Glen Greenwald Continues His Lies

[frontier00]

This Week ‏@ThisWeekABC 40m
.@ggreenwald: NSA has trillions of telephone calls and emails in their databases that they’ve collected over several years. #ThisWeek


No, Glen the N.S.A. isn't storing trillions of phone calls and emails of citizens, it goes in a database so if you contact a suspected terrorist or any connection , than it gets picked up, he's trying to make Americans believe the government is storing everyone's phone calls of average people... for shame Glen, yo dirtbag
You're a loser Glen

[Vietnameravet]

1. He is Limbaugh of the Left!

[burnodo]

2. when did he get a daily national radio show?

I must have missed it

[treestar]

43. A metaphor does not have to mean exactly the same thing

The metaphor works - journalist, extreme, stirs up shit - based on content.

[burnodo]

45. In 15 years, a LOT of people have been called "The Limbaugh of the Left"

all of those comparisons failed as this one has

[think]

27. Fact free baseless smears are my favorites....

[Pretzel_Warrior]

91. Apt description

[Spitfire of ATJ]

153. He's not on "The Left".

[Cooley Hurd]

3. It's Glenn with two n's...

If you're going to post a steaming pile of crap, please, at least, get the name correct.

[Fire Walk With Me]

4. Let's see; Glenn has access to actual, genuine data on the NSA programs

and you have an opinion. Who should I trust....HMMMMMMMMM.......

[DCBob]

8. but we cant see it until Glenn publi$he$ his book.

[Bluenorthwest]

22. Do you know any politicians who $ell book$ while campaigning?

Or is writing books for profit good for some but bad for others? 'If someone I like does it, it is morally sound, if my opponent does the same it is a crime' seems to be the essence of centrist ethics, situational, selective and agenda driven.

[DCBob]

26. Do you know anyone who claims to have incredibly critical world changing information..

but refuses to let us see it unless we pay him $$$?

I do.. they would normally be called shysters.

[think]

30. What do you call Binney, Drake, Wiebe, Ellsberg, Tamm, Edmonds, Tice,

and the other whistle blowers who are corroborating the Snowden files?

[DCBob]

33. The files that have been released are no doubt legit.

But Glenn says there's a lot more and its "really shocking!!" but we cant see it until his book is published. I call bullshit on that.

[Marr]

42. Wait. Is your complaint that his book will cost money, or

are you claiming that the information in this as-yet-unreleased book is untrue?

Both accusations seem absurd to me, but I'd like to know which it is.

[treestar]

47. Why should he ask for money?

For the book? Since it's so important . Weird. Why is he better than "the corporatists?" They ask for money for what they sell.

[Marr]

50. I see. So the problem is that the book will cost money, unlike other books.

Unlike the free book the President wrote, for instance.

[treestar]

59. This information is vital to our freedom I thought?

The President and other authors are of course corporatists. But I thought our hero was above that?

[Marr]

94. Oh, c'mon-- you can do better than that. I've heard Sean Hannity use that "argument".

Al Gore can't talk about climate change because he flies in an airplane. Glenn Greenwald can't criticize the government because he... gets paid for his work...? Actually, Hannity's was a little more coherent.

Your first point I don't even understand. You're saying this information should not be released because it doesn't add to anything?

According to who? You? The guy who also claims it's untrue even though you don't know what it is? A little transparent, don't you think?

[treestar]

97. It is Greenwald saying our freedom depends on it

He has this shocking information. It impacts on the authoritarian dictatorial security state. I would think that's too important to wait for publication of any book.

[Marr]

102. I see. So he says too much, and waits too long to say it.

That... makes sense.

[DCBob]

49. My biggest complaint is why is he waiting to release the information..

if its so gawd awful important?

[Marr]

53. Let's say I just concede the point that Glenn Greenwald is a big meany who

likes to charge money for the books he writes.

How does that make the information contained in that book any less credible?

[DCBob]

61. Makes you wonder his motives and credibility.. doesnt it??

[Marr]

89. No, not really. /nt

[LadyHawkAZ]

115. There's elections next year.

The book is due out right as the campaign season picks up.

[Whisp]

73. If it truly is so shocking and assuming super important, it is selfish of him to delay

this earth crashing information for his own personal reasons and timetable.

I don't know why anyone would not see this.

Glenn is a scamming fake, and, unfortunately, lately the Teabaggin influence has made something go 'click' in people's heads, even on the so called Left, that let blatant scammers and liars continue their blatant scamming and lying when it should be challenged by everyone.

Wtf is happening to you guys down there? Is it something in the water that you believe such extraordinary shit from such extraordinary douchebags?

