matoko_chan Checks In

matoko_chan has been sending me some of her observations. Here’s one:

GREENWALD is just doing his job, although he is a pompous narcissistic assclown.
And Obama is just doing his. As CinC his greatest fear has to be
that someone gives up the crypto key for Granai before we can GTFO in 2014.

This is apparently what she means by Granai. I thought her characterization of Greenwald was spot-on, read in its entirety. The rest of it is vintage m_c. For editing out the mandatory Assange portion, you can thank me in the comments.






326 replies
  1. 1
    Maude says:

    Please don’t encourage her come back to comments. She derails threads with spamming her comments.

  2. 2
    Ash Can says:

    And this is FP-worthy because…?

  3. 3
    Lurking Canadian says:

    OODA! WAI cudlips!

  4. 4
    Just Some Fuckhead says:

    I got a little verklempt when I read that. I taught her “assclown”.

  5. 5
    Gin & Tonic says:

    @Ash Can: Because mistermix thought it was.

  6. 6
    Steeplejack (tablet) says:

    Funny. I was watching Cowboy Bebop last night and, as usual, thought of her. (M_C = Edward.)

  7. 7
    White Trash Liberal says:

    Allah bless you Matoko. Hakim Bey will serve you boat drinks in heaven.

    GG is potentially getting himself into hot water, and not the kind that will baptize him. It’s looking as if he has been working on a documentary for some time, and one of the subjects was Snowden.

    And Snowden… Is a bit hinky. I mean, it’s possible to be a GED having IT wunderkind Paultard with access to the holy grail of US clandestine networking… But my suspension of disbelief to his claims and the quality of his information is tenuous at best.

    Would be a shame to try and hit a grand slam as a civil liberties activist journalist only to discover that the bat you’ve been given is made of Batshit.

  8. 8
    Maude says:

    @Steeplejack (tablet):
    I type on the NST with the eraser end of a pencil. Works like a charm.
    Just thought I’d mention it.

  9. 9
    Paul in KY says:

    @Just Some Fuckhead: It’s like rather than buying her an epithert, you taught her an epithet.

    Circle of life and all that….(sniff).

  10. 10
    Paul in KY says:

    I hate that we cannot edit comments anymore.

  11. 11
    Corner Stone says:

    @Just Some Fuckhead: M_C and eemom on your slate. What other sins against mankind are you responsible for?

  12. 12
    Temporarily Max McGee (soon enough to be Andy K again) says:

    @Paul in KY:

    Huh?

    ETA: I think it’s you.

  13. 13
    Yatsuno says:

    @Just Some Fuckhead: You taught your young Padawan well.

  14. 14
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    Oh dear god.

  15. 15
    Cassidy says:

    I’d rather M_C be here than some of the shitheads we got now. Pie works at home, but that’s it. I wouldn’t pie M_C.

  16. 16
    mistermix says:

    @Paul in KY: What’s your setup? Because it works fine for me. In fact, I went through a fair amount of fuckity-fuck-fuck, as we professionals call it, to get it to work.

  17. 17
    Ash Can says:

    @Gin & Tonic: I find it hard to believe he wouldn’t have anything more worthwhile to post about, such as lumbago, a wonky knee, regularity, etc.

  18. 18
    Steeplejack (tablet) says:

    @Maude:

    Thanks for the tip. I had thought about getting a cheap stylus and trying it out, but maybe I’ll buy a designer pencil instead.

  19. 19
    Corner Stone says:

    I’m just still wondering how Dr. John Carter got a job with the NSA.

  20. 20
    Maude says:

    @Steeplejack (tablet):
    You can get one of those holiday brightly colored ones. When I tried using my fingers, my hands are small, I was hitting the wrong keys. Tried the pencil when I registered it.

  21. 21
    Xenos says:

    I always liked MC. Could not make it to the end of some of the flame wars, though.

  22. 22
    Paul in KY says:

    @Temporarily Max McGee (soon enough to be Andy K again): In my comment box (once it has posted) I see a ‘Reply’ in lower right corner, but no edit button.

    I use IE 8 (curse my work computer).

  23. 23
    srv says:

    I was thinking about a drone strike on Snowden, but we need to think bigger.

    Objectively, GG is aiding and abetting terrorism against the National Security Apparatus, and thus the United States. Perhaps we need to discuss the parameters of a courtesy bomb on Brazil, as the world is the War on Terror’s oyster.

  24. 24
    Just Some Fuckhead says:

    I can’t edit my comments either.

    ETA: Kidding!

  25. 25
    Maude says:

    There are tornado watches until 10 p.m. tonight in southern NJ.

  26. 26
    The Dangerman says:

    @White Trash Liberal:

    …is made of Batshit.

    Falcon (shit) and the Snowden.

    /seanpenn

  27. 27
    Paul in KY says:

    @mistermix: Good ole IE 8 on a PC.

  28. 28
    taylormattd says:

    Oh Christ.

  29. 29
    NickT says:

    I am going to regret asking this, but who is/was matoko_chan and why would we care?

  30. 30
    Xenos says:

    @White Trash Liberal:

    And Snowden… Is a bit hinky. I mean, it’s possible to be a GED having IT wunderkind Paultard with access to the holy grail of US clandestine networking… But my suspension of disbelief to his claims and the quality of his information is tenuous at best.

    Eleventy dimensional chess, it is. General cultural freakout coordinated by White House leads to bipartisan movement to limit NSA powers.

    Could happen.

  31. 31
    Svensker says:

    @Paul in KY:

    Oh, I dunno. That epithert one was just about perfeck. :)

  32. 32
    Just Some Fuckhead says:

    @Corner Stone: I’m a freak magnet.

  33. 33
    El Tiburon says:

    @White Trash Liberal:
    And Snowden… Is a bit hinky
    Ah, so it begins. Time to destroy the messenger.

    Assange, I mean Manning, I mean Snowden have some “issues” and therefore Look a bird!

  34. 34
    Amir Khalid says:

    Did she use the word “maftoon”? I kind of miss seeing it. Sometimes.

  35. 35
    El Tiburon says:

    @Ash Can:
    And this is FP-worthy because…?

    Greenwald bashing is always FP worthy.

  36. 36
    Zifnab says:

    @White Trash Liberal: Any attempt to discredit an informant is merely more proud that the informant us accurate. These are the rules of conspiracy-ball.

    Now that Snowden’s claims are public, and have a veneer of truth, everything he claims afterward will be unimpeachable by the folks who are hearing what they already suspected.

    That’s not even to say whether Snowden’s claims are accurate. I have little doubt that the NSA’s rush to embrace data mining produced bent bringing on lots of warn bodies on the contractor level.

    It is just going to be annoying sorting out built from legitimate claims.

  37. 37
    White Trash Liberal says:

    @El Tiburon:

    His message isn’t all that superlative either.

    And thank you for incorporating me into the greater narrative of Assange and Manning, considering I have not said a negative in regards to either of their characters. But I will be your Piñata of Freedom.

  38. 38
    Maude says:

    @Amir Khalid:
    She also insulted people here in a nasty way.

  39. 39
    Cassidy says:

    @El Tiburon: Well let’s see….Assange is/ was an accused rapist who refuses to face a court of law, Manning is a criminal and traitor, and Snowden seems to havea tenuous relationship with honestly. If that’s the company you want to keep, sure, but I’d be embarrassed.

    Sucks, because it will drown out a much needed topic, but oh well, don’t do anything you don’t want recorded to the internet.

  40. 40
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Maude:
    @Steeplejack (tablet):

    I bought an iPearl case for my soon-to-be-delivered iPad Mini and it came with a free stylus. That was kinda neat. Chinese companies seem to be working hard to have better customer service than US companies do.

  41. 41
    cleek says:

    @El Tiburon:

    Time to destroy the messenger.

    perhaps if so much of what the messenger didn’t sound implausible, we wouldn’t have to pay attention to him. but, that’s not where we are…

  42. 42
    Gin & Tonic says:

    @Paul in KY: No edit button under IE9/Win7 either.

  43. 43
    White Trash Liberal says:

    @El Tiburon: Greenwald ball-cozying is also frequent FP bait. But don’t let that stop you from getting your hate on. The only time you appear in these threads is to defend GG against all threats.

  44. 44
    Hal says:

    I worked in IT once upon a time and can believe you can be a high school drop out and a computer whiz.

    What I’m not understanding is how you start working with GG in February on a job you didn’t start until March. Not to mention the whole less than 90 days employed thing.

    I still think there’s obviously important questions to ask about how far the security state should go, but I’m finding some of the players in this drama a bit eyebrow raising.

  45. 45
    Corner Stone says:

    @Zifnab: That is one nasty autocorrect program you’re working with there.

  46. 46
    mistermix says:

    @Paul in KY:

    I use IE 8 (curse my work computer).

    If I had a computer that would even run that, I’d test it out. But all of mine have auto-updated. Sorry for your situation.

  47. 47
    BGinCHI says:

    M_C; DR

  48. 48
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @El Tiburon: Actually, quite a few people have shown interest in m_c and wondered what was up with her. Her signal to noise ratio was pretty bad and she could be appalling and casually racist. She has horrible musical taste and she was obsessive. She did, however, have some good insights into things on occasion.

  49. 49
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Zifnab:

    IIRC, the Guardian and Washington Post have already backed off from their initial claims of wholesale spying and are now saying that the information is only being turned over in response to a FISA or other warrant. The tech reporters at places like ZDNet and Tech Crunch (via LGF) have been filing some really great stories that make it obvious that the original reporters of the story (including Greenwald) didn’t have the technical knowledge to report what they were looking at accurately.

  50. 50
    Corner Stone says:

    @Hal: He worked for the NSA in 2009 with other companies like Dell.
    He didn’t pop out of Zeus’ skull, fully formed in 2013.

  51. 51
    Cassidy says:

    @Hal:

    I still think there’s obviously important questions to ask about how far the security state should go, but I’m finding some of the players in this drama a bit eyebrow raising.

    This is what normal politicla junkies of the Balloon Juice persuasion are saying. Unfortunately, what the GG acolytes hear is

    “ZOMG! SHEEPLE! YOU’RE AN AUTHORITARIAN REPUBLICAN. ARGLE BARGLE! FRRRRRREEEEEEEDDDDDDDDOOOOOMMMMM!”

  52. 52
    Maude says:

    @Mnemosyne:
    I have ELink. The soft eraser is good.
    ipad can use a stylus with no problem.

  53. 53
    suzanne says:

    FOURLOKO_CHAN!
    I sort of miss her stream-of-half-consciousness “wit” and “wisdom”.

  54. 54
    Hal says:

    Oh, not to mention his intimations that he’s about to be assassinated.

  55. 55
    Corner Stone says:

    @Omnes Omnibus:

    She did, however, have some good insights into things on occasion.

    Not really.

  56. 56
    Ash Can says:

    @El Tiburon: Greenwald himself burned Snowden but good this morning when he came right out and said that he was working with Snowden from the outset of his employment at Booz Allen, and quite possibly before. Besides the obvious legal implications of this, we now have what could have been a legitimate policy debate about the disadvantages of post-9/11 security laws buried by a huge heap of admittedly contrived hey-everybody-look-at-me manure. Happy now?

  57. 57
    Corner Stone says:

    #FREESNOWDEN

  58. 58
    David in NY says:

    “It is just going to be annoying sorting out bu[lsh]ilt from legitimate claims.”

    It is because this is all so secrety-secret. That’s the most certain problem here. It’s a good bet there are worse problems, but that’s one for sure.

  59. 59
    mistermix says:

    @El Tiburon: The sentence “Glenn Greenwald is doing his job AND he’s a pompous assclown” is not a contradiction. And, frankly, considering Glenn’s personality, he probably wouldn’t consider it much of an insult. As far as I’m concerned it’s pretty much a compliment, since most journalists are assholes.

  60. 60
    Ultraviolet Thunder says:

    IIRC Snowden said he was walking away from a $200K job. Anyone familiar with IT knows that for every 6 figure salary there are 750 pixel stained wretches toiling away for $25K – $50K. Unless the NSA pays a boatload more for ordinary talent than the private sector (and for security reasons they probably pay a bit more), Snowden held a pretty responsible position.

