So it turns out that McClatchy, not Eddie Snowden, is this year’s biggest enemy of the state:
As the nation’s spy agencies assess the fallout from disclosures about their surveillance programs, some government analysts and senior officials have made a startling finding: the impact of a leaked terrorist plot by Al Qaeda in August has caused more immediate damage to American counterterrorism efforts than the thousands of classified documents disclosed by Edward Snowden, the former National Security Agency contractor. […]
McClatchy Newspapers first reported on the conversations between Mr. Zawahri and Mr. Wuhayshi on Aug. 4. Two days before that, The New York Times agreed to withhold the identities of the Qaeda leaders after senior American intelligence officials said the information could jeopardize their operations. After the government became aware of the McClatchy article, it dropped its objections to The Times’s publishing the same information, and the newspaper did so on Aug. 5.
I lack the national security expertise of some of the commenters here, so I’ll leave it to them to determine the exact levels of vilification and punishment these McClatchy traitors deserve.
Linda Featheringill
Ah, McClatchy. Guilty of journalism. Again.
Botsplainer
Has anybody besides Griftwald claimed to hear from Snowjob lately, or is Special Ed still chained to the toilet in Putin’s private Kremlin bathroom? And why haven’t Griftwald and his amour planned to visit poor lonely Special Eddie in his Bastion of Freedom?
Ash Can
Fuck off, troll.
mistermix
@Ash Can: That is pretty much all you’re left with, isn’t it?
mistermix
@Botsplainer: Since Greenwald is such a convenient target of your irrational hatred, you of course ignore the fact that Barton Gellman of the Post has also been publishing Snowden’s stuff and is probably still in contact with him:
http://www.npr.org/2013/09/11/221359323/reporter-had-to-decide-if-snowden-leaks-were-the-real-thing
Do you have a clever name for Gellman, too?
LAC
Because there is nothing more important than the vindication of baby Jesus Snowden these days, right?
Bill E Pilgrim
I’m rarely tempted to use the word “droll” but in this case it fits. Resemblance to the similar word starting with T is coincidental, living or dead.
BobS
@Botsplainer: “…Griftwald…”, “…Snowjob…”, “…Special Ed…”. Ha, ha, ha- I love your clever middle-school humor, and I can understand how a deep-thinker like yourself might be distracted by a shiny object like the mention of Snowden, but the subject of the post was the McClatchy reporting. Sometimes you can learn something by clicking on the link provided instead of heading straight to the comments.
Ramiah Ariya
It appears that the entire internet and telecom revolution is seen by “American officials” merely as a bait to lure unsuspecting furiners to give out their “secrets”.
Ash Can
@mistermix: I have plenty more than that, but that’s all that you deserve.
Bill E Pilgrim
@mistermix: And for James Risen, Seymour Hersh, and on and on.
The worst part of being on the demonizing Greenwald bandwagon I’ve always imagined would be finding yourself so in agreement on a major topic with Jeffrey Toobin and David Gregory, not to mention David Brooks and Dick Cheney. To each one’s own though.
mistermix
@LAC: I prefer Mohammed or Buddha, but as Bob S pointed out above, he’s not the point of the story. The point is that in a free society sometimes journalism endangers the smooth functioning of the state, and sometimes even the best journalists (and whether or not you agree about McClatchy, that’s their reputation) will report something damaging.
Habanero
@Ash Can: effing douchecanoe……. Do you ever read what you wrote and go “jeebus I don’t know fuck all!” Self awareness might lift you out of pathetic troll status…….might….
Emma
Did you have to collect the straw yourself or did you go to the feedlot to buy it?
The worst thing about the Greenwald lovers is that every national security issue is now proof that your beloved is the second coming of Christ. Actual issues be damned. And you have the nerve to make fun of the Cruzmaniacs.
Infamous Heel-Filcher
@Ramiah Ariya: The internet: where men are men, women are men, and children are federal police.
Botsplainer
@mistermix:
Gellman is a mere conduit. Griftwald was the real malefactor – as a (currently, but this can change) unindicted co-conspirator with Snowjob, he was in on it from the beginning.
some guy
wow, mistermix sure can get the panties of all these Center-Right asshole regulars tied up in a tight wad. bravo, mistermix.
mistermix
@Emma:
No, I went to the New York Times this morning, where I found a story comparing the damage done by Snowden and the many reporters who reported his revelations, one of whom is a fellow by the name of Greenwald, and stories reported by McClatchy and the Times. I didn’t have to look very hard, it was on the top of the front page. You might want to read it. I used this thing called a “hyperlink” in what we call a “blog post” around here that will transport you, as if by magic, to the Times. Good luck, because it seems that your reading comprehension is sometimes crowded out by your desire to call people Bad Democrats.
ericblair
Later in the article:
So, Snowden still wins, um, yay?