[boston bean]

86. I think he's waiting for the denial.

Wait for someone of authority to pose the question, then drop the bomb.

In watching this play out, I think we'll see the evidence for it soon enough. The building in Utah, IMHO, pretty much confirms they are doing this. Collecting everything for years and after the fact seeking a warrant. I think that would be unconstitutional. If they are doing this, how would you feel about it?

[Whisp]

131. the building in Utah

I've seen a lot of reference to that and I wonder if it is considered that cyberwarfare is a real thing and in order to keep up the pace against transgressors like China, you have to stay in the game and not fall behind. it could be that simple.

It is frightening what can be done by hacking - the new warfare is digging into computer systems that could debilitate power grids and everything we have to this point felt was relatively secure. It's a fricken scarey cyber world out there. Boots on the ground will be passé in our generation.

[boston bean]

133. I agree there are real threats, but the government collecting it info on lawful

Citizens, for the purported use in a possible future criminal proceedings is wrong, IMO.. History has proven the danger of this type of thing..

[Whisp]

138. I can't disagree with what you say.

As long as there are people with ill intent, there will always be a chance for abuse and misuse.

We are in the midst of a tectonic shift in what security can mean and I hope some good decisions will be made.

Scary world out there and at home too.

[Marr]

101. Ok, he's a selfish meany. And that makes the information presented untrue... how? /nt

[Bluenorthwest]

129. That's pretty much everyone. Writers write for a living. What do you do?

The fact of the real world is that some who claim to have actual life saving abilities refuse to save that life without being paid. Are they shysters, these surgeons who demand compensation?
Major companies have drugs that can save lives but they refuse to release them without getting paid thousands a month. 'Yes, we can save your child, but first you pay'.
Are you opposed to profit by individuals? I'm not.
I've heard your argument used against the President by right wingers, they say his first run was 'just a book tour that caught on, now he's stuck with the job when all he wanted was to sell copies'. He sure did not give them away and he sure did claim he was an important figure with important things to say- if you pay for the book in which he says them.
Did you also claim Obama should have given his books away like religious tracts?

[Major Hogwash]

79. Yup, it'll co$t you $ome buck$ unle$$ you want to mi$$ out on hi$ ver$ion of the $tory.

Ab$olutely true!!!

[kentuck]

5. How does it get "picked up" if they are not collecting or storing the information?

Does not compute??

[cannondale]

88. Exactly

The original post makes no sense whatsoever. In a DB means stored.

[MH1]

157. Not my skill area, but it doesn't seem like a difficult technical challenge.

If I understand what the o.p. is saying - and I'm not making any claim that this is actually happening, or that only this is happening:

Let's see, number 123-456-6788 is linked to terrorist suspect Ima Gonnablowitup. A computer (NSA or Verizon, doesn't matter) is monitoring connections to that number. A call is made to that number. The computer monitoring the suspect's phone number records the number of the phone that is originating the call. When the call is disconnected the duration is recorded. Maybe the call content is recorded as well - this is where the need for a warrant would seem to come in.

It really doesn't sound difficult to me.

The point is, if I understand the claim correctly, calls from a non-suspect number to another non-suspect number do not have to be tracked in order for this system to track calls to and from suspect numbers.

[arely staircase]

170. The key words are "on citizens."

he seems to be including stuff by PRISM, which does scan and then store a lot of foreign intercepts.

[Evergreen Emerald]

6. what do they have, and what puts you

Last edited Sun Jul 28, 2013, 01:12 PM - Edit history (1)

in a better position to know more than the guy who has it all?

[99Forever]

7. How the fuck would YOU know?

Considering it's all "top secret." Unless of course, you are deep inside the NSA and are outing it's "secrets."

So I ask again:

How the fuck would YOU know?

[RKP5637]

9. WTF? n/t

[leveymg]

10. What is the difference between "NSA storing" that data and "goes in a database"?

How is that even logical?

[corkhead]

17. here - I'll answer it for you...

[morningfog]

11. You say "it goes into a database." That's the same thing Greenwald says.

"In their database" is the same as "into a database," right?

[frontier00]

15. No

The call doesn't go into a database, just that you made the call does, and once that is made, then a wire tap can be granted

[leveymg]

25. So, you think metadata is all that NSA intercepts and stores?

[KG]

32. it's what they want badly to believe.

[treestar]

44. As the posters above say, how the fuck would YOU know?

You're speculating.

