Post removed

[arely staircase]

1. you know greenwald has to be pissed at snowden

But he can't say so. So he just blows a gasket and looks like a fool. I wonder how far snowden can go helping Putin before even greenwald has to admit the guy is working for Putin.

[leftynyc]

110. Greenwald is getting what he deserved

I'm of the mind that he used Snowden to get what he wanted and abandoned him as soon as the story came out. I feel way more sorry for Snowden (who I think is a thief) than I do for Greenwald (who has no core principles whatsoever)

[Whisp]

2. I'm not near there yet.

Even though I'm convinced that Snowden is and has been working for Pootie Toots all along, I still have more respect for him (not much tho! pretty teeny weeny!) than for that ambulance chasing obnoxious toxic loud mouth GG.

[randome]

4. I agree, Snowden is a more tragic figure.

Greenwald belongs on Fox News.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]A 90% chance of rain means the same as a 10% chance:
It might rain and it might not.[/center][/font][hr]

[arely staircase]

3. also

how long before creeper in the Bolivian embassy has to jump into this?

[randome]

17. Bolivian? Or Ecuadorian?

[hr][font color="blue"][center]A 90% chance of rain means the same as a 10% chance:
It might rain and it might not.[/center][/font][hr]

[arely staircase]

20. ecuadorian

My bad

[randome]

23. It is strange we haven't heard from Julian for a while, isn't it?

No Pulitzer prize or cushy salary for him! The spotlight wanes!
[hr][font color="blue"][center]A 90% chance of rain means the same as a 10% chance:
It might rain and it might not.[/center][/font][hr]

[HangOnKids]

5. So sad that it makes you compose a post?

Talk about a parody. Holy shit you are a riot!

[Cali_Democrat]

6. I'm a riot, but at least I'm not a zombie:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4026920

[HangOnKids]

7. Thanks Sid

Take it up with admin.

[Cali_Democrat]

12. I actually quite enjoy playing with zombies

I'd prefer the admins keep you around.

But as time goes on, more and more people will know and there's nothing you can do about it.

Unless of course you create another DU handle...

[HangOnKids]

81. Poor thing

I just do not know what to say.......

[zappaman]

91. Lol!

Playing with zombies!



Say hi to Binka for me!

[DisgustipatedinCA]

121. "I don't want to empower the zombie hunters, troll hunters, and witch hunters on this site."

"I don't want to empower the zombie hunters, troll hunters, and witch hunters on this site. They can be worse than the zombies, trolls, and witches." --Skinner

I'm not confident that I'm remembering this correctly, but didn't you also change your username some time ago? What was that about. I think I recall you addressing that, but I don't remember all the details. In any case, other users aren't your play toys, so let's stick to the discussion at hand.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

122. Replying to my own post in order to answer a PM and an edit of the OP

I received an IM from user Cali_Democrat, to whom I responded above. He asked me to look at the edited OP. The edited part of the OP states:

"Apparently I've been locked out of this thread, but I can respond using edit. To post #121....please provide a link to this accusation. Pretty please? With sugar on top? How in the world would one even change a screen name?"

My response:
I had a question, not an accusation, and that I took some pains to explain that I didn't recall the situation clearly, but I did think I had remembered you mentioning that you used to have a different-but-similar username, either with a hyphen instead of an underscore, or no space between--something like that. I'm not able to provide a link to that which I wasn't sure about in the first place; I hope you'll understand. If that wasn't you, then my question is asked and answered, and I'm sorry for getting it wrong.

Thanks.

It's a pretty neat trick to be able to respond in a thread you've been locked out of. I salute your ingenuity, if not your circumnavigation of the rules admin opted to put in place.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

123. I found the post I was looking for, and I was wrong. I'm sorry about that, Cali_Democrat

There was another user, P*****el_Wa***or, who said he used to post under a different-but-similar username. I asked him about it, and he answered me. I confused two different usernames, and I'm sorry for propagating that confusion into this thread.

[Autumn]

9. No ones identity is a secret. Skinner knows and here's his opinion.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1259455

[Puglover]

49. What is precious is

This crowd only goes after socks and zombies that disagree with their POV. The others get high fived. Pretty laughable.

Seems to me some loser named Functioning Cog was given the boot after this group of principled DUer's gave his OP's rec after rec.

Seriously pitiful.

[Autumn]

51. True. You see that time and again.

Some people can post links pointing out the similarities between posters that were tomb stoned from five years back, in a matter of a couple of minutes. I've seen that on MIRT. Like you say though, only posters they don't like.