  61. 61
    Ultraviolet Thunder says:

    @suzanne:

    stream-of-half-consciousness

    I am stealing that. It’s mine now.

  62. 62
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @Corner Stone: On rare occasion?

  63. 63
    Todd says:

    @srv:

    Objectively, GG is aiding and abetting terrorism against the National Security Apparatus, and thus the United States. Perhaps we need to discuss the parameters of a courtesy bomb on Brazil, as the world is the War on Terror’s oyster.

    Using up a Hellfire on GG defines government waste.

  64. 64
    Gin & Tonic says:

    @mistermix: Like I said, same thing in IE9.

  65. 65
    Redshirt says:

    M_C! I’ll admit one of the first times in my life I felt like “an old” was reading one of the dozens of M_C posts regarding the movie “Avatar”. I could barely read them, and thought: Is this how the kids are talking these days?

    Thankfully, I learned she’s insane.

  66. 66

    @White Trash Liberal:

    But my suspension of disbelief to his claims and the quality of his information is tenuous at best.

    This is where I am. I have sympathy for him — I think he’s sincerely alarmed by what he believes to be true — but I also don’t think his claims pan out. I trust the tech press more than GG/WaPo on this, because most of them have a strong interest in privacy issues and they have more expertise with which to evaluate the story.

  67. 67

    M_C is like a player that you find terribly annoying when he’s on another team but you love him when he’s on your team. David Eckstein for baseball. I loved watching her rile up the glibertarians at the LOOG.

  68. 68
    chopper says:

    @suzanne:

    i’m still waiting for ‘the american fall’ that was promised after the arab spring. i like fall.

  69. 69
  70. 70
    Cassidy says:

    M_C should have been FPing.

  71. 71
    Corner Stone says:

    @Omnes Omnibus: Never. Does never work for you?

  72. 72
    4tehlulz says:

    @Steeplejack (tablet): I doubt that sucka m_c would be that useful.

  73. 73
    Cassidy says:

    @Omnes Omnibus: Consider the source.

  74. 74
    Violet says:

    Interesting tag on this thread.

  75. 75
    Todd says:

    @suzanne:

    FOURLOKO_CHAN!
    I sort of miss her stream-of-half-consciousness “wit” and “wisdom”.

    Wasn’t she something else previously?

  76. 76
    El Tiburon says:

    @White Trash Liberal:

    And thank you for incorporating me into the greater narrative of Assange and Manning, considering I have not said a negative in regards to either of their characters. But I will be your Piñata of Freedom.

    No, but you did say HINKY, didn’t you? Thereby buying into the narrative to some extent that Snowden has some kind of personalty defect – like it fucking matters.

    All that matters is this: Is the material he provided accurate and true? If so I could care less if who he has locked up in his basement or if he thinks he is a girl or whatever.

    But, like Assange and Manning or Trayvon Martin their ‘hinkiness” will become the focus.

  77. 77
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @Cassidy: Her utter inability to grasp nuance or recognize irony would have been problematic.

  78. 78
    El Tiburon says:

    @Cassidy:

    Well let’s see….Assange is/ was an accused rapist who refuses to face a court of law, Manning is a criminal and traitor, and Snowden seems to havea tenuous relationship with honestly. If that’s the company you want to keep, sure, but I’d be embarrassed.

    Oh boy. I’m embarrassed for you. But thank you for illustrating my point beautifully.

  79. 79
    Todd says:

    @Cassidy:

    M_C should have been FPing.

    *shudder*

  80. 80
    NickT says:

    @El Tiburon:

    Just think how proud Dick Cheney must be though.

  81. 81
    MomSense says:

    So is M_C in some sort of balloon-juice super secret probation?

  82. 82
    Cassidy says:

    @El Tiburon:

    But, like Assange and Manning or Trayvon Martin their ‘hinkiness” will become the focus.

    Oh you poor child. You really are as dumb as come across. but you’re welcome to refute anything I said. Conspircay theories of ebing set up in 3, 2, 1….

  83. 83
    Todd says:

    @Omnes Omnibus:

    Her utter inability to grasp nuance or recognize irony would have been problematic

    So you’re saying that she’d be a natural in the realm of IT employment, right?

  84. 84
    El Tiburon says:

    @White Trash Liberal:

    The only time you appear in these threads is to defend GG against all threats.

    No, I jump in to point out the idiocy and hypocrisy on GG bashers. Again, that Greenwald is ‘pompous’ matters why? Why the fuck do you people care about his pomposity? Shouldn’t you care about the CONTENT? And it is the lack of the conversation here about the CONTENT that I find so amusing.

  85. 85

    @Cassidy: You mean you didn’t think any of her comments were FPing?

  86. 86
    El Tiburon says:

    @Omnes Omnibus:

    Actually, quite a few people have shown interest in m_c and wondered what was up with her.

    Ok, So that Greenwald was the topic was irrelevant? Just simple luck of the draw, huh?

  87. 87
    Cassidy says:

    @Omnes Omnibus: She would have been fun and you know it.

    @MomSense: She got banned for a bit and just never came back. She lurks. I think she got bored with us.

  88. 88
    Belafon (formerly anonevent) says:

    @Ultraviolet Thunder: My wife said after she heard about the salary: “Well, it looks like the NSA has an opening.”

  89. 89
    El Tiburon says:

    @Ash Can:

    Happy now?

    Yes, it always tickles me the pretzels you people will get into to NOT have to debate the content of Greenwald’s articles. Now, what matters to Ash Can is that Greenwald worked with Snowden what?

    A short convo with Ash Can:

    El Tib: Hey, Ash, did you hear about the article Greenwald wrote that is being described as a blockbuster by many?
    Ash: Yes, but so what because something something something.

    THE END.

  90. 90
    Joseph P. says:

    Is Daniel Ellsburg an assclown also? He has called Snowden a hero.

    “This wholesale invasion of Americans’ and foreign citizens’ privacy does not contribute to our security; it puts in danger the very liberties we’re trying to protect.”

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/comm.....si-america

  91. 91
    Paul in KY says:

    @mistermix: No problem. Just have to look at them extra before I hit post.

  92. 92
    NickT says:

    @El Tiburon:

    Do you feel Greenwald understands the technical side of the material he is describing well enough to form a judgment worth taking seriously – and, if so, why?

  93. 93
    Cassidy says:

    El Tiburon Translated:

    Duu-duu-duu-duu…
    Duu-duu-duu-duu…
    Duu-duu-duu-duu…
    Aaa-aaaa

    Where have all the good men gone
    And where are all the gods
    Where’s the street-wise Hercules
    To fight the rising odds

    Isn’t there a white knight upon a fiery steed
    Late at night I toss and I turn and I dream of what I need

    I need a hero
    I’m holding on for a hero ‘til the end of the night
    He’s gotta be strong
    And he’s gotta be fast
    And he’s gotta be fresh from the fight
    I need a hero (hero)
    I’m holding on for a hero ‘till the morning light (‘till the morning light)
    He’s gotta be sure
    And it’s gotta be soon
    And he’s gotta be larger than life (gotta be larger than life)

    Duu-duu-duu-duu…
    Duu-duu-duu-duu…
    Duu-duu-duu-duu…
    Aaa-aaaa

    Somewhere after midnight
    In my wildest fantasy
    Somewhere just beyond my reach
    There’s someone reaching back for me

    Racing on the thunder and rising with the heat
    It’s gonna take a superman to sweep me off my feet

    I need a hero
    I’m holding on for a hero ‘til the end of the night
    He’s gotta be strong
    And he’s gotta be fast
    And he’s gotta be fresh from the fight
    I need a hero
    I’m holding on for a hero ‘til the morning light
    He’s gotta be sure
    And it’s gotta be soon
    And he’s gotta be larger than life

    I need a hero
    I’m holding on for a hero ‘til the end of the night

    Up where the mountains meet the heavens above
    Out where the lightning splits the sea
    I could swear there is someone somewhere
    Watching me
    Through the wind and the chill and the rain
    And the storm and the flood
    I can feel his approach
    Like a fire in my blood
    (Like a fire in my blood)
    (Like a fire in my blood)
    (Like a fire in my blood)

    I need a hero
    I’m holding on for a hero ‘til the end of the night
    He’s gotta be strong
    And he’s gotta be fast
    And he’s gotta be fresh from the fight
    I need a hero (hero)
    I’m holding on for a hero ‘til the morning light (‘till the morning light)
    He’s gotta be sure
    And it’s gotta be soon
    And he’s gotta be larger than life (gotta be larger than life)

    I need a hero
    I’m holding on for a hero ‘til the end of the night
    He’s gotta be strong
    And he’s gotta be fast
    And he’s gotta be fresh from the fight
    I need a hero (hero)
    I’m holding on for a hero ‘til the morning light (‘till the morning light)
    He’s gotta be sure
    And it’s gotta be soon
    And he’s gotta be larger than life (gotta be larger than life)

    I need a hero
    I’m holding on for a hero ‘til the end of the night

    Uuuu-uuu-uuu-uuuuu… (fading background)

    I’m glad that GG gets your motor rumbling, but damn, go do that in private.

  94. 94
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @El Tiburon: Randy Moss was a great WR in his prime; he was also a complete asshole.

    GG, in my view, is a polemicist on civil liberty issues. I find that polemicists are of somewhat limited value. YMMV.

  95. 95
    JGabriel says:

    Hola, Matoko Chan!

    Happy and relieved to see you around these parts again.

  96. 96

    @Joseph P.:

    “Is Daniel Ellsburg an assclown also? ”

    If he had leaked papers during a Democratic administration he would be, but he did so under a Republican so it’s all good.

  97. 97
    El Tiburon says:

    @mistermix:

    The sentence “Glenn Greenwald is doing his job AND he’s a pompous assclown” is not a contradiction. And, frankly, considering Glenn’s personality, he probably wouldn’t consider it much of an insult. As far as I’m concerned it’s pretty much a compliment, since most journalists are assholes.

    If it said “pompous asshole” then that would be one thing. But “assclown” is an entirely different ball game. Being an ‘asshole’ still denotes a sense of seriousness and dignity.

    Donald Trump is an assclown, not an asshole. See the difference?

  98. 98
    suzanne says:

    @Todd: She’s had many names. But she’ll always be my FourLoko.

    Her story is, at heart, a cautionary tale.

  99. 99
    Belafon (formerly anonevent) says:

    @Joseph P.: Nope, that’s reserved for GG, not for what he says, but the way he presents himself, where everything is about promoting GG.

  100. 100
    scav says:

    @Cassidy:

    I think she got bored with us.

    It was a bit entirely mutual. The grass is usually geener in the rear view mirror. Les trolls d’antan.

  101. 101
    pillsy says:

    @Ash Can:

    I had assumed, based on Snowden’s prior career, that he would already have had a high-level security clearance when he started working with BAH. That makes his claims about salary more plausible, since having a clearance in and of itself is a hard-to-meet qualification for a lot of jobs.

  102. 102
    Cassidy says:

    @scav: I liked her. My one and only issue was her casual used of bigoted language, specifically what was directed at Amir. He’s said that it dind’t really bother him and that’s cool, but I wish she had dialed it back after being told “not cool”. Other than that, watching her get everyone’s panties twisted was fun. Hell, I even went a couple of rounds with her for the hell of it.

  103. 103

    @El Tiburon:

    “Why the fuck do you people care about his pomposity? Shouldn’t you care about the CONTENT? And it is the lack of the conversation here about the CONTENT that I find so amusing.”

    They don’t do content here. They do “our side good, their side bad” and proceed from that assumption.

  104. 104
    Soonergrunt says:

    @Todd: many times.

  105. 105
    mistermix says:

    @El Tiburon: He’s clownish at times.

  106. 106
    Cassidy says:

    @Dr. Mantis Toboggan: Awwww, how sweet.

    Actually we do that thing where if you’re a credible person, then we’re likely to give what you say a benefit of a doubt, but when you’re shown to be routinely dishonest or deliberately misleading, we don’t. Hence, GG has no credibility.

  107. 107

    @Cassidy:

    “Assange is/ was an accused rapist who refuses to face a court of law”

    That’s not so. Assange sought assurance that he would not be sent to a black site in the United States when he went to stand trial and was not granted it. It isn’t the bogus rape charges he refuses to face, but being sealed up in some local Guantanamo Bay.

