Greenwald's response: https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/1106195880393297920
good thing glenn won't be impacted by these financial constraints, he'll just go on fox news with noted nazi laura ingraham and talk about the "russia hoax"
Why The Intercept closed the Snowden archive
11–20 of 21 posts
Re: Why The Intercept closed the Snowden archive
#12Anyone have a copy of the full archive? Will it live on at a torrent file somewhere?
No, it's supposed to stay secret. A lot of the documents could literally get people killed if released. That's why Snowden gave it to journalists he trusts, not the open internet.
Re: Why The Intercept closed the Snowden archive
#13Can someone explain this with context? I am not informed enough about this to understand, I assume others are experiencing something similar.
Re: Why The Intercept closed the Snowden archive
#14The author has published a follow-up article: “The Intercept’s editors couldn’t figure out why these leaked emails are important. Can you?”. [1] [1] https://medium.com/@barrettbrown/the-intercepts-editors-coul...
I wonder if he's physically unable to write without being condescending. It really hurts the message.
Re: Why The Intercept closed the Snowden archive
#15Anyone have a copy of the full archive? Will it live on at a torrent file somewhere?
No, it's supposed to stay secret. A lot of the documents could literally get people killed if released. That's why Snowden gave it to journalists he trusts, not the open internet.
Why put so much effort into protecting the privacy of people dead set on killing it for everyone else?
Re: Why The Intercept closed the Snowden archive
#16Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, it's supposed to stay secret. A lot of the documents could literally get people killed if released. That's why Snowden gave it to journalists he trusts, not the open internet.
Why put so much effort into protecting the privacy of people dead set on killing it for everyone else?
> Why put so much effort into protecting people dead set on killing everyone else?
FTFY ;)
Re: Why The Intercept closed the Snowden archive
#17Earlier quoted context omitted.
Read Greenwald’s response, he specifically addressed this point.
To save you time - no because Snowden didn’t want it to be published in full. Ever.
Yes. He wanted journalists to select which documents were in the public's interest, and only those to be released.
Re: Why The Intercept closed the Snowden archive
#18Can someone explain this with context? I am not informed enough about this to understand, I assume others are experiencing something similar.
This article would be a lot better if it started with the introduction: TI decides to end funding for work on the Snowden archive to cut expenditures. Laura Poitras is very angry about this, here are her thoughts.
Re: Why The Intercept closed the Snowden archive
#19Anyone have a copy of the full archive? Will it live on at a torrent file somewhere?
No, it's supposed to stay secret. A lot of the documents could literally get people killed if released. That's why Snowden gave it to journalists he trusts, not the open internet.
>...could literally get people killed if released.
We now know how fucking far we actually are from being a free country and that we can't trust the people who operate the security apparatus of the USA. That's the key "take-away". The actual content of their dowdy-looking power point slides from 2013 is less important as time goes on.
Whatever Snowden got, it's just a snapshot in time. The projects, I'm sure, have since moved on. The acronyms changed, and I think it's fair to assume that they're exploring new initiatives and pushing towards new frontiers for violating privacy, freedom and law.
Re: Why The Intercept closed the Snowden archive
#20Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, it's supposed to stay secret. A lot of the documents could literally get people killed if released. That's why Snowden gave it to journalists he trusts, not the open internet.
Why put so much effort into protecting the privacy of people dead set on killing it for everyone else?
How about: because Snowden isn't interested in murder.
What if the documents contained the identity of an American mole in ISIS, would you release that? Would you watch the execution video when they chop off his head because you blew his cover?
What if the documents contained details of a terrorist plot that the NSA has been tracking, would you release that? Would you apologize to the families of the dead because you tipped off the terrorists on how to avoid law enforcement?
That's why Snowden entrusted the documents to journalists that he drilled in security practices, and that's why he gives the Feds an opportunity to comment on or object to each new document release: there is some stuff that rightly deserves to be kept secret.
Just because the classification system is regularly abused doesn't mean it shouldn't exist.