[rug]

73. From the ATA link:

I don't want to empower the zombie hunters, troll hunters, and witch hunters on this site. They can be worse than the zombies, trolls, and witches.

[Control-Z]

15. Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT

Explanation: Insensitive toward Zombies.

[SidDithers]

16. Awesome...

Love that you link back there every single time.



Sid

[Major Nikon]

25. Looks like someone got their button taken away

On Thu Apr 17, 2014, 06:28 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

Awesome...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4836096

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Talk abour shit stirring and this person is on MIRT. Skinner has no problem with people coming back as long as they don't cause the trouble that got them banned. But Sid and his 2 or 3 buddies do this every chance they get. This makes DU suck

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Thu Apr 17, 2014, 06:41 PM, and the Jury voted 0-7 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Alerting when there is no violation makes DU suck. Alerter: please limit alerts to actual violations.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: IIRC, this particular zombie has been banned multiple times.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

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

[SidDithers]

29. Awesome again...

thanks for posting the results.



Sid

[alcibiades_mystery]

30. Can you imagine the temper tantrum currently underway?

[JI7]

68. so the zombie goes around attacking people personally for no reason

and someone gets offended when they get something back.

i have seen that one attack many people personally and then delete their attacks .

[Bobbie Jo]

104. +1

That seems to be the MO, which certainly speaks to the banning of the original account.

[Jamaal510]

92. .

[morningfog]

78. It's a strange hobby/obsession you have.

Get help, or a life.

[SidDithers]

82. Shouldn't you be saying that to the posters...

who get banned, then come back, over and over and over and over again?

Sid

[morningfog]

85. They could be included, I suppose. The person who tracks those posters, though?

How sad is a person who keeps tabs on banned posters returning to a message board?

Think about it: This person is so pathetic, I am going to expose how pathetic they are by following them and keeping track of them.

Strange hobby dude.

[alcibiades_mystery]

88. When I think of pathetic, I think of the poster who was shutdown 7-0 on that ridiculous alert

It makes me laugh so hard, actually.

To each his or her own, though!

[JI7]

89. not in this case where the person has been going around personally attacking

people. in many cases they say some ugly shit and then delete it.

[SidDithers]

94. Exactly...

There are lots of posters whose historical knowledge of DU, and comments about such, don't match their registration date. Generally, I'm live and let live when it comes to posters who are returnees.

But when they're consistently nasty, or when they come at me specifically, then I might take a few minutes to figure out who they used to be. It's really not that hard. If someone's giving me shit (and I'm not complaining about that - I'm a big boy, I can take it), then I do want to know who I'm really dealing with.

Many posters, even in this thread, have said banned former members are allowed back. Fine. But if they're allowed to be back, why are they hiding their previous identity or identities? Isn't DU3 all about transparency?


Sid

[LanternWaste]

111. Six of one, half a dozen of the other... both seem as petulant as the other.

Six of one, half a dozen of the other... both seem as petulant as the other.

(Insert distinction without a difference here)

[stevenleser]

53. Wow! nt

[99Forever]

8. Has the NSA stopped spying on us in violation of the Constittution yet?

[Autumn]

10. Nope. Pretty sad at this point

and it's not Greenwald or Snowden.

[99Forever]

13. Notice they NEVER answer the real question?

The one I just asked. Just more childish personal smears. Like anyone buys their BS.

[randome]

18. That's because it's been discussed to death.

There is no violation of the Constitution where 3rd party business records are concerned.

You disagree with that, fine, but don't try to say everyone is afraid to debate you.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]A 90% chance of rain means the same as a 10% chance:
It might rain and it might not.[/center][/font][hr]

[paulkienitz]

40. no violation of the Constitution? I'll take Judge Leon's opinion over yours

[Vashta Nerada]

24. I've noticed.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4834614

[BillZBubb]

21. Nope the National Security State has its minions smearing Snowden.

That keeps the sheeple's eyes off the NSA's crimes. Nothing like attacking the messenger to kill the message.

[Vietnameravet]

33. and Obama is a part of that?

[paulkienitz]

37. I really do not get these posters who want to paint Greenwald, Snowden, and Assange as the baddies.

And there are so many of them. I really don't understand where they're coming from. I'm honestly baffled.

Is the actual fact of the NSA wiping its ass with the fourth amendment just irrelevant, or what?