[leveymg]

51. Not speculating at all. It's based in public documents and from court cases/FOIA/as well as leaks

Here's part of it: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=journals&uid=143890

There's a little-known loophole provided by the PATRIOT Act and expanded by the 2008 FISA Amendment (the same one that Senator Obama voted for) that allows NSA three days to seek a warrant and seven under "exigent circumstances" - the government has interpreted this to mean that during that time, analysts are free to look at whatever they want in real-time (this program) and across US government and foreign databases. See, http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=journals&uid=143890

Indeed, it is virtually certain that large amounts of US person data are available without warrants to NSA personnel, at least in the files of other agencies that analysts and contractors may access in the process of profiling suspected terrorists and other NSA targets. Under the law as it was changed by the PATRIOT Act, analysts have 72 hours to examine US person content before they have to seek a warrant. See FISA, 50 U.S.C. § 1801(h)(4): http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/50/1801

no contents of any communication to which a United States person is a party shall be disclosed, disseminated, or used for any purpose or retained for longer than 72 hours unless a court order under section 1805 of this title is obtained or unless the Attorney General determines that the information indicates a threat of death or serious bodily harm to any person.


Furthermore, NSA and its contractors have a full week to seek a FISA warrant under "exigent circumstances". 50 U.S.C. § 1805(e)(3): http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/50/1805

(3) In the absence of a judicial order approving such electronic surveillance, the surveillance shall terminate when the information sought is obtained, when the application for the order is denied, or after the expiration of 7 days from the time of authorization by the Attorney General, whichever is earliest.

PRISM is a “database of databases.” Analysts have access to many databases, both domestic and foreign intelligence agencies, and those contain information from all sources – and they generally are not minimized to segregate US person information. According to the sequence of steps shown in SLIDE 2, US person voice content does get separated out and sent to NUCLEON, and the metadata is deposited in MARINA, but only after a US person has gone through the profiling process. This suggests that US person content is utilized in some way at the initial profiling stage of PRISM, which appears to skirt the intent of FISA, if as we see below, loopholes allow it's use in practice.

Under the law, US person telco content is supposed to be "minimized" under Sec. 215 of the PATRIOT Act, and Sec. 216 is supposed to do the same for US person Internet records. Meanwhile Sec. 702 of the 2008 FAA (FISA Amendent Act) legalized the sort of targeted NSA activities that PRISM carries out, but that targeting is supposed to be restricted to foreign persons abroad. Nonetheless, because of loopholes in the law -- such as the allowance under Sec. 1801(h)(4) and 1805(e)(3) for up to seven days of unfettered viewing of US person data that has been worked into PRISM's Tasking process (profiling) -- it does not look like the FISA wall that is supposed to separate these two NSA programs provides any real separation.

• NOTE B, SLIDE 3: NSA intercepts email, on-line chats in real-time, CONTENT TYPES C,D

This appears to answer some of the issue of whether analysts can access communications in real-time, or whether they have to wait for a warrant. That question was raised by this report in CNET: http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57589495-38/nsa-spying-flap-extends-to-contents-of-u.s-phone-calls/

The National Security Agency has acknowledged in a new classified briefing that it does not need court authorization to listen to domestic phone calls, a participant in the briefing said.

Rep. Jerrold Nadler, a New York Democrat, disclosed on Thursday that during a secret briefing to members of Congress, he was told that the contents of a phone call could be accessed "simply based on an analyst deciding that."

If the NSA wants "to listen to the phone," an analyst's decision is sufficient, without any other legal authorization required, Nadler said he learned. "I was rather startled," said Nadler, an attorney and congressman who serves on the House Judiciary committee.

Not only does this disclosure shed more light on how the NSA's formidable eavesdropping apparatus works domestically, it also suggests the Justice Department has secretly interpreted federal surveillance law to permit thousands of low-ranking analysts to eavesdrop on phone calls.

James Owens, a spokesman for Nadler, provided a statement on Sunday morning, a day after this article was published, saying: "I am pleased that the administration has reiterated that, as I have always believed, the NSA cannot listen to the content of Americans' phone calls without a specific warrant." Owens said he couldn't comment on what assurances from the Obama administration Nadler was referring to, and said Nadler was unavailable for an interview. (CNET had contacted Nadler for comment on Friday.)

Because the same legal standards that apply to phone calls also apply to e-mail messages, text messages, and instant messages, being able to listen to phone calls would mean the NSA analysts could also access the contents of Internet communications without going before a court and seeking approval.


Bear in mind two things: the system seems to handle phone, internet, and email messages differently, and under FISA as revised by the PATRIOT ACT, NSA analysts and contractors have 72 hours to do what they want with all data before seeking a warrant. A warrant is only required if the decision is made to target the individual.

[treestar]

58. You are speculating that they abuse this law

That they get things without warrants when they are not supposed to. Just because it makes it more exciting if the government is so evil.

