Can the Meta Data scandal be filed in the "Another Sloppy M$M Story" file yet?

[uponit7771]

Really, there are links dating back to 2006 on this crap....

Also, what did people think the Patriot Act authorized?! Bake sales?!

Buncha BS

[gcomeau]

1. Should be...

...but people appear to be absolutely invested in insisting on ignoring reality and declaring there's an evil conspiracy by the government to listen in on their conversations with grandma.

[jberryhill]

2. 2006? Try 1979

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smith_v._Maryland

[uponit7771]

3. thx!!!

[Iliyah]

46. Try before 1979

going back to the 1950s.

Most of the public thinks that most of the electronic came out in recent times. Nope. Government have them first and then they are released to the public. Your television, cable companies, telephone, cell phones, computer, radio, et al., I wondered for years how they knew the number of viewers and listeners, i.e. tv show ratings and radio ratings. Chips then, I don't know what is used now.

[madokie]

4. I'm been saying since this shit started its bullshit

I was right too.

[uponit7771]

5. +1

[wandy]

6. Not saying I approve of the NSA, but you're right. Another 'scandal' has done it's job...........

Karl Rove must be thrilled. Even those evil lefties are saying Obama Bad!

[madokie]

10. Thats the sad part too

some just don't get it how they fall for the same ole shit time after time. How many outrages has there been these last few months that turned out to be bullshit? I've lost count.

[wandy]

12. And this is just the 2014 warmup...........

Got to get that Tea Bagger monster, you know the one republicans hide in the closet when they are changing their "Image", all revved up and ready to vote.
By this time next year those 'scandal pains' will be about five minutes apart.

[madokie]

13. I wish I could share the visual I got with that. LOL

I'm afraid this place will become unbearable

[wandy]

17. Just wait till you get to watch Karl Rove try to give birth to Jeb Bush.................

sorry about that.

[madokie]

20. Wooo

It'll take some serious lysol to clean that one out

[uponit7771]

22. The second I saw the M$M jump on the story I thought "more sloppy" the do no research

[Jamaal510]

7. They've been doing tracking

since before Obama first got elected, and it has been approved every several months by people from both sides of the aisle. It must REALLY be a slow news week if they're all of a sudden focusing on this. The government tracking is old news.

[Silent3]

8. "What did people think the Patriot Act authorized?! Bake sales?!"

I'm stealing that!

[Union Scribe]

9. Nope.

The only people who think it's bullshit are those who desperately want it to go away because it's uncomfortable to think about. Around here, that means a very specific subset of loyalists who don't want anything bad associated with their political Bieber, er, leader.

[Cha]

14. Yeah, and you have to resort to calling those who disagree with you "Bieber" supporters..

so you have nothing.

[Union Scribe]

58. ...

maybe you weren't the best one to present that denial, considering the amount of gushing and hearts in your sig.

[Cha]

59. Damn Straight I support the President.

And, I get it.. you can't handle that.

[Union Scribe]

62. If you really loved him

you'd add more hearts. Just deck that sig out like a kraft-paper textbook cover.

[boilerbabe]

61. umm.. i guess you don't know what a metaphor is

he didn't call you beiber supporters. he called obama your political bieber. NOT THE SAME THING! :O lol

[woo me with science]

24. +100000 This one will be incessantly propagandized

with every, and I mean every, pathetic rationalization they can muster. This one goes to the very core of the lies and the assaults on our fundamental Constitutional protections.

This one is explosive.

[pnwmom]

42. Why are you so certain that the document wasn't altered?

Does it really make sense to you that that massive program would have cost only $20 million a year?

Or that jobs in this top secret program would be publicly advertised?

[Union Scribe]

63. You can certainly cling to that hope.

[pnwmom]

66. How do you explain the differences between the WA post document

and the document the Guardian has?

[Union Scribe]

67. You think a forger sent out two different documents?

That's not a very good conspirator. And I don't read the Post.

[pnwmom]

68. So you're accepting claims based on an article you haven't even read? n/t

[DisgustipatedinCA]

11. Absolutely not.

This isn't Benghazi.
This isn't an IRS "scandal".

This is the President of the United States directing his National Security Agency to spy on millions of Americans who haven't done anything wrong, and wanting to keep it secret from the victims of the surveillance. Are you in support of this? I'd really like to know.

[Cha]

18. Link for that.. And, I don't mean some shit from Glenn Greenwald..

'Cause Greenwald just liked bush.. he could do no wrong.



http://theobamadiary.com/2013/06/06/rise-and-shine-521/

There's nothing "secret" about it.. it's been going on since the Patriot Act

President Obama's remarks today in regard to the surveillance issues.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251310274

[DisgustipatedinCA]

21. Answer the question

Do you support Obama's domestic surveillance program? I don't really give a good goddamn what you think about Glen Greenwald. It's been established (among non-idiots) that this program exists. Greenwald broke the story, and there's nothing you can do about that. The question remains, however, do you support this Stasi-like program or not?

[uponit7771]

26. YES!! As long as it has the checks and balanced described in the USSC circa 1979 when they decided..

...that the meta data from a phone doesn't belong to the customer in the first place

[DisgustipatedinCA]

33. Thank ou for the direct answer

I happen to disagree with you in very strong terms, but I appreciate you coming out and saying you want an NKVD operating in the US. Many who agree with you are far too cowardly to come right out and say it. Thanks.

[Cha]

30. And, I don't give a shit what you think of those who disagree with you.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

34. But do you have what it takes to answer the thrice-asked question?

I get that you don't support Glen Greenwald, and believe me, I'm just as impressed as you might think I'd be. But I was wondering...you seem to support the President spying on his citizens. Do you?