[99Forever]

38. It's quite simple really.

Kill the messenger. Nothing more, nothing less. It's authoritarian/surveillance/police state types do.

[leftynyc]

112. Oh - HORSESHIT

And once again we get the same lame argument that if we don't worship at the feet of Snowden and Greenwald we must be NSA stooges as if we can't hold two thoughts in our brains at the same time. You look quite the fool for continuing to make this simpleminded argument.

[alarimer]

46. Simple. Their team is in the White House now and stands to be hurt by whatever revelations there are

Despite the fact, the data collection has been going on since at least Bush, probably earlier.

Hypocrisy in action.

[FiveGoodMen]

54. IOW: Party before country.

[leftynyc]

114. Try human complexity

I can - at the same time - think the NSA behavior is outrageous overreach that needs to stop immediately AND think Snowden is a criminal AND think Greenwald (who I believe used Snowden for his own ends) is a disgusting narcissist ALL AT THE SAME TIME. It's really not that difficult and it astounds me that DUers use this simplistic, useless argument whenever someone disagrees with the poor things.

[Maedhros]

47. Where are they coming from? Why, HBGary, of course:

http://readwrite.com/2011/02/09/leaked_security_firm_documents_show_plans_to_discr#awesm=~oBJKH2SGwIvFZo

[Mojorabbit]

87. There aren't that many. It is just a small group but they are vocal

and hit almost every thread about the NSA spying or anything to do with Snowden or Greenwald. Sometimes there are entire threads with just the group high fiving each other and reccing the thread up. I generally just back out and let them have their fun. They do make it impossible to have any kind of in depth informative conversation about the subject.

[baldguy]

50. You want to change the law, you've got to change the courts first.

But the courts will never change if we have Snowden's pals in the GOP in charge.

[kelliekat44]

11. When I hear that, my heart broke. Even I think it's sad. And even I feel sorry for Snowden. nt

[G_j]

14. and to think

just a short while ago you were "swooning" over "dreamy" Snowden.

[Blue_Tires]

19. I feel sorry for Snowden

since I promise you nobody in his circle has the guts to tell him how big of a horse's ass he made of himself...

I'll never feel sorry for Greenwald, though...He made his bed, and has long been a supreme, smug, unapologetic asshole while doing so -- He deserves everything he's got coming to him, plus some...

[BillZBubb]

22. Greenwald, deservedly, just won a big journalism prize.

He has nothing to apologize for. He did what good journalists are supposed to do.

[Blue_Tires]

26. Exactly...And as a "good journalist"

Last edited Thu Apr 17, 2014, 09:41 PM - Edit history (1)

I have no doubt he will FULLY and COMPLETELY investigate Putin's bold claim that there is in no way whatsoever any mass data collection on his own citizens or foreign nations, no matter how dark and ugly the path to the truth gets...After all, that's what good, professional "journalists" do, instead of pretending they're too important to cover a story, or getting into nonstop twitter fights...

If Greenwald somehow has the stones to pull THAT off, not only is he guaranteed another Pulitzer; they might just change the award to the "Greenwald"...I'm not betting on any of that becoming a reality, though....

And for the record, he will have plenty to apologize for if he continues to play blind-deaf-dumb whenever someone says "Russia"

[frylock]

60. and then he can do an expose on wet water!

derp

[flamingdem]

95. Well said BT

[MohRokTah]

35. And the Pulitzer has officially been tarnished after this latest round...

Of asshattery from Greenwald.

[Whisp]

42. ha! I bet there is a bit of buyers remorse in that camp now. LOL!

[MohRokTah]

44. Yup, eventually happens to all of these awards.

Eventually, they give an award to a complete asshat.

[ucrdem]

70. Greenwald did not win a Pulitzer.

The Guardian and Wapo won Pulitzer prizes, not Greewald and not Snowden. The only "Greenwald" found on on the official Pulitzer website is a Gerald Greenwald, named incidentally in an award-winning 2001 article:

The ESOP's most ardent management champion, CEO Gerald Greenwald, retired in July 1999.

http://www.pulitzer.org/archives/6443

I notice Greenwald claims otherwise on his every-word-a-lie wikipedia site:

Greenwald has received awards including the 2014 Pulitzer Prize for Public Service, [17]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glenn_Greenwald

But it isn't so, and a quick check of the Pulitzer site clears that little fib right up.

[BillZBubb]

74. Who's the fibber?

I never said Greenwald won a Pulitzer. A quick check of my posts should clear up your mistake.

