
NSA morale down after Edward Snowden revelations, former U.S. officials say - mxfh
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/nsa-morale-down-after-edward-snowden-revelations-former-us-officials-say/2013/12/07/24975c14-5c65-11e3-95c2-13623eb2b0e1_story.html
======
spodek
More like " _USA_ morale down after Edward Snowden revelations, much of U.S.
population says," I'd say.

That happens when you do something most people would feel shame for.

A major difference between NSA employees and the rest of us is that they can
easily stop what they're doing. Let's hope their pitiful loss of morale leads
them to develop a conscience, respect for the law, or whatever it takes to
stop doing things that lead to feeling so bad.

> _“They feel they’ve been hung out to dry, and they’re right.”_

Bullshit. They're adults who chose to do what they did and work where they
work.

We have emotions to guide our behavior. If they feel bad for the environment
they chose to work in and the work they chose to do, maybe they should look in
the mirror and ask if they ought to reconsider their choices and do something
that doesn't draw shame and contempt from the rest of the world while
undermining their county's interests.

~~~
tokenadult
_More like "USA morale down after Edward Snowden revelations, much of U.S.
population says," I'd say._

I suppose you and I meet different subsets of the United States population in
our daily lives. I am on record here on HN as having participated in the Take
Back the Fourth protest in Minneapolis about overreaching NSA surveillance. I
was not afraid to go out in public in view of TV cameras and the police (the
protest location was a plaza across the street from the headquarters of the
Minneapolis police deparment, and I saw officers with cameras overlooking the
protest location) to indicate that I think governmental surveillance, if it
occurs at all, should be according to law, and strictly limited by law.

That said, I don't treat Snowden as a hero, and I hope no one else in the
United States emulates him, ever. He would have done a lot more good for
humankind by increasing the NSA's ability to conduct surveillance in China and
in Russia (the two countries that have protected him so far) and in central
Asia in general. And what has most struck me as I have conversations with
American adults of approximately my age (birth years in the 1950s, 1960s, and
1970s) who remember more history is that they are mostly very eager to see
Snowden prosecuted to the full extent of the law, which would probably mean
spending the rest of his life in prison.

Yes, people choose where they work. And some people remember not to stab their
co-workers in the back when they go to work. I have never chosen to work for
NSA, and I would be glad to see NSA have more effective oversight from
Congress and a more limited role in data-gathering. But the United States
(like every other country in the world) needs some intelligence-gathering
capabilities, and I seem to be joined in my daily activities by a lot of
Americans who think that Snowden didn't help anyone by revealing official
secrets and that he has a very misguided set of priorities about which
governments to oppose. My morale decreases to know that anyone who was
contracting for NSA wasn't checked out well enough to detect that tendency to
treachery in advance.

The day the news broke that Edward Snowden had left Hong Kong, I was out of
town at a soccer tournament with my daughter. The parents of her teammates,
mostly younger than I am, heard me announce that news, and when one parent
asked, what Snowden's destination was, another said, "Gitmo?" with a smile
that indicated that he thought Snowden belongs there. I find that reaction
quite commonplace among Americans I know.

AFTER EDIT: I see the downvotes indicating disagreement are already coming
here, and that is not a surprise here on Hacker News, but do we have strong
evidence that the general opinion of the American public is united in
supporting the HN community view of Snowden's conduct as an NSA contractor?
That's one factual question worthy of factual discussion here, whether you
agree with my opinion or not.

AFTER FURTHER EDITS: I appreciate the replies to my comment, practicing free
speech to help me understand other people's perspectives. I would say that
it's quite possible to be a genuine whistleblower without disclosing the
degree of operational information that Snowden disclosed. And it is possible--
it has been done--to decry current NSA practice and still stay in the United
States, as some NSA officials have done in the last few years. I'll check the
polling data kindly shared in one reply. I'll note that Americans my age and
older (well above the modal or median age of HN participants) have multiple
sources of information through which to form opinions on this issue, and don't
rely solely on governmental statements or influence from political leaders to
make up our minds on these issues.

