The vast majority of DU supports Snowden's and Greenwald's actions

[MannyGoldstein]

Perhaps 80-90%:

Snowden's revelations: thumbs up or down?

Greenwald: Thumbs Up or Down?

For some reason, a small but loud and tenacious group on DU keeps attacking these two and their actions using half-truths and full falsehoods. Again and again. At this point, is it really worth responding to these folks?

Our federal government is actively breaking the law as plainly understood from our Constitution, and the Executive branch has lied like crazy about their lawlessness to us, and to Congress.

Enough.

[scarletwoman]

1. If anyone is making a list of Snowden and Greenwald supporters,

I want to make sure they add my name.

[TheKentuckian]

5. I care about neither personally but if there is some list of supporters of our rights, put me on too

The one that feigns indifference but is on every NSA thread like stink on shit cracks me up, trying to sound all above the fray and bored.

[GoneFishin]

75. +1

[dreamnightwind]

176. You are already on the list

as are all of us that support these revelations. The NSA maintains the list for us, bless their hearts.

[billhicks76]

180. Sock Puppets

Duh. The fake managed sock puppet profiles are out there. It's the digital age. Anyone who doesn't realize this is probably over 35 and ignorant to the current paradigm. Over 30 is probably a better metric.

[billhicks76]

182. Fools

Anyone who feeds into the pro-NSA bs is just way behind the curve. If they are worth their weight they will catch up.

[freebrew]

218. But, but, but...

it's the law. Nothing they've done has broken any of the laws they've written for themselves...

Wait while I cut & paste a bunch of stuff.

(sorry, I couldn't help it)

[dreamnightwind]

183. While I don't think all of the NSA supporters here are socks

I do think it is fairly obvious that some of them are, and that the strategy used was to doggedly focus attention on the leakers rather than on what was revealed by the info they leaked. This appeared to me to be a concerted effort.

[billhicks76]

185. Yes

Of course not all. That would be foolish in itself and make us look stupid. But some are. It's their job...duh.

[lark]

223. Think there are both sock puppets & Obamabots.

Based on the bodys of work, or cut and paste efforts in this case.

[LiberalLovinLug]

225. One of their favorite tactics..

..is screaming about how those concerned with Snowden's revelations are obsessed with the man


...and in so doing, are attempting to focus the debate ON Snowden. That he's living in Russia, or he is a traitor, an asshole etc...Who is obsessed with the man again???

[TheKentuckian]

286. That's what I'm talkin bout!

[JimDandy]

266. That's the list I want on too. n/t

[hrmjustin]

2. People from what I see have honest disagreements.

For some it is clear cut but others have mixed feelings.

[riderinthestorm]

9. Really? You think those who resort to "Comrade Eddie" or "Gigi" or the rotfl smilie are being HONEST

They seem particularly disingenuous to me.

YMMV

[hrmjustin]

11. Well ok you got me there. Some people resort to name calling.

[riderinthestorm]

16. I can think of ONE poster who is conflicted and reasonable. The rest are seething and very vocal

[hrmjustin]

19. I am sure there is more than just one.

[1StrongBlackMan]

17. +1 ...

But anything short of full throated, unquestioning support is unacceptable, even as those that impose that standard, say it's not about snowden or greenwald. Go figure!

[hrmjustin]

21. I try to stay away from this issue because it gets very emotional.

[sabrina 1]

156. Violation of Constitutional rights seem pretty clear cut to me. At least they were during the Bush

era. NOW it seems, SOME purporting to be on the 'left', appear to be confused regarding our Constitutional Rights. I fail to understand how anyone can misinterpret the very clearly stated rights US Citizens are entitled to under the 4th Amendment of the US Constitution.

When did this confusion begin to occur?

[arthritisR_US]

163. It was unconstitutional when GWB was doing it and I think

it hasn't changed in that respect, one damn bit. The program has continued to grow and still is illegal, IMHO

[sabrina 1]

171. Thank you. I don't feel one bit confused, but sometimes when I read DU I wonder if I made a

wrong turn. Suddenly it seems, everything we opposed under Bush, has become 'unclear' to some here.

[QC]

190. So true.

The speech had been proceeding for perhaps twenty minutes when a messenger hurried on to the platform and a scrap of paper was slipped into the speaker's hand. He unrolled and read it without pausing in his speech. Nothing altered in his voice or manner, or in the content of what he was saying, but suddenly the names were different. Without words said, a wave of understanding rippled through the crowd. Oceania was at war with Eastasia! The next moment there was a tremendous commotion. The banners and posters with which the square was decorated were all wrong! Quite half of them had the wrong faces on them. It was sabotage! The agents of Goldstein had been at work! There was a riotous interlude while posters were ripped from the walls, banners torn to shreds and trampled underfoot. The Spies performed prodigies of activity in clambering over the rooftops and cutting the streamers that fluttered from the chimneys. But within two or three minutes it was all over. The orator, still gripping the neck of the microphone, his shoulders hunched forward, his free hand clawing at the air, had gone straight on with his speech. One minute more, and the feral roars of rage were again bursting from the crowd. The Hate continued exactly as before, except that the target had been changed.

[cstanleytech]

219. Wait, I am a bit confused here.

Now if I recall the government under Bush was involved in recording phone conversations without warrants? Right?
So yes thats wrong and it should be stopped but isnt the current topic regarding the information snowden over the NSA having a central database not of conversations but rather of what phone numbers called what phone numbers at a specific time and date?
But that aside lets assume it was illegal for them to keep such records do we ignore the issue of the other information that wasnt related to that database such as his release of information on efforts the NSA has made at penetrating computers in china?
After all the job of the NSA is to gather intelligence on other countries I thought?

[arthritisR_US]

224. Gathering intelligence on other countries is supposed to be the purview

of the NSA and if Snowden released documents with respect to this then he's a traitor, IMO. Thing is, I don't know just what it is that he downloaded and took with him to Hong Kong.

With respect to domestic spying, do these documents indicate that the NSA isn't just collecting numbers and times but recording and saving the conversations? If it came out that this was the case then we would be thanking Snowden for alerting us and giving us a voice in the debate.

There is so much I don't know and the most I get is little dribbles here and there from Greenwald and now this interview with Williams. I am conflicted when it comes to Snowden, I understand his fear given what happened to Drake et al. Tons of spin going on from the government side and from the Greenwald side.

[truedelphi]

241. You state:

If it came out that this was the case then we would be thanking Snowden for alerting us and giving us a voice in the debate.

That is exactly Snowden's point. The NSA has the ability to untangle their meta data and re-assemble the phone conversation you or I had last week with with the Anti_Monsanto protesters. This can be done at any point in time.

So today, while talking to the protesters is legal, if in five years that is not the case, that evidence could blacklist you or me or do harm that is much much worse that a mere blacklisting.

I am old enough to remember how many lives were ruined when their legal involvement with the Communist Party in the Thirties and Forties pushed them onto a blacklist for much of the Fifties sand sixties.

This is off Juan Cole's website:



Everything you wanted to Know About NSA Surveillance *but were afraid to ask (Stray)

gmoke 06/29/2013 at 8:13 pm with 1 replies

Jay Leno interviewing Shia LeBoeuf about his new movie, "Eagle Eye" on the Tonight Show 9/17/08:

Shia LeBoeuf: I remember we had an FBI consultant on the picture telling me that they can use your ADT security box microphone to get your stuff that is going on in your house. Or OnStar, they can shut your car down. And he told me that one in five phone calls that you make are recorded and logged and I laughed at him. And then he played back a phone conversation I had two years prior to joining the picture, the FBI consultant...

Leno: They had a record of you from..

Shia: Two years prior to me joining the picture...

Leno: That seems creepy.

Shia: Extremely creepy.

link to dailykos.com

The FBI consultant on the picture, Thomas Knowles, denies this happened.
############################################################
However, here's another part of the surveillance state story from historian Rick Pearlstein (link to thenation.com):

"We have been here before.

"In the fall of 1975, when a Senate select committee chaired by Frank Church and a House committee chaired by Otis Pike were investigating abuses of power by the CIA and FBI, Congresswoman Bella Abzug, the loaded pistol from New York (she had introduced a resolution to impeach Richard Nixon on her first day in office in 1971) dared turned her own House Subcommittee on Government Information and Individual Rights to a new subject: the National Security Agency, and two twin government surveillance projects she had learned about codenamed “SHAMROCK” and “MINARET.” They had monitored both the phone calls and telegrams of American citizens for decades.

"At the time, even political junkies did not know what the NSA was. “With a reputed budget of some $1.2 billion and a manpower roster far greater than the CIA,” the Associated Press explained, it had been “established in 1952 with a charter that is still classified as top secret.” (Is it still? I’d be interested to know.) President Ford had persuaded Frank Church not to hold hearings on the matter. (Ford had something in common with Obama: hypocrisy. “In all my public and private acts as your president, I expect to follow my instincts of openness and candor with full confidence that honesty is always the best policy in the end,” he’d said in his inaugural address, the one where he proclaimed, “Our long national nightmare is over.”) So Abzug proceeded on her own. At first, when she subpoenaed the executives responsible for going along with the programs the White House tried to prevent their testimony by claiming the private companies were “an agent of the United States.” When they did appear, they admitted their companies had voluntarily been turning over their full records of phone and telegram traffic to the government at the end of every single day, by courier, for over forty years, full stop. The NSA said the programs had been discontinued. Abzug claimed they still survived, just under different names. And at that, Church changed his mind: the contempt for the law here was so flagrant, he decided, he would initiate NSA hearings, too."

So, it seems that almost all communications have been monitored from the 1930s on, except for maybe a few minutes in the late 1970s when things got a little too hot and before Reagan's morning in America reinstalled the wiretaps.

[arthritisR_US]

290. Well, the standing joke within the NSA, since its inception, is that

it stands for No Such Agency...

[hrmjustin]

201. I can't help you on that answer.

You would have to ask those who said it is ok.

[Capt. Obvious]

3. I predict that I will not see a single :rofl: on this thread

Who's with me?

[mindwalker_i]

12. You know, this response seriously deservs a rofl

If I were to post one, it would seem petty, so I won't.

[Capt. Obvious]

15. I still wouldn't see it

Blocking the rofl guy has made DU more pleasant.

[QC]

20. Blocking that smiley would totally silence a number of DUers.

Hmmm, that's not a bad idea.

[mindwalker_i]

36. I'm afraid it would be replaced by 10,000 links

to previous posts that said the same thing ("see, I said so before&quot . The rofl is slightly easier to ignore.

