That’s not what they said.

They said that Snowden caused a shift in the public debate not that nobody listened to them beforehand (you should know they were raising concerns going back to 2002).

Baltimore Sun was reporting on Drake in 2006. Binney was publicly talking about it to Wired News and Democracy Now in 2012. Snowden happened in 2013.

… and nothing happened.

So that makes my point even plainer than it possibly could have been made. The people who did the right thing by your definition got nothing done (and this was what caused Snowden to do it the way he did) and since Snowden, those previous cases were taken seriously by the government

Well their complaint triggered a formal DoD IG investigation and produced a highly critical audit plus fraud investigations. Trailblazer program was killed in 2006. That all happened well before Snowden. Snowden skipped all of those channels entirely. Binney and Drake were taken seriously but you are glossing over all do the other stuff that Snowden leaked that had nothing to do with the privacy concerns deemed that went beyond what FISA courts authorized (and no court found violation of 4th amendment).

Snowden did it completely wrong and you can’t convince me otherwise. I don’t see this conversation going further as you move the goalposts.

I'm "glossing over it" because you are, I explicitly asked you in another thread what he leaked that wasn't relevant for the public interest.

I'm not sure what your angle is, but the NSA proved that they were beyond contempt when they lied to the Senate and there were people in the room that knew the situation who didn't pull them up on it.

Regarding Binney specifically; the IG's report largely supported his claims, but it was classified and changed little. Thomas Drake, a serving NSA official who raised similar concerns internally, also got nowhere.

The government's serious attention came only after the New York Times revealed warrantless wiretapping in December 2005, and it came as a leak investigation. In 2007 the FBI raided the homes of Binney, Wiebe, Loomis and Roark; Binney has said agents drew guns on him while he was in the shower.

Drake was indicted under the Espionage Act in 2010. The case collapsed in 2011, he pleaded guilty to a minor misdemeanour, and the judge sharply criticised the prosecution's conduct. So the substance of Binney's warnings was mostly ignored or denied.

Binney went fully public around 2012, and NSA officials publicly denied that they kept files on ordinary Americans.

The core contrast is that Binney went through proper channels, took no documents and was not believed. He was investigated anyway and achieved almost no reform. Snowden bypassed every channel, took vast amounts of classified material and was pursued far more aggressively, but he forced a public debate and concrete legal changes.

You can pretend that's not true, but you'd be ignoring reality.

It’s clear you want the last word with AI help so I’ll let you have it.

Since you have no actual answer to anything, even provably true things.

Thanks!

Exactly coming from a London-Swedish guy the spewing nonsense is what I should have expected. What business of the US is what we do anyways?

That GCHQ was involved definitely interests me, that GCHQ was being used by NSA to spy on US citizens (and vice-versa) to bypass citizen protections should be of interest to civilians of both countries.

I don’t trust civil servants to not abuse access into everyones communications, the damage a stalker or pedophile can do is immeasurable, and we have some statements that was happening.

Goalposts moved again. Started with 4th amendment argument then keep changing your tune. Goodbye

I’m following your lead.