Looks like Greenwald might have a lot more...

[dkf]

@ggreenwald: Clapper: leaks "literally gut-wrenching" - "huge, grave damage" - save some melodrama and rhetoric for coming stories. You'll need it.

@ggreenwald: The very idea that anything we've exposed tips "the terrorists" off to anything is so absurd that people should be furious at the insult

@ggreenwald: Ask @DanielEllsberg what US Govt said about him when he exposed the lies of the Vietnam War: all the same stuff being said now.

[villager]

1. Good point about Ellsberg, and sad to think how many here would denounce him, if Nixon simply had...

...a "D" next to his name.

[Autumn]

2. He would be in prison or hung had Nixon had that

magic D after his name.

[villager]

5. "We've known about the Vietnam war for years -- why is Ellsberg bringing it up now!?"

etc.

[Autumn]

7. Yeah and we have to have this war to keep us safe!!!

terrorists and all that shit.

[villager]

31. "Ellsberg didn't vote for the President in '68!"

etc.

[Autumn]

38. He did it just to make Nixon look bad!!!

And Ellsberg never understand the chess moves

[villager]

40. "There's nothing either party can do to end the war"

So you might as well have our pro-war party in office, instead of the other one!

[Autumn]

56. And that's just fucking heartbreaking. Consider the possibilities

of what we as a Country could do if this ridiculous government we have would spend the time and money that this fucking new way of life they desire is costing our tax monies on the American people and programs that would benefit us all. The possibilities are endless.

I'm so fucking old I can remember when I thought of America as the land of the free and the home of the brave because that what we were taught. Now I see it's America, land of the cowed and a bunch of scared fucking wusses. That what constant threats of terror and surveillance will do.

Pretty fucking sad.

[villager]

57. I'm old enough to remember thinking that if we "just elected Democrats," things would get better.

Sigh.

[Autumn]

61. Yeah. Seems like a long time ago.

Maybe was Shakespeare who said something about seeing through a glass darkly but now I see face to face? That's how I feel . It's not murky anymore. Oh well what is, is.

[villager]

62. Eyes no longer wide shut?

[Autumn]

73. I don't know ROTFLMAO it just popped into my head

can't remember where I heard it and it seemed to fit the minute. But for sure, a hell of a lot of us have our eyes wide open and no longer blindly trust.

[emulatorloo]

4. Bullfucking shit

[villager]

6. And "Discussion" like this would rule the day... as it does now

n/t

[Bobbie Jo]

11. sorry....

AUTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your Jury Service
At Sun Jun 9, 2013, 11:16 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

Bullfucking shit
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2976796

REASON FOR ALERT:

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate. (See <a href="http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=aboutus#communitystandards" target="_blank">Community Standards</a>.)

ALERTER'S COMMENTS:

This is "Discussion?"

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Sun Jun 9, 2013, 11:19 AM, and the Jury voted 0-6 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: It is not "Discussion" but so what. There are plenty of posts that are one or two words. Not the basis for an alert.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: not against the rules -
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: This post makes infinitely more sense than the rat fucking kooks that have infested this board. Stupid alert, go away.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: calling Bullshit is asking for more facts. Prove your point. Don't run to the jury for this bullshit. Leave.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: Is cussing disallowed here. I don't think so. Leave it.

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[villager]

12. Wow. What is it with the jr. high school mentality of the same people apologizing for the NSA?

But I guess attacking people is more important than the 4th Amendment.

All about priorities, eh?

[Bobbie Jo]

14. Just pointing out

your alert failed.

Talk about high school.

[villager]

16. Yes. That was already pointed out in a message from DU, thanks.

Your "kindness" -- for all that it reveals about your true character -- is duly noted.

[Bobbie Jo]

50. Transperancy

and all that, etc....

My "kindness" had nothing to do with it.

Your passive aggressive alert reveals much about your "true character" as well.

[villager]

52. No, your "kindness" certainly has nothing to do with it at all!

Thanks for underscoring that point!

[Bobbie Jo]

58. Hooookay.

You don't do the "victim" thing very well, either.

[Orrex]

55. Wait--so the alert failed?

I just want to be clear on this. The alert failed?

[Bobbie Jo]

60. Miserably.

[emulatorloo]

19. You have a nasty habit of shoving words into other people's mouth

and a rather Stalinist tendency to fabricate shit about anyone who does not agree 100% with your vary narrow ideological point of view.

[villager]

20. You mean, the words they use first? Though of course, I haven't actually used yours

Nice projection about "Stalinist," and "narrow ideological point of view," btw...

[Ash_F]

74. Guy. Guys. GUYS! People who want transparency are basically Stalin!

DU 2013

[nashville_brook]

9. blahaahahaha! would you like some bargle with that yargle?