[Capt. Obvious]

191. It's a great idea

On some threads it's just a string of blank posts

[mindwalker_i]

32. That's a really good idea

[Doctor_J]

206. with or without 20 blue links?

[Capt. Obvious]

207. I predict that I will not see that

[JackRiddler]

297. Wait, you can block posts with :rofl: ?

How? Please show me! Few indicators are as reliable in showing that a post is unbelievably stupid.

[Capt. Obvious]

301. Ad block the smiley

It makes some threads show a bunch of blank posts.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

4. I support both Greenwald and Snowden.

I support the ideals they espouse. Irrespective of anything else they do or say, I'll continue to support those ideals.

[Octafish]

49. What Voltaire believed.

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." His Biographer

What you said DisgustipatedinCA, and I, too, believe.

[Dwayne Hicks]

6. I do not support either

There are better ways of going about what he did. Instead he ran and he in Russia and makes outrageous and over exaggerated claims. IMO Snowden is a traitor.

[LoisB]

14. My two cents: I agree.

[Tikki]

29. Nor do I...

Tikki

[one_voice]

94. I agree with this.

[brush]

111. IMO he crossed over into sedition with . . .

divulging details of his own country's international covert operations.

I agree with exposing the domestic 4th amendment violations. I support that. He and Greenwald should have stopped there.

And what is with him admitting he was a spy? How does that help him — his actions with the international revelations seem to make him a double agent?

[dionysus]

117. nailed it.

[Dopers_Greed]

216. He didn't "admit he was a spy"

He said he was "trained" as a spy by the U.S. government.

[brush]

275. A very slight difference . . .

but still, how does that help him?

Talk about someone desperately in need of a good handler/advisor to counsel him on what to say and what not to say.

And it's already out of the bag but he needed that advisor when he choose to release clandestine details of covert international operations — not smart, and not likely to garner the support he gained (including mine) when he revealed the 4th amendment domestic violations of the NSA.

[whathehell]

277. Agreed. Revealing details of our international covert ops?

Where was the "patriotism" in that?

I'd love someone to explain that to me.

[brush]

284. Exactly. No patriotism in that. nt

[arthritisR_US]

139. When I saw was Holder did to Thomas Drake I can't say I blame

Snowden for running.

[Uncle Joe]

148. I would wager most people have either forgotten or never heard of Thomas Drake nor what he

was fighting against, the irony being because he stayed and fought.

On the other hand Snowden and in turn the NSA have stayed in the national spotlight front and center because he is abroad and an ongoing story.

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

In November 2005, Drake contacted Siobhan Gorman of The Baltimore Sun newspaper, sending her emails through Hushmail and discussing various topics.[9][22] He claims that he was very careful not to give her sensitive or classified information; it was one of the basic ground rules he set out at the beginning of their communication. This communication occurred around 2006.[34] Gorman wrote several articles about waste, fraud, and abuse at the NSA, including articles on Trailblazer. She received an award from the Society of Professional Journalists for her series exposing government wrongdoing.[9] Judge Richard Bennett later ruled that "there is no evidence that Reporter A relied upon any allegedly classified information found in Mr. Drake's house in her articles".[35]

2007 FBI raids[edit]In July 2007, armed FBI agents raided the homes of Roark, Binney, and Wiebe, the same people who had filed the complaint with the DoD Inspector General in 2002.[27] Binney claims they pointed guns at his wife and himself. Wiebe said it reminded him of the Soviet Union.[21] None of these people were charged with any crimes. In November 2007, there was a raid on Drake's residence. His computers, documents, and books were confiscated. He was never charged with giving any sensitive information to anyone; the charge actually brought against him is for 'retaining' information (18 U.S.C. § 793(e)).[20] The FBI tried to get Roark to testify against Drake; she refused.[21] Reporter Gorman was not contacted by the FBI.[15][22]

(snip)

In early June, shortly after the May 22, 2011 6 pm broadcast of a 60 Minutes episode on the Drake case, the government dropped all of the charges against Drake and agreed not to seek any jail time in return for Drake's agreement to plead guilty to a misdemeanor of misusing the agency’s computer system. Drake was sentenced to one year of probation and community service.

At the July sentencing hearing the presiding judge, Richard D. Bennett of the Federal District Court, issued harsh words for the government, saying that it was "unconscionable" to charge a defendant with a list of serious crimes that could have resulted in 35 years in prison only to drop all of the major charges on the eve of trial.[61] The judge also rejected the government's request for a large fine noting that Drake had been financially devastated, losing his $154,600 job at the NSA and his pension.

(snip)

In a September 2013 interview Drake re-affirmed his belief that the problems of the NSA are so chronic and systemic that the only solution would be to completely dismantle and subsequently rebuild the entire organization.[67]

[arthritisR_US]

155. He ended up having a public defender by that hearing because they had bankrupted

him. They had to drop all the charges because they knew they would lose in court and that the charges were bogus, they had framed him and knew it would be exposed. What he plead guilty to was one charge of unauthorized use of a government computer, a misdemeanour.

Loomis's life fell apart as did his marriage. What these poor buggers went through is despicable. Snowden had really looked into what had happened to all of these people and decided the government could have some other red meat, just not him and I can't say I blame him.

[Uncle Joe]

159. I believe past results must certainly be taken in to account

when considering Snowden's actions.

[arthritisR_US]

162. I used to be dead set against the little prick but after reading up on

what went down on others, it's not so black and white....

[JDPriestly]

144. He did not run to Russia. He went to Hong Kong. The US took away or cancelled his passport

and the only place that he could reach and that would take him in was Russia.

Here is a link to a news conference by some other NSA whistleblowers who used proper channels and were mercilessly harassed by our government. Binney and Tice are two of the whistleblowers. They suffered for going through proper channels.

http://new.livestream.com/accuracy/nsa-rebuttal/videos/39824993

Snowden was not the first. He was the first to come out with so much evidence, so many documents many of which will never be published.

[arthritisR_US]

161. Knowing what other whistleblowers have gone through and the utter

disgrace the laws are that are supposed to protect them, i.e., they are none existent or never enforced. When whistleblowers go up through the "proper" channels they are met with retributions, swift and sure. Snowden was well aware of what had happened to the NSA gang who were trying to rein in their wild west bosses and he figured out of country was the only way to go. I don't judge him for leaving at all.

No other country was willing to risk the wrath of the US other than Russia. I think Russia chose Snowden, not Snowden choosing Russia.

[MADem]

169. He ran to the Russian Consulate in Hong Kong BEFORE his passport was voided for

travel anywhere other than the US. And he stayed there for several days. Celebrated his birthday there.

I mean, come on.

He was never "stranded in Russia." To be truthful, he was "stranded in Hong Kong." However, his little buddy Assange somehow managed to nab him an "Ecuadorean travel document" (how tough was that to do, seeing as he's living in an Ecuadorean Embassy) and out he went to Moscow--not to Iceland, not to Somalia, but to MOSCOW--on that.

He could have stayed in Hong Kong--have to wonder why he didn't do that.

[Major Hogwash]

173. Not only that, but Putin knew Ed was going to the consulate in Hong Kong!

But, that fact doesn't mean anything to his fans.

[MADem]

174. Where there's smoke, there's fire, I'm thinkin'.... nt

[ancianita]

213. According to his Hong Kong legal team, he could not stay in Hong Kong.

Snowden, meanwhile, remained in hiding in Hong Kong. Some believe he was at an out-of-the-way house arranged by the three attorneys he had retained who now oversaw his fate: Albert Ho, a prominent local legislator and fixer; his young associate, Jonathan Man; and a canny Canadian-born specialist in extradition matters, Robert Tibbo. None will discuss their roles today, but their two-pronged strategy was clear to everyone in the burgeoning community of human-rights activists in Hong Kong. Behind the scenes, they needed to feel out government officials to see how Snowden’s situation was viewed. That would take time, so the trio’s top priority was rallying public support, to make it harder for the Chinese to hand over Snowden to the Americans. “The thinking was, if we could get some attention on the actual person, we could offer him some protection,” recalls Tom Grundy, a Hong Kong activist who became involved in the efforts to publicize Snowden’s situation. “We had to raise his profile. That way maybe he couldn’t just be ‘disappeared’ off the street, we thought.”

snip

By Friday, June 21, it was clear the situation was approaching an endgame. Snowden’s attorneys had made little headway with the Hong Kong government, which had held numerous internal meetings about the situation, without including Snowden’s lawyers. The problem, it turned out, was Albert Ho, who had long agitated for Hong Kong to enjoy a full and open democracy—the government didn’t trust him...

http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/2014/05/edward-snowden-politics-interview

[MADem]

269. Snowden’s attorneys had made little headway with the Hong Kong government

Of course they didn't, and of course they wouldn't. Putative "independence" from China notwithstanding, Hong Kong is a wholly owned subsidiary of Beijing when they want it to be, and Hong Kong KNOWS this. Beijing likely said "We're sending that little shit back to our largest trading partner, once we copy everything he has on him. Don't like it? Tough shit."

I don't think the problem was "Ho," though--it was Edward Snowden. The Chinese weren't in the mood to get in the shits with USA--they're approaching a housing bubble, a significant sector of their economy is about to go SPLOT, and they need all the friends and sources of income that they can get.

[KittyWampus]

212. Nonsense. Snowden could have gone ANYWHERES before Greenwald released the info. ANYWHERES.

[ancianita]

215. Not so. The US has re-routed planes of South American presidents.

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

[MADem]

270. Excuse me--that didn't happen until Snowden was in RUSSIA.

When he was in Hong Kong, he had a window of opportunity to dump and run.

Instead, he went to the Russian Consulate IN Hong Kong, and hung out there. For days.

Even had a birthday party.

[ancianita]

274. The point I was making was that he knew US capabilities in apprehending him. So no, he couldn't

have gone just anywhere, and that he already knew that without reference to the actual subsequent events that proved he was right.

[MADem]

280. He had weeks to get away from HK, had he so chosen to do that.

Why did he go to the Russian consulate in HK? Why did he go to HK at all, realistically, not listening to his lame protestations about their supposed independent views? If you read the VF article, you see that HK was taking direction from Beijing and they were ready to hand him over--I could have told him that before he left Honolulu. Same deal with his dream of running to Iceland--they had a change in government since the Number 2 Wiki guy was sheltered there; trade between USA and Iceland is Job One for that government; they're not going to cut off their nose to spite their face.

For a smart guy, he's not so smart when it comes to the nuts-and-bolts. I think his ego overtook his judgment, frankly.

[mike_c]

244. going ANYWHERES and receiving asylum there are two very different things....

Snowden had no claim for asylum anywhere until AFTER he became a target for arrest. Hong Kong is one of the few places on Earth he could avoid extradition while his asylum requests were considered.

