Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: The vast majority of DU supports Snowden's and Greenwald's actions [View all]truedelphi
(32,324 posts)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? Id 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, hed 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.
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? Id 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, hed 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.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
303 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
The vast majority of DU supports Snowden's and Greenwald's actions [View all]
MannyGoldstein
May 2014
OP
I care about neither personally but if there is some list of supporters of our rights, put me on too
TheKentuckian
May 2014
#5
Really? You think those who resort to "Comrade Eddie" or "Gigi" or the rotfl smilie are being HONEST
riderinthestorm
May 2014
#9
I can think of ONE poster who is conflicted and reasonable. The rest are seething and very vocal
riderinthestorm
May 2014
#16
Violation of Constitutional rights seem pretty clear cut to me. At least they were during the Bush
sabrina 1
May 2014
#156
Thank you. I don't feel one bit confused, but sometimes when I read DU I wonder if I made a
sabrina 1
May 2014
#171
I would wager most people have either forgotten or never heard of Thomas Drake nor what he
Uncle Joe
May 2014
#148
He ended up having a public defender by that hearing because they had bankrupted
arthritisR_US
May 2014
#155
He did not run to Russia. He went to Hong Kong. The US took away or cancelled his passport
JDPriestly
May 2014
#144
Not only that, but Putin knew Ed was going to the consulate in Hong Kong!
Major Hogwash
May 2014
#173
Nonsense. Snowden could have gone ANYWHERES before Greenwald released the info. ANYWHERES.
KittyWampus
May 2014
#212
The point I was making was that he knew US capabilities in apprehending him. So no, he couldn't
ancianita
May 2014
#274
yeah, i never knew a few polls with less that 170 responses spoke for the "vast majority" of DU...
dionysus
May 2014
#105
I just got a hide for saying I couldn't believe that people still read the posts from a person here
Number23
May 2014
#158
MAD, that's excellent advice but you know as well as I do that it won't do a thing
Number23
May 2014
#273
Thanks for the heads up. Love that I was supposed to "learn" something from that first
Number23
May 2014
#271
I don't like alert stalking no matter who is doing it or who is the recipient.
Warren Stupidity
May 2014
#272
I never knew that a few polls with less the 50 responses spoke for ANYONE, let alone
sabrina 1
May 2014
#133
Glenn isn't as much of a journalist as he is an editorialist, IMHO, and a sheer opportunist to boot.
dionysus
May 2014
#294
Well, considering that Snowden flunked out of high school and had to get a GED...
randome
May 2014
#73
I wonder if GG delivered ES a check--after all, GG fenced the goods that ES stole.
MADem
May 2014
#99
Didn't we read that Snowden has a job in Russia working on their version of Facebook?
JDPriestly
May 2014
#145
It's called "drawing a logical conclusion," not projecting, but thanks for playing.
MADem
May 2014
#261
That KGB friend of Putin's, who is now his lawyer (gee, what a coincidence), gave him
MADem
May 2014
#264
We will have to get together for some Shake-n-Bake real soon, and call each other by our
MADem
May 2014
#137
MADem, do you really think it is OK for the NSA, the executive branch, to collect all of our
JDPriestly
May 2014
#157
Snowden had--so he insists--capabilities that other whistleblowers did not have.
MADem
May 2014
#288
And you have to photoshop GG head on someone elses body to make you childish smear?
LiberalLovinLug
May 2014
#233
"I am not here to hide from justice." Said from his undisclosed location in Hong Kong.
randome
May 2014
#43
But corporate America is not bound by the Constitution to respect your rights.
JDPriestly
May 2014
#147
Strictly out of curiosity, would you please name some traitors of 2nd & 3rd highest orders?
DisgustipatedinCA
May 2014
#295
"obsessive posting from this oddly isolated group on DU is something like addiction"
carolinayellowdog
May 2014
#82
Hey Manny....the last time I was in a minority like that, it was 9/12. I didn't support Bush. So
msanthrope
May 2014
#52
Apparently there's a movement to ban the popcorn smilie as well. Shall we do
msanthrope
May 2014
#63
The participants in the survey are self selected so that may skew results, but I think your point
Ed Suspicious
May 2014
#79
therefore the vast majority must be drowned out by the desperate minority
carolinayellowdog
May 2014
#80
He exposed massive criminality by our government. As a result, he is the target of smear campaigns.
woo me with science
May 2014
#85
Credibility doesn't matter a whit. It's all about getting the smear and diversion out there.
woo me with science
May 2014
#88
I support both of their actions. The character attacks tell me much more about the
GoneFishin
May 2014
#87
Snowden is an unusual man, an interesting man who I am grateful to. I would know less
Jefferson23
May 2014
#93
Excellent thread, Manny. Tremendous effort and resources are being poured into
woo me with science
May 2014
#96
Yes they do. So do a majority of the American people, not to mention the German, British, Irish,
sabrina 1
May 2014
#97
When I hear that from someone whose opinion matters, like an Admin, I'll give a damn. Until then
Rowdyboy
May 2014
#103
Sorry to disappoint you but no one tells me what to think, the number of recs notwithstanding....
Rowdyboy
May 2014
#208
Got aa link to that? Lol, it's always fun watching them reveal themselves. They are showing
sabrina 1
May 2014
#124
You mean, the vast majority of those who responded to those polls support Snowden and Greenwald.
DavidDvorkin
May 2014
#132
I think that all good, right thinking people in this country are sick and tired of being told...
Algernon Moncrieff
May 2014
#138
The tyranny of the majority always has to be counterbalanced by the voice of the minority.
Rex
May 2014
#152
vocal is fine, singing multipart harmony in a hymn to the US govt is not
carolinayellowdog
May 2014
#262
Well, when you're a party apparatchik, and you're *supposed* to post defenses of the indefensible
villager
May 2014
#154
I support Snowden/Greenwald, but didn't vote in either poll because I never saw those posts. nt
NorthCarolina
May 2014
#203
148 votes in one poll, 169 votes in the other, and you make that proclamation?
George II
May 2014
#214
And DU "supported" Dennis Kucinich for President. Democrats? Not so much. What's your point?
Tarheel_Dem
May 2014
#226
I mean, it's the internet. Alex Jones is popular on the internet. Snowdenistas are in great company.
Tarheel_Dem
May 2014
#235
Well if you are going to word the survey "Sad" that he did it then yes most people won't answer it.
gholtron
May 2014
#229
I support their actions. No, I suppose it is not worth responding to the supporters of the Military
Zorra
May 2014
#234
glad to see you; many of us are sick of the anti-Snowden/Greenwald shitstorm
carolinayellowdog
May 2014
#253