~~~
vidarh
As a non-American, I see him as a hero but I am frankly more outraged by the
revelations of how complicit European governments have been, and how unwilling
the press have been to follow it up.

The shocking level of quiet acceptance and resignation is to me indication we
need many more like Snowden, not only in the US. And frankly, I've come to
think that the most important form of political activism is not to agitate for
change at this point, but to build up support structures for whistleblowers
and find ways of actively encouraging whistleblowing. Not just technical
infrastructure for anonymous leaks, but physical protection, escape routes,
and support networks.

Not just to get leaks, but to destroy morale in these organizations by making
everyone worry about whether their co-workers will turn. Make these agencies
consume themselves.

I do recognize that states needs intelligence to protect their interests, but
that does not make it _right_. In fact, I see it as a symptoms of a
fundamentally broken system, and yet another reason why the state can never
avoid becoming a tool of oppression.

One thing that makes me happy about recent developments though, is that while
I used to be far out on the fringe when it comes to my views on the immorality
of US foreign policy (I used to regularly face people who refused to accept
that CIA actions that past CIA directors had publicly admitted to in broadcast
TV interviews ever happened, that's the extent of the trust the US _used_ to
have with the European right), here in the UK I now meet people far, far right
of me politically who now agree with me or even are more negative to it than
me where they'd previously have refused to acknowledge it even as a
possibility.

The view of the US as "land of the free" is rapidly disappearing amongst the
type of people I meet, and it is more and more common to hear people across
the political spectrum refer to the US a police state or complain about
increasing authoritarianism. It's not long ago since the idea of meeting
Europeans who refuse on principle to travel to the US would be utterly bizarre
- now it is relatively commonplace.

As for a "tendency to treachery", I find that description disgusting. Anyone
going into public service has a duty first and foremost to the people. No
matter what they might sign or what other promises they might make. In that
respect he did his job far better than most other NSA employees, whether or
not the public are grateful for it now.

~~~
mercurial
> As a non-American, I see him as a hero but I am frankly more outraged by the
> revelations of how complicit European governments have been, and how
> unwilling the press have been to follow it up.

I agree, it's terribly depressing. There is this narrative of "the NSA is
spying on us" when Europeans should wake up and realize that their domestic
security service are doing exactly the same, either secretly (France, UK...)
or openly (Sweden). But considering how both the moderate right and the
moderate left have been perfectly accommodating about it, people, provided
they are even aware of it, are left with little legal recourse.

~~~
vidarh
I'm Norwegian, and the most horrifying demonstration of how weak the press is
we got when one of the major newspapers (Dagbladet) published claims that the
Norwegian intelligence services (without specifying which one - there are 3)
handed over millions of call records per months to the NSA (EDIT: specifically
claiming this was about surveillance _in_ Norway).

The response was downright scary:

All the three agencies denies that there was any surveillance of Norwegians in
Norway, as one would expect them to do.

 _But_ the agency responsible for foreign military surveillance "admitted" to
handing the NSA tens of millions of call records from conflict areas. Now,
Norway is a small country, with limited military involvements: The only areas
we are active in are areas where the US is active too. They wanted us to
believe that Norway has a foreign surveillance capability where we are able to
collect that kind of call volume in places like Afghanistan, that _the NSA
does not already have_.

If we do, that too should be news, and should have led to further reports and
political questions raised. And it should have led to questions over how,
then, the domestic intelligence couldn't make do with far less money, as
military intelligence apparently manages to do a massive amount of
surveillance in war zones on what suddenly looks like a shoestring budget...
But the press response was to parrot what military intelligence said.

They held a press conference - something they hardly ever do - and made what
appeared to be revelations about operational ability - something they never do
- and courted media all day.