But I believe you already know that.

[MADem]

283. That just is not accurate. If that were the case, why didn't he stay in HK?

Why isn't he still there, putting out feelers, trying to find someone who will take him on?

Answer--because Beijing TOLD HK that he'd be snatched up and sent home. China wasn't going to let their little +cough+ *independent* +cough+ enclave, Hong Kong, fuck up relations with their largest trading partner. It's one thing to play the "freedom loving enclave" game with rinky-dink countries, it's another thing entirely to screw with nations upon which one's economy depends.

[Number23]

153. But two DU push polls that got about 300 votes COMBINED say otherwise!

And those not even 300 votes represent the VAST MAJORITY of a web site with potentially thousands of users.

And dissent will not be accepted by the enforcers of dissent!

And, and...!!

[Luminous Animal]

160. Brilliant!

[Enthusiast]

193. I don't think there are viable alternatives to what Snowden did.

If he employed "better ways" you would never have heard from him and you never would have found out about the extent of governmental surveillance.

Snowden is no traitor. Traitors are the ones keeping the entire populace of the US under surveillance (in violation of the constitution) mostly to serve the interests of multinational corporations.

[riqster]

198. Agreed. But the information exposed is valuable.

I think they did the right thing in the wrong way.

[arthritisR_US]

291. I'm leaning in this direction. nt

[noiretextatique]

205. what is the better way?

WWYHD?

[ancianita]

211. Please enlighten us about those better ways. Seriously.

[LiberalLovinLug]

227. Oh for gawd's sake

better ways?

"...uh excuse me boss, but but I can see that my own government is lying to Americans about mass spying so I thought I'd bring my concerns to you."

"Ok thanks Ed, I'll look into it. Oh by the way, here's your pink slip."

[bvar22]

250. According to the interview last night,

Snowden did that numerous times
with the predicted results.

[merrily]

7. Does it matter?

[Maedhros]

8. There are some posters with reasonable criticisms of Snowden and Greenwald.

I will debate with those people.

But the empty vessels that pour out the "Snowdenz is TEH TRAYTERZ!!!" nonsense? Straight to the ignore list.

[mindwalker_i]

10. "If OUR president does it, it means it's not a crime"

Unfortunately, that's what it comes down to. I hated Bush for torture, among other things, and still get pissed off at people who defend him no matter what. What he did with the "national security" apparatus was terrible and damaging to this democracy, and continuing those policies (or expanding them) is also terrible. If our "team" does this crap, they should be called on it. Rather than get mad at us for hurting the election chances for Democrats, maybe they should get mad at the people for doing those things.

[Autumn]

13. I just don't bother going into their OPs,

we all know what they have to say. So I figure why waste my time reading their opinions. Trying to change their mind is a waste of time. I say if you support Snowden and Greenwald stay out and don't bother them.

[L0oniX]

18. *** they're heroes.

[stupidicus]

22. and those that don't are traitors to privacy

period.

The only good reason to respond to them is to express the disdain we share -- mine for them and theirs for GG/Snowden.

[zeemike]

48. Or more accurately, the constitution.

Because it is that document that codified that right...and which has been and is being violated

[stupidicus]

54. that's a valid point

but it's something we've historically cherished and something that has served to differentiate between a preferred gov and one not.

It's hard to imagine how Jefferson's tree of liberty could ever be fertilized without it.

I've long been convinced that all the NSA stuff is more about keeping tabs on internal threats to the powers that be than those "terrorists" who provide them cause for more erosions to things like privacy.

[zeemike]

56. And I am convinced of that too.

Information on people is power and they have found the holey grail of that with the NSA program.

[randome]

58. So if you think the NSA, which is forbidden by law from spying on citizens...

...is violating that law, you must be scared to death of the FBI! And the CIA. And DHS. And your local police department.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Where do uncaptured mouse clicks go?[/center][/font][hr]

[JDPriestly]

149. I am thinking this may be true:

"he NSA stuff is more about keeping tabs on internal threats to the powers that be than those "terrorists" who provide them cause for more erosions to things like privacy."

[WillyT]

69. But The Constitution Is "Just A God-Damned Piece Of Paper" Don'tcha Know ???

Sounded right... from the right.

[sulphurdunn]

23. The name of the game

is to shine the light on something or someone else, misdirect and manager the perceptions of the peasants away from the rulers and into animus for one another. That's how it has always been

[RufusTFirefly]

34. Bingo! I call 'em "Distractivists". n/t

[dreamnightwind]

177. Great word, I'll try to remember it. n/t

[Enthusiast]

194. Oh, there's a fucking army of paid Distractivists.

Paid by tax payers too. They infest the web from one end to the other.

[Soylent Brice]

186. lol

[grasswire]

24. the critics are indeed wasting their time

No minds on DU will be changed by smears and insinuations regarding Greenwald and Snowden. Especially disgusting today were insinuations that Snowden (because of a long-ago seizure disorder) might suffer "psychiatric" issues or alcoholism.

The critics of Snowden/Greenwald have little interest in discussing the issues related to a surveillance state or an administration that promised transparency but has delivered more secrets.

[Curmudgeoness]

25. Put me down in that 80-90%.

Wow, I am amazed that I am not in the usual minority. I love DU.

But I am not going to get into any of those discussions where all the "traitor" language is being thrown around.

[Uncle Joe]

26. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, MannyGoldstein.

[Puzzledtraveller]

27. Well, working from home has so many benefits.

[RufusTFirefly]

28. K&R. This is why I sometimes feel nostalgic for unrec

...and why I support a none-of-the-above option in elections.

I think the presence of those threads and the election of some candidates falsely convey the impression of widespread approval or support.

I think you're right, Manny. Unfortunately, those few who don't support Snowden and Greenwald's actions receive disproportionate representation. It's a bit like doing a show on climate change and inviting a climate change denier as one of the guests. Viewers at home get the idea that the opinions are evenly divided.

They aren't.

Thanks for making this clear and for reminding us.

[spanone]

30. only if the vast majority of du'ers voted in your 2 polls...

[Cryptoad]

41. That Papa Paul Math is bugger

when it comes to stats...heh?

[zeemike]

55. Do the vast majority of voters vote in polls?

and yet if Gallup polls 2000 of the hundred million we buy it right away...why is that?

[dionysus]

105. yeah, i never knew a few polls with less that 170 responses spoke for the "vast majority" of DU...

[sheshe2]

121. Yikes! That many?! Thanks for the awesome update dionysus.

Power to the 170 that responded...



I probably should not be posting a I read someone here got 2 hides in 24 hours for doing just that. Seriously, they did. The smilies seem to be forbidden here. They are so hate filled.

[MannyGoldstein]

123. But not nearly so hate-filled as "etc."

Yes?

[sheshe2]

125. Well~

You just can't let that go can you Manny~
Yes you are so great at etc etc etc. Bothers you does it not? You are posting it all over DU! Cool!

Keep highlighting your posts Manny....etc~

Women...gays~ etc~

Nightly night~

[Number23]

158. I just got a hide for saying I couldn't believe that people still read the posts from a person here

whose posts consist 90% of the time of a noun, a verb and PROPAGANDA!!1 Apparently commenting on the quality of someone's POSTS is now a personal attack if that person belongs to the anti Obama/Dem crew running Democrats from this site in droves.

And the fact that I'm sure that alert came from someone that keeps following me around like a diseased pup (when he's not openly and proudly haranguing other black posters here) when I've repeatedly asked him to leave me alone just makes it all the more stupid.

I read someone here got 2 hides in 24 hours for doing just that.

Soon, anyone that disagrees with the squatters that own GD will be shown the door. And when that happens, they'll probably open a bottle of red, watch their blood pressure go down and wonder why the fuck they didn't leave sooner.

[Warren Stupidity]

188. And of course somebody alerted on this too.

On Thu May 29, 2014, 07:41 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

I just got a hide for saying I couldn't believe that people still read the posts from a person here
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5017049

REASON FOR ALERT

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

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Lots of ugly attacks on jurors and other fellow DUers here. This kind of constant negativity and ad hom makes DU suck.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Thu May 29, 2014, 07:49 AM, and the Jury voted 2-5 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Apparently this poster didn't learn from the first hide.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Which jurors were attacked? Which DU'ers were attacked? It appears a somewhat contentious post, in a contentious thread was alerted on. I look at the context of a post when asked to serve on a jury.
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: seems more like a vent than an attack

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

[MADem]

259. I have a recommendation for you, you can take or leave it as you'd like.

That alert is clearly a "targeted" one. It's not about the post, because there's not a damn thing wrong with that, it's about the alerter's attitude towards the POSTER. I would "alert" on those jury results and ask the admins to put that alerter on their radar. They won't "do" anything about it, necessarily, but it will add to their level of awareness when dealing with that person in future.

That kind of conduct "makes DU suck." Talk about a bogus alert!!!

[Number23]

273. MAD, that's excellent advice but you know as well as I do that it won't do a thing

Until the admins get more involved in their site and try to do something about the anti-Dem idiocy that goes around here non-stop, you know as well as I do that we have targets on our backs.

All we can do is be thankful that the caliber of the folks doing the targeting ain't all that great. If they fun us off, if we stay, it won't make a bit of difference. DU has become irrelevant to the Dem party and that's just the way some folks like it.

[Number23]

271. Thanks for the heads up. Love that I was supposed to "learn" something from that first

hide as if it had some deep and profound meaning other than that five jurors believe that the posts of certain people here are not to be criticized.

I'm such a bad girl.

[Warren Stupidity]

272. I don't like alert stalking no matter who is doing it or who is the recipient.

It is just sneaky and underhanded.

[sheshe2]

199. Sadly I am not surprised...

And ouch...I see that someone alerted on you again, for this. So sorry Number23.

The hides I was talking about was a HoF member and you are not only a woman you do it while black. Do you sense a pattern here?! Women and PoC.

Rather fragile fee fees.

[sabrina 1]

133. I never knew that a few polls with less the 50 responses spoke for ANYONE, let alone

the vast majority of DU. Democrats generally support Whistle Blowers and Journalists so it should not be surprising that this Democratic Forum supports Whistle Blower Snowden and Journalist Glenn Greenwald.

[dionysus]

294. Glenn isn't as much of a journalist as he is an editorialist, IMHO, and a sheer opportunist to boot.

had Snowden limited himself to exposing NSA activities against Americans only, i'd consider him more or less a whistleblower.

but by telling other countries about US intelligence methods, and very possibly handing over materials, he's walking the traitor tightrope big time. Chelsea Manning had the courage and integrity to face the music, Snowden ran away like a wimp.