    “Manning is a criminal and traitor”

    He is not a criminal because he has not been convicted of a crime. And he is not a traitor because he did not provide help to an enemy, but instead blew the whistle on illegal activities to a news gathering organization.

    “Snowden seems to have a tenuous relationship with honestly”

    Based upon what?

  108. 108
    Belafon (formerly anonevent) says:

    @El Tiburon: So, you’re reduced to looking for dignity in the word asshole.

  109. 109
    Todd says:

    Stupidest corporate violation of my privacy ever, just now. Got a call on my cell(!) from a Gallup rep, on behalf of my bank. He was surveying my most recent experience visiting a specific branch(!!), which I had visited Thursday. I might visit this branch once very four months, it isn’t my usual.

    My account has my office line as my primary number, the rep says they’re making these calls on cellphones to get more response.

    He knew enough for it to not be a bullshit phishing expedition, but as I’ve said before, since my bank is handing my info to third parties, I have no expectation of privacy.

    I did hang up on him, though – pollsters piss me off.

  110. 110
    suzanne says:

    @scav: I think that E. D. Kain leaving just took all the fight right out of her. Makes me think of Inigo Montoya: “It’s very strange. I have been in the revenge business so long, now that it’s over, I don’t know what to do with the rest of my life.”

  111. 111

    @Cassidy:

    What has Glenn Greenwald said or done to lower his credibility?

  112. 112
    Chyron HR says:

    @Dr. Mantis Toboggan:

    Yeah, those Obotomized Obots who mindlessly worship (and possibly fantasize about getting raped by) Dear Leader are all about the tribalism.

  113. 113
    burnspbesq says:

    @Todd:

    Using up a Hellfire on GG defines government waste

    Really. Just kidnap his ass, dress him up in Lazio kit, bind and gag him, and drop him outside a bar frequented by AS Roma Ultras. They’ll know what to do.

  114. 114
    White Trash Liberal says:

    @El Tiburon: Snowden is putting his ethos out there as part of his personal narrative. And the claims made by both him and GG in regards to the actual extent and reality of PRISM are coming under scrutiny.

    Snowden and GG are making a huge claim about the scope and authority of the national security state. I am interested in determining the full story without placing myself on a particular team with all my narrative and opinions baked in.

    I would like to hear your appraisal of the leaks and the validity of the materials. How about you put your best foot forward and argue the “relevant details” instead of putting yourself on the other side of the character debate and pretending you aren’t.

  115. 115
    El Tiburon says:

    @NickT:

    Do you feel Greenwald understands the technical side of the material he is describing well enough to form a judgment worth taking seriously – and, if so, why?

    I have no idea. I have only skimmed the article in question. I find it all rather boring to an extent.

    What I find interesting is to then see what happens aftewards. Folks like Charles Johnson, David Simon and Bob Cesca are basically callilng bullshit. I have no problem with this. Greenwald may have reported something faulty or in error orbe just wrong. If so, then I expect he will correct it.

    But, I also expect Greenwald to respond at some point and that will be interesting to see. But more pertinent is that since it is Greenwald, many people WANT to find errors and mistakes just because. Look, ALL reporters/bloggers/people make mistakes. And if Greenwald’s analysis has flaws, so be it. I won’t defend him because I don’t think I’ve ever really defended him.

    And if it is shown that his original reporting was faulty, then it will forever be tethered to him especially around here.

  116. 116

    @White Trash Liberal:

    “And Snowden… Is a bit hinky. I mean, it’s possible to be a GED having IT wunderkind Paultard with access to the holy grail of US clandestine networking”

    Wouldn’t it be somewhat unlikely that Mr Snowden would provoke outrage from the government if what he was saying wasn’t true?

    On the other hand, a person who drops out of school could never amount to anything in the world of computing, right Bill Gates?

  117. 117
    burnspbesq says:

    @Joseph P.:

    Is Daniel Ellsburg an assclown also?

    Yes. One random good act 40 years ago doesn’t give you a lifetime pass to be an idiot.

  118. 118
    El Tiburon says:

    @Omnes Omnibus:

    Randy Moss was a great WR in his prime; he was also a complete asshole.

    Assclown. Was he an assclown or asshole?

  119. 119
    Todd says:

    @Dr. Mantis Toboggan:

    What has Glenn Greenwald said or done to lower his credibility?

    Expressed his opinion, which is always wrong and usually dishonestly stated.

  120. 120
    Cassidy says:

    @Dr. Mantis Toboggan:

    That’s not so. Assange sought assurance that he would not be sent to a black site in the United States when he went to stand trial and was not granted it. It isn’t the bogus rape charges he refuses to face, but being sealed up in some local Guantanamo Bay.

    If you think that’s even remotely true, your delusional. The Bourne Conspiracy was a movie.

    He is not a criminal because he has not been convicted of a crime. And he is not a traitor because he did not provide help to an enemy, but instead blew the whistle on illegal activities to a news gathering organization.

    I think this is the most amusing bit of dumbass I’ve read all day. Blew the whistle on illegal activities? Really? Go back to the fuckin’ playground.

    Based upon what?

    Has been discussed in other threads, inlcuding this one. Please keep up.

    Don’t bother responding. I have zero respect for your position and you’re spin and delusion are not worht my time or effort. I prefer to stay in reality, thank you.

  121. 121
    El Tiburon says:

    @mistermix:

    He’s clownish at times.

    Goddamnit. Cole is clownish. DougJ is clownish. But I don’t think either are assholes or assclowns. Well maybe DougJ…

  122. 122
    piratedan says:

    good to see both sock puppets in the same thread… please proceed

  123. 123

    @El Tiburon:

    ” But more pertinent is that since it is Greenwald, many people WANT to find errors and mistakes just because.”

    And look at what they are finding: “There’s something about Greenwald’s tone that makes me think he is lying.” “Greenwald’s latest tweet struck me as pompous, so clearly there’s nothing to this story.” “Greenwald doesn’t even live in America, and he reports for a foreign country’s newspaper, so who cares what he says?”

    Ridiculous.

  124. 124
    Alien-Radio says:

    count me in the pro m_c camp, She had Kain pegged from day 1, so did I but she had the tenacity to really give that equivicating ass a serious trolling that I can only respect. Plus she picked up the OODA loop thing from me.

  125. 125
    El Tiburon says:

    @Belafon (formerly anonevent):

    So, you’re reduced to looking for dignity in the word asshole.

    Around here it is a noble calling.

  126. 126
    Mandalay says:

    Nobody is more qualified than this great man to put some perspective on what Snowden did, but I still find his analysis a bit surpising….

    In my estimation, there has not been in American history a more important leak than Edward Snowden’s release of NSA material – and that definitely includes the Pentagon Papers 40 years ago. Snowden’s whistleblowing gives us the possibility to roll back a key part of what has amounted to an “executive coup” against the US constitution.

    I hope he’s right on all counts, but I think he’s being a bit optimistic.

  127. 127
    NickT says:

    @El Tiburon:

    I have no idea. I have only skimmed the article in question. I find it all rather boring to an extent.

    So you are defending Greenwald and calling others out on the basis of an article you skimmed, which deals with technical material you find boring?

    Interesting approach you’ve got there.

  128. 128
    YellowJournalism says:

    Now someone just needs to track down Darrell or BOB, and our reunion of entertaining trolls will be complete.

  129. 129
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @El Tiburon: Moss was both. In addition, he was a douchecanoe.

  130. 130

    @Dr. Mantis Toboggan:

    What has Glenn Greenwald said or done to lower his credibility?

    I predict you’re going to get a lot of answers to this one, but a particular lowlight for me was his farcical attempt at creating OWS brand outerwear.

  131. 131

    @Cassidy:

    “If you think that’s even remotely true, your delusional. The Bourne Conspiracy was a movie.”

    Assange does not want to be treated like Bradley Manning. That’s just a fact. And since the United Nations has judged America’s treatment of Manning to be cruel and unusual punishment, he has a valid concern.

    http://rt.com/usa/manning-crue.....rture-383/

  132. 132
    El Tiburon says:

    @Dr. Mantis Toboggan:

    What has Glenn Greenwald said or done to lower his credibility?

    Dr. while I admire your tenacity, attempting to have any dialogue with Cassidy is like trying to clear your throat by shoving your hand up your a-hole. Totally not gonna work plus you have poop on your hand.

  133. 133
    Cassidy says:

    @YellowJournalism: None of these fools ahve got shit on BOB. That was some master class shit.

  134. 134
    burnspbesq says:

    @Dr. Mantis Toboggan:

    He is not a criminal because he has not been convicted of a crime.

    He is a criminal because he pled guilty. Are you really that ignorant?

  135. 135

    “I think this is the most amusing bit of dumbass I’ve read all day. Blew the whistle on illegal activities? Really? Go back to the fuckin’ playground.”

    I know who won’t be going back to a playground any time soon: The Iraqi children that a US helicopter shot for no good reason, which we wouldn’t know a thing about without Manning’s leaks.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C.....eo_footage

  136. 136
    Cassidy says:

    @El Tiburon: Are you still looking for a hero? How many pairs of panties do you throw on stage? SQUEEE!

  137. 137

    @Cassidy:

    “Has been discussed in other threads, inlcuding this one. Please keep up.”

    Yes, and never has anyone offered anything better than the absurdities I’ve already listed.

  138. 138
    Jewish Steel says:

    @Belafon (formerly anonevent):

    So, you’re reduced to looking for dignity in the word asshole.

    Pretty good.

  139. 139
    Cassidy says:

    @burnspbesq: We’re dealing with the roving band of GG sycophants, hanger-ons and pustules. What do you think?

  140. 140
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @Joseph P.: Ellsberg doesn’t choose my heroes. What he did with the Pentagon Papers was heroic, but I won’t outsource my hero determinations to him because of it.

  141. 141
    different-church-lady says:

    @El Tiburon:

    But, like Assange and Manning or Trayvon Martin their ‘hinkiness” will become the focus.

    Why not just throw in Sacco and Vanzetti, Ghandi, and Jesus Crhist* while you’re at it?

    (*Left the typo uncorrected, in the spirit of the thread.)

  142. 142
    burnspbesq says:

    @Mandalay:

    what has amounted to an “executive coup” against the US constitution.

    Wait, what? Legislation passed by Congress = executive coup? That’s too fucking stupid to require any further comment.

  143. 143
    4tehlulz says:

    After reading this, I am wondering if someone is following Snowden’s money trail. I have a sneaking suspicion the NSA was not the only one paying him.

  144. 144

    @burnspbesq:

    “He is a criminal because he pled guilty. Are you really that ignorant? ”

    I don’t think you know quite how our criminal justice system works. That’s okay, such information is easy to find.

    A question: if we already know he is a criminal, why is he currently on trial in court?

  145. 145
    Soonergrunt says:

    @El Tiburon: “Was he an assclown or asshole?” That depends on whether or not he had any dignity.

  146. 146
    different-church-lady says:

    @Dr. Mantis Toboggan:

    Assange does not want to be treated like Bradley Manning.

    Then Assange should not join the U.S. Army. Pretty simple, really.

  147. 147
    El Tiburon says:

    @White Trash Liberal:

    Snowden is putting his ethos out there as part of his personal narrative.

    So what?

    And the claims made by both him and GG in regards to the actual extent and reality of PRISM are coming under scrutiny.

    Good. Healthy skepticism and review is crucial.

    Snowden and GG are making a huge claim about the scope and authority of the national security state. I am interested in determining the full story without placing myself on a particular team with all my narrative and opinions baked in.

    I have not aligned myself with any team. I have made no comment whether Greenwald is correct or not. I don’t know. Now, saying that, I will say that I find Greenwald to always be very meticulous and thorough and I tend to trust him at face value, but have no problem if he is proven to be wrong on certain facts.

    I would like to hear your appraisal of the leaks and the validity of the materials. How about you put your best foot forward and argue the “relevant details” instead of putting yourself on the other side of the character debate and pretending you aren’t.