Meanwhile, the Police Security Service, which in the past have been caught
red-handed carrying out substantial illegal surveillance, kept extremely low
profile despite the fact that the allegations made by the newspapers (and
reiterated in a piece by Greenwald) was that this was about surveillance _in
Norway_ which means it is the Police Security Service's "table". _They_ were
able to get away with a denial through a press contact and were then out of
the news picture with no further questioning.

Apparently not a _single_ news source saw it as odd enough to question why
military intelligence was all over the news and why they might want to push
for further responses from the people _actually_ responsible for surveillance
in Norway. The people who (under their previous name - the Police Surveillance
Service) not only spend decades carrying illegally political surveillance of
the Norwegian left, but were even caught carrying out illegal surveillance of
the member of parliament who led the parliamentary commission investigating
their illegal surveillance _while he was investigating them_.

The press did not apply any pressure at all. Not publicly at least. They just
immediately accepted the claims from military intelligence. Dagbladet folded
immediately and backtracked. And the major papers subjected their online
forums to the harshest moderation I've ever seen in Norwegian papers.

Frankly, no event in Norwegian politics in the last 30 years have scared me
more than how that was treated: Whether or not Dagbladet's claims were true or
not, it demonstrated _either_ a scary ability of the establishment to shut
down any kind of real journalism around it, _or_ a scary level of apathy and
disinterest. I'm not sure which is worse.

~~~
mercurial
You don't say. Being a French expat in DK, I found the apathy of the French
public in answer to allegations of internal, warrantless surveillance
appalling. Apparently, gay marriage is more important. The Danish government
has kept mum about the subject, as far as I know, and I haven't heard anything
in the Snowden documents concerning DK, but considering how eagerly the
Conservatives previously in power went to look for WMDs in Iraq, I fully
expect PET to be carrying out the same operations.

Regarding the press and the government, what are their usual working
relationship? My impression here is that Danish people are much less cynical
about the government than the French are. Combined with a culture of
consensus-seeking, this could lead to the press not being as incisive as it
could be (though on the other hand, it's apparently possible for politicians
to be evicted over scandals that would make the French barely bat an eyelid).

------
revscat
> “The agency, from top to bottom, leadership to rank and file, feels that it
> is had no support from the White House even though it’s been carrying out
> publicly approved intelligence missions,” said Joel Brenner, NSA inspector
> general from 2002 to 2006.

Publicly approved? _Publicly approved?_ The amount of rage-induced facepalming
this causes is immense. No one in the public has known what they're up to, and
Congressional attempts to get insight have been stymied and shut down. No one
knew, that is, until Edward Snowden did HIS duty to country.

> “They feel they’ve been hung out to dry, and they’re right.”

Well, that's good, then. What the NSA does is despicable, unconstitutional,
ineffective and a waste of treasure. No threat is worth the cost of what they
do. I hope everyone from the rank and file up to Alexander feel like complete
shit.

~~~
noarchy
>Publicly approved? Publicly approved? The amount of rage-induced facepalming
this causes is immense. No one in the public has known what they're up to, and
Congressional attempts to get insight have been stymied and shut down. No one
knew, that is, until Edward Snowden did HIS duty to country.

This is one of the great weaknesses in how we carry out things in a
"democratic" society, imo. We have elections, and use the election to justify
everything that happens thereafter as being part of the "public will".

------
nl
I think people are missing what this is.

This article isn't a puff piece about NSA morale. It's a demand from the
security apparatus for political support - especially for legislation to make
recording of phone records legal.

Read the article - there is very little mention of morale at all, whereas
there are many anonymous quotes asking for the President to get behind them:

 _former officials who say they are dismayed that President Obama has not
visited the agency to show his support._

 _employees are privately voicing frustration at what they perceive as White
House ambivalence amid the pounding the agency has taken from critics._

 _A senior administration official who was not authorized to speak on the
record said that the White House would normally not endorse legislation so
early in the process but that “it’s been clear . . . that we prefer
legislation” that preserves the phone records program “while making some
changes . . . to potentially strengthen oversight and transparency.”_

 _The president has multiple constituencies — I get it. But he must agree that
the signals intelligence NSA is providing is one of the most important sources
of intelligence today._

 _Former officials note how President George W. Bush paid a visit to the NSA
in January 2006, in the wake of revelations by the New York Times that the
agency engaged in a counterterrorism program of warrantless surveillance on
U.S. soil beginning after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks_

I think the NSA is seeing this as an opportunity to actually increase their
powers by getting legal cover for what they already do.