@mistermix:
Yes, and maybe they have a moral responsibility to evaluate the impact of revealing information versus the public good of releasing it? Or else, what differentiates the “best” journalists from the rags that publish nude celebrity pics, intercepted phonecalls, and anything else that grabs an eyeball?
some guy
@Emma:
you really need to put down the Tolkien and get out more.
JasonF
You neglected to quote this part:
And I’m not sure what point you’re trying to make. That because something more damaging occurred, Edward Snowden’s damaging theft of classified information is excused?
Xantar
@JasonF:
Well, come to think of it, the drone program hasn’t killed nearly as many people as Hitler…
hoodie
@JasonF: The new rule appears to be “less harm, no foul.” Chop blocks are ok because spearing is more dangerous. And there is the part about McClatchy not actually stealing anything or possibly abetting the stealing.
mistermix
@ericblair:
Do you think that McClatchy tried their best to evaluate the impact, thought the public good outweighed it, and published something damaging? Or are they like the National Enquirer?
SRW1
If you push the right button, or tangle the right bit or raw meat – please chose the metaphor of your preference – the RBC apparently can be as irrational as the best of ’em baggers (fire, tea, or otherwise).
magurakurin
@mistermix: That’s exactly the same as swearing to keep information secret in order get a position of trust and then using that position to steal secrets and shop them around to foreign governments.
Chyron HR
@JasonF:
Loosely summarized:
Greenwald is great
Obots are scum
They worship Dear Leader
They’re stinky and dumb
JasonF
@Xantar:
Nor, to be more on point, has it killed as many people as the Dresden firebombing campaign. If you think we shouldn’t be targeted terrorists with drones in light of the collateral damage, then say so. Personally, I’d appreciate it if when you did so, you also included a proposal on how you would deal with al Qaeda, but that’s your choice. Regardless, facile comparisons to other wars or incidents don’t really advance the conversation.
mistermix
@JasonF: My point was to see what those who say they know better than me think about this. There’s a cadre of commenters here who have maintained that someone who does the kind of damage Snowden did — and one particular reporter who reported it (not Barton Gellman, of course, he’s respectable) — should be subject to all sorts of draconian punishments. Well, here’s an example of a well-respected news organization doing more “immediate” damage than Snowden. What punishment do they deserve? That’s my question. Haven’t gotten much of an answer, though I have learned yet again how awful Glenn Greenwald is.
Mark S.
I am horrified that Snowden’s actions have detrimentally affected our ability to spy on the Brazilian president.
ericblair
@mistermix:
Why would I know? It looks like we found out that: Al Qaeda leaders talk to each other, the US can intercept communications between Al Qaeda members, and the State Department acts on intelligence to determine security posture. Is that news to anybody? The cost is that we seem to have seriously damaged an intelligence capability.
What is the moral responsibility of journalists, or is it “none”?
glocksman
I have a question that I’m not sure of the answer to.
Is there a legal difference between a journalist who merely receives classified documents and publishes them and one who urges the ‘inside man’ to steal them and then pass them on when it comes to laws such as the Espionage Act?
The Dangerman
@JasonF:
And I’m missing the newspaper having been given a security clearance with penalties for disclosure.
Punchy
@Mark S.: At least we’re not spying on the President’s Braziliian.
ruemara
Mr. Mix, you’re exactly why Greenwald publishes the shit he does. Does the fact that the phrase starts with “some” analysts and officials not register? It’s an opinion. It’s not a fact. And this is hardly unknown. If you followed the story when it first broke, it was the uncovering of an actual resource within AQ that triggered the investigation. It’s also an analysis based strictly on the AQ/ME terrorism angle, not much else. So there’s nothing wrong with an opinion that the Snowden “revelations” did less harm than the McClatchy article-which is not exactly journalism, by the way, not when it’s just that hunt for an exclusive. But it is not the sole view, as clearly stated within the article, based on international relations which is key to say, oh, solving Syrian chemical weapons issues. Jesus man, you are trolling. And worse, you’re acting like GG by cherry picking and crafting a narrative that does not live up to a thorough reading of the facts you’re supposedly discussing. Apologies for likening you to GG but harsh measures are required.
@glocksman: There probably is, but right now, everyone thinks laws they don’t like shouldn’t be followed with their own interpretive dance based on the Crucifixion. Except for us little people, of course. We need to keep in line.