[AllINeedIsCoffee]

62. They're not even using it to track down missing children or bust sex slave traffickers.

But I can see people rushing to defend the perpetrators of these crimes were that the case.

[leveymg]

72. No, if it worked, there would be far less criticism.

The problem is, we've spent almost a trillion dollars during the last decade on NSA and the defenders of the universal surveillance system can't even point to a single, solid case where it was instrumental in preventing a real terrorist attack inside the US (not ones involving CIA agents provocateurs and known terrorist suspects).

It doesn't have efficacy, it doesn't work, it has practically a zero benefit-to-cost ratio, except to the private contractors and the system's bureaucratic patrons.

[treestar]

77. You know you are right, that is not even considered at all

They have been successful in getting DU to consider this metadata only used in a negative way, to spy on innocent Americans, or some such hooey. And of course they must be abusing it to do something to their political enemies (which right now, oddly, would be right wingers).

We are to assume they never use it to bust criminals or terrorists.

[Mojorabbit]

159. It is like our vice Prez said

"I don't have to listen to your phone calls to know what you're doing. If I know every single phone call you've made, I'm able to determine every single person you talk to, I can get a pattern about your life that is very, very intrusive. And the real question here is what do they do with this information that they collect that does not have anything to do with Al Qaeda? We're going to trust the President and the Vice President that they're doing the right thing? Don't count me in on that."

[treestar]

164. Or maybe sometimes it could lead to something about Al Qaeda

Or child traffickers or sex slave traffickers. Or foreigners committing espionage. It's not beyond the pale that the government actually goes after criminals and terrorists.

[HardTimes99]

162. Ladies and Gentlemen, welcome to McCarthyism, v. 2.0 -- Taking slurs to a whole

new level ("I can see people rushing to defend the perpetrators of these crimes.&quot

How about I call you a fucking Nazi and we'll call it even, OK?

[leveymg]

69. No, this is not speculation. I'm pointing out how the system describes it own operation.

If you can find the words "abuse" "not supposed to" or "so evil" anywhere in the post I linked that analyzes the Snowden documents -- go back and take a few minutes to read the whole thing -- let me know, and I'll go back and remove them.

If you want to have a fact-based discussion, I'll do that. But, you have to stick to the facts and be able to cite sources.

[Marr]

48. It sounds to me like he's acknowledging that call content is stored, but since it's not

actually listened to by a human being until a warrant of some sort has been issued by a secret court, it's isn't really blanket surveillance.

Kind of Schroedinger's Call sort of thing.

[HardTimes99]

163. Props for 'Schrodinger's Call' - an awesome and appropriate metaphor, even if

it demands a working understanding of 20th-Century Physics.

[bobduca]

166. Its a dodge

When Siri or Google voice transcribe your utterance it "knows" what it means immediately, or a (sometimes) close approximation thereof.

When all "secrets" are transcribed it kind of defeats the meaning of secret.

"Not a trick, it's just a simple trick!"

And thats why it feels illegal and is illegal.

[bluetexas]

96. frontier00, are you the NSA?

I noticed that you only started posting on DU when Snowden started revealing what the NSA is up to.

[hootinholler]

12. OH MY GAWD!!!

I'm surprised you didn't throw in a gratuitous GiGi there!

[frontier00]

13. Point

My point is no one has released any story, revealing such an overreach, until he has proof , or releases that proof that the government is storing everyone's phone calls, he shouldn't make such claims

[corkhead]

14. Takes one to know one

Enjoy your stay

[MannyGoldstein]

16. Thank you. You've changed my mind on this subject.

I have been fooled for so long. Hopefully the others on DU will similarly see the light.

Regards,

Government Sock Puppet

[RKP5637]

20. Phew, I'm so glad they came forward with their cardinal knowledge thereby

setting DU and the world straight on all of this.

[UTUSN]

18. R#4 & K for, I guess it's more important to know his name has 2 'n'(s) than his facts are correct nt

[Thinkingabout]

19. GG is either terribly misinformed or he like misinforming those who believe in him.

Either clueless or just likes Spying and Lying

[Common Sense Party]

137. What is he misinformed about? He says the NSA has trillions of calls and e-mails in their database.

They do.

Hardly any of them are domestic.

[Thinkingabout]

143. Have you really listened when phone call records are being collected. They are talking about the

billing information which you see on your bill, it is the records, not the calls. My goodness, if people really knew what the records are this could be settled in short time. When you look at your bill, do you hear the conversation? No, you don't. If this is the information you are getting from GG, then it is a total lie. This is one of the reasons why people does not believe him.