(Also note that it is the Washington Post this is in - ie, it is for a
Washington - political - audience who will read what the leaked statements,
not the headline)

------
PeterisP
The article reads as if they're waiting for confirmation that they were right
all along.

However, USA citizens are still waiting for an admission that they were
overboard and will change their ways.

These viewpoints aren't reconcilable, and trying to please both is not only
hypocritical but simply impossible - the president must make a decision, and
set clear the expected direction for NSA; otherwise there can't be good morale
if they're unclear if what they're doing is considered by the top leaders as
good or evil.

~~~
wprl
We, the citizens, are the "top leaders." Who cares what the administration
thinks? It's time to vote out all Democrats and Republicans.

~~~
Svip
Ho ho. Only problem with that is that American political system isn't really
tailored for that. But even ignoring that, a major problem is that good and
clever people are not willing to run for Congress in the US, because the
climate is so rotten there, that they'd rather work in the private sector (and
who can blame them?).

So Democrats and Republicans cannot even get decent people to run on their
names. And no one is going to rally about the alternatives, because... well,
who are the alternatives?

------
pvnick
I feel a lot of sympathy for these people. At the very least, they honestly
believe they're protecting this country and their friends/loved ones. It's not
their fault the higher-ups have botched the national security apparatus and
turned it into something disgusting and unamerican. Most of them were/are
likely unaware of the vast majority of what the agency does, and they had
trust in their government that they worked at a trustworthy institution.

However, this is one major element that will lead to change. Internal rot will
force an organization to adapt faster than any external pressure ever will.
NSA workers, current and future, as well as decision-makers need to be forced
into a position of deciding whether this surveillance is right for this
country. No more sticking their head of their ass and ignoring what the NSA
doeas. The revelations are out in the open and more are still coming out. This
is not the time for ambivalance. It's a time for making tough choices.

~~~
spodek
I can see sympathy up to when they discover their work wasn't what they
thought it was, for those that were caught off-guard. After all, if their boss
was willing to lie to Congress on the record, who knows what lies he and the
rest of the organization was willing to spew to them?

Once the revelations broke, they alone have responsibility for their actions.
I can see giving them a month or two to figure out how to react and to make
sure of the leaks' authenticity.

At this point I don't see how to see them as anything but complicit out of
willful choice.

They can choose any moment to leave.

Or to blow the whistle and leak more information useful to the citizenry.

(Edit to nrmilstein's response: Choosing _is_ simple. As I mentioned, I can
see taking months to act.)

~~~
nrmilstein
You make leaving a job seem simple. Not everyone can just "choose any moment
to leave." People have careers and families.

~~~
pkinsky
This argument is a variant of the Yuppie Nuremberg Defense, courtesy of Thank
You For Smoking.

1; You know what you're doing is wrong. 2; Everybody has a mortgage to pay. 1;
Ah, the yuppie nuremberg defense.

~~~
walshemj
what ever a NSA employee has done or not done saying that is the same as a war
crime for example the Srebrenica massacre is just childish hyperbole.

~~~
nitrogen
You misread the parent comment as comparing the crimes, when in fact it was
comparing the excuses for continuing to commit them, using a quote from a
movie.