[ucrdem]

75. Greenwald.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glenn_Greenwald

Hey that was easy!

[deutsey]

120. Greenwald was given a George Polk Award

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/apr/11/journalists-nsa-guardian-polk-award-snowden

[flamingdem]

96. Thanks for the clarification because on this site it sure seems

like Greenie and Snowie ran off with the prize!

[leftynyc]

116. Was just about to post the same

It seems some DUers, kinda like their hero Greenwald, have no trouble bending the truth when it suits their narrative.

[joshcryer]

63. I think it was LIHOP.

I think the NSA needed to reign in contractors and their lax security. I think they weighed the negatives and dumped Snowden with the least damaging data they could muster.

Snowden then got directed in the Assange / Wikileaks / GG direction, so he could ultimately be discredited.

[Number23]

93. I was about to say the same. I feel for Snowden, not so much for Greenwald

[Tarheel_Dem]

27. And they got Pierre to spend all that money on a Pulitzer to implode like this?

[albino65]

28. Their 15 minutes might be over n/t

[BillZBubb]

32. Right, because disclosing NSA crimes is only worth 15 minutes n/t

[albino65]

36. OK...

Give'em twenty, twenty-five tops. You pick.

[Whisp]

43. I think it files into the '15 business minutes' thing. n/t

[Marr]

31. Nixon Staffers Agree: Daniel Ellsberg Big Poopy Head; Has No Credibility

lol.

[BillZBubb]

34. It is really hard to believe, sometimes, that this is a Democratic site...

The attacks on Snowden are authoritarian right reactions. I guess there is a lot of that in the Democratic party as well. Sad.

[Maedhros]

48. It's convenient, though, for keeping my ignore list up to date.

Found a few more to add on this thread.

[G_j]

56. me, me!

pleeezze?

[frylock]

61. look, all that shit is going to change when president jeb takes up residence in the whitehouse..

then the domestic spying will be the worst thing ever.

[zeemike]

67. There are authoritarian reactionaries in every party

But it becomes sad when they get into positions of leadership and power...that is when they turn off the rank and file. which can actually be their intent...smaller numbers means more power for them.

[MisterP]

39. my question is what the hell you'll do with yourselves starting January 2017

[MohRokTah]

45. They'll go after Hillary Clinton.

Or they'll be supporting the war being started by Jeb Bush, one.

I'm talking Greenwald and Co. here.

[frylock]

98. and when jeb is in the white house, you'll continue to support the NSA's data collection?

[MohRokTah]

99. I strongly support data collection of internatinal data.

I strongly oppose data collection of domestic data.

The NSA is capable of doing one without doing the other. Scalia and Ginsburg have intimated they'll be hearing the case against collecting domestic data. With any justice, they'll put an end to it and leave the NSA to do what they are supposed to do.

[lillypaddle]

41. To tell you the truth

I was starting to rethink my position on Snowden. Then this. WHIPLASH!

Being Putin's puppy is way over the fucking line.

[left on green only]

52. Back In The USSR, You Don't Know How Lucky You Are, Boys

Putin doesn't need a device as arcane as a telephone to be able to tell what everyone is saying. Not when the walls have ears, he doesn't.

[lbrtbell]

55. Snowden has obviously been coerced into it

If Putin wants to use him for PR and he refuses, Snowden becomes a man without a country. Or a prisoner. Or worse.

It's too easy to forget this, while sitting in one's comfortable home and posting on online forums.

[randome]

71. He's a prisoner now. Putin could fly him to safety at any time.

But he won't. Where is Wikileaks? Laura Poitras? Why does Snowden have no one standing by his side?
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Aspire to inspire.[/center][/font][hr]

[allinthegame]

57. I called him

On his game on day one....no surprise here.

[whatchamacallit]

58. I feel sorry for YOU

[frylock]

59. Snowden made Putin lie on TV to the people of Russia..

I'm of the mindset that Snowden pwnd pooty-poot on this one.

[Cali_Democrat]

65. LOL. Interesting take. nt

[Nanjing to Seoul]

64. Has the US Government stopped snooping and spying on me and others? No?

Thank you Edward, for exposing it. Violations of the Constitution by people sworn to protect it need to be exposed.