[JDPriestly]

151. 170 is a large number of responses to a DU poll.

You have to be on DU at the right time and see the OP with the poll.

[Electric Monk]

278. Plus or minus 5%, 19 times out of 20.

[ProSense]

31. So you must too!

"Enough"

Lockstep by poll!

[MADem]

37. Manny being Manny....

He's happiest when he's dividing.

Another "With me or against me" OP.

[Whisp]

60. We know who Snowden is with...

[URL=.html][IMG][/IMG][/URL]

[Comrade Grumpy]

68. Really? Are we back in 7th grade now?

[Whisp]

72. oh, you got held back a couple years? sorry about that. n/t

[randome]

73. Well, considering that Snowden flunked out of high school and had to get a GED...

...maybe 7th grade level is appropriate.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Where do uncaptured mouse clicks go?[/center][/font][hr]

[MrMickeysMom]

107. You know what they say..

Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and to remove all doubt.

[Mojorabbit]

120. Wow, that was low even for you. nt

[MADem]

99. I wonder if GG delivered ES a check--after all, GG fenced the goods that ES stole.

It's only fair that they divvy up the proceeds....

[dionysus]

106. i highly doubt it. nt

[MADem]

109. He looks like he's living well. Moscow is a Very Expensive City.

Someone's paying his bills, buying him suits, getting him high end haircuts...

[dionysus]

116. most likely his russian handlers...

[jberryhill]

128. They gave him a job at a school book depository

[Whisp]

131. hee hee.

[JDPriestly]

145. Didn't we read that Snowden has a job in Russia working on their version of Facebook?

[MADem]

168. I understand that job offer was withdrawn.

You tell me what kind of work a guy who doesn't speak Russian--as Snowden acknowledged to Brian Williams this evening--can get in Russia.

He's spending his days watching TV on the computer. He's through season 2 of THE WIRE...

I think he's bored out of his skull, and I think he's starting to realize he made a HUGE mistake. This was his attempt to rapproche, but he came off like a hubris-laden blowhard. He is a long, long way from admitting that his strategy to effect change (assuming he was sincere) was boneheaded, and his tactics a total failure.

[CanSocDem]

200. Project much...??? (eom)

[MADem]

261. It's called "drawing a logical conclusion," not projecting, but thanks for playing.

He told Brian Williams he didn't speak Russian and he was into the 2nd season of THE WIRE. Do follow along.

Now, you take those facts, along with the others that ES provided in his interview (highlights: he misses his family, he misses his friends, the workers at NSA are being demonized unfairly, he wants to come home, etc.) , and draw your own conclusions. Then, once you do that, I can petulantly accuse you of "projecting" as well. Of course, I won't do that, because that would be a silly and childish course of action.

[SidDithers]

248. +1...nt

Sid

[Blanks]

251. If he's as smart as I'm told that he is...

He'd be speaking Russian by now.

What else does he have to do? If I were in Russia, that's what I'd be doing.

[MADem]

254. He told Brian Williams he doesn't speak Russian.

It's a hard language. I took it years ago; I can still read it, but I cannot speak it to save my life. I'm at the "I remember a few words" level.

[Blanks]

260. Still, if you were in Russia with nothing better to do...

Wouldn't that seem like a worthwhile thing to do? I spent 3 years in Germany, I spoke a little German, but I spent most of my time on the army post around other Americans. If I'd been immersed in it, I'm sure learning it wouldn't be hard to learn.

I think the fact that he doesn't speak Russian tells us a lot about him. Perhaps he doesn't like to take on difficult challenges.

[MADem]

264. That KGB friend of Putin's, who is now his lawyer (gee, what a coincidence), gave him

some Russian language material--either a book or Rosetta Stone, don't remember which.

It is a hard language, but it doesn't take a horrible amount of work to be able to communicate simply. If it were me, I'd have my nose in a newspaper every day, translating the short articles, and I'd have the TV on constantly and try to talk to people and have them correct me--I do the hear/talk/read learning thing well.

Of course, nowadays, there are translator apps available so you can have an interpreter in your pocket, in essence. I sometimes wonder if I would have taken the effort to learn the languages I did learn, had such a thing been available to me when I was in need of being able to speak another tongue. I used to think the "pocket dictionary" -- which was fairly complete, with small print, about the size of a pack of cigarettes, for foreign languages was a gift from the gods. I've got quite a few of 'em that are very well thumbed.

As for ES, he called himself an "indoor cat." He probably spends most of his days farting around on the computer. Nothing wrong with that, but if he's used to actually "working" and interacting with fellow employees, maybe competing with them a bit, he's gotta be bored out of his skull.

[George II]

302. I wonder if they're paying him a flat rate or per leaked-document?

[sheshe2]

126. No no no no no!

Remember...we are not allowed to use initials here! The gods have spoken. We are homophobic when we do this!

We are bad people. Spoken from a person who has been called by her initials her whole life. That's me MADem!

My parents must hate me! As do my nieces and nephews et all.

[MADem]

130. That accusation has been roundly debunked, and ah hepped!!!

If you go to page six of the accuser's own journal, you'll see the accuser using the GG term--in a subject headline, no less!!!

Talk about hypocrisy!

I guess we can safely GG GG GG.....all the way home!!!!

[sheshe2]

136. Thank you Gawd!

I can now proceed to be called by my nick name...my initials without any repercussions.

Sigh~

I feel so much better now knowing my family loved me and never hated me.

Thanks MADem!

[MADem]

137. We will have to get together for some Shake-n-Bake real soon, and call each other by our

initials while we prepare it!!!

[sheshe2]

140. Sounds good to me!

Will next week work for you?

[MADem]

142. Only if ah kin hep!!!!!

[JDPriestly]

157. MADem, do you really think it is OK for the NSA, the executive branch, to collect all of our

metadata?

If so, why?

I'm asking you these questions because I think you are when all is said and done a pretty intelligent person and I don't understand how you can agree with the NSA surveillance.

I'd like to lift the discussion beyond the three-year-old level. I really don't understand why people think it's OK for the government to grab all our metadata. As I have said, I used to work for the phone company. I've seen metadata. I've seen how it can be used in civil and criminal law. The Maryland case dealt with a very specific instance in which metadata was obtained from a phone company to help solve a specific crime. I don't understand how you can think it is OK for the government to grab so much, such a vast amount of data, analyze it, group it and study the networking of millions of Americans. Why would they want to do that? I can think of only one reason: to understand and acquire ways to control political dissidents. Not terrorists. Just dissidents. People with new or different political ideas.

If they were on the lookout for terrorists, they could get warrants. They are looking for broad groupings of people, not for small terrorist cells. Terrorism is not commonplace in the US. Americans are not in rebellion.

For small terrorist groups, they could get warrants.

Please explain your view. Why do you think the government wants and should have our metadata? Do you think the government is collecting the content of our calls, e-mails, etc.?

Why are they spending so much money on electronic surveillance of Americans? It does not prevent the mass shootings. It doesn't help law enforcement. We are already checked out when we get into a plane. Why is this being done?

[MADem]

166. I think that what Snowden did--when he had options--was reprehensible.

He could have gone to any one of a dozen members of the Senate Intel Committee, including his pal Rand Paul, and asked for closed session. Now what's happening is GG is fencing the goods stolen by ES, and that sucks. He's telegraphing capabilities as well as sources and methods, and I can't help but notice that he has nothing to say about the Russians. Surely he scooped up some of their stuff too.

We know Assange was sitting on a bunch of Russian intel he was going to release, and then--suddenly--he changed his mind.

And who helped Snowden into Russia? Why, Assange's old "main squeeze," his ex-lover. Gee, nothing odd about that *cough*horseshit*!

If he could really do all the hacking he claimed, all he'd have to do is ask Rand Paul "So, did the blow up doll you ordered from ToyzRFun arrive, and I see you've got a hair club for men appointment at two thirty, and did you read that classified material that was sent to you on the secure server about Dubai?" to make it clear he could hack his shit (if he could).

Now he's claiming he was a spy. Not a contractor, with a degree of separation, but a spy, an employee who signed very specific agreements in terms of his conduct and disclosure that last for frigging ever, even if he subsequently left "spy" service. If he was an actual spy, the idiot is basically telling us that he is, indeed, one of those traitors.

Frankly, I think if he was a "spy" that was a title given him by Putin's crew.

I think his hubris still has center stage, but I think he sees his future in Russia and it sucks. I don't think he sleeps well at night, I think he wishes he'd never been such an idiot and done what he did. Thing is, though, he's such a blowhard he can't just speak frankly. He's got to be The Smartest Guy In The Room. And he's not--he's over his head, and he fucked up.

The idea behind the meta data isn't to prevent mass shootings--unless you want the US police to be able to access that pile of material (and they can't). The purpose is to keep nutcases from abroad from bombing us. Of course, now that Snowden has given them the playbook, you can be sure they'll be more cautious in their communication methodologies. And a warrant doesn't do any good unless you have a haystack to look in. You can't spot connections that go back in time unless you have a record of them.

I don't object to Snowden taking issue with how things are done. What I do take issue with is his going to our adversaries and giving them the keys to the treasure house in a fit of pique. There was absolutely NO need to do what he did, and the only reason I can suss out is that he thinks he's smarter than the average bear. In actual fact, he's Boo Boo to Putin's Yogi, and he's stuck in Russia's version of Jellystone Park for the foreseeable future, unless he's willing to suck it up and do time in Club Fed.

If I were Brian Williams (whose bags "went missing" enroute to Moscow, and were only delivered a few hours before that interview started) I'd have dumped the damn bag and all of its contents. Every single thing. Those Russians aren't amateurs either.

[JDPriestly]

285. I might agree with you if your assumption that a whistleblower can find

a helpful audience in the Congress or elsewhere were true.

But the experiences described by previous whistleblowers negates your underlying premise -- which is that there was an alternative for Snowden.

Here is (or at least was) a press conference given by some of those who tried before Snowden to warn Americans about the excesses of the NSA (and possibly other agencies') surveillance.

http://new.livestream.com/accuracy/nsa-rebuttal/videos/39824993

One member of the Senate oversight committee tried to get the NSA to admit to its snooping on the private communications of Americans. He was not successful in alerting us to the excesses until Snowden came forward with documents. The order to Verizon shocked me. I will explain to you why in a private DU e-mail.

The record of our government with regard to punishing whistleblowers is appalling. Remember. A whistleblower who disclosed information about Cheney and Bush's torture program, which was probably criminal under international law if our views during WWII still apply, is serving a prison sentence right now.