~~~
walshemj
and your point is what exactly.

~~~
nitrogen
Two points:

1\. The comment to which you replied wasn't comparing violent war crimes to
privacy violations, so your indignation was unnecessary.

2\. Whether you're discussing war crimes, selling cancer-causing tobacco
products, or spying on innocent civilians, the "just doing my job" and "I have
a family and a mortgage" excuses are inadequate justification.

------
salient
It should've happened _before_ Snowden's revelations, and have their morale
down after everything they've been asked to do. They just seem upset about
"getting caught" now. Well, cry me a river.

~~~
vidarh
People are very good at insulating themselves in bubbles where they convince
themselves that everything they do is for the good of people. In those
instances it takes public revelations before they will start taking notice.
And even when it gets public you can expect that a lot of the morale issues is
that some of them will feel betrayed for not getting lots of officials (and
Obama) speaking up in their support for doing what many of them presumably
still think is vitally important work.

This is one of the reasons why transparency is so vital: People with power are
scary when they operate without getting to hear what people think about what
they do. We're experts at filling in the blanks with what we think we deserve
to hear.

------
thaumasiotes
According to the article, they're not feeling down because they're widely
hated by the populace (well, technically, it's mentioned in the last
paragraph).

They're sad because the president hasn't personally visited their building to
give them a pep talk.

~~~
crazy1van
Are they really widely hated by the populace, or are they just widely hated on
small communities like HN?

~~~
001sky
This is more than a loaded question. HN has its own views, but they also have
an information set perhaps not widely available. The better framing is that,
given a(n equal) technical understanding of what NSA is doing, where would the
majority stand? I don't think they would stand with the government's over-
reach. The red-states don't really go for that, and the blue states don't
really go for it either: it's anti-liberal in a different sense. What the NSA
is really doing here is protecting the 1%, in the sense that those in power
are merely seeking to stay in power at all costs. Ideology, constitution, and
every other consideration be damned.

------
nspiegelberg
"I have spent the best years of my life giving people the lighter pleasures,
helping them have a good time, and all I get is abuse, the existence of a
hunted man." \- Al Capone

I think NSA leaders would do well to read Dale Carnegie again and remember
that even violent monsters think they are victims.

------
x0054
This yet again points out how spineless Obama is. He stated on the record that
he supports everything that NSA does, and that their work is invaluable to
United States. And yet, he is not standing behind them, he is doing what's
more politically prudent for him self. Basically saying one thing, while doing
another. How typical!

To be clear, I think what NSA does is despicable, if I had the power, I would
close down the organization and prosecute some of the people in it. But, I
think a man should stand by what he believes in. If you believe NSA does good,
stand by it, if you don't, do something about it. Stop sitting on the fucking
fence!

------
squozzer
It's easy to view this event in isolation but the years since 2001 have
brought forth several unsettling revelations.

1) Abu Ghraib 2) Gitmo 3) Torture and certain shell games (renditions, black
sites) to keep culpability at arm's length 4) Drones turning Earth into a
free-fire zone 5) The joys of flying post-911 (TSA, no-fly lists) 6) NSA
hoovering the Internet for fun and profit

Shall I go on? Do you need links for evidence?

We are in a state of nature, sir.

~~~
philwelch
It's cute that you think the NSA dragnet has anything to do with 9/11\. This
is just the kind of stuff the NSA does. Look up "Echelon".

------
walid
Full disclosure: I am not an American citizen.

Having said that, isn't it out of place for PR people from the NSA be asking
that the president show a form of political endorsement for NSA actions while
the NSA is just an agency that does what it is told to do. I mean they are not
policy makers and all the noise about NSA surveillance expects Congress and
the White House to instigate policy change rather than to "show the love" or
hate. The NSA in effect is just an employee, not a policy maker. Am I missing
something?