    Again, I haven’t really read in detail the article in question. So, I have no real argument to make on the details. But, I will argue that when Snowden’s personality or personal details begin to become the focus, like Assange and Manning before him, then I definitely have an opinion. And that opinion is it does not matter. ALL that matter is the material. And I’ve seen enough prominent reporters/pundits/bloggers say this leak is a big fucking deal. So, I’m running with this and will alter my take as more facts come out.

  148. 148

    @burnspbesq:

    Do you know more about this topic than Daniel Ellsberg? If so, further comment is very much appreciated.

  149. 149
    chopper says:

    @different-church-lady:

    Neil: Crucifixion is a really negative way to kill yourself man, I’ve tried it before loads of times, there’s no way you can hammer in the last nail.

  150. 150
    scav says:

    @suzanne: Might be it. She was more than a bit repetitive, which got old, and the free-floating obsessions and delusions were a bit disturbing to be constantly and unavoidably rubber-necking (pie-scrubbing is not 100% effective). But definitly more in the I hope she gets help than the I hope for a targetted asteroid class.

    There were less exhausting (and more documented and balenced) sources of similar insight.

  151. 151
    different-church-lady says:

    @Joseph P.:

    Is Daniel Ellsburg an assclown also?

    I hadn’t really thought about it before now. I guess I’ll have to do some research.

  152. 152
    burnspbesq says:

    @Dr. Mantis Toboggan:

    A question: if we already know he is a criminal, why is he currently on trial in court?

    Because he didn’t plead guilty to all of the charges and specifications, and the prosecution decided to go to trial on the charges that he didn’t plead to. There are public documents, that you can find in less than a minute via Google, that explain all of this. Are you too lazy to do the research, or are you determined to be stupid no matter what?

  153. 153
    El Tiburon says:

    @Cassidy:

    Don’t bother responding. I have zero respect for your position and you’re spin and delusion are not worht my time or effort. I prefer to stay in reality, thank you.

    See Dr. Toboggan, what did I tell you?

  154. 154

    @El Tiburon:

    “But, I will argue that when Snowden’s personality or personal details begin to become the focus, like Assange and Manning before him, then I definitely have an opinion.”

    What, you don’t like the medieval method of evaluating claims by judging the person making them? I suppose when you get sick you don’t drill a hole in your head to let out the demons, either, mister hoity-toity.

  155. 155
    mai naem says:

    @El Tiburon: I don’t know the definition of Hinky but the the gist of the post was that there was something off about the story not so much that Snowden has psych issues. BTW, I would not be surprised if you now hear that Snowden is a child porn consumer, a perv, bipolar,schizo,wife beater or a psychopath etc. kind of standard MO from any government.

    Anyhow, I’m just wondering how Greenwald and all the other purists expect Obama to even bring up civil liberties, FISA etc. when this is what he’s had to deal with four years :musleem! soshulist! kenyan musleem! appeaser! Illegitimate!Amerika apologist! black musleem! Democrat spit on the military ! America Hater! Commiepinkosocialist! Medicare killer! Deathpanel founder! Teabagger harrasser! Monkey! Chimpanzee! Ape! Gorilla! Reparations! N%clang! N@clang Liar! Liar! Welfare lover! Foodstamp lover! UE numbermaker upper! Gungrabber! Seriously, they think he can lead these people to agree to curtailing the Patriot Act? Really?

  156. 156
    different-church-lady says:

    @chopper: I’m gonna guess: “Young Ones”?

  157. 157
    Mark B. says:

    @Mandalay: That’s a pretty hyperbolic statement. I’m a little disappointed in Ellsberg. Since the program was completely legal and nothing surprising was revealed, his statement seems a little overblown. Now that Snowden has fled to China and likely will provide them with all of the more important intelligence he claims to know, that’s somewhat of a bigger deal. You know, Ellsberg turned himself in after disclosing the Pentagon Papers. Imagine if he had fled to the Soviet Union?

  158. 158

    @El Tiburon:

    Oh I believed you. I just have a few minutes to kill before preparing dinner.

  159. 159
    El Tiburon says:

    @Dr. Mantis Toboggan:

    Ridiculous.

    Welcome to the Balloon Juice of Glenn Greenwald Hatred.

    It is a feature around here, not a bug.

  160. 160
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @Dr. Mantis Toboggan: Manning has entered guilty pleas to some of the counts with which he was charged. He is being tried on others. You may want to make sure you are au courant before you say stuff.

  161. 161
    suzanne says:

    @Omnes Omnibus: douchecanoe
    And a douchehat.
    Ross really should change his name.

  162. 162
    burnspbesq says:

    @Dr. Mantis Toboggan:

    Yes, actually, I do. I still remember what I learned in Con Law about separation of powers and the structure of government. Ellsberg either never knew that, has forgotten it, or is deliberately misstating how our system of government works in order to make a point.

    By definition, action by the legislative branch cannot constitute an “executive coup,” whatever the hell that is. In addition, the President has a constitutional obligation to “take care that the laws are faithfully executed.”

  163. 163
    Mark B. says:

    @Dr. Mantis Toboggan: I wouldn’t expect Ellsberg to be an expert on cyber security, but I haven’t researched the issue.

  164. 164
    Ash Can says:

    @El Tiburon: If Greenwald cared about the content of his articles, it’d be great. He’d really perform a valuable service. But he doesn’t. Instead of doing some actual journalistic research and building a scenario of what exactly the practical implications of FISA and the Patriot Act are and where exactly the system is going wrong so that legislative fixes can be applied, he’s all OMG NSA CAN GET WHATEVER CALL LOGS IT WANTS !!ELEBENTY! Yeah, no fucking shit it can. If anyone’s surprised by this, then their doctors are sure to be delighted to see them waking up from their 12-year comas. Got anything else? Yeah, some guy who Greenwald couldn’t be arsed to make sure wouldn’t make the both of them look ridiculous.

    This is not what building a decent case looks like. This is not what persuasive journalism looks like. And this sure as hell isn’t what ethical journalism looks like. Given all this, I see no real content in Greenwald’s work because I don’t trust him to tell the truth, to tell the whole truth, and/or to bother getting his facts right. If there’s any content of value there, I won’t see it, because I can’t tell it from the bullshit.

  165. 165
    El Tiburon says:

    @Mandalay:

    I hope he’s right on all counts, but I think he’s being a bit optimistic

    Well, Ellsberg did see a psychiatrist so you know he’s batshit crazy. So we can discount him as being ‘hinky’ as well.

  166. 166

    @Mark B.:

    “Since the program was completely legal and nothing surprising was revealed”

    But the papers Daniel Ellsberg leaked didn’t show anything illegal, either. And if “surprise” is what makes a story important, then you must be obsessed with the case of the cat jumping out of nowhere while you were watching TV.

    “Now that he’s fled to China and likely will provide them with all of the more important intelligence he claims to know”

    You think that’s “likely”? May I ask why? And China may have some catching up to do with the rest of the world in some areas, but I really don’t think a person has to physical travel there in order to give the Chinese government information.

    “Ellsberg turned himself in after disclosing the Pentagon Papers. Imagine if he had fled to the Soviet Union? ”

    Imagine if Ellsberg had leaked in a time when the United States practiced torture.

  167. 167
    Mandalay says:

    @burnspbesq:

    Legislation passed by Congress = executive coup?

    Yes, I am struggling with some of the points he made myself.

  168. 168

    @burnspbesq:

    “By definition, action by the legislative branch cannot constitute an “executive coup,” whatever the hell that is.”

    If the president does it, it’s legal. Got it.

  169. 169
    El Tiburon says:

    @NickT:

    So you are defending Greenwald and calling others out on the basis of an article you skimmed, which deals with technical material you find boring?

    Interesting approach you’ve got there.

    How fucking stupid are you? Go back and find where I defended Greenwald anywhere? Because I’d like to see it. Do you just see where I don’t say anything negative about Greenwald and thusly assume I am defending him?

    Did you happen to read where I clearly said, “I don’t defend Greenwald, just point out the idiocy and hypocrisy on Greenwald haters”

    So please, go find where I defended him. Please.

  170. 170
    Soonergrunt says:

    @Dr. Mantis Toboggan:
    “I don’t think you know quite how our criminal justice system works. That’s okay, such information is easy to find.”
    Why yes, it is rather easy to find…
    Judge accepts Manning’s Guilty Pleas
    Bradley Manning pleads Guilty to misusing classified data
    PFC Manning admits leaking classified material that ‘upset’ him to Wikileaks
    Bradley Manning pleads Guilty to some Wikileaks charges
    And, right here, on our very site:
    PFC Manning Plea Hearing Today
    Oh, dear.

  171. 171
    srv says:

    You know, Ellsberg actually thought Vietnam was winnable, but the issue was the realists had privately given up and were just going to let it stew for a few years until Henry came up with the Decent Interval plan.

    Sorta like we have in Afghanistan.

  172. 172
    El Tiburon says:

    @Omnes Omnibus:

    Moss was both. In addition, he was a douchecanoe.

    Yeah, but he was a damn good receiver for a while.

  173. 173
    different-church-lady says:

    @Mandalay: It’s worse than that: he doesn’t seem to grock which branch is the legislative.

  174. 174

    @Ash Can:

    Greenwald did do research: he spoke to an insider with intimate knowledge of this program. Was that unethical?

    And again, the “surprise test” by which a story is only important if it is something we had not before expected. I wonder what Kim Kardashian is doing right now–maybe she is dating a movie star! That would be new and surprising, and thus important.

  175. 175
    El Tiburon says:

    @burnspbesq:

    He is a criminal because he pled guilty. Are you really that ignorant?

    Come on, you know that Manning was considered a criminal from day one and was treated as such. Even Pres. Obama said he was guilty. You know that’s what he was referring to.

    Are you really that ignorant?

  176. 176
    Mandalay says:

    @Mark B.:

    his statement seems a little overblown.

    Agreed, but more than a “little” IMO.

    Ellsberg turned himself in after disclosing the Pentagon Papers.

    The rights and wrongs are much more clear cut for the information that Ellsberg exposed.

    Imagine if he had fled to the Soviet Union?

    Point taken, but imagine if Snowden hadn’t fled. I don’t think he has much chance of keeping his freedom, but if he had stayed here he would have been dead meat.

  177. 177
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @El Tiburon: I already said that. It was, to coin a phrase, central to my point.

  178. 178

    @Soonergrunt:

    Okay, he is a criminal who is guilty of leaking important information that the public needed to know. I suppose people around here look down on that sort of thing, when the president is a Democrat anyway.

  179. 179
    NickT says:

    @El Tiburon:

    Child,please, try harder. You demanded discussion of the content of Greenwald’s article. Then, when I asked you to discuss why yes, the content of said article – you scurried off with nothing to say. And now, here you are yapping out some of the most boringly unoriginal personal abuse as if it could hide your hypocritical slack-bladdered ignorance and inability to say anything worth hearing.

  180. 180

    @El Tiburon:

    Yes, what a fine expert on the law our president is.

  181. 181
    cleek says:

    @El Tiburon:
    right now, his personal details are interesting because some of this story feels … off, so people are trying to figure out what the angles are.

  182. 182
    El Tiburon says:

    @4tehlulz:

    I have a sneaking suspicion the NSA was not the only one paying him.

    Of course. Because we all know some money is enough to be possibly pursued relentlessly by your government and being faced with charges of treason and espionage.

    Yep, that’s the ticket.

  183. 183

    @cleek:

    “right now, his personal details are interesting because some of this story feels … off”

    It doesn’t feel…off to me. I guess my off-feeler needs to be checked out?

  184. 184
    srv says:

    @YellowJournalism: Darrell wrote extensively in defense of FISA activities, PA and warrantless collection. It was hypothesized he had been part of the “community”. I’m sure the GG bashing Obamadroids and Darrell would be vewy, very congruent on this topic.

    @El Tiburon: Say it proudly: I AM SPARTACUS FIREBAGGER!

  185. 185
  186. 186
    El Tiburon says:

    @Soonergrunt:

    “Was he an assclown or asshole?” That depends on whether or not he had any dignity.

    Come on, do you agree or not with the assertion there is a big difference between ‘asshole’ and ‘assclown’?

  187. 187
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Dr. Mantis Toboggan:

    Greenwald did do research: he spoke to an insider with intimate knowledge of this program. Was that unethical?