[MADem]

288. Snowden had--so he insists--capabilities that other whistleblowers did not have.

If you don't think he couldn't have waltzed into Feinstein's office and told her "You're being spied on, I can prove it" and then did just that, that she wouldn't give him more than a hearing, but she would have gone on a rampage, and used every fiber of her being to protect him, I don't know what to tell you.

You do know that anything a Senator says on the Senate floor is pretty much protected speech? People seem to forget that. This whole nonsense about not being able to talk about stuff is just not supported.

If Snowden actually had "the goods," he could have gotten help. It's becoming obvious that he didn't try very hard to go through channels--he couldn't even be bothered to put his concerns in writing, and get replies to them, from his superiors.

Again, if he coughs up the emails he sent, and the names of the people to whom he sent them, I'll revise my view. But to not put concerns in writing is Amateur Hour.

It makes his claims of being the Knight in Shining Armor appear less likely, not more. More and more, I'm starting to think this is more about his EGO and how HE thinks things should be done, and less about his efforts to work within the system to make change.

What Snowden is doing, I think, is mixing truth with fiction, overstating his importance and capabilities, and flat-out prevaricating about the steps he took to intervene in what he thought was a troublesome set of practices by NSA and the rest of the intel community.

If he really complained to superiors, where are his copies of the letters of complaint? Where are the emails expressing his concerns? This guy isn't a child--he's a thirty year old adult who told Brian Williams that he was a "spy"--surely he knows that verbal orders don't "go" when you're trying to nail down an issue of legality?

[woo me with science]

268. Well, you gave it a try, anyway.

It was a very clear request, met with more diversionary Snowden-smear.

[sheshe2]

197. Well of course you can~ nt

[freshwest]

292. She's gonna get a vaca one of these days... Send pix of the fried chicken.

Don't forget the salad and strawberry shortcake:



Wait, that's not food...

[freshwest]

289. How ironic. I've been downloading chicken recipers for BTA today... n/t

[LiberalLovinLug]

233. And you have to photoshop GG head on someone elses body to make you childish smear?

If you're going to all that trouble why stop there? You could have used the head of Putin, or what the hell, Hitler!

I will do the honor of posting the original photo of Snowden with Hans-Christian Ströbele, who co-founded the "Alternative List for Democracy and Environmental Protection," a predecessor to the Berlin chapter of the Greens. He has always been a champion of the left. He is now a Green member of parliament.

[Whisp]

236. Hitler wasn't available but Omidyar was:

[URL=.html][IMG][/IMG][/URL]

[LiberalLovinLug]

240. Oh, I guess Hitler would be on your side, sorry

and you support an authoritarian secret Stasi police state. Tit for tat if I stoop to your juvenile level.

Oh, and Ron Paul was also against the Iraq war and the war on drugs...so I guess by your math, it means you have opposite views right? Someone with a few libertarian views must be always be wrong about anything else.

Must be nice and easy to go through life with such a black and white view:

[Whisp]

242. RON PAUL ROCKS!!! so much I had to add him to the family:

[URL=.html][IMG][/IMG][/URL]

[LiberalLovinLug]

245. So... black and white it is...

[Whisp]

246. Are you calling God stupid?

Or you think my opinions of the Libertarian Boys is stupid, and you are with me on that?

Hmmm. Yu are certainly an interesting feller or gal.

[LiberalLovinLug]

247. God? I'll leave her out of it

But for the record. IMO Libertarians generally are selfish, unrealistic and idiotic.

But if a Libertarian jumped in and saved me from being run over by a bus, I'd thank him or her. What I wouldn't do is, once I found out they held a few Libertarian views, is scream at them to get away from me and call them stupid.

[Whisp]

249. If one saved me from being run over by a bus

I would be grateful but I wouldn't feel obligated to adopt their selfish and idiotic ways.

I'm taking it that you think Snowden kept Americans from slipping under the bus with his actions and shouldn't be questioned because what he says HAS to be true even though their are holes the size of Mac trucks in his and GG's stories?

Nope.

[MADem]

300. ha ha!

You know GG has to love that PS--he's TALLER than ES in that pic!

[dionysus]

101. two polls.. each with less than 175 votes.. DU clearly has spoken....

[fbc]

33. It's probably just Obama support

These same people would probably support the exposure of illegal activities if there was a republican in office.

[liberal N proud]

35. For some reason we occasionally are strongarmed to some members views

And not allowed to develop our own opinions.

I will not tow the line, sorry.

[perdita9]

38. I'm in the minority and have no intention of shutting up

So deal with it. I don't trust Snowden's motives or his actions.

[struggle4progress]

39. The Non-Conformist Oath

[Cryptoad]

40. I heard Comrade Snowden's new Beach House

in Crimea is now ready for him to move in,,,,

[blue neen]

42. DU only has 151 members?

(according to the first linked poll).

Wow, I thought there were a lot more DU'ers than that. Huh. You learn something new everyday.

[ProSense]

57. The "vast majority of DU"

"Wow, I thought there were a lot more DU'ers than that. Huh. You learn something new everyday."

...believe President Obama is a progressive: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024973535

Vast majority!!!

[randome]

43. "I am not here to hide from justice." Said from his undisclosed location in Hong Kong.

"It's like a fireworks display." Greenwald says.

These 'geniuses' thought PRISM was a way for the NSA to download the Internet on a daily basis.

There is a reason China didn't want him and even the Wikileaks attorneys don't want him. http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002310173

Reasonable minds might see there is more than one facet to this affair.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Where do uncaptured mouse clicks go?[/center][/font][hr]

[ProSense]

44. Snowden

wants to come home: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025015322

[Trust Buster]

45. Snowden is a traitor of the highest order IMO.

Corporate America invades your privacy daily in a much more aggressive way and they do it solely for reasons of profit.

[MrMickeysMom]

112. That statement's got to be a mile wide and an inch thick

… an not based on real homework and over-simplification of "corporatism".

[JDPriestly]

147. But corporate America is not bound by the Constitution to respect your rights.

We can pass a law that would prohibit corporate America from invading our privacy if we want to. Might be a good idea. I think that corporate America should have to get our consent before they use any of our private information. I'm not on Facebook or Linked In or any of those sites because I do value my privacy. I joined a few knitting sites. That's about it.

I value my privacy. The Fourth Amendment is very clear. Here it is:

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

http://constitution.findlaw.com/amendment4/amendment.html

It prohibits the government from violating our right to privacy. It is very clear.

Collecting our metadata and analyzing it with powerful computers is a violation of our right to be secure in our persons, houses, papers and effects.

The Fourth Amendment is quite clear. Of course, the Founding Fathers did not have computers or telephones so we have to apply it to the technology of our time. Houses, papers and effects --- it isn't just about your house. It is also about our writings and the things we own. It applies also to our telephone calls. The old decision that held that law enforcement could, in the course of an investigation, obtain our pen registers, the lists of phone numbers with which we communicated, would I think be distinguished from what the NSA is doing on a massive basis today.

Lose your Fourth Amendment right to privacy and you have lost nearly all the other rights you have under our Bill of Rights.

[frylock]

231. solely for reasons of profit and not imprisonment

[Logical]

256. Bullshit! nt

[DisgustipatedinCA]

295. Strictly out of curiosity, would you please name some traitors of 2nd & 3rd highest orders?

[randome]

46. I'm watching 'Rushmore' with my daughters this evening.

It makes this eternal DU squabbling seem like a grain of sand on the beach. Why can't we focus on positive things? The things we mostly agree on? Does it always need to be a 'fight of the week' on DU?

Are our dreams and aspirations so small?
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Where do uncaptured mouse clicks go?[/center][/font][hr]

[dionysus]

296. awesome choice of film.

[ucrdem]

47. Possibly in a moment's kindness Manny they flattered you in a poll.

Let's not hold it against them.

[Jake2413]

50. I vote for the Presidential Medal of Freedom for Snowden

[Android3.14]

51. Unfortunately, on DU we mistake number of posts with member population

I know that everyone understands the difference, but I think the observation is still valid.
There is a group who have enormous amounts of free(?) time to boost their posting numbers. In the isolation of the typical computer user, these examples of weak principle and sloppy rhetoric appear to represent a larger crowd than is actual for the simple reason that they somehow have the ability to post something along the lines of 30 messages a day, 24-7, including holidays for the past decade or longer.
We make the mistake of offering respect for high posting numbers. What do you think of people who spend their days on Facebook and other social media, whittling away their 22,000 days of existence "liking" and posting their endless streams of pap? I feel mostly pity.
The same is true for our super-duper posters.
Sure, people who participate more in this community will have a greater number of posts, and that is usually a great way to evaluate the robust nature of an online community, or any other community for that matter. However, I believe that super-high posting numbers are a symptom of an actual emotional/behavior problem such as codependency.
Consider a church community. A healthy church community has people participating and attending services regularly. Members of the church gain social status by committing time to doing church stuff. But what of the person who attends service every day and all day, obsessively spouts dogma at the slightest prompt, and shrilly attacks anyone who questions church teachings?
I certainly wouldn't consider that person a reliable source for anything.
There would be similar cognates for any community, from a college fraternity to the chess club to the Little League Baseball Boosters.
The obsessive posting from this oddly isolated group on DU is something like addiction, but it is also about coveting a perception of respect from a community because of a lack of self esteem within their own psyche.
Either that or they are just sock puppets intent on spreading discord, manipulating propaganda messages and promoting the MIC.

[carolinayellowdog]

82. "obsessive posting from this oddly isolated group on DU is something like addiction"

The obsessive posting from this oddly isolated group on DU is something like addiction, but it is also about coveting a perception of respect from a community because of a lack of self esteem within their own psyche.
Either that or they are just sock puppets intent on spreading discord, manipulating propaganda messages and promoting the MIC.

As easy as it to adopt the second scenario of insincere sock-puppetry, I think that most of these people are sincere authoritarians. There is a veneer of authoritarian sadism, and some of their "leaders" are nonstop sadists expressing nonstop scorn for their DU "inferiors," but the essence is authoritarian masochism submitting to their "superiors." KISS UP KICK DOWN is the motto. As described by Erich Fromm in 1957:

The passive-authoritarian, or in other words, the masochistic and submissive character aims — at least subconsciously — to become a part of a larger unit, a pendant, a particle, at least a small one, of this “great” person, this “great” institution, or this “great” idea. The person, institution, or idea may actually be significant, powerful, or just incredibly inflated by the individual believing in them. What is necessary, is that — in a subjective manner — the individual is convinced that “his” leader, party, state, or idea is all-powerful and supreme, that he himself is strong and great, that he is a part of something “greater.” The paradox of this passive form of the authoritarian character is: the individual belittles himself so that he can — as part of something greater — become great himself. The individual wants to receive commands, so that he does not have the necessity to make decisions and carry responsibility. This masochistic individual looking for dependency is in his depth frightened -often only subconsciously — a feeling of inferiority, powerlessness, aloneness. Because of this, he is looking for the “leader,” the great power, to feel safe and protected through participation and to overcome his own inferiority. Subconsciously, he feels his own powerlessness and needs the leader to control this feeling. This masochistic and submissive individual, who fears freedom and escapes into idolatry, is the person on which the authoritarian systems — Nazism and Stalinism — rest.