~~~
poof131
The NSA did what the President asked them to do. Now the President is
distancing himself from them for his own political reasons. Americans loathe
to blame the leaders they elect, for then they would have to blame themselves.
It is easier to blame a rouge Agency. But the only rouge actions of the NSA is
the PR you are talking about.

~~~
alan_cx
Hang on, didnt this start with Clinton, then get widened with each president?
If so, then the NSA have been doing what the political establishments wanted,
backed by the democratic votes of American people.

What I don't like about this is the voters pretending they had nothing to do
with it, when their votes endorse each president, and both houses. You cant
run from responsibility in a democracy. Americans need to wake up and smell
the BS. If grass roots money was enough to get Obama to the top job, which we
are led to believe, then grass roots can create a new party.

But frankly, I know this will never happen, because when you get down to it,
most people are safe enough, employed enough, fed enough and distracted
enough, and will there for never risk losing that for a sort of political
revolution. Why risk it?

UK wise, on one gives a toss in any way shape or form really. The apathy is
stunning. Yeah, it gets a mention in the press, and there has been a bit of
tokenistic questioning in parliament, but basically, its a non issue.

Personally, I find the whole thing depressing. What scares me is wondering how
far things do have to go until people revolt, and how many have to suffer
before that happens. I think one of the cynical calculations in all this is
that these governments have worked out that if only a few people, preferably
foreigners, suffer as a result, they will get away with it. So be as bad as
you like, just keep the numbers down and try not to make it effect the voters
much.

------
xacaxulu
My morale would be low too if I had just deprived billions of people of their
rights to privacy. It could be said that suicide would be a good option for
anyone suffering from especially low morale regarding their complicity in the
largest breach of trust in US history. They aren't sorry, they're sorry they
got caught.

------
natch
It's about time. With scummy, law-breaking, deceitful, cynical, practices that
hold the most cherished rights and freedoms of people everywhere in contempt,
and bald-faced lying to congress, no less, on the part of top management,
what's to feel good about?

------
alexeisadeski3
Wonder how much of the morale depletion can be traced to the fact that many of
the surveillance systems put in place by the NSA will now be much less useful,
given that the targets now know how to evade the NSA's wide net.

The targets are aware that they _must_ have as minimal a virtual footprint as
possible, _must_ eschew almost all telephone use, etc. They will also push for
their associates, friends, family to all have as little virtual presence and
phone use as possible (not easy to do, but important for them!).

Once these measures are taken, the NSA's entire world, everything they've been
working on for the past decade plus, will have been exploded.

------
jaryd
I wonder if this is just a case of "bad press" for them, or if the broader
implications of widespread domestic spying has actually sunk in.

Interesting to read this in light of the recent flurry of engineer code-of-
ethics style submissions that we've seen lately.

~~~
privong
Based on the article's statement that "agency employees are privately voicing
frustration at what they perceive as White House ambivalence amid the pounding
the agency has taken from critics", I suspect it's the "bad press" angle
rather than a realization of the (negative) consequences of their actions.

------
flatline
Plummeting morale has been the norm for federal employees for the last 5+
years. I'm sure the Snowden leaks have not helped things for the NSA but
everyone has been on a pay/hiring freeze for ages with the public and
administration seemingly very anti-federal-employee.

------
azernik

      “The agency, from top to bottom, leadership to rank and
      file, feels that it is had no support from the White House
      even though it’s been carrying out publicly approved
      intelligence missions,” said Joel Brenner, NSA inspector
      general from 2002 to 2006.
    

Despite this being totally incorrect from the broader perspective ("publicly
approved" but no one knew about it??), this actually makes me feel a little
sympathetic - the political echelons (Congress, the Bush and Obama
administrations) handed down the orders to do this, and now the elected
politicians are all acting like it's something that "just happened" outside of
their control.

------
knodi
WTF about the American people's morale, fuck your morale NSA.

------
heromat
I know that the American People are heartly and cordial. But killing and
spying in the name of freedom isn't acceptable.

American people don't deserve agencies like the NSA or the CIA.

I hope that there are many freedom fighters like Snowden to come.

Get rid of this type of total surveillance! (Btw: dear entrepreneurs, please
respect our privacy.)

\-- A european fellow who once respected and admired the US.

