>Arguing that you don't care about the right to privacy because you have nothing to hide is no different than saying you don't care about free speech because you have nothing to say.
I really wish people would look beyond Snowden. It isn't as if there was zero knowledge of these types of programs or whistleblowers before him. William Binney, Thomas Drake, J. Kirk Wiebe, and Edward Loomis, just to name a few, deserve a lot more credit in this instance.
Many revealed the Holocaust to the Allies during WWII, but very sadly, no-one managed "to blow the lid off" until Germany collapsed. "The Nazis attempted to keep the Holocaust a secret, but in August 1942, Dr. Gerhart Riegner, the representative of the World Jewish Congress in Geneva, Switzerland, learned what was going on from a German source. Riegner asked American diplomats in Switzerland to inform Rabbi Stephen S. Wise, one of America’s most prominent Jewish leaders, of the mass murder plan. But the State Department, characteristically insensitive and influenced by anti-Semitism, decided not to inform Wise.
The rabbi nevertheless learned of Riegner’s terrible message from Jewish leaders in Great Britain. He immediately approached Under Secretary of State Sumner Welles, who asked Wise to keep the information confidential until the government had time to verify it. Wise agreed and it was not until November 1942 that Welles authorized the release of Riegner’s message.
Wise held a press conference on the evening of November 24, 1942. The next day’s New York Times reported his news on its tenth page. Throughout the rest of the war, the Times and most other newspapers failed to give prominent and extensive coverage to the Holocaust. During World War I, the American press had published reports of German atrocities that subsequently turned out to be false. As a result, journalists during World War II tended to approach atrocity reports with caution." http://www.history.com/topics/world-war-ii/american-response...
So I thank Edward Snowden, even more than I thank the rest.
They seem so much more enlightened now: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XEVlyP4_11M&t=1336
> "Blow the lid off" doesn't mean the first person to reveal something...
Which is probably why you remember Riegner, yet give no mention of Leon Feiner.
> ...it refers to an explosion that can't be ignored.
Sure, or an artful twist to facilitate some hero worship.
The "artful twist" is built-in to not just that idiom but also "blow wide open." It's not a coincidence, it's central to the meaning.
I'm not, and I don't understand your necessity to pick out one above others.
> Why not at least praise them all.
Easy, now. Don't forget that was my argument.
> Your blasts don't ... (unintelligible) ... or something?
Ugh, no. Let's not digress, again...
> The "artful twist" is built-in to not just that idiom but also "blow wide open." It's not a coincidence, it's central to the meaning.
That idiom is overused. That "artful twist" lost its impact a long time ago and "blow wide open" is just a variant. These days both are highly subjective (as illustrated above).
No, the impact from Snowden's actions are useful but no more explosive than what was, and is now becoming, known to those of us who were paying attention all along.
Which is the entire point of my original comment. Would you criticize the WSJ for not name dropping Trump in an article on political stupidity? Or did he blow that wide open, too?
Talk about not adding anything... Good grief, and good night.