[SidDithers]

66. DU rec...nt

Sid

[former9thward]

69. Your concern is noted...

[ucrdem]

72. Neither of them won Pulitzer prizes this week, either.

The Guardian and Wapo won Pulitzer prizes, not Greewald and not Snowden. The only "Greenwald" found on on the official Pulitzer website is a Gerald Greenwald, named incidentally in an award-winning 2001 article:

The ESOP's most ardent management champion, CEO Gerald Greenwald, retired in July 1999.

http://www.pulitzer.org/archives/6443

Greenwald claims otherwise on his wikipedia page:

Greenwald has received awards including the 2014 Pulitzer Prize for Public Service, [17]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glenn_Greenwald

But it isn't so, and a quick check of the Pulitzer site makes that clear.

[Egnever]

79. Well why does that not surprise me in the least!

Good lord greenwald is one creepy bastard.

[LittleBlue]

76. Don't feel too sorry for a Pulitzer winner

His contribution to journalism is now enshrined for all time.

Such a shame that the prize isn't given for persistence, his haters might have won it.

[Egnever]

80. except he didnt win a Pulitzer LOL

more BS from greenwald.

[LittleBlue]

84. He's being credited with it in the Guardian's acceptance article

It's even on his Wiki page. Oh the fury that his haters must feel! The highest award in journalism to someone they'd tried for a year to discredit.

Careful everyone, your coping mechanisms are showing.

[Egnever]

86. not the same as winning one

The guardian can credit bozo the clown if they want. They dont give the award.

[Thinkingabout]

77. Snowden may be trying to work himself into position to get into Russia's spying agencies. Butter up

Putin and assist Putin to get the world to believe Russia does not do any spying, They are kidding themselves, Putin was in the KGB intelligence and he is trying to continue the KGB program with a Putin twist. GG needs Snowden to stay in Russia and away from asking for his share of the money.

[Union Scribe]

83. "in the most juvenile fashion via twitter?"

...says the anonymous poster on a message board who spends an unhealthy portion of their time obsessing about two strangers he or she despises for going against another stranger he or she is overly attached to. Yep...nothing more juvenile than someone on Twitter!

[JI7]

90. strangers ? these are news stories and this is a discussion board

[Capt. Obvious]

108. Greenwald is juvenile

Using however is what adults do.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

97. Oh well, they can console themselves with the admiration of most of the world.

Not to mention the awards that human rights organizations have given them.

[ucrdem]

100. Only the parts afflicted by ODS.

As for turncoats and betrayors generally, history takes a dim view of that sort, whatever their motives, see Coriolanus if you're wondering why. And Snowden's motives are hardly beyond reproach.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

105. What are his motives? I tend to think they're what he says they are.

What are the motives of the NSA? What are the motives of Obama in giving a pass to war criminals and torturers?

[ucrdem]

109. Political partisanship, any way you slice it. nt

[DisgustipatedinCA]

101. Yeah...that Pulitzer Prize shows they're desperate.

Impressive analysis.

[ucrdem]

102. Neither Snowden nor Greenwald won a Pulitzer prize. See for yourself if you don't believe me:

http://www.pulitzer.org/node/8501

[totodeinhere]

103. True, but the news organizations that did win it wouldn't have without the help of Snowden. n/t

[ucrdem]

106. Perhaps. But they're doing fine without them.

Greenwald stopped "reporting" news when he left the Guardian. And personally I suspect that Snowden is just as much a frontman as Greenwald.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

119. Dense though I may be, the Pulitzers bestowed upon the WP and the Guardian wouldn't have happened...

...without the work of Greenwald and Poitras (and Gellman), and without the information from Edward Snowden. It's not as though the gardening advice columnist is getting credit for the Pulitzer. Any claims to the contrary are, charitably speaking, not very well thought out.

[LanternWaste]

113. Heddy Hopper would be proud of who, rather than what we often give our attentions to.

Heddy Hopper and Louella Parsons would be proud of who, rather than what we often give our attentions to.

[Vashta Nerada]

115. At this point, Snowden and Greenwald are irrelevant.

The bigger issue we should be addressing is the NSA domestic spying.

[rhett o rick]

117. What I think is "sad at this point" is your obsession to vilify these individuals in post after post

To listen to you one would think they are worse than Cheney and Rumsfeld.

What specifically did they do to warrant such hatred? Shatter your illusions?

"Sometimes people don't want to hear the truth because they don't want their illusions destroyed." Nietzsche

[Broward]

118. So many all in on the surveillance state.

Last edited Fri Apr 18, 2014, 03:37 PM - Edit history (1)

Troubling to say the least.