Botsplainer
@glocksman:
Griftwald (who always was an incompetent lawyer whose specialty ran to advocating the positions of actual fascists) didn’t seem to think about that until after some better lawyer may have pointed that out to him. Nowadays, he doesn’t make trips to places like the US or to nations likely to extradite his ass to the US or the UK, and only appears via video from the safety of the undoubtedly safe walled-off elite areas of Rio or Sao Paulo – no mingling with the truly indigenous untermensch for one so special as the Great and Powerful Him.
The dude is Orly Taitz with man-tackle.
RP
You think you’re making some profound point, but it’s mostly just pointless snarking.
Poopyman
@mistermix: But who made the assessment that
?
“Some government analysts and senior officials” OK, I accept that anonymity should be expected when dealing with intelligence.
But you conveniently failed to include this part of the article:
ETA: Yeah, I’m repeating other commenters, ’cause I actually took the time to read the article.
Just Some Fuckhead, Thought Leader
@mistermix:
Martin will tell us what is really going on as he is cleared by our intelligence agencies to do so. Don’t be cheeky, you cheeky bastard.
piratedan
@The Dangerman: where was that part about McClatchy violating the Espionage Act again?
also too, where is that part where the US is doing something illegal against its citizens?
who moved the goalposts on this issue?
RP
Can you cite some examples? My sense is that most of the “anti-Snowden” people have some respect for Snowden and what he was trying to accomplish, but think he’s guilty as hell because he violated his oaths. We also don’t see him as a pure whistleblower because he apparently gave this info. to Russia and China and sought asylum in both places, hardly the acts of a good samaritan. Finally, I don’t think many people believe that Greenwald should be punished; we just think he’s a self-aggrandizing jerk.
ericblair
@ruemara:
I think a lot of it is a confusion between legal and moral levels. The point of leaking and the establishment of a free press is to provide an extralegal outlet for dealing with issues that the public needs to know about but through some perceived failure of the system they can’t be discussed legally. The responsibility then becomes a moral, not legal one for the leaker. Martin Luther King violated the law for a higher moral purpose, and most of us tend to agree with him. The asshole who shoots an abortion provider thinks that he acts for a higher purpose, too.
You break the law for a supposed higher moral purpose, you have a moral responsibility. It may not be a legal responsibility, and we may not want it to be a legal responsibility, but saying that you can do whatever the fuck you feel like if you don’t like the law and have no repercussions at any level is chaos.
Mark S.
@Poopyman:
We are supposed to accept all this surveillance because it protects us from TERRORISM. So our ability to spy on China and Brazil doesn’t really make your point.
Poopyman
Also too, it seems to me the point of this article was for the NYT to pat itself on the back while wagging their finger in McClatchy’s face.
If memory serves, both McClatchy and the Times have at different times in the past withheld disclosing sensitive information and, rarely, not withheld it, either intentionally or not. I have no idea whether McClatchy ran this on purpose or not.
Mark S.
@RP:
That hasn’t been my sense.
Poopyman
@RP:
Actually, wasn’t it Snowden himself in some interview who said that he discussed releasing classified info with Greenwald BEFORE he got the job at Booz Allen?
Just Some Fuckhead, Thought Leader
@Mark S.:
Glenn Greenwald lives in Brazil and Snowden defected to China, you feckless Firebagger!
Poopyman
@Mark S.: Snowden released data on more than just counterterrorism techniques, so yeah, it does make my point.
Poopyman
@Just Some Fuckhead, Thought Leader: Brazil and China: The New Axis of Eeevil.
RP
@Poopyman: Right. I think it was kind of scummy, but it’s not clear to me that he should be prosecuted for that.
mistermix
@Poopyman: I didn’t quote the whole article, but your hint that I get that Snowden might have done some long-term damage is nominating McClatchy for this year’s biggest enemy of the state. Maybe Snowden and Greenwald (never Gellman, of course) are this decade’s enemies of the state. So what? The point is that some security experts think that McClatchy revealed some damaging information. Are commenters like you, who hate Greenwald (but not Gellman), willing to subject McClatchy to the same harsh judgment?
Redshirt
Russia, Number 1! China, Number 1! Death to America!
Also, once we weaponize Unicorns, no one will ever be droned again. They’ll be horned instead, which is a much better – magical! – way to die.
Corner Stone
@RP:
Finally, someone with some common sense on this, and the proper perspective! I’ve been waiting for this kind of astute analysis for some time now.
Corner Stone
@Redshirt: I can’t honestly say that being horned to death would be all that bad a way to go.
Just Some Fuckhead, Thought Leader
Awesome, now we can’t have the conversation we needed to have. Thanks Corner Stone!