[Cha]

37. Yeah, you just keep asking that.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

40. And you can just keep being afraid that you support domestic surveillance

Should I search archives to find the support you gave to Bush when his spying was revealed, or have you only recently changed your mind?

[boilerbabe]

28. but you would be ok with an ANDREW SULLIVAN LINK

and he supported the invasion of iraq as well! you are so disengenous with your stupid jackeens meme.

[Cha]

31. Your ignorance is on display again.

[Iliyah]

49. LOL, did I miss something?

Was it Andrew Sullivan that wrote the article?

[Cha]

53. No, the poster keeps bringing up

Andrew Sullivan everytime it throws out insults. Not sure what it's about. And, care less.

[uponit7771]

23. Yes it is, greenwald...that in and of itself says a lot

[pnwmom]

43. Or it's a hoax using an altered document.

Does it make sense to you that this massive program would cost a mere $20 million a year? Or that the documents in the hands of the WA Post and the Guardian don't match in several key ways? Or that jobs in this top secret spying program would be publicly advertised?

[DisgustipatedinCA]

45. The White House doesn't react the way it has for altered documents

That cat is out of the bag, 25 years early.

[pnwmom]

47. I think it's reacted appropriately. n/t

[DisgustipatedinCA]

48. I don't, but that isn't what we are discussing

You brought up the notion that the document was forged. I countered that the White House admitted the validity of the document.

[pnwmom]

55. No, it didn't admit that the document was valid.

And how do you explain that there were differences in the "same" document that the WA Post and the Guardian had?

[sheshe2]

60. And the fact that WaPo amended their story,

three times~ pnwmom.

The Washington Post Has Now Hedged Its Stunning Claim About Google, Facebook, Etc, Giving The Government Direct Access To Their Servers

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022967870

hmmmmm~

[muriel_volestrangler]

56. The OP is about the meta data, ie Verizon, leak

You appear to be talking about 'PRISM'. 2 different leaks. The Meta Data one has been confirmed as authentic - James Clapper is very annoyed it's now public, but Sen. Feinstein says it's routine, and has been going on for years.

[Luminous Animal]

15. Why does this need to categorized as a scandal. How about merely some more sunlight into the doings

of our government.

[uponit7771]

27. The sunlight has been shed on this subject 3 times already, this time its a winger who is reporting

...a "leak" that wasn't a leak

[Luminous Animal]

35. Actually. It is a leak of a top secret document. There is no arguing that.

[uponit7771]

38. ...and the document stated what we've already know since 2006 and been reported on 3 times already

[Luminous Animal]

51. Indeed. Could I see that 2006 information?

No links to your own or any other DUers posts, please.

[pnwmom]

44. There is plenty to dispute on that. How do you know that it's a real document?

How do you explain that the WA Post and the Guardian had documents that didn't match each other in key ways?

Or that PRISM jobs -- this big super secret spy program -- were being publicly advertised?
Or that the whole massive program was occurring at the bargain price of only $20 million a year?

[randome]

16. The government needs to keep its hands off my Precious Bodily Numbers!

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]

[FarCenter]

25. I do not avoid women, Mandrake, but I do deny them my essence.

[gulliver]

19. Yup but it hooked a few fish so they'll do it again.

Glenn Greenwald, star reporter, uncovers proof that water is wet. And the MSM knows good sucker bait when it sees it. The news cycle needs eyeballs, the more credulous the better. This got a bunch for a short time.

[uponit7771]

29. lol...yeap, sounds like the big lie performance Herman Goering spelled out

[Warren DeMontague]

32. The Patriot Act Authorized "going after terrorists", which no doubt is why it's been

used primarily to go after low-level drug offenders.

So how has the Patriot Act fared as a defense against terrorism? The act has been used in 1,618 drug cases and only 15 terrorism cases.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/blogpost/post/patriot-act-used-to-fight-more-drug-dealers-than-terrorists/2011/09/07/gIQAcmEBAK_blog.html

[uponit7771]

36. Yeap, I'll be working hard for 2014 change of congress into liberal hands

[Warren DeMontague]

39. So will I. But these policies are unacceptable and many of them are driven from the Executive Branch

We need an AG, for instance, who doesn't think dragging wheelchair-bound grannies off to prison because they smoke a joint is somehow acceptable policy.

[Iliyah]

52. Agreed.

I do like Eric Holder tho. City of Los Angeles had a recent election for mayor, and propositions one dealing with allowing I believe keeping over 1,000 medical MJ open. Very low turn out, but they voted against that and only allowing about 3 hundred or so. Friend has one shop in L.A., possible shut down - total BS and F'ked up.

[Niceguy1]

41. and for a president

That doesn't sign the patriot act into law , then defends it.

As both bush an obama have.....

[Iliyah]

50. Right there with ya!

Joining the Democratic meetings first one in mid June.

[Th1onein]

54. And what would you suggest we do with the PRISM story? Hmmm?

[Uzair]

57. THIS JUST IN!!!! OJ HAS BEEN ACQUITTED

Since we're getting outraged over old news, why not go further back?

12 Goddamn years the government has been spying on people. Obama should've stopped it outright, sure. But at least he put some oversight into it, and at least it's not illegal like it started under Bush. But let's keep on making "new" "scandals" for Obama so that the media can keep up the narrative that his second term has been "derailed".

And DUers eat this shit up. Every time.

[uponit7771]

65. +1

[CakeGrrl]

64. But...but...Obama = Bush!!!

He's destroyed the trust of people who never trusted him.

You would think the MSM would eventually stop following shiny objects, but apparently no time soon.