ha ha ha ..... no rebut, only criticism. Your opinions belong on the laffer curve. Why is the NYT article "short-sighted" on this issue?
Why should they? Is that your only "criticism?" LOL
You said the article was short-sighted. The NYT is not a legal firm; they are a newspaper company.
Yes, you are correct. They are a newspaper company.
any future Snowden revelations that will be coming from the Guardian in the UK or the Washingtonpost.
Sick sick fucks aren't good people, Oralloy.
When someone reveals that government officials have routinely and deliberately broken the law, that person should not face life in prison at the hands of the same government. - NYT Editorial (behind paywall). Excerpts and discussion Here
I think that the USA have the Whistleblower Protection Act ...
... but I know: you're saying, Frank,he isn't a whistleblower.
(And as far as I understand it, it has been said that Snowden could claim whistleblower protection only if he took his concerns to the NSA’s inspector general or to a member of one of the congressional intelligence committees with the proper security clearances.)
The reason that Snowden is not a whistleblower is because the government was never doing anything wrong.
I imagine our enemies are laughing their butts off at us...and shaking their heads.
Frank Apisa wrote:I imagine our enemies are laughing their butts off at us...and shaking their heads.
you might also want to think seriously about what your allies/former allies are thinking and doing