------
chris_wot
_" Literally, neighbors are asking people, ‘Why are you spying on Grandma?’
And we aren’t. People are feeling bad, beaten down."_

But you may well be doing so! We have no idea who you are spying on. You don't
get to be trusted when you are so secretive.

------
wesleyd
I'm sure the Watergate burglars had low morale too after they got caught.

------
dmfdmf
I agree with Nick Lothian in this comment buried far down the list. The drop
in morale is not because of shame about spying on fellow citizens but Obama's
lack of explicit political support for what they are doing. The implications
of this position does not bode well for our freedoms in this country. The
title of this post should be "NSA to Obama; your move".

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6872550](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6872550)

------
gaius
I am reminded of
[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ToKcmnrE5oY](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ToKcmnrE5oY)

------
Aloha
I'm likely to get downvoted for this.

But not all of what the NSA is doing is bad.

I think the phone records program is good. These records are not secret by any
means (the phone company owns them, not you) and its a minimally intrusive way
using amounts to pattern matching to find some people who might want to hurt
me and my countrymen not for who we as individuals are, but simply because
we're Americans based on their Call Detail Records history.

Having spent the majority of my career working in the Telecom industry, these
records are accessed with surprising ease - anyone with any sort of access to
the billing system usually has full access to them (Both at a Major ITSP and
one of the major wireless carriers in North America) I had actually presumed
the government did too - perhaps not in real time, but anytime they wanted on
demand.

I don't consider it a private thing whom I talked to - I consider the contents
of those calls protected, but not the fact I made them. For what its worth,
because of the structure of our telephone network, it virtually impossibly to
monitor the contents of every call - You'd have to have a recording device or
special service trunks to every end point everywhere in the nation. Billing
records on the other hand, are generally forwarded to a central collection
point for processing into your telephone bill (as well as storage and analysis
for traffic planning purposes).

For what its worth - I don't think the government has a right to access mobile
telephone geolocation data without a warrant - that to me is so clearly
protected as it - ought to be - to be a breach of privacy if collected without
a warrant.

These are simply my opinions, others clearly feel differently - IMO there
really is no wrong answer here, it's all about what feels right and just to
you, and where your line of privacy is.

------
DannoHung
Good! I hope their morale continues to fall as they realize that they are
committing continuing acts of treason and violations of the US Constitution.
Let their morale sink so low that they have clear consciences.

------
shmerl
What did they expect? That abusing power will be cheered?

------
wprl
good

------
joering2
It is somehow relevant and was interesting to learn about state
"nullification".

[http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/12/03/some-nsa-
oppo...](http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/12/03/some-nsa-opponents-
want-to-nullify-surveillance-with-state-law)

------
zmmmmm
I feel for the people on the "front line", so to speak, but if it does
anything to add to the chance that internally the NSA will recognise that no,
what they are doing is NOT ok, then I am glad for it nonetheless. They need to
feel it from every angle, including internally.

~~~
swalkergibson
Why do you feel badly for those people? Even if they were sold a bill of goods
at the outset, and they thought they were doing what was right for "the
greater good," what about now? Once the authenticity of the leaks was
verified, why didn't they leave immediately? Fuck them. Every last one of them
still there is a bad apple.

------
sakura_k
They say that like it's a bad thing

------
macspoofing
I'd like to think a lot of NSA workers are regular Americans who are also
concerned with the revelations. I mean, most aren't decision makers, and
wouldn't have a full picture of the entire system.

~~~
gnu8
I'd like to think a lot of Nazi death camp workers are regular Germans who are
also concerned about the mass executions. I mean, most aren't decision makers,
and wouldn't have a full picture of the entire system.

~~~
macspoofing
That was fast

------
alexeisadeski3
Tragedy.

------
kevrone
Oh, ya think?

------
eternalban

       me: This whole affair stinks. Hmph. 
    
            Official state organs, chime in. 
    
       outlet: "blah blah official boo hoo blah blah" 
    
       me: Quick, where is my tin foil?