Corner Stone
Personally, I always enjoy getting my threat analysis from anonymous senior govt officials.
Feels like…victory.
Redshirt
@Corner Stone: Horns for all!
Corner Stone
@Just Some Fuckhead, Thought Leader: Fuck. I gave y’all fiddy damn comments to get it right before I curbstomped this muthafucka.
Cacti
Mistermix, as chief resident Snowden leg humper, maybe you could enlighten us all with how any of this makes what your patron saint did less illegal?
Kthxbai.
Just Some Fuckhead, Thought Leader
@Corner Stone: You know we always start slow as we hash out the teams and the specific contest we want to have.
Corner Stone
@Just Some Fuckhead, Thought Leader:
I don’t know if he’ll have time to help us understand what this article really means. Between mediating the backdoor negotiations to avert a govt shutdown, AND working with Governors to fine tune their ACA exchanges to be more efficient, Martin may just not have enough time for national security threat analysis.
But, you know Martin! No task is too Herculean for that guy!
Thank God we have him!
Corner Stone
Damn mistermix! You got told son!
Cacti
@Poopyman:
Mistermix has been posting a lot of fail lately. See any of his posts on Syria for reference.
Poopyman
@mistermix:See my comment here @Poopyman: Newspapers periodically shit on intelligence efforts, intentionally or not. If it was intentional and can be proven malicious, then yeah, prosecute.
By similar standards, if an employee acts as “whistleblower”, then flees to two countries he knows are VERY interested in our intelligence activities with four (?) laptops with classified data, then maybe he’s not so much a whistleblower, eh?
I suspect Greenwald wanted a big whistleblower scoop, but Snowden took much more than was needed and then fled. I don’t know whether Greenwald knew how this would play out or not. Nice of you to neatly divide everyone into Greenwald Haters and Other, though.
ruemara
@Poopyman: Yes, this is so. Also discussed with Laura Poitiras.
Just Some Fuckhead, Thought Leader
Is there any chance Greenwald and McClatchy are having secret homoseks?
Jockey Full of Malbec
…yet you persist on pontificating on the subject with all the rigor and seriousness of a 7th grader sneering at the Vice Principal behind his back.
Joey Giraud
Lots o’ Greenwald Derangement Syndrome on display here.
Speaking of journalists you clowns love to hate, why no posts about Sy Hersh claiming Story About Killing Osama Bin Laden is One Big Lie?
I wanna see what kind of low-brow insults you all can come up with for Sy.
Villago Delenda Est
What I love about these threads is that the actual issues raised by the original post get quickly subsumed in various personalities slinging poo at each other.
I wish some journalist type would explain how the revelation of the names of these al Qaeda types is so damaging…oh, wait…if you do that, you make the damage worse! What the NSA apparently did was catch some al Qaeda types being sloppy and thus got a conversation out of it. Now, did the NSA get their locations in this process? We have a good idea as to what NSA is capable of gleaning from these communications, but is this revelation well after the fact actually damaging? The substance of the communication was not disclosed, and even if it were, information is perishable. Also, people can, um, move around which means that location data is also something perishable.
What we have here are anonymous sources offering opinions that don’t have any apparent means of support.
Comrade Dread
I thought there was a tiny bit of difference between leaking information when you discover wrongdoing at your job and taking a job specifically for the purposes of stealing classified information.
But since everyone is determined to canonize the guy, I guess the next time I head down to church, I’ll be sure to light a candle in front of the icon of St. Snowden of Moscow.
Botsplainer
@Joey Giraud:
Sy long ago made the leap into George Noory/Art Bell territory in terms of seeing government conspiracies and boogie men everywhere. The best part is that it’s all conflation from anonymous senior administration informants, undoubtedly retired E-5s who never served beyond a CONUS QM depot and who post extensively on STRATFOR.
Emma
N@RP: Please give up on the logic. They want a hero. A pure, unchallengeable saviour.
Someone up thread made a really hysterical comment about my “putting down the Tolkien.” Funny about that. Tolkien knew more about real war and real pain than all the martyrs-to-the-state wannabes.
Corner Stone
@Botsplainer:
So are you saying you do, or do not, want to have sex with Sy Hersh?
The Sheriff's A Ni-
@Villago Delenda Est:
Thread was DOA from the original post. There will be no discussing of the issues, because this topic has become nothing more but ‘my tribe good your tribe bad’ trollbait.
Redshirt
@Joey Giraud: Since the “Lamestream Media” is covering for Obama’s lies, does that mean OBL is still alive? Maybe living in D.C.?
Cacti
@Joey Giraud:
“Not one word of it is true,” Hersh told The Guardian newspaper in an interview meant to drum up publicity for his new book about national security.
