and what you could do to obtain real privacy, here's something you should listen to.  Though real privacy isn't EZ convenient and as fast as photons in ultra-fast connections.  And if you want your leak of information or just plain information to be as private as possible, here's an even better how-to do it.