    Er, no, Greenwald now says he was in contact with Snowden about this story before Snowden got the job and Snowden was feeding him information.

    If the Chinese had done that directly, we would be referring to Snowden as a Chinese spy.

  188. 188
    different-church-lady says:

    @Dr. Mantis Toboggan:

    I guess my off-feeler needs to be checked out?

    They recommend yearly screenings after the age of 50.

  189. 189
    Mnemosyne says:

    @El Tiburon:

    Because we all know some money is enough to be possibly pursued relentlessly by your government and being faced with charges of treason and espionage.

    As far as they can tell, that’s why Robert Hanssen did it. It’s probably the most common reason people agree to spy against their own country.

  190. 190
    srv says:

    Good TImes!

    Darrell says:
    December 23, 2005 at 2:37 pm
    As John Cole pointed out the other day, the NSA and other agencies have been monitoring communications between foreigners and US citizens for a long, long time, and have done so without obtaining warrants. See Echelon for more evidence. This intercepted information has ALWAYS included conversations and emails involving US citizens. Are we to seriously believe that the NSA and other agencies never in the past read the intercepted information if it involved US citizens? Or do you Bush haters want to argue that they never intercepted communications involving foreign suspects and Americans?

    Nothing new there, although the left is dishonestly trying to pretend that there is. If there is no dispute that the President has the constitutional authority to monitor foreign enemies without warrant in order to protect us, than can the left admit that at best case for their argument, this is a murky area when foreign enemies communicate back and forth with US citizens? A murky area in which the Bush admin has a very plausible case

    Liberal law professors like Cass Sunstein, Richard Posner and Clinton Associate Attorney general John Schmidt have argued that Bush is fully within his constitutional rights when he issued that executive order.

    Tim links to lawyer Glenn Greenwald as a rebuttal to the Sunstein, Posner, Schmidt, DOJ legal dept, etc, etc. But to understand where Greenwald is coming from, read what he wrote in his comment section:

    “If Bush molested 5 year-old girls on television, they would find legal theories that they would say were “plausible” to defend him.”

    For Greenwald, this is all about getting Bush

  191. 191
    Salacious Crumb says:

    all i can is say is, Edward Snowden is a racist because he deliberately leaked this information to make Dear Leader Obama look bad, ABL, eemom, Mnemosyne, can I get an AMEN!?

  192. 192
    TG Chicago says:

    It’s hilarious to me that anybody would call Greenwald narcissistic when it’s his critics who want to make the story about him.

    Greenwald is not the story. If you dislike him, that’s all the more reason not to make him the story. Let’s focus on the actual meat of the matter. Let Maureen Dowd wank about the personality types involved.

  193. 193
    El Tiburon says:

    @cleek:

    right now, his personal details are interesting because some of this story feels … off, so people are trying to figure out what the angles are.

    So the story ‘feels’ off – so let’s pursue the personal.

    Why don’t we pursue the story? And if you honestly believe that the only reason his personal details are coming out is because the story “feels off” then you know swampland for sale and all.

  194. 194

    @srv:

    “Say it proudly: I AM SPARTACUS FIREBAGGER!”

    You should try evaluating claims on their merit, not on the personality of the person making the claims. It might open up a whole new world of understanding.

  195. 195
    John O says:

    The 4th Amendment was always my favorite, so put me down as squarely on the leaker’s side in this one. This shit needs to be discussed.

    It isn’t about the players, from Snowden to Obama, not at this size of intrusion.

  196. 196
    Joseph P. says:

    If the Watergate coverup had not unraveled the Nixon presidency, Ellsberg would never had gotten his freedom. Nixon would have used the information that Nixon’s bagmen Liddy and Hunt got by ransacking Ellsberg’s psychiatrist’s office to discredit him. Ellsberg’s trial judge would have taken Nixon’s offer of FBI director in exchange for finding Ellsberg guilty. And the official story on the Vietnam war would have been that we would have won had it not been for that traitor Ellsberg.

    Think about that when you call Snowden a traitor and Greenwald an assclown.

  197. 197

    @TG Chicago:

    “It’s hilarious to me that anybody would call Greenwald narcissistic when it’s his critics who want to make the story about him.”

    Blam! Hit the nail right on the head.

    @different-church-lady:

    “They recommend yearly screenings after the age of 50. ”

    Oh god, I hate those things. Darn tongue depressors.

  198. 198
    Hal says:

    @Salacious Crumb: unless I’ve missed it, you’re the first person to mention race in regards to snowden.

  199. 199
    different-church-lady says:

    @TG Chicago:

    Let’s focus on the actual meat of the matter.

    Yes, let’s get back to basics here — I think we can all agree that matoko_chan is “a bit hinky.”

  200. 200
    Mark B. says:

    @Dr. Mantis Toboggan: I think you will find that the United States has always practiced torture. To think otherwise is rather naive.

  201. 201
    Alex S. says:

    She’s right (as usual). It’s not about Obama, the NSA would do these kinds of things regardless of who is president. It’s not about Greenwald, without him there would still be a leak and another journalist/man on a mission like Assange would pick up the story. It’s about the system that allows these things to happen.

  202. 202
    different-church-lady says:

    @Dr. Mantis Toboggan:

    Darn tongue depressors.

    Hate to tell you this, but under the tongue isn’t where it’s located.

  203. 203
    MomSense says:

    @Cassidy:

    Oh my, what does one have to do to get banned-step on Tunch’s tail?

  204. 204
    El Tiburon says:

    @Mnemosyne:

    As far as they can tell, that’s why Robert Hanssen did it. It’s probably the most common reason people agree to spy against their own country.

    Whoa, are you comparing Snowden and Manning and Ellsberg to Robert Hanssen? You don’t see any difference between these people?

    Did Manning spy on his country?

  205. 205

    Here is an important story for those who think a story is only important if it is surprising:

    Kim Kardashian Goes Off on the Paparazzi After Years of Being ‘Gracious’

  206. 206
    Chyron HR says:

    @El Tiburon:

    Do you agree or not that mistermix has been consistenly railing against the security state since these stories started breaking last week?

    Or is that “substance” stuff not as important as extracting confessions of insufficient Greenwalditude?

  207. 207
    Amir Khalid says:

    @Joseph P.:

    If the Watergate coverup had not unraveled the Nixon presidency, Ellsberg would never had gotten his freedom. Nixon would have used the information that Nixon’s bagmen Liddy and Hunt got by ransacking Ellsberg’s psychiatrist’s office to discredit him. Ellsberg’s trial judge would have taken Nixon’s offer of FBI director in exchange for finding Ellsberg guilty. And the official story on the Vietnam war would have been that we would have won had it not been for that traitor Ellsberg.

    How can you be sure of any of these hypotheticals?

  208. 208
    cleek says:

    @El Tiburon:

    So the story ‘feels’ off – so let’s pursue the personal.

    yes. when the backstory details don’t make sense, and there are big questions about the main story, it will all be investigated. i’m sorry if you would prefer we just take gg’s word for all of this and start the revolution straightaway. but it’s not going to go like that.

    the leak itself is a story. and people are going to talk about it. like it or not.

    Why don’t we pursue the story?

    to the extent that anyone here can “pursue the story”, we have been. did you miss the other dozen threads on this? “the story” has been discussed ad nauseum.

  209. 209
    Mnemosyne says:

    @John O:

    It isn’t about the players, from Snowden to Obama, not at this size of intrusion.

    Actually, it’s turning out that the size of the government’s intrusion is not so big after all, at least according to the technical press, who I suspect understand the technology better than the journalists writing about the story do.

    This is one of the reasons people are starting to ask questions about Snowden — at least some of the information he provided about the government’s part in this seems to have been bogus, or at least misleading. His claims are not panning out.

  210. 210
    Mandalay says:

    @Hal:

    unless I’ve missed it, you’re the first person to mention race in regards to snowden.

    If only that were true, but on another thread a poster got the vapors about “some” comparing Snowden to Rosa Parks.

    Of course nobody was making any such comparison, but that didn’t stop the poster’s poutrage.

  211. 211
    Gin & Tonic says:

    @John O: I’m not clear on how the 4th amendment enters into a program where commercial entities whom you have contractually allowed to share data about your usage with others actually do share that usage data with others. Please elaborate.

  212. 212
    Mnemosyne says:

    @El Tiburon:

    Whoa, are you comparing Snowden and Manning and Ellsberg to Robert Hanssen? You don’t see any difference between these people?

    As far as I know, Manning and Ellsberg did not do it for the money, but there’s some evidence that Snowden may have. So I’m only comparing Snowden to Hanssen, not Manning or Ellsberg.

    I know you desperately want Snowden to be your new constitutional superhero, but it’s not looking good for him right now, especially the whole “buggering off to China in the midst of a cybercrime conference between the US and China” aspect of it.

  213. 213
    Joseph P. says:

    @Amir Khalid: The break-in of Nixon’s men into Ellsberg’s psychiatrist and Nixon’s offer of the FBI directorship to Ellsberg judge Matthew Byrne—those are not hypotheticals; they actually happened.

    The judge declared a mistrial in the Ellsberg case because of the Watergate revelations. It is safe to assume that had they not come out, there would be no mistrial.

    As for the Vietnam war, sure that’s hypothetical. But we do have Nixon on tape so we know that that’s exactly the history he wanted to write.

  214. 214
    Emma says:

    So some of you are saying that if someone tells me something and then that person is shown to be a liar or an exaggerator, I can’t take that into consideration when I evaluate his story.

    All right, then. Carry on.

  215. 215
    John O says:

    @Gin & Tonic:

    Fair point, but I only do that because I have no choice in the matter. Or very, very little, when one adds in my precious convenience needs.

    I’m reminded of the South Park episode on the Apple iTunes agreement.

    And I’m willing to accept that the 4th is effectively dead and buried. I just hope this kind of story renews some interest in it. Sad how personally people take, oh, I dunno, the 2nd compared to the other ones.

    Just for the record, the 4th is pretty damn straightforward and tight.

    The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.[1]

    Not saying any laws were broken, either. I’m saying the laws are broken.

  216. 216
    different-church-lady says:

    @Emma: No, not at all.

    What some people are saying is that if a person is first shown to be a liar or an exaggerator and then tells you something, you’re not allowed to take that into consideration when you evaluate the story.

  217. 217
    Emma says:

    @different-church-lady: Oh. I stand corrected. Thanks.

  218. 218
    Mandalay says:

    @El Tiburon:

    So the story ‘feels’ off – so let’s pursue the personal.

    Exactly so. Posters here have written hundreds – maybe thousands – of messages about their opinion of Greenwald since Snowden went public, but hardly anyone is writing anything about (for example) the mysterious non-denial denials from Google, Facebook, et al on their participation.

    Even an FP that DougJ created on that very topic descended into a bitchfest on Greenwald.

    I’ve realized that many here just don’t give a shit about what Snowden revealed. And I’m not talking about the blowhards who pretend that they already knew what was happening. I’m talking about people who truly just don’t give a shit.

  219. 219
    John O says:

    I’ve watched the interviews with both GG and Snowden, and don’t have any sense of BS going on. GG is a bit of a hysteric when it comes to civil liberties, but IMHO we could use a few more of those in our Corporate Media. I’m glad he’s getting the exposure, and I’m glad he keeps pointing out that story isn’t about him or Snowden.

    Oh, and if you’re making $200K/year, you have some serious access. Snowden, at 29, to get the jobs he’s had, is obviously a fundamentally technically talented individual.

  220. 220
    Joseph P. says:

    One point: Assange has not been formally accused of rape or any other crime. The government of Sweden (with the encouragement of the US, no doubt) wants to extradite Assange to question him regarding an alleged rape that the victim herself has declared did not happen. On what planet do people face international extradition in order to be forced to submit to questions when they haven’t even been charged with a crime? To my mind, it’s just a stunt being perpetrated at high levels to get Assange into a cell where he can no longer defend himself.

    Snowden is right to hide.

  221. 221
    Loneoak says:

    I heard that if you go into the bathroom, turn out the lights, look into the mirror and mutter “cudlip” in a drunken slur three times, m_c will appear behind you yelling about Freddie deBoer’s murky libertarian leanings.