If a guy who has a book to sell said it, it must be true!
Joey Giraud
@Botsplainer:
Ooh, you sound so … *experty*. I’m sure you really know what you’re talking about.
Joey Giraud
@Cacti:
Yeah, it’s a guarantee that promoting a book proves you’re a liar.
Cacti
@Joey Giraud:
I know right.
Just because he makes an outrageous claim to hype a book, and presents zero evidence in support of said claim, doesn’t mean we shouldn’t believe him.
And Bob Woodward really was threatened.
Betty Cracker
@Joey Giraud: I bookmarked an article on that (from another source) for reading later (been super busy), but I can’t completely disagree with the opening of the article you linked:
Or maybe just promote local paper editors to the national desks and forbid them from ever attending a Sally Quinn cocktail party? In many cases, local editors and journalists do a fabulous job, it’s just that hardly anyone gives a shit about the stuff they’re reporting on.
But Hersh has a point about insider bullshit. It’s been a disaster for foreign policy AND domestic issues coverage — hence Chuck Todd’s absurd claim that it’s not his job to correct Republican lies about the ACA.
Corner Stone
@Joey Giraud: How *dare* you!? Didn’t you see the acronyms?
burnspbesq
@mistermix:
Opportunist, useful idiot, aider and abetter of multiple felonies.
Frankensteinbeck
@mistermix:
Please be specific about these ‘harsh judgments’. I’ll supply the ones I’m aware of:
A) Snowden broke the law and the government is within its rights to treat him as a criminal. If McClatchy broke the law here (doesn’t seem to have) sure, they should receive the appropriate legal punishment. B) Snowden lost what little moral sympathy he might have gotten by planning this out ahead of time and running straight to the countries most interested in buying American intelligence secrets. It’s arguable that releasing these specific names was inappropriate, but that’s a weak equivalence. C) The details of Snowden’s flight have been humorously inept. I don’t see how that can apply here. D) Most of the information Snowden revealed was so misrepresented, both by him and those who published the stories, that it was effectively lies. This is the part that tars GG particularly, since this is SOP for him. McClatchy doesn’t seem to be doing that here.
Nothing I just said was snark. Have I addressed how this McClatchy article does and does not (mostly does not) apply to Snowden for you?
burnspbesq
For the reasons explained by Marty Lederman ( whose jock Greenie is unworthy to carry or sniff) last week at Just Security, McClatchy, as a practical matter, doesn’t face any legal risk but let’s not lose sight of the fact that it benefited from somebody else’s crime.
FlipYrWhig
@Joey Giraud: Then again, Seymour Hersh’s sources told him that full-scale war with Iran was imminent for, like, three consecutive years.
burnspbesq
@Joey Giraud:
How about ” there is not a shred of reliable evidence to support his hypothesis.” Is that sufficiently low-brow for ya?
Joey Giraud
@Betty Cracker:
That part, about our terrible media, is pretty easy to agree with.
@Cacti:
Those of us who felt our intelligence insulted with the evidence-free Bin Laden execution fairy tale feel that Sy Hersh doesn’t have to provide “evidence” to call out obvious bullshit.
Joey Giraud
@burnspbesq:
No. But it is weak.
Joey Giraud
@FlipYrWhig:
So what? That doesn’t matter.
Cacti
@Joey Giraud:
So you concede that you’re supporting an allegation made without a shred of evidence.
There’s a word for that: fantasy.
But if believing in fantasy makes you feel all warm and fuzzy inside, please proceed. Just don’t expect those of us who don’t peddle in fantasies to believe in the dragon that lives in your garage.
Cacti
@burnspbesq:
Haven’t you heard? Sy Hersh don’t need no steenkin’ evidence!
Joey Giraud
@Cacti:
Your childish insults aside, it’s the military story that has no evidence.
No corpse, no photos, no videos, nothing.
You a fool.
Snarla
It is totally unsporting to spy on al-Qaeda’s emails. We should stop that immediately, to level the playing field.
Mnemosyne
@Joey Giraud:
Because it’s a nutty conspiracy theory with no proof offered by Hersch?
Oh, wait, I scrolled down and saw that you believe that Hersch is above little things like “proof” and “evidence.” Hersch said it, you believe it, case closed.
Joey Giraud
@Mnemosyne:
Another day, another incredibly foolish poster with a grandiose name, all full of sound and fury over “evidence” and “proof” and other high-minded things.
Betty Cracker
@Joey Giraud: Okay, I took a look at your link, plus a couple of other stories about Hersh’s accusation online. I respect Hersh and give him enough of the benefit of the doubt to reserve judgment until he comes out with whatever evidence he has.