[villager]

28. In a way, the whole subthread proves my point exactly: The swarm would do its swarmiest on Ellsberg

...given only the slightest alteration of circumstances.

[emulatorloo]

41. It is a thread about Glenn Greenwald's goddamned "tweets"

The subthread is about your fucking need to trash people who do not agree with your point of view by putting words in their mouths.

[villager]

45. Emulatorloo would be there dutifully swearing at those he disagreed with, calling them "Stalinist"

... dropping F-bombs, and accusing others of "putting words in other peoples' mouths," etc.

[emulatorloo]

54. I am more than happy to take on elitist DU'ers

who believe they are the arbiter of what makes a "true liberal" and makes specious claims about those who don't follow the party line 100%

[totodeinhere]

22. Oh I don't care about all that as long as I get my subsidized health care.

/sarcasm

[emulatorloo]

3. Doubt it. But he gets paid to create controversy, more ad $$$ for Salon

[sabrina 1]

8. He created lots of controversy during the Bush years. I don't recall any complaints from the 'left'

during those years. On the contrary, so why the antagonism now? He's doing exactly what he did during the Bush years, on the very same issues. HE hasn't changed, nor have I btw, still outraged over Bush policies despite them now being used by a Democratic Administration.

[JoePhilly]

17. Greenwald supported the Iraq war.

And like you said ... "he hasn't changed".

[burnodo]

23. So did Hillary, John Kerry, and many others

what's your point?

[emulatorloo]

26. Greenwald fully adopted Republican talking points on Benghazi.

[burnodo]

30. that was his point?

seems like a whole new topic to me

[emulatorloo]

33. He's an opportunist who will say anything to advance his agenda

That's my opinion, and he has done nothing to change it.

[burnodo]

36. well that is certainly your opinion

and you're certainly entitled to it

[zeemike]

72. That is a cheep shot.

He is a journalist and if he reports a story that gets attention he is an opportunist?

It is so convenient when you can create a category that will dismiss things just buy putting the messenger in it.

That is my opinion and you have done nothing to change it.

[RobinA]

79. Opportunists

Do not have an agenda, see Woodward 2.0.

[JDPriestly]

85. There is no point in shooting the messenger.

Who Greenwald is or what it did in the past or might do in the future is not the issue.

The issue is the massive spying that Obama and the NSA are doing on the American people.

The issue is a so-called "democratic" government that in no way is answering to the wishes of the people who elected it.

The issue is that our government does things without communicating to us that it is doing them.

The issue is that there may be a massive collection of data about us, about the American people in general, or perhaps about some of us as individuals and we seem to have been given no notice of it and no ability to see it or challenge it.

The issue is that we are wondering what else the NSA and "our" "elected" government is doing behind our backs.

The issue is that the government is spending money, probably huge amounts of money, on this wasteful program while some groups in our country want to cut food stamps and Social Security because we are supposedly short on money.

And these are just a few of the issues that Glenn Greenwald is directly or indirectly raising.

A lot of big Obama fans don't want to admit just how much the existence of these secret programs violates their and all of our human rights.

What does the Fourth Amendment mean? Sure. The government should be able to get phone records if they actually suspect an individual or an organization of a crime. But this blanket collection of information is outrageous. So our outrage is justified.

And if you doubt that the collection of information is blanket and covers an overly broad assortment of information, please READ THE COPY OF THE COURT ORDER ATTACHED TO THE GLENN GREENWALD ARTICLE IN THE GUARDIAN THAT SET THIS WHOLE SCANDAL OFF.

We who are offended did not start this scandal. Neither did Fox News. Some fool in NSA who thought that an easy way to identify terrorists would be to just suspect everyone and prepare a dragnet wide enough to snoop on everyone caused it.

So now they have a record of every phone call that Dennis Kucinich or Marcy Kaptur, John Edwards or Anthony Wiener or Bill Clinton or John Boehner or you and I make. Does our government need that? Should they have that? Do they have a right to have that? No. Not in my view. How can they claim to have any cause at all to gather information on all the telephone calls of all of us including the Supreme Court Justices such as Anthony Scalia, John Roberts and all the rest. This is overly broad. It is overly inclusive. There is no justification for it. And, in my opinion, it chills every single right that is guaranteed to us in the Bill of Rights, every one of them.

No mass surveillance of Americans, not by our government or anyone else's. Do we need the United Nations to take this up?

[sabrina 1]

42. Lol, I was waiting for the usual 'he supported the war'. You forgot to mention how he

quickly learned we had been lied and it was THAT, the realization that we had been deceived, that created his passion against the Bush administration. I wish all those who thought after 9/11 that they had to support their government had realized, as quickly as he did, the lies they were telling. Had that happened, people like Hillary Clinton eg, the funding for the war would have been stopped and that criminal war ended long ago.

Since I first came across his blog he has opposed Bush policies and was always honest about his initial naivety.