  222. 222
    Corner Stone says:

    @Mnemosyne:

    As far as I know, Manning and Ellsberg did not do it for the money, but there’s some evidence that Snowden may have.

    There is? Where, please.

  223. 223
    Mark B. says:

    I’ve watched the interviews with both GG and Snowden, and don’t have any sense of BS going on.

    You might want to recalibrate your detector. Mine was pinged at 100% the entire time.

  224. 224
    Corner Stone says:

    @4tehlulz:

    I have a sneaking suspicion the NSA was not the only one paying him.

    That’s a link to an article by TPM doing a timeline of employment by USG and then outside contractors to the USG.
    What the fuck is wrong with you to read that and then come here and say the above?

  225. 225
    El Tiburon says:

    @Mnemosyne:

    So I’m only comparing Snowden to Hanssen

    Does your little comparison exercise cause you any concern in that Snowden offered his material to an entity called a “newspaper” and on on-line “newspaper” that publishes things to the “public” while Hansen (insert Sam Kinison Voice here:) SPIED FOR THE FUCKING RUSSIANS!! OH OH OH! THE FUCKING RUSSIANS!!

    Seriously out of all the dumb BS you have puked out, this one is right up there.

  226. 226
    different-church-lady says:

    @Corner Stone: Evidence… rumors… theories… what’s the difference, really?

  227. 227
    Gin & Tonic says:

    @John O: Why should this story renew interest in the 4th amendment when the program that is being described by Snowden has nothing to do with the 4th amendment?

    The story about PRISM just tells people to be better about tradecraft. If you’re going to plot the violent overthrow of the US government, it’s probably better not to use Gmail for that. And if you’re going to call your buddy in Waziristan, it’s probably better to use a throwaway cell phone with a cheap calling card you bought at a bodega.

  228. 228
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @Loneoak: You try it first, okay?

  229. 229
    different-church-lady says:

    @Gin & Tonic:

    Why should this story renew interest in the 4th amendment when the program that is being described by Snowden has nothing to do with the 4th amendment?

    The 4th Amendment: it’s the new 2nd Amendment, only left-handed!

  230. 230
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Mandalay:

    [H]ardly anyone is writing anything about (for example) the mysterious non-denial denials from Google, Facebook, et al on their participation.

    They all said flat out, “No, we’re not feeding everyone’s raw data to the government. We’re only providing it when the government shows us a warrant.” I’m not sure why you think those were “non-denial denials,” because they didn’t weasel around the issue at all. They said it’s not happening the way Snowden claims.

    No one is writing about that because you’re the only one who thinks they were “non-denial denials.” Everyone else thinks they were just straight up denials.

  231. 231
    cleek says:

    @Mandalay:

    the mysterious non-denial denials from Google, Facebook, et al on their participation.

    they don’t seem like non-denial denials, to me and many others; and that’s part of what doesn’t make sense.

  232. 232
    Mandalay says:

    @Emma:

    So some of you are saying that if someone tells me something and then that person is shown to be a liar or an exaggerator, I can’t take that into consideration when I evaluate his story

    Nobody is saying that AFAIK….unless you have a link?

    What some are rightly saying is that however flaky Snowden’s personal claims may be, that flakiness is irrelevant when evaluating the government data he released. Not a difficult concept to grasp, but I suspect that you may struggle with it.

  233. 233
    John O says:

    @Mark B.:

    Forgot the YMMV add. :-)

    Jesus, what’s in it for them? I just saw GG categorically deny the Guardian was paying for any information, and they’ve both just more or less ruined their own lives to varying degrees.

    Your BS detector is calibrated differently than mine. I don’t assume people choose to be gay because of all the societal fun they’ll enjoy from their choice, and I don’t assume young people making lots of money in Hawaii (!) are going to choose a life of being on the run unless they feel pretty strongly about the issue at hand.

  234. 234
    Mnemosyne says:

    @El Tiburon:

    Does your little comparison exercise cause you any concern in that Snowden offered his material to an entity called a “newspaper” and on on-line “newspaper” that publishes things to the “public” while Hansen (insert Sam Kinison Voice here:) SPIED FOR THE FUCKING RUSSIANS!! OH OH OH! THE FUCKING RUSSIANS!!

    Only once it was revealed that Snowden’s safe haven of liberty was China.

    Honestly, it gave you no pause whatsoever that Snowden fled to China? It’s totally what an honest person not spying for the Chinese would do?

  235. 235
    El Tiburon says:

    @Chyron HR:

    Do you agree or not that mistermix has been consistenly railing against the security state since these stories started breaking last week

    I don’t know but will take your word for it. And…

    Or is that “substance” stuff not as important as extracting confessions of insufficient Greenwalditude?

    So that there is substance ON OTHER posts somehow negates the lack of substance whenever Greenwald is involved? How does that matter?

    Again, for the jillionth time: when Greenwald is at hand, you can be sure of a substance and fact-free thread. Why? I don’t know. Funny how I can read Greenwald and see a normally well-researched and thorough discussion of the topic at hand. Is he long-winded at times and sometimes a bit on the dramatic side? Yes. Yes he is. Pompous? One person’s pomposity I guess is another’s confidence in a sense. Asshole? Sure, Whatever. Assclown? Absolutely not. Greenwald does NOT equal Donald Trump.

  236. 236
    FlipYrWhig says:

    It still seems to me like there are two drastically different stories to consider.

    1) The NSA hoovers up (pun intended) all Internet usage by tapping directly into major Internet companies and monitoring all activity. From there, it derives a blacklist of suspicious people and their circles of associates.

    2) The NSA acts under the terms of FISA and/or the PATRIOT Act to hoover up Internet usage by people it considers suspicious, as well as their circles of associates.

    An “executive coup,” per Daniel Ellsberg, would be a somewhat hyperbolic way to characterize (1). It would not seem to be an accurate way to characterize (2).

    I would guess that the general public would be overwhelmingly against (1), much less so against (2). They would probably turn against (2) if it were shown that the NSA and/or the FISA Court were being too sweeping in building the list of suspicious people, for instance if it were shown that the list included not just suspected terrorists but also dissidents, activists, and such.

  237. 237
    John O says:

    @Gin & Tonic:

    Nothing to do with being secure in your papers and person and houses? On what planet?

  238. 238
    Corner Stone says:

    Barton Gellman of WaPo just vouched for Snowden’s full credibility on Tweety’s TV show.

  239. 239
    different-church-lady says:

    @Mnemosyne:

    Honestly, it gave you no pause whatsoever that Snowden fled to China?

    China in and of itself isn’t bothering me. It was the “because it’s a country that has a good track record on freedom of speech” statement that made me think, “OK, dude’s just punking us now.”

  240. 240
    Mark B. says:

    @Mandalay: I don’t care about how flaky or non flaky he may be as a person, but many details of the story he has told so far have turned out to be questionable or outright false, which calls into question the entirety of what he has said. And some of his claims seem to be pretty grandiose. I hope Booz Allen can’t hack the President’s desktop, and if they can, it seems implausible that a guy with less than 3 months in the company would be given the keys.

  241. 241
    joes527 says:

    @srv: This blog is nothing if not consistent.

  242. 242
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @El Tiburon: Weirdly, I think most people saw this a toko-loko thread. I know I did.

  243. 243
    Gin & Tonic says:

    @John O: People have *voluntarily* given up the information that it seems PRISM is taking. It’s not an unreasonable nor warrantless search of anything, as they have already surrendered that.

    *My* papers are secure – I don’t store them on Google Drive.

  244. 244
    John O says:

    CNN posting poll results that show giant majorities of Americans prefer to be spied on, presumably under the wonderfully sound “if you’re not doing anything wrong you don’t have to worry about it” principle.

  245. 245
    John O says:

    @Gin & Tonic:

    Understood. Just like I voluntarily sign an agreement with Apple that for all I know coughs up my kids and volunteers me for experimental medical studies.

    It’s my fault for not reading it.

  246. 246
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @different-church-lady:

    The 4th Amendment: it’s the new 2nd Amendment, only left-handed!

    I’ve been thinking about this in a different way, but it might shed some light. Let’s say, somehow, overcoming the NRA, there were a federal registry of guns. The government knew where guns had been bought, where they were kept, who was the legal owner, all that. Then a crime happened with a gun. Wouldn’t you want the government to be able to do a bunch of pattern-matching on their gun database to see the web of associations around each gun and gun owner? Even if you did it reactively rather than proactively, you could get far quickly with your database in investigating the crime. Is this NSA stuff different than that? If so, how? Not a rhetorical question, the real kind.

  247. 247
    Mark B. says:

    @John O: I don’t get why you’re somehow introducing the fact that Greenwald is gay into the mix. It pretty much has nothing to do with the subject of the conversation. It’s got to be one of the biggest non sequiturs I have ever encountered.

    I don’t know what Snowden’s motivation is, but I do know that his stated reasons and certain details of his story don’t add up. I think we’ll find out more later.

  248. 248
    Keith G says:

    @mai naem:
    (Emphasis mine)

    I’m just wondering how Greenwald and all the other purists expect Obama to even bring up civil liberties, FISA etc. when this is what he’s had to deal with four years :musleem! soshulist! kenyan musleem! appeaser! Illegitimate!Amerika apologist! black musleem! Democrat spit on the military ! America Hater! Commiepinkosocialist! Medicare killer! Deathpanel founder! Teabagger harrasser! Monkey! Chimpanzee! Ape! Gorilla! Reparations! N%clang! N@clang Liar! Liar! Welfare lover! Foodstamp lover! UE numbermaker upper! Gungrabber! Seriously, they think he can lead these people to agree to curtailing the Patriot Act? Really?

    So you are saying that the job is too hard and that he can not live up to the expectations of his employment.? He could lead if only folks did not pick on him?

    To the extent that this is the way that some folks feel (and some here seem to), I find that scarier that a gun store full of drunk crackers. How can a society depend on such a tender and easily cowed leadership.?

    For the record, I do not feel that this is the reason for his action in re the Patriot Act. He wasn’t cowed by insults. Like Bush his actions were/are shaped by the “Not on my watch” assertion. It’s possible for his team to point to real benefits in the short term just as it is possible for others to note the missed opportunities to redirect some of the momentum of the growing surveillance and security state.

  249. 249
    Mandalay says:

    @cleek:

    they don’t seem like non-denial denials

    Really? They do to me. From DougJ’s FP:

    PRISM allows “collection managers [to send] content tasking instructions directly to equipment installed at company-controlled locations,” rather than directly to company servers

    So what does Google say?..,..

    First, we have not joined any program that would give the U.S. government—or any other government—direct access to our servers. Indeed, the U.S. government does not have direct access or a “back door” to the information stored in our data centers. We had not heard of a program called PRISM until yesterday.

    Google relentlessly pounds the theme that THE GOVERNMENT DOES NOT DIRECTLY ACCESS OUR SERVERS! Well whoopy do! They are perfectly well aware that the government does not need to access their servers. Google is carefully crafting factually correct and reassuring statements that are completely irrelevant and blatantly misleading.

    But let’s bitch about Greenwald instead….

  250. 250
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @Corner Stone: Is the credibility being vouched for a matter of his being who he says he is, or that his story is true about what the government is doing and under what conditions?

  251. 251
    John O says:

    @Mark B.:

    Wasn’t thinking about GG at all, Mark. I didn’t know he was gay until very recently because I care so little.

    It was non-sequitur for sure, but it was most definitely not meant to reference GG.

  252. 252
    different-church-lady says:

    @John O: Giant majorities of Americans no longer have a problem announcing to the world at large every god-damned thing they do every second of the day. I don’t think they’d even understand the concpt of “being spied upon” to begin with.

    One of these days some people in left-blogosphere are going to wake up and realize “civil liberties” are their particular vibrating dildo, and not everyone else’s.

  253. 253
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @Keith G: Also, Obama DID bring up some parts of the general set of issues in the “end of the war on terror” speech. I don’t think it’s impossible for him to bring them up. If anything, I think he’d like to see Congress have another go at reformulating policy on surveillance and terror suspects, and that he wouldn’t pull a Bush/Cheney/Yoo/Addington and say that nothing can bind the executive, tough noogies, no backsies, neener neener.