But to be fair to your opponents in this thread (not all of whom deserve it, but we’ll leave that aside), there isn’t any evidence yet to support Hersh’s claims. Unless you’re aware of something I didn’t see, in which case, kindly link it. Yes, he’s Sy Fucking Hersh. But until more comes out, that’s hardly enough dispositive.
burnspbesq
@Joey Giraud:
How’s the weather in Tinfoil Hat Territory today?
Mnemosyne
@Joey Giraud:
I know, silly me, demanding proof of factual claims when what I really need is your pure, unspotted faith. What exactly is it that separates you from conservatives who “know” that birth control causes abortions and don’t need any stinking “proof” or “evidence” for their claims?
burnspbesq
@Cacti:
When somebody who was on the mission says it, on the record and for attribution, I’ll take this seriously. Not before.
The Sheriff's A Ni-
@Betty Cracker:
You’re right. Its Sy Hersh and It Makes The Other Tribe Look Bad. The thought of just how many people that would have to clam up over a conspiracy of this size never once enters into consideration. It makes My Tribe look good, and Their Tribe look bad. Book it, done. That’s all that’s needed to make it gospel truth.
Joey Giraud
@Betty Cracker:
It *is* just a claim.
I always thought the whole story was an obvious lie.
Obvious as in “anyone with a half-brain should doubt this fantastic tale.”
Joey Giraud
@burnspbesq:
What’s it like being a person who thinks that’s clever in any way?
Mnemosyne
@The Sheriff’s A Ni-:
I still can’t get any of the conspiracy theorists to explain to me why the US faked a military strike in the middle of Abbottabad that included downing a US helicopter. Why such an elaborate and expensive hoax? Why draw so much attention to it that local tweeters were commenting on the fake “raid” in real time?
All I ever get is, “You just don’t get the conspiracy, maaaan!”
Joey Giraud
@Betty Cracker:
Actually, Hersh’s comment isn’t even a claim.
It’s more of a “you’ve got to be kidding me, people actually believe this shit?”
Joey Giraud
@The Sheriff’s A Ni-:
What impresses me is that anyone considers this to be a thought worth having.
So tell us, just how many people would have clam up? Give us a diatribe on the credibility of whistleblowers, the internal open-information habits of security agencies, and the difficulty of keeping one’s “clam shut.”
“but someone would spill the beans!” – a children’s book.
Mnemosyne
@Joey Giraud:
So what does Hirsch think actually happened that night in Abbottabad? Be specific. Remember that you’re trying to convince people that this downed helicopter was just a figment of their imaginations, so you’re going to need to come up with a plausible explanation other than the official one. Did CNN know they were broadcasting a fake image? The Daily Mail? The Guardian? The BBC?
Another Holocene Human
@mistermix: Goddamnit, now that I understand what you’re saying, you ARE trolling. Obama went after the leakers in the government who jeopardized national security. He subpoenaed the papers too, as part of that effort, and boy are they pissed. They think they ought to be shielded entirely even though they were unconscionably reckless.
Certainly the press would not be under the same kind of sanctions as a secret stealer, because in the case of Snowden, intent absolutely does matter, as well as the fact that there are special laws and custom protecting the press, as their should be.
As for Greenwald’s partner, play with fire and get burned. I’ll let a UK poster to opine on whether Britain’s intelligence community and their anti-terrorism laws go too far. It’s a bit much to traffic the secrets of a foreign country and then cry when said country tries to stop you. Anyone who’s every been in a London airport knows they don’t play.
At the end of the day, Greenwald and Snowden forced some sunshine onto the FISC court, something more sane activists had been trying to do for years without success. It wasn’t a sexy topic to a lot of people, but it is to civil liberty nerd white boys who shudder at the thought of somewhere, anywhere being slightly inconvenienced. But it’s good that it was brought to the forefront. The way that they both behaved is utterly ridiculous, however.
As for Petrobras, our government should probably be keeping an eye on them, but I know the only reason they do is at the behest of our energy giants which we don’t keep an eye on at all, heck the Bush admin went all 3rd world, sleeping with and snorting coke with energy company reps? Nice.
Joey Giraud
@Mnemosyne:
Nothing. Is that specific enough?
Now I’m sure there were some dinner parties, some guys gambling at the coffee house, some children playing the Pakastani equivalent of “kick the can.” And always with the prayers. This is Pakistan.
And your proof that the official story is true? Other then, “my betters say it’s so?”
Mnemosyne
@Joey Giraud:
Really? The tweets from that night were all fake? The pictures were all faked? The news reports? The protest by Pakistan’s government? The crashed helicopter? All faked?