[Common Sense Party]

145. No, no, NO. The NSA has actual recordings--but NOT of U.S. citizens. They RECORD calls

from FOREIGN sources. That's what they DO. Why do you think they have these ENORMOUS servers?

Read Inside the Puzzle Palace by Bamford. This is what the NSA was set up to do, and it has been doing it well for many, many years.

[Thinkingabout]

156. Recording of a call is obtained through wiretapping. This is completely different from phone call

Records. A warrant is issued for the records from communication companies and if information is gathered to indicate the need for wiretapping and this would be more specific. From some of the posts on this site there seems to be confusion.

[bahrbearian]

34. I just watched that, Scarey, you would think we would have learned something. Thanks n/t

[snappyturtle]

35. Thank you mother earth. I think we all want to know what

Glenn Greenwald has. I can well understand though why he won't,
can't, shouldn't reveal it now. He's protecting his source. Putin
has told Snowden not to 'do harm' to U.S. Well, that's why I'm
thinking we're not going to see earth shaking news coming from
Glenn for some time.

[nenagh]

36. William Binney, 30 yr. NSA employee..is the mathematician and code breaker that created the system..

which was used against foreign enemies. After 911, he found out that his program is now being used to track Americans via bank records, phone data and other domain data.

These form a 3 dimensional graph that grows more extensive over time.

Thanks mother earth for finding and posting the William Binney videos.

[nenagh]

75. I can't thank you enough for posting the Binney videos. Invaluable to our understanding.

Mr Binney explains that he used math and code to create a program that spied on the Soviet Union essentially.

After 911, Binney's code was cannabolized and the last part of Binney's Soviet Union code was retrofitted with other code that enabled it to spy on USA citizens.

He explains how this USA application made the code highly secret.

He explains this domain data of US citizens forms a 3 dimensional metric display of each domain, eg, banking and phone by which Americans can be profiled and their back data assessed over time.

The man is brilliant..thanks mother earth..

[KG]

23. hilarious.

[Vinnie From Indy]

24. Speaking of dirtbags...

You have the subtlety of a hurricane!

Cheers!

[PSPS]

28. We may as call this "#5 Sunday."

Worshiper/Apologist Hit Parade:

1. This is nothing new
2. I have nothing to hide
3. What are you, a freeper?
4. But Obama is better than Christie/Romney/Bush/Hitler
5. Greenwald/Flaherty/Gillum/Apuzzo/Braun is a hack
6. We have red light cameras, so this is no big deal
7. Corporations have my data anyway
8. At least Obama is trying
9. This is just the media trying to take Obama down
10. It's a misunderstanding/you are confused
11. You're a racist
12. Nobody cares about this anyway / "unfounded fears"
13. I don't like Snowden, therefore we must disregard all of this
14. Other countries do it

[woo me with science]

31. +10000

[treestar]

46. A list?

You should know those are frowned on here.

Yours proves nothing. Or that there are 14 arguments you are not willing to answer or confront. You seem to think that it is wrong inherently to disagree with you.

[MannyGoldstein]

83. LOL

Although it's actually not funny...

[boston bean]

29. Database = no collection??

Me thinks the parsing here is fucking hilarious!!

[snappyturtle]

37. See mother earth's link up thread....

[treestar]

40. He needs to stir it up

So he can get some more attention.

[U4ikLefty]

168. Pot meet Kettle.

[MjolnirTime]

41. Glen has an agenda. He will bend anything to serve its purpose. The truth matters little to him.

He's after attention. And money.

[Bradical79]

52. You don't know what a database is.

That's all your post is telling us. This is almost as bad as when we were being told a highway map of Moscow was the Bolivian plane's flight path, lol.

[cantbeserious]

54. The Character Assassination Continues - First Snowden - Now Greenwald

eom

[treestar]

63. If they can't take the heat, why did they go into the kitchen?

What is this whining about how they, who put themselves into a situation, should be only praised and immune from all criticism?

Maybe you can have an equivalent of the BOG? A forum where only supporters of Glennie can post.

[cantbeserious]

64. NonSensical Reply - An Individuals Response To Attack Is Independent Of The Attack

eom

[treestar]

76. Obama, Reid, Pelosi get attacked here all the time

Why can't Greenwald be attacked in similar fashion?

Maybe you need a GGG so you can avoid hearing about that?

[cantbeserious]

81. I See - Continuing To Justify The Character Assassination Versus Focusing On The Information

eom

[treestar]

93. Obama Reid Pelosi, and most of Obama's nominees get the same thing

So why can't Greenwald put up with it? And they are elected, and he isn't? Why is he a special flower?