If it weren't the Democratic Party and Obama that are idealized as above reproach, it would be some other authority structure and authority figure.

[Android3.14]

90. That seems a better description than mine

My Sense is that most of our "obsessive posters from this oddly isolated group" are the masochistic submissive flunkies who would pave the way for the worst human tragedies.
I wish there was a way to fix them, besides ignore, so they were less annoying and defusing their potential to usher in atavistic affronts to human dignity.

[msanthrope]

52. Hey Manny....the last time I was in a minority like that, it was 9/12. I didn't support Bush. So

being in the minority doesn't scare me.

[rury]

53. I am firmly in the minority here at DU because

I do not support the actions of Greenwald and Snowden.

[msanthrope]

61. Yes, Whisp, ENOUGH!!!!

You're killing me with your graphics!!!

[Whisp]

62. I moved it to #60.

better use those rofls up before they become illegal for everyone.

[msanthrope]

63. Apparently there's a movement to ban the popcorn smilie as well. Shall we do

a live thread of the interview???

[Number23]

164. These folks cry so hard over the rofl smiley because they know they're jokes

I keep being reminded of Otto from A Fish Called Wanda. The stupidest thing on dry land (and he secretly knew it) so what was the ONE thing you could say to him that was guaranteed to send him off the deep end? Yep. Calling him what he was.

[WillyT]

64. Yes We Do...

& Rec !!!

[bobduca]

65. K&R

Its the same 5-10 personas as three months ago, I've not added any to ignore since then and I can't see any of the usual phallacy-flinging NSA-defenders.

[albino65]

66. Yeah, a vast majority of maybe 170 people. Incredible! n/t

[msanthrope]

67. Don't bring Math into this!!! That means you support the NSA. nt

[WillyT]

71. You Haven't Been Here Long Enough To "Know" The Math...

Sorry.

[Logical]

257. A good sample! Get sampling? nt

[cantbeserious]

70. Thank You Snowden, Thank You Greenwald, Thank You Manny

eom

[RufusTFirefly]

74. Why did the Post and the Guardian win a Pulitzer for Public Service?

Could it be that public service is now considered treasonous by some of our colleagues?

Sure seems that way.

Here you go, Pulitzer committee. Under the bus with you.

[randome]

78. Why did Obama win a Nobel before he even had a chance to be President?

Political prizes are as much about public relations and fashion as anything else.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Where do uncaptured mouse clicks go?[/center][/font][hr]

[bobduca]

84. because

Pulitzer prizes are routinely handed out to news organizations for publishing stuff we all already knew!

[Blecht]

76. That's what the ignore function is for

I no longer see these people you mention.

[randome]

77. What? I can't hear you! Speak up!

[hr][font color="blue"][center]Where do uncaptured mouse clicks go?[/center][/font][hr]

[Ed Suspicious]

79. The participants in the survey are self selected so that may skew results, but I think your point

is legit.

[carolinayellowdog]

80. therefore the vast majority must be drowned out by the desperate minority

the median post count of the anti-privacy crusaders must be 10x that of the mainstream DUers who are being portrayed as the fringe... by the fringe

[Raine1967]

81. Another possibility:

Many DU members choose not to get into these pissing matching that force people to take sides.

You made a very big assumption here, Manny. Your first poll consisted of 148 votes.

Your second consisted of 175 votes.

Compare that to the amount of people on this site that did not vote. I would hardly consider that a vast majority of DU members.

Third Way Manny might approve of this push type poll, I'm surprised you do.

[String Fiesta]

83. As a Liberal I love the federal government.

And there's no wrong as far as I can see.

La la la la

[woo me with science]

85. He exposed massive criminality by our government. As a result, he is the target of smear campaigns.

Above all, the incessant propagandizing on this topic, the relentless smears and lies and disruption, demonstrate how sick and corrupt and authoritarian our govenment and its political messengers really have become.

This is the kind of behavior we associate with totalitarian states trying to destroy an enemy they cannot reach, not political institutions in the United States of America.

Of course the majority of DU supports what he did. And the majority of DU understands the smearing, clownish diversion for exactly what it is: a desperate attempt to divert from the criminality and egregious abuses of power being revealed.

[bobduca]

86. "smearing clowns have no credibility whatsoever."

who needs credibility when you have a safe haven?

[woo me with science]

88. Credibility doesn't matter a whit. It's all about getting the smear and diversion out there.

Brazen lies and vicious smears, and when called on them, they just move on.

I don't know how any adult chooses to be complicit in this type of political activity. It is incompatible with conscience and human decency. This smearing of human beings to defend criminal abuse of power, a governmental corruption that is dismantling this country's democratic foundations and assisting those driving millions into poverty and despair, is a base, disreputable occupation, IMO among the lowest of the low.

[Enthusiast]

196. +1 a whole fucking bunch.

[GoneFishin]

87. I support both of their actions. The character attacks tell me much more about the

attackers than about Snowden and Greenwald. I don't care if they dated pole dancing boxers or have garages full of strippers. I don't care. Those are pathetic and transparent attempts to impune their characters because they cannot effectively shut down the messages they deliver.

I hope they dribble this stuff out slowly and keep it out front for how ever long it takes for every person with two brain cells to rub together to realize just how far we have fallen down the rabbit hole.

I think they are geniuses for releasing the information slowly so the constitution violators have to keep recalibrating their cover stories over, and over, and over again until they look like a preschooler who can't keep his lies straight.

[cantbeserious]

118. + 100

eom

[TheKentuckian]

178. Fuckin A!

Beam them between the eyes with a 2x4 for however long it takes for dumb motherfuckers to see clearly and then and only then can a government that serves the people can actually be employed to bring to heel the tentacles of this particular octopus, the communications corporations.

Right now our "cop on the beat" is too compromised and crooked to function in such a fashion and it is very difficult to tell at times where one ends and the other begins with the capture, revolving doors, and the same players from tight circles.

[madfloridian]

89. Yes, they do.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024994264

[brooklynite]

91. I never knew DU was so small.....

Seriously? 148 votes is your evidence for "80-90%" support?

[dionysus]

108. in purposefully misleading-land it is...

[ProSense]

92. Check in if you Support President Barack Hussein Obama

Check in if you Support President Barack Hussein Obama
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024536564

"Vast majority."

[bobduca]

95. Missed Opportunity!

you really should have re-kicked this on Loyalty Day!

[Jefferson23]

93. Snowden is an unusual man, an interesting man who I am grateful to. I would know less

than I know now if not for his willingness to be bold and determined. Takes a lot of nerve
to do such a thing.

[woo me with science]

96. Excellent thread, Manny. Tremendous effort and resources are being poured into

trying to give the false impression that Americans support our own government's abuses of power against us, and that we have contempt for those who exposed them.

Let's repost some reminders of what we are really dealing with here:

Obama taps "cognitive infiltrator" Cass Sunstein for Committee to create "trust" in NSA:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023512796

Salon: Obama confidant’s spine-chilling proposal: Cass Sunstein wants the government to "cognitively infiltrate" anti-government groups
http://www.salon.com/2010/01/15/sunstein_2/

The US government's online campaigns of disinformation, manipulation, and smear.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024560097

Snowden: ‘Training Guide’ for GCHQ, NSA Agents Infiltrating and Disrupting Alternative Media Online
http://21stcenturywire.com/2014/02/25/snowden-training-guide-for-gchq-nsa-agents-infiltrating-and-disrupting-alternative-media-online/

The influx of corporate propaganda-spouting posters is blatant and unnatural.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3189367

U.S. Repeals Propaganda Ban, Spreads Government-Made News To Americans
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023262111

The goal of the propaganda assaults across the internet is not to convince anyone of anything.*
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023359801

The government figured out sockpuppet management but not "persona management."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023358242

The Gentleman's Guide To Forum Spies (spooks, feds, etc.)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4159454

Seventeen techniques for truth suppression.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4249741

Just do some Googling on astroturfing - big organizations have some sophisticated tools.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=1208351

[MannyGoldstein]

98. You rock.

A cornucopia of full-frontal truth.

Thank you!

[Pholus]

184. Excellent read!

I'm fairly sure I've met more than a few of these on DU over the years.

Thanks for the nicely concentrated information!

[sabrina 1]

97. Yes they do. So do a majority of the American people, not to mention the German, British, Irish,

Spanish and just about everyone who actually cares about Democracy.

[dionysus]

100. LOL.. two polls with less than 175 votes. keep trying manny...

a borderline traitor and an egomaniac.. what's not to love about Snowwald?


you're right about a small and tenacious group, but not in the way you mean....

[MrMickeysMom]

102. Well, Manny… All I can say is my Rec is #101 for this thread...

and the two person that doesn't want to die thread has 9 …

I seriously sigh sometimes...

[Rowdyboy]

103. When I hear that from someone whose opinion matters, like an Admin, I'll give a damn. Until then

I think its a bit presumptuous for you or anyone to dictate party line on the issue.

[carolinayellowdog]

175. it's extremely presumptuous of you to falsely accuse Manny

and it's extremely obvious that a small gang is trying to dictate party line and the rest of us increasingly are disgusted by the party-- just look at the recs gotten by anti-Snowden vs. pro-Snowden threads.

Telling us that only the opinion of the admin matters when the question is not one of opinion but of fact, quantifiable observable fact, is telling us you are authoritarian WITHIN the toxic little world of DU as well as macrocosmically.

DAMN I HATE IT when a DUer I long admired turns out to be.... another addition to the ignore list.

[Rowdyboy]

208. Sorry to disappoint you but no one tells me what to think, the number of recs notwithstanding....

Manny is one voice, you are one and I am one. No ones voice matters more than any other. If my agreeing with the vast majority of Americans and Democrats nationwide makes me an authoritarian in your mind then so be it. I agree 100% with John Kerry's recently expressed opinion on Snowden-does that make Kerry an authoritarian too? His career and record says otherwise. As to Greenwald, I don't care for libertarians who supported George Bush's war (or any libertarians for that matter). If that makes my voice worthless to you, then whats the point of a "discussion" board? We should all just goosestep cheerfully?