Other than the photos, the contemporaneous reports in real time, and the news footage? I have to admit, other than documentary evidence in the form of photographs and news stories, I got nothing. And since all of the documentary evidence has been hand-waved away in favor of “Seymour said it, I believe it,” I guess we get to file you with the guys who think that the US never landed on the moon and everything was faked on a Hollywood sound stage. Though at least they pretend to look at the evidence rather than claiming no evidence exists.
Joey Giraud
@Mnemosyne:
A picture of something against a wall somewhere. On CNN.
Smells like proof!
Geez, you are credulous.
Betty Cracker
@Joey Giraud: I hope he’s got more than that in his forthcoming book or he will have done serious damage to a hard-earned reputation.
Joey Giraud
@Mnemosyne:
The whole thing was a media charade. That is correct.
And you bought it, hook line and shrinker.
Mnemosyne
@Joey Giraud:
Now tell us about how the Apollo landing was totally created in a soundstage. I love that story — so full of imagination!
burnspbesq
@Joey Giraud:
It’s not clever, but then again, you haven’t done anything to deserve clever. All you’ve done is stupidly buy into a lame conspiracy theory.
johnny aquitard
@Mnemosyne: Geez mnem, take the tin foil hat off. That’s no super secret seal team chopper, that thing is one of those space-saving umbrella-type clothes line dryers.
No doubt there wasn’t room enough inside the walled compound for normal clothes lines.
I figure if the SEALs came in they would’ve come in on something like the flying hunter-killer in Terminator, although it must have been modded with a droppable infantry pod underneath.
Which proves they didn’t. Duh.
different-church-lady
I ain’t one to put much stock in critique of the quality of this blog, but Savior in a
Shake-n-Bake bag, if this post isn’t like a cement block chained to the ankle of sanity. It’s like you want us to all be dumber.
burnspbesq
I’m obviously too stupid and credulous to understand the true scope of the conspiracy, so I’m going to stop trying and go have lunch.
Mnemosyne (iPhone)
@johnny aquitard:
Ah, okay, I’m being punked. Good job! Though since there are at least two other regulars who have posted exactly what you did while apparently believing it whole-heartedly, you can’t really blame me for finding your schtick plausible. ?
different-church-lady
@Mnemosyne (iPhone): Poe’s law: as fundamental as gravity.
johnny aquitard
@Joey Giraud:
Sez the guy who’s got even less evidence than that.
You are a skeptic when it comes to one story and are a believer when it comes to the other. I guess it comes down to which story that strikes your fancy.
What is it you like about the government hoax one? You got no evidence so so it must be something else that appeals to you about it.
Keith G
Wow, the commentary attached to this thread is as edifying as an evening at Michael Vick’s dog pit.
Good job.
johnny aquitard
@Mnemosyne (iPhone): I kinda like the umbrella clothesline dryer angle. In fact I am becoming quite enamored of it since 1) I think it’s so awesome bin Laden was drying his doo-rag turban wrap on one of those things Alice Kramden would’ve probably used, and 2) (and this is totally utterly important to any self-respecting F-bagger, in fact it is a ‘bagger’s raison d’être) it pokes a finger in the eye of the Man even while 3) the black helicopters are laughing. Or something.
And that’s good enough for me!
Joey Giraud
Some of you regulars are as dumb as a bag of rocks.
@johnny aquitard
@burnspbesq:
Joey Giraud
@Betty Cracker:
Betty, I’m not making any argument from authority. Sy Hersh is just a good journalist.
He got some deserved fame for reporting things that contradicted official stories. And here he’s saying what anyone with some sense already suspected.
The Good Guys finally get a famous, but mysterious and shadowy Evil Doer, kill him real good, and then dump the body without any photos of the body or independent witnesses.
I guess I’m mostly surprised that no-one here noticed the story, if only to post more childish mockery and tin-foil name calling.
Betty Cracker
@Joey Giraud:
That is a classic argument from authority, and your repeated claims that “anyone with any sense” would disbelieve the story is another bogus tactic that seems designed to deflect attention from the fact that there is no evidence so far to support Hersh’s claim that the bin Laden story is a lie.
As I said before, I respect Hersh as a journalist, so I’m reserving judgment on his statement until whatever evidence he has to back it up is presented in his new book. (The Guardian piece in which Hersh made the claim that the bin Laden story is a lie says that a chapter of Hersh’s new book is devoted to that topic.)
But so far, there’s no THERE there. If all he’s doing is making a claim — as you are, with no evidence to back it up — I’ll personally find that disappointing. That’s not journalism, it’s pointless wanking, and there’s already enough of that going on.