[cantbeserious]

95. Missed The Point Again - Character Assassination Is Not The Same As The Information

eom

[treestar]

100. So have you

Why can't Greenwald get character assassination too? Everyone else does.

[cantbeserious]

103. One Supposes That One Never Took A Debating Class - Character Assassination Is Not Allowed

One might choose to consider some actual information that supports Greenwald's claims.

One will have to read the DU post linked as follows:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023358435#post2

to absorb this information.

[treestar]

126. Why does that not apply to Obama, Reid and Pelosi?

And every nominee to every post that gets their character assassinated?

It is the post that is not on the subject but rather whining about poor Glenn getting his character assassinated.

[cantbeserious]

128. Once Again - No Comprehension Of The Underlying Information Nor Understanding Of Character Assassination

eom

[WinkyDink]

55. "isn't storing....goes in a database..." DID YOU READ YOUR OWN WORDS?

[Hong Kong Cavalier]

68. ^^^ This ^^^

I read that in the OP and was like *twitch*

[AllINeedIsCoffee]

57. I don't remember voting for Greenwald to

read secret documents and determine what I should know and shouldn't know.

Fuck him and the rag he wrote in on.

[Generic Other]

65. I don't remember voting to be spied on

to have my phone data and emails compromised. To have my constitutional rights violated. In case you didn't know it, those who expose the roaches in the system don't need to be elected. And I am grateful for their willingness to come forward and expose the illegal actions of my government. No, I take that back. NOT MY GOVERNMENT. The people in charge now have overthrown the real government that followed laws and the constitution.

[treestar]

78. +1 and yet there are complaints that he is criticized!

Apparently it is cool to criticize our elected officials but not unelected persons who stick themselves into the situation.

[stonecutter357]

109. K&R

This^^^^^

[villager]

60. Nice two minutes hate.

You're clearly a fine, NSA-approved citizen!

[Katashi_itto]

67. Goebbels would be proud

and off to the trash

[janlyn]

70. Might I suggest

that in the future you don't totally disprove your own claim!!!!
I would tell you to reread what you wrote, but more than likely you did and still didn't see the contradiction.

[marions ghost]

74. You mean

"The NSA isn't storing"...followed by "it goes in a database" ....??? THAT contradiction?

[janlyn]

116. Yes, that's what I meant!!!

All I could do to keep from asking if the poster was really that obtuse! I kept waiting for the tag. I usually get it without the tag, thought it was a mistake on my part. But nope,the poster seemed totally serious!

[Cooley Hurd]

71. This:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023358242

[grasswire]

90. that puppet is kinda dirty! nt

[RevStPatrick]

99. Oooops..you beat me to it!

I didn't look at all the responses.
Your sockpuppet is better!

[NorthCarolina]

80. NSA spying is SECRET, so how can you purport to KNOW

exactly what is stored and what is not stored? How did you avail yourself of secret dealings made behind closed, and locked, doors?

[cantbeserious]

82. Without Detailed Facts - The Only Thing To Attack Is The Messenger

eom

[randome]

98. How can Greenwald purport to know?

Nothing he and Snowden have published shows the NSA doing anything illegal. They both make vague claims of nefarious doings but never offer the evidence.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]

[NorthCarolina]

105. Greenwald is a Journalist with access to information and connections that average citizens

do not share. So, my question to the OP as to where he gets his information that he spreads with the authority of someone on the inside? I know where Greenwald got his info, so lets disclose where the OP gets his/her info? Or is it just a "gut feeling" being pushed off as factual knowledge? Inquiring minds want to know.

[randome]

119. Until Greenwald provides evidence, it's only his 'gut feeling', too.

Note that all the evidence provided so far does not support the idea that the NSA is operating illegally. If Snowden provided evidence that illegality was occurring, he would be the very definition of a whistleblower but so far that is not the case.

Greenwald very strongly implied that 'direct access' meant the NSA was monitoring the world when that was not the case. Neither he nor our 'genius' hacker, Snowden, apparently understood what secure FTP servers are.

I'm sure this latest insinuation will follow the same course. Implications of nefarious activity without an ounce of evidence.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]

[ChairmanAgnostic]

84. 13 people shamefully recced this idiotic thread?

unbelievable.

this author has an interesting history. Mainly a hatred of Greenwald and rumor mongering about snowden. I smell a plant, a GOP plant here, folks.

[wtmusic]

108. Cut and paste the list...collect 'em all!

They're adorable.

[NRaleighLiberal]

85. worst OP of the ...(name the time period).

