All the governments just want to have more power when it comes to economic espionage, diplomatic manipulation and political influence.

All I wanted was for the public to be able to have a say in how they are governed. That is a milestone we left a long time ago.

No one would argue that it's in the United States' interest to have independent knowledge of the plans and intentions of foreign countries. But we need to think about where to draw the line on these kind of operations so we're not always attacking our allies, the people we trust, the people we need to rely on, and to have them in turn rely on us.

There's no saving me.

All the governments just want to have more power when it comes to economic espionage, diplomatic manipulation and political influence.

We decentralise the ability to decide the level of publicity that's attached to any of our communications.

The state says: "Well, in order for it to be legitimate civil disobedience, you have to follow these rules." They put us in "free-speech zones"; they say you can only do it at this time, and in this way, and you can't interrupt the functioning of the government. They limit the impact that civil disobedience can achieve. We have to remember that civil disobedience must be disobedience if it's to be effective.