So your 'gotcha' effort fails as it always does when someone tries to discredit him for being willing to admit when he was wrong.

Lol, I always get a kick of this effort to smear Greenwald, and wonder if it came from the morons at HB Gary in their campaign to shut him up.

Here's what makes this such a failure. When someone isn't trying to hide something, it's kind of useless to pretend you have revealed a big secret that the person themselves actually wrote about in a book and spoke about online and never tried to hide on public forums.

I recall being happy with every one who fell for the lies, then realized they were lied to. One in particular I recall was the Republican Congressman who invented the 'Freedom Fries' attacks on France for refusting to go along with Bush's war. When he woke up and realized he had been duped, he joined Democrats in trying to end that war.

Greemwald gets even more kudos for his honesty. For being willing to admit he was wrong, something he does always and which people admire about him.

Thanks for reminding me how honest he has been and how willing to do something a lot of people simply cannot do, admit when he is wrong. A very good character trait. But my comment stands, he has not changed one bit on the issues he railed against throughout the Bush years, nor have I. He still opposes Bush policies. So do I.

How about you?

[byeya]

51. Glad to see someone interested in the truth. Thanks!

[premium]

68. Say it loud and long sabrina 1!!!

I'm with ya.

[dkf]

80. Nice background on Greenwald. Thx.

[rhett o rick]

89. Well said. The conservatives among us want to discredit the messenger and ignore the

message. The apologists are seeing their wonderland slipping away.

[Luminous Animal]

10. He writes for the U.S. edition of the Guardian.

[Generic Other]

13. Easy girl!

[emulatorloo]

24. LOL

Love that!

OTOH I know Greenwald's work, not gonna get taken in by his bullshit.

[Generic Other]

82. Seems he's not the only one saying it

Anyway, I don't care who says it, we need to address this permanent state of government surveillance anyway. It is too much power in either party's hands. And it opens the door to terrible abuses. People should be shouting about it. We need to establish the cyberprivacy line in the sand and insist that no one public or private cross it. The Constitution is equally valid online or it is not. Our choice.

Thanks for having a sense of humor over the silly picture. It was just so cute I couldn't resist.

[burnodo]

21. he gets paid to create controversy?

I bet that would be news to him, his editors, and the owners of The Guardian

[emulatorloo]

25. Lots of paid bloggers use melodrama/hyperbole to drive web hits.

The Guardian needs ad $$$$ too.

[burnodo]

29. slandering them doesn't help your argument

You are pre-supposing that they're falsifying and/or embellishing this story for popularity and ad revenue? Do you have the same opinion about every for-profit news organziation on the planet?

[emulatorloo]

34. I'm not making an argument. And no, I do not trust libertarian bloggers who use hyperbole

and promote Republican talking points.

[burnodo]

37. why do you keep calling him a blogger?

is that supposed to be an insult?

[emulatorloo]

43. No. He has a blog, he is a blogger.

[burnodo]

44. so, his being a journalist is somehow overshadowed by his ability to

type into a computer, press enter, and have his words posted on the internet?

[emulatorloo]

47. WTF why the incessant need here to put words into other people's mouths?

[burnodo]

48. so calling him a blogger was a term of endearment?

[emulatorloo]

53. Once more, WTF?

I read lots of bloggers.

[sabrina 1]

75. Lots of paid journalists get paid to lie to the American people about wars, and such things.

I remember a few of them by name, they were 'credible' we were told. They worked for the NYT, were on CNN etc.

Greenwald tells the truth. Sometimes, in fact in the current society we live in, the TRUTH DOES create 'controversy'. It's so rare that we get any truth from the Corporate Media.

Btw, you've attacked Greenwald, but you have said nothing about our government using our own telephone companies to spy on the American people. Do you have any opinion on that, DID you have any opinion on that when Bush was doing it??

[Luminous Animal]

15. Boundless Informant is up today:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/08/nsa-boundless-informant-global-datamining

The DU post is here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022976685

[jazzimov]

18. You need to complete your title

Looks like Greenwald might have a lot more... explaining to do about shoddy reporting.

There, fixed it for you!

[emulatorloo]

27. Nailed it.

But he's too slippery to be held accountable.

[Luminous Animal]

35. If you say it, it must be true!

Of course, you haven't actually pointed out any shoddy reporting but who cares!

[emulatorloo]

46. See post #39

[Luminous Animal]

49. Why thank you! Another DU said something so it must be true!

[emulatorloo]

59. Good article for you

WaPo Misread Powerpoint- Story on Feds tapping directly into internet companies was wrong & rushed
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022974284

As far as I can tell that false information is conventional wisdom around here now.

Gonna need to get the facts straight on this. If Greenwald is up for the job, then good. So far he has not impressed me.

Post #39 sounds like a rational approach.