[cannondale]

87. They are in a DB = they are stored

"No, Glen the N.S.A. isn't storing trillions of phone calls and emails of citizens, it goes in a database so if you contact a suspected terrorist or any connection , than it gets picked up"

Point of logic: You say the NSA is not storing records, but then say they are in a database. That, my friend, is storing records. There is no other way to read that. Unless they have a time machine, you have to store records to them use them if you are a suspect.

So yes, they are storing information on the calls. This is not in dispute.

[RevStPatrick]

92. (HB)Gary? Is that you?

[wtmusic]

104. .

[SidDithers]

106. DU rec...

But the cult of Greenwald isn't going to like you accusing St. Glenn of lying.

Sid

[shenmue]

107. Hey, you're not allowed to doubt.

Glen Greenwald burps pure silk, as we all know. None shall question him.

[MrMickeysMom]

110. This OP is the real loser...

Enjoy your stay here.

[Ichingcarpenter]

111. Clapper has spoken !!!!

But he lied twice to Congress as did the other assholes in the FBI, CIA , NSA, ATF....... .

Glen? No proof yet.

I can't wait for Grayson's hearing. Plus the Senate one the same day.


Now, that's must see TV..

But I will be watching on the web.


The OP .... ?.......Major Fail

[SoapBox]

112. +1000

Ditto...Stop make'n shit up Mr. Beck...sorry, Greenwald.

[Fumesucker]

113. I don't normally do this but after reading this entire thread there is only one appropriate response

[SCVDem]

114. My country right or wrong

has now become, destroy our country by any and all means necessary.

Like the 5 blind men touching different parts of an elephant and coming to different conclusions of what an elephant is, I doubt anyone has all the pieces of our NSA puzzle as some would like us to believe. Looking at you Glenn!

I do know we need better control but then this is a congressional oversight issue and not the Presidents. He doesn't have the authority people believe he has to do so many things, nor the funding. Look at who wants to privatize everything and issue no bid contracts to find the guilty parties.

I have an issue with building a structure that can save all e mail and phone calls. How much useless information is being stored? Think of all the teenagers and their important TMZ calls or family grocery lists. What are we saving this crap for? Even in the pay phone 70s I never considered a phone line secure. How many of you did?

Most of this was probably authorized when the expression, 'it's the bomb' was popular.

For security I can see where key words are scanned but then the rest deleted if it's just a grocery list or other routine junk. Bad guys must communicate somehow.

My question is, why we haven't been able to use this intel to stop the real threats like banking fraud?

Perhaps too many politicians names would pop up.

I want every elected official to be forced to read the Patriot Act. All of it!

There will be a test!

[Iggo]

117. "Picked up" from where, frontier00?

[flamingdem]

118. Greenwald was on CNN with Morgan Spurlock yesterday claiming

that an NSA worker can listen to YOUR phone calls with a very agitated voice.
Without a warrant is what he's implying, for fun, for evil.

He's a shyster. He lies by omission at best.

If this was true, let's see the evidence.

[boston bean]

123. "shyster" has a rather discriminatory tone to it,

especially since Greenwald is jewish. You do know it can be considered a slur against jewish people.

[flamingdem]

124. Your comment is ridiculous, that term is in common use

try on a new Faux Outrage outfit

[boston bean]

130. No outrage. Just pointing it out.

If anything I find it sad, and pathetic.

[flamingdem]

132. Did you even look up the word? It's from MIDDLE GERMAN nt

[boston bean]

135. Yeah, I looked it up and have heard it used derogatorily in reference to Jewish people.

Did you look it up. Do you see how it has been used?

[flamingdem]

139. You are shameful really, and I never bother getting angry with people on DU

but you've set a new mark.

How dare you accuse me of anti-semitism just for your own self rightgeous stupidity.

Do you think that I might know more than you about language? I DO.

If you write me again with this tripe I will put you on ignore and report you for harrassment.

[boston bean]

140. I told you, you were using a word that has been used as a Jewish slur, toward a Jewish person.

I did not accuse you of being anti Semitic.

[U4ikLefty]

169. BULLSHIT

You implied the poster was anti-semitic.

[Common Sense Party]

146. You're inventing meanings that are not there.

http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-shy1.htm

It is not anti-semitic, no matter how many people choose to use it that way.

[boston bean]

147. So say you. I can pull up links that say otherwise.

You can too!

[Common Sense Party]

148. You did not even read the link. You do not care about learning or about the truth.

Shyster is not an anti-semitic slur. Is "niggardly" somehow anti-African American?

Words mean things. Just because you THINK it means something, it ain't necessarily so.

[boston bean]

150. I'm not the only person in the world who thinks this.

there are plenty of links to support my pov. You can find them if you try.