  254. 254
    John O says:

    @FlipYrWhig:

    I agree. Thank FSM we have a sane POTUS to, hopefully, lead this discussion. President Cheney would have just said “FU.”

  255. 255
    different-church-lady says:

    @Mandalay:

    Google relentlessly pounds the theme that THE GOVERNMENT DOES NOT DIRECTLY ACCESS OUR SERVERS!

    Considering that “THE GOVERNMENT HAS DIRECT ACCESS TO THE SERVERS!” is, indeed, what was being asserted, I’d call that a denial of the assertion.

  256. 256
    John O says:

    @different-church-lady:

    True enough. But shouldn’t Americans be able to do that with impunity? Doesn’t the 4th basically say it is so?

    I have no problem with The Man coming in RETROSPECTIVELY and invading my privacy if I do something wrong. Until then, they should bug out.

  257. 257
    Mandalay says:

    @Mark B.:

    it seems implausible that a guy with less than 3 months in the company would be given the keys.

    I see your point, but “implausible” is not the same as “impossible”.

    Was it not also “implausible” (astounding?) that Private Manning had access to all the data he dumped as well?

  258. 258
    FlipYrWhig says:

    Spotted just now on Bob Cesca: Al Franken: I’m Not Surprised

  259. 259
    Corner Stone says:

    @FlipYrWhig: It was multi-layered. Gellman indicated Snowden was a very intelliegent individual, he was precise in his descriptions and answers and when BG challenged him over a long period of time he felt confident Snowden had the access, facility and authority to do what he claimed.
    That’s all a summary. I’m sure MSNBC will put transcript up later for those interested.
    But BG had no hesitation about answering Matthews’ questions re: Snowden and the tale he’s telling.
    Take that for what it’s worth, either way.

  260. 260
    different-church-lady says:

    @John O: To be serious, I think the whole situation brings up interesting quandaries about the lines of demarcation between personal and public. If my e-mail is stored on 14 different computers before it hits the destination, who’s house is being searched? Who does the message really belong to?

    As to your second point, there are theories being presented that this is exactly how things are actually unfolding — in essence, that rather than everything being sucked up, they are only putting in pipes that allow them to suck up huge amounts very quickly and then look for the needles in the haystacks. I ain’t sayin’ I know if that’s true, I’m saying that I think there’s a reasonable possibility that the Guardian and Snowden have presented a misinterpretation of what these programs do.

    And I know for a damn fact there’s a reasonable possibility people themselves have over-simplified what they’ve been told and heard. But the wheels on the eternal bus go eternally ’round and ’round.

  261. 261
    Corner Stone says:

    @FlipYrWhig: I, for one, am really happy Sen Al Franken is not surprised.
    Of course, I’m also not surprised he’s not surprised.

  262. 262
    Mandalay says:

    @different-church-lady: Considering that “THE GOVERNMENT HAS DIRECT ACCESS TO THE SERVERS!” is, indeed, what was being asserted

    You’ve lost me. Here is what DougJ posted….

    According to a more precise description contained in a classified NSA inspector general’s report, also obtained by The Post, PRISM allows “collection managers [to send] content tasking instructions directly to equipment installed at company-controlled locations,” rather than directly to company servers.

    The government is explicitly stating how they access Google’s data: “from company controlled locations rather than directly to company servers”.

    So why on earth is google choosing to scream that the government does not access their servers at all? Because it’s all a diversion and a strawman. They want to tell you what they are NOT doing in reassuring terms, rather than tell you what they ARE doing. If google was truly honest, rather than being legally accurate, they would simply state that the government is accessing google user data from data centers controlled by google. That is what is happening, but google won’t be honest about it.

  263. 263
    ruemara says:

    @El Tiburon:

    All that matters is this: Is the material he provided accurate and true? If so I could care less if who he has locked up in his basement or if he thinks he is a girl or whatever.

    And you guys run about yelling dear leader jokes? OOOookay.

    Look, if he did have someone locked in his basement and I’m not even going to touch the assumption that gender identity issues equates to a disorder, he’d still be worth scrutinizing. His message is one of information and closer public scrutiny. I don’t quite get how that exempts him from being scrutinized. Also, reviewing his key statements on what he wants to achieve and I’d say even the people who consider him a hero are missing his point.

    If all you’re looking at is defining who is good and who is bad, as opposed to examining not just the national security laws but also the racket of national security, where a dropout got access to so much mined information, and at the exponential costs of doing this data mining-you’ve skipped past his point. The discussion of how to disengage in the pernicious fantasy of increased security through greater paranoia needs to happen. The discussion of how and who to elect to tear down this crap is important. I also think we need to examine how are all these “leaks” occurring and why? What, everyone got a conscience suddenly? How is this whole thing playing into constant war, constant siege mentality? Who is benefitting at throwing the issue out into the public, misframing it and then leading you past the real questions you should be demanding answers to? I also cast some side eye that a guy got this much access after 3 months on the job. Seriously? I had a year long process and that’s with my boring police record and being in control of mic volume only.

  264. 264
    Keith G says:

    @FlipYrWhig:

    If anything, I think he’d like to see Congress have another go at reformulating policy on surveillance and terror suspects,

    I am pretty sure there are folks who know (and have known for years) how to get that ball rolling. I care less about what the leaders of this democracy might like to do, then what they actually attempt.

    Edit…Sometimes being in leadership means that one leads.

  265. 265
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @Corner Stone: My impression is that Snowden isn’t just making shit up, but that he is blurring the distinction between what I set up above as (1) and (2). IOW, that he’s taking a concern that surveillance so far aimed at suspicious people (like suspected terrorists) _could be_ broadened into total panoptic surveillance over everyone and treating it like that mission-creep has already started to happen. So he’s blowing the whistle on a set of practices he worries could be abused — and he’s not wrong in that — but not on a set of practices currently occurring. As with drones, it seems like where it can go amok is when too few people have input, and where all the incentives are on the side of leaving no stone unturned rather than caution, restraint, and skepticism.

  266. 266
    a hip hop artist from Idaho (fka Bella Q) says:

    @Cassidy: You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means. Or you may have a totally different concept of fun from (many of) the rest of us.

    Of course, you could be fucking with us.

  267. 267
    FlipYrWhig says:

    @Keith G: Touche, but, to use an analogy I’ve trotted out before, no organization that wants to hire somebody wants HR to be _more_ involved, because it seems like it’ll create bottlenecks and wasted time. Likewise, the executive branch isn’t just going to voluntarily restrict itself — that branch wants maximal range for how it conducts itself, and probably (like the hiring subcommittee) figures its judgment is at least as good as HR’s, so why not cut them out of the loop and save time. That’s why IMHO the best course of activist action would be to make new laws, especially considering that Obama himself broke from conventional wisdom and _asked_ to have the powers conferred by the AUMF curbed.

  268. 268
    Spaghetti Lee says:

    @different-church-lady:

    I was never under the illusion that most Americans share my opinions about privacy and data-gathering. Doesn’t mean I’m going to give up my own opinions.

  269. 269
    mai naem says:

    @Keith G: I didn’t say Obama is not up to the job. He picked his battles. In case you forgot he was trying to get the ACA passed through. And close down two wars. He got rebuffed by McCain on Gitmo. And the economy was in the shitter. And he had to deal with the BP deal. Lets not forget the underwear bomber. And, oh yeah, the Dems lost the House in 2010. I will have to sit down and figure out why FISA and surveillance etc. was not on the top of his to do list.

  270. 270
    Cassidy says:

    @a hip hop artist from Idaho (fka Bella Q): Honestly, I genuinely liked M_C. She had some flaws, but we all do. She could be a bit much at times, but she was never just a straight out sshole like CS and JSF and she contributed a lot more than these tired ass trolls we got lurkin’ around.

  271. 271
    different-church-lady says:

    @Spaghetti Lee: Nor should you.

    Frankly I’ve not made up my own mind how I feel about “being violated” like people have told me I’ve been violated. Intellectually I’m aware there ought to be a problem, but I’m just not feeling it.

    What I was talking about are the folks who blow right by the trade offs, the pros and cons, the legal points, the possible mis-reportings, mis-interpertations, and misunderstandings, and plunge the spaceship straight into the heart of BIG BROTHER SHREDDING THE CONSTITUTION NO PRIVACY THOUGHT CRIME SPYING SURVEILLANCE STATE NO DIFFERENT THAN THE STASSI I’VE BEEN TELLING YOU THIS FOR YEARS!!! And then act all surprised when people outside of the 10 blogs they read feel that if the government catches a copy of their cat-playing-piano YouTube in their trawl nets it isn’t the complete collapse of all that’s fundamental about our freedoms.

    Which, quite obviously, is not how everyone who has problems with these programs behaves. But there’s enough of them to keep the dialog from being fruitful and informative. Bus. Wheels. ‘Round. ‘Round. All that, all that.

  272. 272
    different-church-lady says:

    @Cassidy:

    but she was never just a straight out sshole like CS and JSF

    I would quibble with this assessment: she could be just as ‘sshole, but she was more entertaining about it.

    In the end, I feel any ‘ssholishness from any of the three of them is more from conviction and passion than trolling.

  273. 273
    Mark B. says:

    @Mandalay:

    Was it not also “implausible” (astounding?) that Private Manning had access to all the data he dumped as well?

    No, not really, Manning went through the normal process that military personnell go through to acquire a security clearance. That’s a well known process and it’s pretty formalized.

    But Snowden’s access to the magical hacking machine that could secretly peek into any computer on the federal network is much more dangerous. And there’s no way that an exploit that powerful, if it actually exists, wouldn’t have a very high level of security attached, not just to access of the system, but to even know that it existed. Intelligence organizations don’t give up this kind of information to the new guy who just got there yesterday.

  274. 274
    Keith G says:

    @mai naem: It’s a big job, but I am certain that there was room to p[ull and few Dems aside like Widen and the like and say, “Let’s get this going. Let’s get some ideas together on how we can let the public have the info it needs.”

  275. 275
    mclaren says:

    Ah, mistermix — the troll-fu is strong with one.

  276. 276
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Mandalay:

    How is what you posted inconsistent with the reports from the technical press that says that Google et al have a system in place to respond to government subpoenas?

    There’s nothing in what you posted that says that Google et al are routing all of the information they collect to the government. It is consistent with what Google et al says they are doing, which is pulling out the information requested on the FISA warrant and sending it securely.

    Basically, Google said, “We’re doing A, not B,” and your response is, “Ah-HAH! That’s PROOF that they’re also doing B!”

  277. 277
    Mnemosyne says:

    @Mandalay:

    If google was truly honest, rather than being legally accurate, they would simply state that the government is accessing google user data from data centers controlled by google. That is what is happening, but google won’t be honest about it.

    The Washington Post has already walked back their story claiming that that was what was happening. The current story is that Google et al are responding to FISA warrants using secure data centers. Which is what Google is saying in their statement.

    So, given that the story has been walked back and is no longer about mass government surveillance, but about data centers’ response to FISA warrants, what about Google’s statement is a lie?

  278. 278
    kdaug says:

    @Maude:

    She also insulted people here in a nasty way that no one could fucking understand until she translated what the fuck she was saying

    FTFY.

    Cudlips.

  279. 279
    AA+ Bonds says:

    hahahaha m_c owns

  280. 280
    Cassidy says:

    @kdaug: I knew what she meant. It was a good book.

  281. 281
    AA+ Bonds says:

    m_c offered more and better commentary on American foreign policy than anyone before, during or since. come back m_c.

  282. 282
    El Tiburon says:

    @ruemara:
    Hey, remember those two girls who had been held captive for 10 years and then rescued by that dude?

    You know word came out he had had some domestic issues of his own. It doesn’t change the fact that he rescued those girls. If it were my daughters I wouldn’t care if the person doing the rescuing was a serial killer, you dig?

    So, let’s assume Julian Assange is guilty of rape. Ok. Convict him of rape. But does it change the content of the material on Wikileaks? Julian Assange and Bradley Manning are almost beside the point when referencing the material contained within those documents.

    So, if Snowden had some other motives or whatever, it doesn’t change the fact that he leaked some documents that at least SOME VERY CREDIBLE sources are callling one of the most significant leaks in US history. So, at this point in the game, I don’t care about Snowden.

