By this token, any kind of lobbying is also terrorism. Hell, any kind of activism in a political space "is designed to influence a government and is made for the purpose of promoting a political or ideological cause".
Seems like a perfect illustration of the kind of slippery slope the world is on.
This article seems to also parallel well with the Russian detention of a Greenpeace ship and charging crew with piracy: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-11-02/piracy-charges-against.... Effectively, "it's piracy because we say so", just like "it's terrorism because we say so" logic in the "Ports Circulation Sheet" document.
Most lobbyists and activists aren't carrying around NSA documents.
If you carry documents that are uncovering a surveillance state you might endanger the lives on a few people relying on it. Still probably your goal is to improve privacy and long-term safety for the general population.
I think we should be way more careful with what we call terrorism. Democracy requires whistleblowing, free speech and critical perspectives on governments actions. Even if that means that this complicates some of the government's operations. The question is not just about safety but about commensurability.
The definition of terrorism that is implied is so vague and arbitrary that it seems that it can be attributed to almost any political process.
When everything that is meant to change status quo becomes terrorism we will live in a terrible world.
It's interesting you used the phrase "higher standard", as opposed to "amount of". The NSA seemed to have tons of freedom.
See "Why We Revert to Original Titles" (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6572466)
The guidelines ask you to use the original title apart from some narrow exceptions, which this submission doesn't meet. (http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html)
> Otherwise please use the original title
Your modified title is misleading and is link-baity.
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentagon_Papers [2] http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/daniel_ellsberg_doc/
[1]http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-07-07/opinions/40427...