I'm sorry you find my opinion deserving of ignoring (in 12 years I've never ignored anyone on DU) but it is what it is. The decades long party that is called DU is being thrown by Skinnner, Elad and EarlG-when they tell me what I have to think, I'm gone. Until then, I remain.

[1StrongBlackMan]

104. More evidence that DU does not reflect ...

the sentiment of the American people ... including those that self-identify as Democrats.

Both Republicans (40 percent to 27 percent) and Democrats (40 percent to 26 percent) tended to say that Snowden did the wrong thing, while independents were more likely to say he did the right thing (36 percent to 26 percent). Likewise, both Democrats and Republicans were much more likely than independents to say they thought Snowden should be prosecuted.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/01/edward-snowden-support_n_5071938.html

[MannyGoldstein]

113. 53% of Americans want the info disclosed, 24% not

From your linked article:

Fifty-three percent of Americans in the poll said the public has a right to know about the surveillance programs that became public knowledge as a result of Snowden's actions, while only 24 percent said those programs should have remained secret.

Unless the Obama administration was about to disclose it themselves (yeah, LOL), someone had to leak it.

[1StrongBlackMan]

114. And ...

Both Republicans (40 percent to 27 percent) and Democrats (40 percent to 26 percent) tended to say that Snowden did the wrong thing, while independents were more likely to say he did the right thing (36 percent to 26 percent). Likewise, both Democrats and Republicans were much more likely than independents to say they thought Snowden should be prosecuted.

Which supports my statement regarding your initial statement about DUer support of snowden.

[sheshe2]

129. And

Here, many probably have Manny on ignore, so they don't vote in his OP. While others could not be bothered to vote in these silly OP's.

Simple, I just didn't bother. So it is indeed skewed. Surprise! Or not.

[Blanks]

252. I don't think any useful conclusions can be drawn from your polls...

The questions were obviously phrased for a particular outcome.

People are throwing a fit about the sample size, but the questions themselves are worthless.

I'm kind of surprised that such a spirited debate has erupted from such silly questions. There isn't really a way to vote 'not in support' of either Snowden or Greenwald - being 'sad' about it is not the same as saying you aren't in support of them.

But, I think you know that.

[Peregrine Took]

110. Absolutely! n/t

[mia]

115. Yes!

May whistleblowers thrive and multiply. Otherwise we perish.

[elzenmahn]

119. You can count me among Snowden's and Greenwald's supporters, as well...

...we're at the stage now where the only way that that we the people will know what is really going on in our name is through "lawbreaking" like this.

I would submit that all of the wailing and gnashing of teeth from Kerry, Gates, Harris-Perry, Schultz, and the rest, is because the Snowden revelations are happening with their guy in the White House. Snowden, at the most, pantsed the US government and the spy apparatus here, and his revelations have given confirmation to what a lot of people worldwide have suspected for a long time. It would have been impossible to have the discussions we've been having over NSA spying and government/corporate overreach without what Snowden revealed, and it's disingenuous to say otherwise.

By the way, how much time did John Kerry give to what Snowden had revealed when he gave his "pre-emptive" response to the Snowden interview and told him to "man up?" He made it purely about Ed Snowden, not about NSA overreach. That should tell you everything you need to know about this administration's attitude about civil liberties vs. going after people like him.

Snowden needs to stay in Russia or any other country that will take him and not extradite him. He won't get a fair trail in the US, and look what happened to Manning and other government whistle-blowers.

[psiman]

122. Same thing at the Daily Kos

A small gang of thugs tries to enforce a narrow orthodoxy by talking loud and using swarm tactics to silence the wrong thinkers. Most people simply ignore them, but there was a poll the other day that showed them up for what they are: foul tempered extremists out on the fringes of the left. Their tears of outrage were delicious, let me tell you.

So if you want to get a rise out of a douchebag kossack, just whisper "eight point four five percent."

[sabrina 1]

124. Got aa link to that? Lol, it's always fun watching them reveal themselves. They are showing

an enormous amount of desperation right now, but to no avail. Snowden like all the other Whistle Blowers before him, are doing a great service to the American people and no amount of thuggery or bullying and no matter what happens to him, will change the fact that, thanks to all those courageous Whistle Blowers, the people have valuable information they absolutely need to have in order to continue living in a democracy. Without that info, the people would have no say in how their government is run. And THAT is why we are seeing so much desperation, they do not want the people to know what they are up to.

[Renew Deal]

127. The same justification was used for homophobia and racism for many years.

It must be right because it's popular.

[DavidDvorkin]

132. You mean, the vast majority of those who responded to those polls support Snowden and Greenwald.

[DirkGently]

134. KNR

[pnwmom]

135. Is there a reason you didn't do a poll? n/t

[Algernon Moncrieff]

138. I think that all good, right thinking people in this country are sick and tired of being told...

... that all good, right thinking people in this country are fed up with being told that all good, right thinking people in this country are fed up with being sick and tired. I'm certainly not, and I'm sick and tired of being told that I am

[Marr]

141. WOW. That is an incredibly loud 15 or so people.

I'm amazed at how much interference that tiny crowd can cause.

[mvd]

143. Our government was caught..

And I feel they are still vindictive towards Snowden as a result. It's a good thing this came out IMO. That is brave. Do I wish he would confront them here? Yes, but I also haven't done what Snowden did so can't put myself in his place. He likely has a good knowledge of how he would be treated.

[PowerToThePeople]

146. I support. n/t

[DeSwiss]

150. Damn straight.

- Enough.

K&R

[font color=darkgreen]''A monopoly of the 'means of communication' may define a ruling elite more precisely than the celebrated Marxian formula of the 'monopoly of the means of production.'''

~Robert Anton Wilson

[/font]

[Rex]

152. The tyranny of the majority always has to be counterbalanced by the voice of the minority.

As much as some of the more authoritarians types get on my nerves, they do vote the same way I do and after giving it some more thought...wanting them shit-canned from this site makes me no better then those that want to make lists of people not welcomed here.

They can't all be government agents Manny, some have to be real people that (for whatever reason) are sincere in how they feel about politics. Maybe their parents brought them up to love God and Country - they vote for the person I vote for at the end of the day. That is important to me.

I think it boils down to people here know (they can read) Congress is Kabuki theater and to keep from drinking at night (every fucking night), they still envision the WH as a core unit of moral value...even with the obvious NSA spying going on up every pipe in every sewer on the planet. People need structure and authoritarians need it most.

Give them something, the SCOTUS is all bought and paid for, Congress couldn't run a small business to save their lives. The M$M is a farce of nature...nothing of value there for the average moderate. The actual structure of government breaking down probably frightens them on some level.

Some of them are good people, the ones using half truths and falsehoods...yeah everyone sees that. Haven't you noticed who gets replies and recs and who doesn't? Still to have a healthy forum, you need the vocal minority. Even on this issue.

You want enough? Sorry, but the vocal minority on any issue is here to stay and you know it.

[carolinayellowdog]

262. vocal is fine, singing multipart harmony in a hymn to the US govt is not

There is something very different about the "majority" and "minority" factions' posting pattern, which is that the positive comments in threads about Snowden/Greenwald seem very spontaneous whereas the anti- often have a creepy quality of coordination across different threads by the usual suspects.

[Rex]

265. I am no GG/Snowden supporter, but even I can see the deflection going on.

True, the focus on the people and NOT the NSA spying on everyone is a telling tactic. I think even the dullest dullard can see that.

[villager]

154. Well, when you're a party apparatchik, and you're *supposed* to post defenses of the indefensible

...well, you'll keep loudly bleating, virtually speaking, no matter what...

[JohnnyRingo]

165. Well then... It's settled.

Last edited Thu May 29, 2014, 03:02 AM - Edit history (1)

The majority here is always right, and I look forward to Dennis Kucinich's "Dept Of Peace".

Oops... That was a few years ago. Get back to me next year and let me know how the CIA and NSA is defunct.

Fact is, it isn't worth debating because nothing is going to change. Consider a dream admiinistration where Ms Warren and her running mate Bernie Sanders move into the White House... There's no way they'll trade domestic intelligence for the sake of privacy. That genie is out of the bottle.

[snot]

167. And Julian Assange, I believe.

They've succeeded in turning the discussion into: is he a nice person.

But that is not the issue. If you look at what he led Wikileaks to accomplish, I think most people, let alone DU'er's, approve.

And for the umpteenth time, check out what OpenLeaks or others have accomplished, who said they had a better way: nada. (see, some time ago: http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/i-doubt-domscheit-berg-s-integrity-top-german-hacker-slams-openleaks-founder-a-780289.html -- and nothing much since).

[blkmusclmachine]

170. Feds are bold faced LIARS?!?! Who coulda known?!?!

[Major Hogwash]

172. The vast majority of DU members don't even know what Snowden did!!

They think he saved the day, but in reality, all he did was steal secret communiques and give them to foreign countries.

Some hero you got there, pal.

[Helen Borg]

179. Some of the documents themselves may provide an answer.

After all, DU is a large political site that would be worth trying to influence/disrupt using the NSA playbook.

[Coolest Ranger]

181. add my name on there too

since your making a dang hit lit. Edward Snowden is a coward and a traitor and should face the music. Greenwald is nothing but a fame seeking bastard. I'm getting so sick of seeing these freaking threads pop up every few days.

[DrBulldog]

187. Read Greenwald's book ...

... and then you will understand that Snowden broke the law to expose the gross illegality of the NSA and FBI.

[Skidmore]

189. Why is it so important to you that people should disagree with

the way the actions of these two are perceived? I disagree. I agree that the domestic overreach exposure is important, but I also am very much aware that we were having those discussion on DU a decade ago so it was not new. I draw the line at the international intrigue that the trio of Assange, Greenwald, and Snowden appear to be engaged in. Not a one of us out here can claim to know what they have in hand and what they have divulged and to whom. There is room to suspect that some of this intrigue has caused harm and that their motives are unclear. I do not understand the insistence that everyone absolutely embrace these characters without reservation. People are capable of holding more than one thought at a time and making judgments based upon them. Now, I'm off to my dentist appointment.

[flashbang]

202. Did the dentist

ask if it was safe?

Sorry, couldn't resist.

I don't know enough about Snowden's information and likely never will. Thing is, is he suggesting he's the only guy working
in his field who could see this great evil and speak of it?

As for this latest'interview', the hype puts me off. It seems overly dramatic.

"Watch Brian Williams enter the shadowwwz of the shadowy world of Snowden's shadowwwz. And in the shadowwwz they
shall speak together for the winz. Oh, and Snowden will talk about spooky stuff."