[Luminous Animal]

63. Have you read the Guardian article? I suggest that you do and get back to

me with any inaccuracies.

[emulatorloo]

65. More specifics on Greenwald use of that misinformation here

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022974638

"Canonizing bad reporting as a means of inciting a debate is as bad as no debate at all. Attachment to empirical reality must remain a central trait of the left, otherwise the progressive movement is no better than the non-reality based propagandists on the right who will say and do anything to further the conservative agenda."

[Luminous Animal]

69. Absolutely nothing in that link that refutes one thing in Greenwald's article.

Go head. Read the article and get back to me.

[sabrina 1]

76. Lol, is that the latest talking point about Greenwald because I've seen the exact same personal

attack several times already today.

Do you remember when Anonymous hacked into the 'security contractor' HB Gary's emails and to everyone's surprise they had offered to create a SMEAR CAMPAIGN against Greenwald?? Presumably they were submitting the bid on the contract. I wondered why they needed to conduct a 'smear campaign', which generally means 'make stuff up'. If he was such a threat to the government for simply writing his opinions on his blog, why did they need a smear campaign, how about just some facts? I concluded that was because they had nothing on him so they were preparing to make stuff up, like calling him a 'sloppy journalist'.

Thing is he has never claimed to be a journalist so how can someone who is NOT a journalist be a 'sloppy journalist'? He's a lawyer with a blog!

I always wondered who got the contract HB Gary was trying to get which included attacks, made up stuff, about Greenwald. Someone must have because we've seen the smear campaign in action.

[JaneyVee]

32. Is it going to be more stuff from 2006?

[okaawhatever]

39. I'll wait and see what he has. This sounds alot like the gop talking about the hearings

and how they were going to be the next Watergate. So far, Greenwald has disclosed nothing new. The phone program was reported, among other times, in Aug of 2012. Laura Poitro was thinking scotus would find the program unconstitutional and they didn't. The so-called leak about prism is more than questionable. He needs to put up or shut up. He keeps claiming he has more info. That he won't release all he has because of national security. All a lot of talk, but no real story.
Greenwald doesn't have a lot of credibility with me.

[dkf]

77. You do realize he has leaked 4 NSA docs several with top secret clearance?

And they are opening leak investigations with the DNI saying it was gut wrenching and huge grave damage?

[okaawhatever]

81. We'll see. I already knew about what Greenwald is claiming. Scotus looked at parts of this already.

I question the authenticity of the prism slides. Also, the most recent world map showed doesn't bother me a bit. I already knew and expected us to do that. We have to. That's a program based on the world, not American citizens. We'll see if American citizens are being harmed. Also, there are companies who do the same thing for different reasons. I don't appreciate the way Greenwald used the world map to make it seem like it was a program aimed at American citizens. He's long on hype and short on description and information. China hacked into McCain and Obama's campaign computers. Certain freedoms are gone. We can't change that. All I expect is that I have constitutionally protected rights within the u.s.a. I expect no such things with international phone calls or emails.

[dkf]

83. I don't email or call internationally.

Theoretically that should make all my info unreachable to the govt.

[Recursion]

64. This is starting to remind me of Sibel Edmonds (nt)

[dkf]

67. Except he has NSA docs

[premium]

66. Anybody watching This Week With George Stephanopoulous?

Even Keith Ellison is slamming this program.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

70. News is what somebody somewhere wants to suppress; all the rest is advertising. Lord Northcliffe

Looks like the pursuit of whistle blowers by this administration identifies who the "..somebody, somewhere wants to suppress" is.

[jeff47]

71. I'm sure he does. There's lots of other things the Democrats want to slip through Congress while

we're not paying attention.

[Life Long Dem]

78. Mike Rogers Attacks Glenn Greenwald For NSA Expose: ‘He Doesn’t Have A Clue How This Thing Works’

Greenwald, says that he’s got it all and now is an expert on the program. He doesn’t have a clue how this thing works, and neither did the person who released just enough information to literally be dangerous.”

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/mike-rogers-attacks-glenn-greenwald-for-nsa-expose-he-doesnt-have-a-clue-how-this-thing-works/

[blkmusclmachine]

84. I want to know what GWB knew, and when he knew it, re. 9-11.

Start from there.

[WinkyDink]

87. He knew enough to sit still, instead of acting as a normal POTUS would have.

[faithnomore]

86. Greenwald has better start wearing bullet proof underwear

and watch where he eats. I'm sure the bastards are already trying to figure out a way for him to have an "unfortunate" accident or better yet commit "suicide."

[indepat]

88. Big Brother takes umbrage at his own treachery being exposed and always claims that such

exposure gives aid and comfort to a ubiquitous enemy: just like with junior, the enemy is anyone and everybody who opposes big brother's policies or sheds light on his treacheries.