The Western concept of freedom probably started with the Greeks. Of course, they weren't perfect, they owned slaves (as did the young American Republic) but Western civilization has never been and never will be perfect. The Romans added a great deal to the mix, as did the British, and the United States is really just built on all that came before it.

Incidentally, I've never been to Sweden, but I've spent some time in Finland. I'm actually headed back there for a month this summer and have a trip to Stockholm on the agenda. If you've got any suggestions for things to do.... :)

Our country can't even move forward with the military tribunals of unlawful combatant foreign nationals captured aboard, even though such tribunals are explicitly allowed under both domestic and international law. You think we'd be able to do it against an American citizen, for crimes allegedly committed on American soil? Give me a break. This is the type of conspiracy theory nonsense that makes internet discussions a complete waste of time. Study how the real world works, it's a lot more boring and bureaucratic than you think.

You'll forgive me if I decline to discuss my views of the relevant NSA programs, since /. isn't exactly welcoming to opinions more nuanced than "Snowden Good. NSA Bad."

All I'll say on the subject is that there are mechanisms in place for people who feel their Government is doing wrong. He could have gone to the relevant Congressional committees or the Inspector General at NSA. He could have used the whistleblower act. He ignored all of those options and leaped straight to leaking, then further threw the baby out with the bathwater by leaking details of programs that had no bearing whatsoever on domestic civil liberties, like NSA's activities against China. In effect, he substituted his judgment for the judgment of our elected representatives, an act of extraordinary hubris in the words of Robert Gates.

In spite of everything I may have retained some understanding of his choices had he opted to selectively leak the details of NSA's domestic activities. He didn't do that though, he took as much as he possibly could and leaked it all, with no consideration for the damage it would do to American interests and national security. That may not mean anything to you but such actions have far reaching ramifications and I don't recall seeing Mr. Snowden's name on the ballot when I was selecting the people who would wield that power on my behalf.

Get one, mmaybe two real wireless microphones from Shure or someone like that -- think "audio equipment catalog", not "computer equipment catalog". Get the cables to hook the base station up to standard microphone input. Pass the mic around to whoever is talking; it doubles as the "currently speaking" token (and you only have one person at a time talking at standup, right?). Make sure you have lots of spare batteries (presumably rechargeable) in a convenient location.

You might have a different perspective if you're homosexual. Or Muslim. Or generally anything but Slavic Orthodox.

Here's an interesting statistic that speaks volumes about corruption in Russia: The annual global wealth study published by the financial services group Credit Suisse says a mere 110 Russian citizens now control 35 percent of the total household wealth across the vast country.

I submit that an individual who breaks a law that conscience tells him is unjust, and who willingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment in order to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in reality expressing the highest respect for law. - MLK Jr, emphasis mine

I can't arose much sympathy for someone who professes to love his country but seeks refuge from a regime that stands opposed to virtually everything his country stands for. There are people who are willing to die for this country, without fame or recognition, but Mr. Snowden both outs himself and refuses to face a jury of his fellow citizens?

It's not Finnish. ;)

OK, and digging loose change out of your couch cushions is you making use of a banking platform.

Everybody involved here knows that "investment" means something very specific when you're handing money to a company to use in the formation and growth of their business. What happens when you funnel money towards a favored project through Kickstarter is no more an investment than losing some change in your couch is you making a bank deposit.

There's nothing wrong with Kickstarter or with people on both ends of the gift-giving making use of it. But it's not an investment. If you're one of these people that thinks you've just "invested" money when you go to see a movie, then the term - to you - is so absurdly broad as to have no meaning, especially not in the context of an actual discussion about business finance and project funding.

That is one thing that it absolutely is NOT. It's a donation platform, and some people asking for donations offer some incentives in exchange for your generosity. That's it. There is no investment. People who've given money are not vested in any way, except perhaps emotionally.

More than a quarter of British Muslims recently polled said they support militant Islamists who attack westerners they consider out of line with jihaddi sensibilities. That's 27% who applaud the slaughter of magazine publishers by ISIS-associated Muslim fanboys/girls. Those people think that ISIS is very Muslim, and is in fact a better example of practicing Islam than the more "moderate" groups who don't practice or support such violence. What is it, exactly, that you think Obama is demonstrating to those millions of people who simply laugh at his assessment of the Muslim-ness of one group or the next?

With whom are you having that debate? Bombs aren't supposed to make distinctions between innocent people and medieval-minded wackadoos following the Koran's guidance and lopping heads off of the local insufficiently-Islmaic villagers. It's human intel, targeting, and decisions that make that distinction.

No, you're just annoyed that someone actually paid attention to the words someone said.

And "everyone else" is going to look to Obama as the arbiter of what is, and is not, proper interpretation of the Koran? Really?

So, here you are, twisting and turning, trying to avoid the actual commented-on issue, which asserts that Obama has the power to "take away" Islamist street cred, or bestow it. Limit your comments to whether that's actually true, or not. Which Muslim, in which country, is going to be thinking one moment that ISIS adherents are strictly faithful Muslims fighting the good fight against evil things like women who want to read and write, and then based on something Obama says, change their mind and decide that position (and thus ISIS) is no longer actually Islamic? What kind of person do you think holds ISIS as being defender of the faith but who also holds Obama as someone they should listen to as an authority on what is, or is not, authentically Muslim? Can you point to a single person, anywhere, who holds both positions?

You've just made them even happier with their choices. You fundamentally misunderstand what makes them tick. They want you to hate them. They're banking on it. They need you to hate them, and they're willing to do things like roast people alive in order to make you hate them even more.

Do you really think that an organization of many thousands of people which slaughters other Muslims for being insufficiently Muslim will give a rat's ass whether or not a politician in the US considers them to be sufficiently Muslim? Obama can no more "take away" their embrace of fundamental Islam than he can turned to by millions of other Muslims as an authority on whether they are legitimately following the Koran. What nonsense, to even suggest such a thing.

People like the Jordanians will demonstrate their "legitimacy" through their own actions, not through having the president of the United States proclaiming their particular adherence to their own cherry-picked passages in the Koran as being the "right" one. Would you consider Obama to be also a strategic genius for weighing in on which groups in Israel or Brooklyn or Poland are legitimately Jewish? Please.