Now it feels like Snowden really is fame whoring, worried that he's not publically relevant. Can't he do Tumblr?

It's too bad he got stuck in Russia. There will be no life of ease there. The old guard's never had much respect for turncoats and the Russian people, generally, don't wish ill on Americans. Many still recall the Americans who went over to help during/after Chernobyl. And of course many live here in the u.s. lol

BTW, I'm not defending violations by anyone. I just feel like'
"OK dude, I get burning down the house because of it representing years of systematic abuses to you. But did you have to do it while the kids were still inside?"

Plus, for all his 'spy training', (from an old MAD magazine?), then why the hell couldn't he figure out how to release the info without anyone knowing it was him? Because his ego is the size of Texas, that's why?

BTW, someone suggested that nsa agents lurk around DU.

If that's true, then I am REALLY disappointed in these agencies. They'd need some new challenges, so I put forth we invent a new language that will be crackproof.

kat = cat; // for the feline hidinz

aww yeah, we're off to a good start now...

[Enthusiast]

192. I support Snowden's and Greenwald's actions.

The government has overreached on surveillance and propaganda. Way overreached.

If you deny this, I really wonder where your thinking is.

[rtracey]

195. ZZZZZZZZZZZ

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ..

[NorthCarolina]

203. I support Snowden/Greenwald, but didn't vote in either poll because I never saw those posts. nt

[Scuba]

204. ...

[johnny156]

209. Snowden and Greenwald

They are traitors, now and forever,and I am a loyal DUer!!

[Progressive dog]

210. We should vote on which opinions can be

expressed on DU, then it would be unanimous.
Anyway,if Eddie has 80-90% support, then it should be no problem for him to come home and face a jury of his peers.

[George II]

214. 148 votes in one poll, 169 votes in the other, and you make that proclamation?

There are more than 214,000 registered members of Democratic Underground.

So less than one tenth of one percent of the membership here "voted".

You should revise your subject line to read "the vast majority of a vast MINORITY of DU supports...."

[joeybee12]

217. I do...knr

[themaguffin]

220. Argumentum ad populum, really?

[lark]

221. I so agree

Just read yet another post with the usual suspects vociferously defending this government's actions against Snowden and saying (at the same time) that the NSA spying was totally legal and yet Snowden hurt this country by outting the secret. LOL. I managed not to jump in yet again, though I did have to restrain myself.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

222. The first poll...

135 people from an internet poll on a largely liberal/progressive website are "glad" that Snowden did what he did.

Aside from this polling data barely rising to the level of "laughable" in its accuracy, it's also a somewhat stupid question.

Am I glad Snowden did what he did? Yes, I am. This behavior should be brought to the light of day, and while it probably would have happened eventually (it's not like nobody knew the NSA was spying until Snowden came along), what Snowden did was also a crime. And a serious one at that.

Civil Disobedience was a long pedigree in our society, and it basically always results in the protestors doing time in jail. Henry David Thoreau spent his celebrated night in jail. So did Martin Luther King, Jr. While you're perfectly welcome to break the law in the pursuit of a higher purpose, you really should have no expectation that, having broken the law, you'll not be punished for it.

So thank you, Edward Snowden, for doing what you did. Now either prepare to live outside the reach of U.S. law for the rest of your days or lawyer up and come home.

[Tarheel_Dem]

226. And DU "supported" Dennis Kucinich for President. Democrats? Not so much. What's your point?

[SidDithers]

230. Hive mind...

Sid

[Tarheel_Dem]

235. I mean, it's the internet. Alex Jones is popular on the internet. Snowdenistas are in great company.

Why would Manny think a poll of DU is relevant to anything in the real world? Besides, we've got company. Not that hard for Manny to get the result he's looking for.

Democratic Underground - Read the comments
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023064050

Obama branded a war criminal in the Irish Parliament - read the comments on this one too.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023067394

The Dems are starting to wake up and smell the coffee.
We should join forces.

Don't mention Ron Paul on DU you will get eviscerated (they are still brainwashed over that).
Just mention his policies - the ordinary Dems love lots of them.

Anti bankster
Anti war
Anti Corporatism

etc. etc.

http://www.dailypaul.com/290123/one-rule-for-the-rich-and-one-rule-for-the-rest-banksters-snowden-nsa

Take a look on Democratic Underground

They have the gov't paid trolls out, trying to limit the outrage & rebellion on there.

If that is the reaction of hard core Dems to the news stories on the NSA, I want to stoke up some more of it.

Lots of traffic on DU.

It's the most popular Dem internet site, except for Huffy Po - where everything meaningful gets censored.

http://www.dailypaul.com/288556/clapper-and-feinstein-get-caught-lying-big-time#comment-3103138

It's not hard to see where the sustained assaults on a certain DU member as being a "paid" poster comes from. They hate her because she can back up her shit. They fear her "Blue Links! Blue Links!".

[SidDithers]

228. The vast majority of DUers wanted Kucinich to be President...

DU is not the real world.

Sid

[MADem]

299. Edwards was the bee's knees here too amongst a certain subset.

While I liked the 2 Americas message, the guy and his delivery always came off as "insincere" to me. I liked his wife better.

Now, in death, there are people about who will trash her, too. There's nothing that will rehabilitate JE, though--he's just not Ready for Prime Time, and he probably never will be.

[gholtron]

229. Well if you are going to word the survey "Sad" that he did it then yes most people won't answer it.

I personally don't support this thief. What he did is NO different of what he is accusing the NSA of doing. So if he is going to lead by example, you are essentially saying that if you accuse someone of breaking the law, then it's ok to go to their home or place of business and STEAL the evidence and take off to a country that won't extradite you. I may not agree how the NSA is collecting Data, but I don't agree that you do a data dump of secret documents and flee the country with it.

[LiberalLovinLug]

239. So if members of your family were wronged in a serious way...

and you knew for a fact that this criminal was going to get away with it because you knew that the police and courts and government were all colluding together to keep this prep protected and were in fact publicly proclaiming his innocence. And you also knew that the proof of both his crimes and the collusion was hidden in a drawer in his house. When the only hope left for righting this wrong was bringing it to the attention of the greater population...and an opportunity was there (an open window) you would walk on by?

....because its STEALING!?

[gholtron]

258. Yes.

Two wrongs don't make a right. So if the police accused you of something and breaks in your house and steals things; lots of things from your house, you would be good with that?

If i illegally took something like oh I don't know, Top Secret Information perhaps, then yes I would expect to pay the consequences.

By his OWN admissions, he took the job solely to STEAL the information. So this is espionage. He planned it and fled the country. He knew the consequences of getting caught and he CHOSE to accept it.

[gholtron]

263. Just to add to my previous response post

Some of Snowden's supporters are equating him to Dr. Martin Luther King or Rosa Parks. These are true heros who broke the law and didn't run. They paid the price for their law breaking. They didn't have to take top secret information and leave the country. I would have had a little respect for him if he stayed and fought. Then he goes to Russia and ask the most stupidest question to Putin. I wonder if he will steal evidence from the Russian Government. We all know they are spying on their citizens.

[frylock]

232. i support the disclosures

[Zorra]

234. I support their actions. No, I suppose it is not worth responding to the supporters of the Military

Industrial Complex who are posting deliberately misleading propaganda in an attempt to help maintain, and further, the status quo of global rule by the Plantation Class Oligarchs.

I promote democracy, not arbitrary totalitarian rule by egotistical, greedy megalomaniacs who are so poorly evolved that they believe that having many possessions makes them superior to those who do not.

[robertpaulsen]

238. Thanks for renewing my faith in this site, Manny.

Great to see that most people here have their priorities and principles in order. I haven't posted here in a while just because I'm sick of having to read all the "loud and tenacious" bullshit while searching for the truth. In answer to your question, "At this point, is it really worth responding to these folks?" I say: Ignore them. Or tell 'em to fuck off, then ignore 'em. Enough indeed.

[carolinayellowdog]

253. glad to see you; many of us are sick of the anti-Snowden/Greenwald shitstorm

the swarm effect is quite visceral, once my partner was sitting next to me watching TV while I was DUing and he said "what just happened to you?"-- I had flinched and gotten a scared expression etc. as if watching a horror movie, just from reading it.

Seems like a lot of new low post count members are jumping in to disagree with the consensus here. Every voice of assent from long-silent DUers helps counter the continuing propaganda so thanks for speaking up.

Almost 6 million people watched his interview last night so I guess the propagandists have their hands full dealing with the fallout.

on edit-- i put 250 in the header, then removed it, but that seems a likely number of total recs at the current rate

[mike_c]

243. rec'd

eom

[bvar22]

255. DURec!

*Rampant Government Secrecy and Democracy can not co-exist.

*Persecution of Whistle Blowers and Democracy can not co-exist.

*Government surveillance of the citizenry and Democracy can not co-exist.

*Secret Laws and Democracy can not co-exist.

*Secret Courts and Democracy can not-co-exist.

*Our Democracy depends on an informed electorate.

You either believe in Democracy,
or you don't.
It IS that simple.

[Jakes Progress]

267. Glad to rec and kick.

Just look at the silly things that some people do when they can't admit they were fooled . . . again.

They support bush-like surveillance of their lives, cheer those who would enslave them, and say stupid, nasty things about the brave people who try to help them despite their ignorance.

Keep it up, Manny. Their heads are exploding.

[randys1]

276. When you use the word "overall" you get me on board too

What i will NOT do is blame it all on Obama...

One man comes in to the worst mess our country has ever seen or 2nd worst, and he has to clean it all up, he makes mistakes, sure, and some stuff he wants to change he cant and some stuff he wants to do he cant and I am glad he cant do stuff like TPP or one hopes and if he green-lights Keystone I will be furious, but I wont blame him the way many do.

[Puglover]

279. Oh Manny how wrong you are.

Look at the MASSIVE support for this POS OP.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025015763


SEVENTEEN recs! And about 5 DUers getting their hate on. Over and over and over.

You're wrong wrong wrong!!!

What a colossal joke.

[carolinayellowdog]

281. I can only see 6 out of 176 posts THANK YOU IGNORE LIST!

Those 6 are fine.

[Puglover]

282. Seriously.

The bile and the bullshit are thick in that thread.

[DrBulldog]

287. No matter what Snowden said ...

... Kerry has come out acting like an idiot and a liar. This was a gigantic win for Snowden's cause.

[McCamy Taylor]

293. I support Snowden, haven't paid any attention to Greenwald so neutral.

[JackRiddler]

298. I did the same two polls a while ago!

Snowden
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023848902

Greenwald
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023762079

[raindaddy]

303. 100%

In support..