Joey Giraud
Betty, it would be argument by authority if I was saying Hersh is always right SO he’s right now. I’m not saying that.
I’m saying “Sy Hersh says the official story is a lie,” AND I think he’s right and have always thought it was a lie.
Joey Giraud
And it’s preposterous to demand evidence that something extraordinary *didnt* happen.
This is like religionists who demand proof that God doesn’t exist.
The only evidence you have that the official story is true is….. the official story.
And that *is* argument by authority.
Betty Cracker
O. @Joey Giraud: Christ on a crutch, no. There are official and nonofficial reports from multiple people who claim to have heard it all unfold in real time. Are they allnliars? There are corroborating accounts from people nearby (tweets from some random dude in Abbottabad, for one). There are photographs of the defective copter. There was the official reaction from the Pakistan govt and reactions from al Qaeda militants, etc. If someone comes along and claims it’s a massive hoax, the onus is damn sure on them to produce evidence or at least a plausible alternate scenario.
Mnemosyne
@Joey Giraud:
Uh, dude, do you really not realize that you just contradicted yourself? Saying “Sy Hersh says the official story is a lie” is an argument from authority — you’re using Sy Hersh as your authority. “Sy said it, I believe it, so therefore it’s true” is 100 percent an argument from authority.
Personally, I’m still waiting to hear the Apollo 11 story from you. After all, it has the same level of “proof” as the Bin Laden assassination (photos, video footage, eyewitnesses, junked equipment, etc.) so it’s obviously a hoax by the government, amirite?
Mnemosyne
@johnny aquitard:
If the conspiracy was something like “Obama sent in Seal Team Six to steal Bin Laden’s mummified corpse so al-Qaeda couldn’t use it for propaganda anymore,” that would sound semi-plausible to me. But to claim that the photos, videos, news stories, and eyewitness accounts were all faked and there was no raid at all requires a level of psychosis I just can’t comprehend.
Once again, firebaggers remind me of a Brian DePalma movie, as the brainwashed heroine keeps repeating, “There is no body because there was no murder!” even after the murderer confesses.
Joey Giraud
@Betty Cracker:
I don’t know these people. The world is full of liars, many who will lie for money.
And contradictory ones from others who live nearby.
Let’s not play the game of battling experts and witnesses, ok? Why not just admit we can’t really know for sure, and that dumping the only incontrovertible evidence; Bin Laden’s corpse, is damn suspicious.
I for one don’t buy it. And Hersh is the first fairly mainstream reporter to express that skepticism, which should be enough to give a thoughtful person pause to reconsider.
Mnemosyne
@Joey Giraud:
Here’s Sohaib Athar, who got 15 minutes of fame for tweeting about events in his neighborhood. Your turn. Links or STFU. And posts from DU saying, “Well, I know a guy who knows a guy and he said that a guy he knows whose cousin lives in Pakistan said nothing happened” don’t count.
ETA:
You need to present some kind of expert or witness before you can say they’re “battling.” So far, all we have from you is that Hersh knows something that he’s not telling and you don’t need to know what he knows, because it’s good enough for you that he knows, like, something.
Joey Giraud
@Mnemosyne:
Memory man, you’re really off base.
Wrong. It’s a statement of fact.
An argument by authority is a syllogism. Syllogism; X *and* Y, *therefore” Z. In this case, X is an authority, X claims Y, therefore Y is true. ( Y is true is the Z )
As payback for the Apollo 11 crack, I could ridicule you as a naive fool who believes Saddam had nuclear weapons, or with a hundred other wrong things an authoritarian might parrot.
But I’m too nice for that. :)
I would add though, that a well-constructed and properly marketed lie doesn’t need an army of liars to reinforce it, only an army of fools to believe it and repeat it.
At least half the Balloon Juice regulars can be counted on to help.
Joey Giraud
@Mnemosyne:
Fuggedabout it. Any argument involving links to random and unknown websites is futile.
FWIW, as any BJ regular should know given it’s history of sockpuppetting and trolling, the business of the disinformation campaign has been made much more cost efficient by the Internet.
But creating a host of false websites might seem too sophisticated for you.
Joey Giraud
@Mnemosyne:
Can it be that you’re reading a statement of fact “Famous guy says X” as an implicit argument that X is true?
I could believe that. It’s pretty common. People do it all the time, same way they use the word “ain’t” and other mistakes.
I’m different. When I say “Hersh says X,” I’m not offering that as proof of X. I’m saying that “Hersh says X.” And he did.
(unless the Guardian made the Hersh interview up… but I’ll leave that conspiracy theory for you to develop :)