[Common Sense Party]

151. I looked. I can't find one that's credible. And I know you are wrong on this.

So, discussion is closed.

[boston bean]

152. ok, you can close the discussion and determine what "links" you think are credible.

good day.

[unapatriciated]

161. The meaning of shyster may not have started out as an Anti-Semitic slur but...

It has evolved and been used in that connotation many times since it's first use. It is all over the web and throughout our history.

I agree with the authors at the below linked site, Patricia T. O'Conner and Stewart Kellerman. I would think twice about using it.

For many (if not most) of us, the word is guilty by association. That may be unfair, but I’d think twice before using it.

http://books.google.com/books?id=hsu47CBwJPUC&pg=PA140&lpg=PA140&dq=shyster+anti+semitic+origin&source=bl&ots=Z2tGHv1pnN&sig=Jp5gUqvJm2E9WMdKg44nRwe_iIM&h

[Scurrilous]

120. He has a forthcoming book to sell.

Time to reel in the suckers.

[Bragi]

121. Is frontier00 a social media persona?

I ask because it seems as though it might be. There's a pattern.

-b

[another_liberal]

122. Which part of our Surveillance State . . .

Such faith in the overarching goodness of our National Security Administration would be touching, if there wasn't so much evidence to the contrary regarding their motives and methods. Your post makes one wonder which part of our Surveillance State apparatus you work for? Your "Company man" style attitude toward good, fact-based reporting on the NSA does seem to suggest something like that may be the case?

[randome]

125. Where is the evidence they are doing anything illegal?

I'm not even saying they aren't doing something illegal. I'm saying where is the evidence?
[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]

[another_liberal]

127. I would tell you . . .

I would be happy to tell you, but it's all: "Top Secret."

Seriously though, any spying on Americans' private communications without a proper warrant is illegal. Surely you realize by now that the NSA is doing just that, and doing it wholesale.

[randome]

141. They are monitoring foreign communications.

They include domestic communications -obviously- when one of the individuals is foreign-based and the other is not.

So far as we know, the NSA turns over domestic information to the FBI.

Now if the NSA is operating illegally or abusively, let's see the evidence of that.

If you're referring to metadata, that has been long ruled not covered by the 4th Amendment and that data cannot be viewed without a robust system of sign-offs that even Carl Bernstein said looks pretty strong.

If there is evidence of illegality or abuse, let's see it and let the chips fall where they may.

As for there being too much secrecy, we are all in agreement on that.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]

[another_liberal]

158. They have already admitted they are doing more than you suggest.

This story has moved on quite a bit since that was the official line. Greenwald's latest article and recent testimony by NSA officials to Congress leave that "only foreign calls" claim behind in the dust.

[Common Sense Party]

136. Where does he say "of citizens"???? Please point that out.

This Week ‏@ThisWeekABC 40m
.@ggreenwald: NSA has trillions of telephone calls and emails in their databases that they’ve collected over several years. #ThisWeek

You implied that these phone calls and e-mails were those of U.S. citizens:

No, Glen the N.S.A. isn't storing trillions of phone calls and emails of citizens,

but Greenwald did not say that. It is undeniably true (but not at all newsworthy) that the NSA has trillions of calls and e-mails in their database BECAUSE THAT'S THEIR FREAKING JOB. They are SUPPOSED to spy on people outside the U.S. They have been doing so for decades. And they're pretty good at it. And it's no secret.

[randome]

142. Makes you wonder why Glenn thought fit to mention it then, huh?

He is quite the con man. He knows precisely how much information to reveal -and how much to not reveal- and then his 'audience' will take it in the desired direction.

The man is smart in at least that aspect of his 'reporting'.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]

[QC]

144. Glenn Greenwald is a big ole meanie!!!

[MrMickeysMom]

160. Yeeah!

What's all this, "speak truth to power" poo-poo, anyway, wise guys?

[sigmasix]

149. greenwald loves Teabaggers

He respects the teabagger movement so much that he refers to them as "the new breed of small government conservatives". If Greenwald was an actual journalist without ties to the right wing, why does he trumpet the AntiAmerican teabagger contingent as a legitimate political movement? Greenwald's cowardice and lies are catching up to his right wing hatred for America and exposing him as an agent of the GOP and extremist teabaggers.

[Waiting For Everyman]

154. Of course he's lying.

We all know the NSA only built the Utah data center to be a racquetball court.

No... no... I got it. it's a parking garage, that's the ticket.

[Scurrilous]

165. Boink.

[bobduca]

167. Rec'cing for the huge pile of stupid that is this thread.