    I care about those documents and I want to know if they are really a big deal and something that potentially could help alter the course of the expanded security-state we live in.

    If they turn out to be fake or exaggerated or otherwise misleading AND this has correlation to Snowden being a Dbag, then let’s cross that bridge when we get to it.

  283. 283
    AA+ Bonds says:

    @Hal:

    What I’m not understanding is how you start working with GG in February on a job you didn’t start until March.

    By being a kick ass stand up dude

  284. 284
    kdaug says:

    Oh, and the other thing m_c did, all the time, was change her name.

    Dunno why, really – it was always immediately obvious it was her.

  285. 285
    AA+ Bonds says:

    Hmm yes this Snowden guy is kind of hinky, shady, smelly, you know what I mean? Possibly Jewish and gay, mayhaps a Muslim? Birth certificate please.

  286. 286
    Corner Stone says:

    @Cassidy: Unlike the nuance you provide when determining threatened violence is the answer to a disagreement you’re unable to properly articulate your position in.
    And of course, there’s your glee at suggesting the blog threaten the livelihood IRL of another poster you disagree with.
    You’re a real winner, champ.

  287. 287
    different-church-lady says:

    @AA+ Bonds: A Jewish Muslim? You never know…

  288. 288
    AA+ Bonds says:

    @Ash Can:

    Besides the obvious legal implications of this, we now have what could have been a legitimate policy debate about the disadvantages of post-9/11 security laws buried by a huge heap of admittedly contrived hey-everybody-look-at-me manure. Happy now?

    Don’t shit on people and tell them it’s snowing, Ash Can

  289. 289
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @AA+ Bonds: You think a set of assertions that US foreign policy is essentially proselytizing evangelical protestantism is good commentary?

  290. 290
    Cassidy says:

    @El Tiburon:

    it doesn’t change the fact that he leaked some documents that at least SOME VERY CREDIBLE sources are callling one of the most significant leaks in US history.

    See, this kind of hyperbole is stupid. Do you really believe that the monitoring of this kind of data hasn’t been happening for a very long time? SMH.

  291. 291
    AA+ Bonds says:

    @Cassidy:

    M_C should have been FPing.

    Glad to know I’m not the only one to say so anymore.

  292. 292
    AA+ Bonds says:

    @Omnes Omnibus:

    *knocks over strawman, dusts off hands*

  293. 293
    AA+ Bonds says:

    @Cassidy:

    See, this kind of hyperbole is stupid. Do you really believe that the monitoring of this kind of data hasn’t been happening for a very long time? SMH.

    Right – you’re just a dickhead and a pushover if you dismiss it when it comes to light.

  294. 294
    AA+ Bonds says:

    Ho hum the government is spying on me. Yup my wife gets beaten in the street on the way home. Happens every day, nothing to see here, lol you’re CONCERNED about this?

  295. 295
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @kdaug: She generally changed her name after a banning.

    ETA: or timeout.

  296. 296
    Cassidy says:

    @AA+ Bonds: I didn’t say that at all. I just don’t get all the hand wringing and chicken little stuff going on. I mean, FFS, who really thought the NSA, whose job is to monitor domes electronic traffic, wasn’t doing this?

  297. 297
    AA+ Bonds says:

    Cassidy your slavish weak-kneed desperate bid for the approval of those in power has already failed. Why carry more water for them? Problems in childhood?

  298. 298
    Cassidy says:

    @AA+ Bonds: Oooh, you’re so witty. I don’t know what I’m going to do. I feel so insulted. Seriously, I do. You are so good at that. /eyeroll

    That’s okay though. I’ll let you do the delusional purity pony emo prog foolishness and I’ll handle the facts, reality, and logical reasoning. That’s not too much for you is it? Wouldn’t want to strain you.

  299. 299
    AA+ Bonds says:

    Cassidy if Nixon’s dogs found out that Ellsberg was being treated for bipolar disorder would you have been going around telling people to ignore the Pentagon Papers

    What if he was a shoplifter

  300. 300
    AA+ Bonds says:

    The point I am making is that everyone who challenges those in power is subject to the same slime machine, usually run by the exact same aging veterans at the levers, using the same tactics

  301. 301
    AA+ Bonds says:

    and the only reward you get for carrying water for those who gladly fuck you over, Cassidy, is . . . well, there isn’t one

  302. 302
    Cassidy says:

    AA+ Bonds says: I’d gladly pay you never for some pie right now.

    AA+ Bonds says: Your comment reminds me, I could really use some pie!

    AA+ Bonds says: I like pie. A lot.

    That’s the stuff. You’re useless and irrelevant with nothing worth saying. You have nothing worth listening to.

  303. 303
    ruemara says:

    @El Tiburon: I wish you actually responded to what I’m saying, instead of having the argument with the non-issue you wish to have. Who. Cares. About. Assange. Manning. And. Snowden. What about all those firms with our data? What about these NSA contractors with our data? Why can’t we have some transparency and law about how long these things are kept or the costs of outsourcing to companies who obviously have really lax policy? Do we have a sunset on this data being kept? Are there firm standards of what/who is flagged? If we were really getting good information, we’d be closer to being able to answer the questions this leak should cause.

  304. 304
    mclaren says:

    @Mnemosyne:

    IIRC, the Guardian and Washington Post have already backed off from their initial claims of wholesale spying and are now saying that the information is only being turned over in response to a FISA or other warrant.

    Distinction without a difference. It is wholesale spying. 11,000 FISA warrants got served last year. As we now know, one of the warrants was for millions of intercepts.

    No FISA warrant has ever been turned down. Ever. It’s a rubber-stamp kangaroo court, and it’s secret.

    “FBI Recorded 27 million FISA `sessions’ in 2006.” Probably up to 150 million in 2012.

  305. 305
    kdaug says:

    @Omnes Omnibus: Yeah, I remember quite a few “timeouts”. And she’d try to sneak back in with a new nym.

  306. 306
    mclaren says:

    @kdaug:

    Since you’re replying to a guy (omnes omnibus) who is a sock puppet for a PFC typing his bullshit out of a Pentagon basement, the irony here is rich indeed.

  307. 307
    Mnemosyne says:

    @mclaren:

    Distinction without a difference. It is wholesale spying. 11,000 FISA warrants got served last year.

    The US population is about 350 million. Let’s say that 200 million of those people have email and/or cell phones.

    The difference between 200,000,000 and 11,000 is “a distinction without a difference”?

  308. 308
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @mclaren: What is really funny is that I was just about to agree with something you said:

    It’s a rubber-stamp kangaroo court, and it’s secret.

    But never mind.

  309. 309
    mclaren says:

    @Mnemosyne:

    Thanks for demonstrating your gross innumeracy. No, the difference between 27 million FISA sessions in 2007 (and by now probably 100 million FISA sessions) and the 206 million adults in America is a distinction without a difference.

    One out of every 8 americans compared to 1 out of every 2 Americans getting their phone calls intercepted…a distinction without a difference. It’s still an East German-style stasi police state.

  310. 310
    Cassidy says:

    @mclaren:

    It’s still an East German-style stasi police state.

    Yeah….lot’s of murdered Germans might disagree with your choice of comparison. You’re lack of awareness is offensive.

    But, as I’ve said before, thank you for being you and reminding me that I didn’t have you pied.

  311. 311
    El Tiburon says:

    @ruemara:

    I wish you actually responded to what I’m saying, instead of having the argument with the non-issue you wish to have

    You want to have an argument where no argument exists. I agree on most of what you said – transparency etc yes yes yes.

    But, this entire discussion has centered around the personal foibles of the leakers. Why Snowden has access, in this context, is irrelevant. It could have been a janitor who happened upon it. Who cares? At this stage I ONLY care about the contents of the material. What Who Why and When don’t freaking matter right now.

  312. 312
    Mnemosyne says:

    @mclaren:

    One out of every 8 americans compared to 1 out of every 2 Americans getting their phone calls intercepted…a distinction without a difference.

    Those 11,000 warrants produced those 27,000,000 intercepts, dummy. It’s not how many people were wiretapped, it’s how many individual calls were wiretapped.

  313. 313
    mclaren says:

    Amid the bleatings of the craven quislings like Mnemosyne and Martin who rush forward to justify any atrocity or depravity by their government masters, let’s hear from one of America’s top terrorism analysts on why this kind of panopticon universal surveillance is an incredibly bad idea:

    “The Foundation of a Very Oppressive State : Why one of America’s top terrorism analysts thinks U.S. government surveillance has gone too far,” Slate magazine, 7 June 2013.

    The oppressive state doesn’t yet exist, he said, but if a president wanted to move in that direction, “the tools are in place now.” The choice to do so “could be made under circumstances that appear perfectly reasonable,” he went on, noting, “Democracy does not preclude voluntary submission to despotism. Given a frightened population, Congress can legislate away liberties just as easily as tyrants can seize power. That seems to be what has started to happen.”

  314. 314
    mclaren says:

    @Mnemosyne:

    Prove it, fool. We know at least some of those warrants covered many many people.

    Show us the documents or shut the fuck up, innumerate ignoramus.

  315. 315
    mclaren says:

    @Cassidy:

    Yeah….lot’s of murdered Germans might disagree with your choice of comparison. You’re lack of awareness is offensive.

    As opposed to all the murdered Afghan and Iraqi detainees who were proven innocent but tortured to death anyway by America’s out-of-control police state, like the taxi driver Dilawar tortured to death at Bagram after it was clear he was an innocent bystander picked up by mistake.

    But the fact remains that most East German dissidents weren’t murdered by the stasi, instead they were arrested and thrown into prison on bogus charges. Exactly like the non-violent protesters at the 2008 Republican National Convention who got swept up and arrested on trumped-up bogus terrorism charges courtesy of exactly this kind of universal surveillance.

    So your analogy actually supports my claims, but you’re just too stupid and too ignorant to realize it. Standard stuff for the B-J comments section.

  316. 316
    Cassidy says:

    @mclaren: Ahh, I see. I’m sure you’re very impressive to the other high school kids.

  317. 317
    different-church-lady says:

    @mclaren:

    The RNC Welcoming Committee is a self-described anarchist group that has worked for months planning disruptions at the convention. Police blamed the group for sparking violence during Monday’s antiwar protest in St. Paul. Although most of the estimated 10,000 people at the march were peaceful, police say a splinter group of about 200 people harassed delegates, smashed windows and started at least one fire.

    Sounds completely non-violent to me.

  318. 318
    ruemara says:

    @El Tiburon: Actually, you don’t care. You’re focused on the who, which is why I find your anger at the questions of the who doing the leaking very funny.

  319. 319
    Mnemosyne says:

    @mclaren:

    As usual, you forget to read your own links:

    Aftergood thinks that if you take the number of targets and add them up, it’s not that crazy a number. He also suspects that there are likely less than 2,100 foreign surveillance targets and that each target likely gets multiple orders – one for a fax line, one for a cell phone, one for a secret house search, etc.

    But, hey, why read and comprehend the information you post instead of fearmongering about what’s in it?

  320. 320
    Forum Transmitted Disease says:

    She’s annoying but smart. Most of you tedious old fuckers are just annoying. Wish she’d come back and take her patented brand of batshit trolling to about 95% of the commentariat here, who are not worthy of her presence.

    Oh well, glad she’s still out there carrying on. Godspeed, MC.

  321. 321
    El Tiburon says:

    @ruemara:

    Actually, you don’t care. You’re focused on the who

    You are delusional. I just shitted out 30-40 comments railing against “the who” in all of this.

    You are a putz.

  322. 322
    cleek says:

    @Mandalay:

    Google is carefully crafting factually correct and reassuring statements that are completely irrelevant and blatantly misleading.

    says you.

    i disagree.

    your move.

  323. 323
  324. 324
    Paul in KY says:

    @Loneoak: Don’t do it, Loneoak!!!

  325. 325
    Paul in KY says:

    @Omnes Omnibus: Certainly would like to know if there are official docs spelling that out.

  326. 326
    Paul in KY says:

    Just for the record, I like Matoko & wish she still posed here (said by a cudlip).

Comments are closed.