New Audio: Listen to Edward Snowden Defend Whistleblowers

“I’d realized that the highest likelihood, the most likely outcome of returning this information to public hands would be that I would spend the rest of my life in prison.”


Edward Snowden beamed into DC from Russia Wednesday afternoon to accept the Ridenhour Prize for “truth-telling,” speaking before a crowd at the National Press Club via a Google+ hangout. Snowden’s lawyer and his father sat at a table in the front row and accepted the award on his behalf.

“A year ago there was no way I could have imagined being here, being honored in this room,” Snowden said to open his remarks. “When I began this, I never expected to receive the level of support that I did from the public. Having seen what happened to the people that came before, specifically Thomas Drake, it was an intimidating thing.” Drake is a former high-level employee at the National Security Agency who was vigorously prosecuted after revealing waste and mismanagement at the agency. “I’d realized that the highest likelihood, the most likely outcome of returning this information to public hands would be that I would spend the rest of my life in prison,” Snowden said. “I did it because I thought it was the right thing to do.”

When asked what advice he would give to the next potential whistleblower who wants to expose wrongdoing in the intelligence community, Snowden said that there needed to be systematic changes; otherwise that whistleblower would be forced into exile like him. “Thomas Drake showed us that even if you’re a real classic [whistleblower revealing] waste, fraud, and abuse in a program… there’s a very good chance the FBI will kick in your door, pull you out of the shower naked at gunpoint in front of your family, and ruin your life,” he said. Instead, Snowden suggested that Congress needed to add safeguards to encourage people to come forward. “Work with Congress in advance to try to make sure that we have reformed laws,” he said, “that we have better protections, that all these shortcomings and failures in our oversight infrastructure are addressed so that the next time that we have an American whistleblower who has something that the public needs to know, they can go to their lawyer’s office instead of the airport. Right now I’m not sure they have a real alternative.”

Politicians, including Hillary Clinton, have criticized Snowden for fleeing the country. Snowden countered that he would have received no whistleblower protections had he remained in the United States. “I knew what would happen,” he said. “I knew that there were no whistleblower protections that would protect me from prosecution as a private contractor as opposed to a government civil, a direct government employee. But that didn’t change my calculus of what needed to be done.”

Snowden noted that he wasn’t alone among intelligence professionals worried about the massive amounts of data collected by the US government. The leaker said that he had frequent conversations with his colleagues about bringing the agency’s actions to public attention, but all were aware of the risks of exposing NSA activity.

“Do you think it’s right that the NSA is collecting more information about Americans in America than it is about Russians in Russia?” Snowden asked. “Because that’s what our systems do. We watch our own people more closely than we watch any other population in the world.” Snowden explained how he himself could have spied on any person, “from a federal judge to the president of the United States,” from his own desk, as long as he had an e-mail address or other digital identifier of the target. “When you make a purchase, when you buy a book. All of that is collected,” Snowden said. “I could see it at my desk, crossing my screen.”

At one point during Snowden’s appearance, an organizer of the event asked the audience not to record him—but this was near the end of his remarks, and numerous people in the audience were holding up smart phones and recording devices.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate