If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Telegraph)   The Guardian had another massive scoop about American spying and European government complicity with it. But then they googled the guy who was their source   (blogs.telegraph.co.uk) divider line 81
    More: Fail, Institutions of the European Union, Guardian, Obama, NSA, Americans, Europeans, complicity, Wayne Madsen  
•       •       •

13971 clicks; posted to Main » on 01 Jul 2013 at 10:28 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



81 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-07-01 10:19:56 AM
Nothing tipped them off about this guy? That's supposed to be "Vetting a Source 101" for journalists
 
2013-07-01 10:20:00 AM
He was once described by The Church Times as a "blood-crazed ferret".That's beautiful.
 
2013-07-01 10:25:02 AM
I'll take the Guardian with all their inaccuracies over most other newspapers' accuracies any day.
 
2013-07-01 10:36:34 AM

Langston: Nothing tipped them off about this guy? That's supposed to be "Vetting a Source 101" for journalists


They think they struck gold with Snowden so now they're just running with everything else they can to keep it moving.
 
2013-07-01 10:37:57 AM
goodcomics.comicbookresources.com
 
2013-07-01 10:37:57 AM
Doesn't matter. NSA still immoral, useless, and probably criminal.
 
2013-07-01 10:39:20 AM
I dated a girl who gave me a fast and very painful reverse ferret once.

Best night of my life.
 
2013-07-01 10:43:00 AM

Langston: Nothing tipped them off about this guy? That's supposed to be "Vetting a Source 101" for journalists


Didn't stop them from running with Snowden's story before they found out how trustworthy he is, and now look where we are.
 
2013-07-01 10:43:43 AM
Glenn Greenwald, who did not byline this, must be face-palming. Snowden came to him, not the Guardian, because of his past writing which was mostly at Salon, not the Guardian.
 
2013-07-01 10:44:15 AM

Gulper Eel: He was once described by The Church Times as a "blood-crazed ferret".That's beautiful.


I've been described as a "Blood-Crazed Ferret" in the sack.
 
2013-07-01 10:46:34 AM
I call bullshiat on most of this. If they really did that much spying, Chicago would have about 12 murders a year.
We would not have a high umemployment rate, someone has to data mine that shiat
Obama would have seen this coming from a mile away
 
2013-07-01 10:49:54 AM

Nem Wan: Glenn Greenwald, who did not byline this, must be face-palming. Snowden came to him, not the Guardian, because of his past writing which was mostly at Salon, not the Guardian.


Glenn's vetting isn't sounding so hot, either.  His level of self-satisfied ego is GIGANTIC.  I'd bet there are a lot of key facts we don't know yet about Snowdon's adventure.
 
2013-07-01 10:50:07 AM
So, why is Obama supposed to be gay?
 
2013-07-01 10:50:14 AM

Marcus Aurelius: I'll take the Guardian with all their inaccuracies over most other newspapers' accuracies any day.


Candy asses. The Daily Fail not only would not have retracted, they would have doubled down.
 
2013-07-01 10:51:30 AM
Jouralism is dead. Long live the new flesh!

(obscure anywhere else but here)
 
2013-07-01 10:52:22 AM

"...and also suggested that Barack Obama is gay (which he isn't)."


For some reason it seems funny that they had to thrown in the remark that Obama isn't gay, as if there is a rational doubt that Michele Obama isn't a real wife but just a beard along with the kids.

 
2013-07-01 10:54:27 AM
Love all the reverse skepticism about individuals ... Greenwald, Snowden, et al, and not the institutions.

Because the government works so well! Because the world is in such great shape! The world is a mess, and it couldn't possibly be because of complete system corruption at all levels....
 
2013-07-01 10:55:15 AM
Well, good for them for letting the facts get in the way of a good story.
 
2013-07-01 10:56:17 AM

heinrich66: Love all the reverse skepticism about individuals ... Greenwald, Snowden, et al, and not the institutions.

Because the government works so well! Because the world is in such great shape! The world is a mess, and it couldn't possibly be because of complete system corruption at all levels....


Why not be skeptical of both?
 
2013-07-01 10:57:41 AM

JohnAnnArbor: Glenn's vetting isn't sounding so hot, either.


He spent weeks talking with Snowden over the internet, flew to Hong Kong to meet with him personally, and used his sources to verify that the documents were legitimate. I don't know what else he could have possibly done.
 
2013-07-01 10:58:20 AM
this lib rag is a disgrace to the new wave of journalism, where we put whatever the fark we want up on the front page then the next day put "maybe we were wrong...but probably not" on page 11 the next day
 
2013-07-01 10:59:40 AM

skinink: "...and also suggested that Barack Obama is gay (which he isn't)."
For some reason it seems funny that they had to thrown in the remark that Obama isn't gay, as if there is a rational doubt that Michele Obama isn't a real wife but just a beard along with the kids.


A respectable journalist wouldn't have gone with the absolute, but would have noted that no evidence of his gayness has been revealed at this time.
 
2013-07-01 11:02:06 AM
I call bullshiat on this whole story. They not only pulled the article, but had Google delete it from their memory hole. Gee, maybe the flak IS heaviest over the target. To gloss over this story by denigrating the source instead of vetting the facts and allegations is not exactly real journalism.

"He's nutz .. he said Our Glorious Leader is Gay" .. everyone knows that would be impossible, right? Right?

Quick!! Somebody shoot the messenger .. and, BTW, nothing to see here .. move along.

Why do people believe that ANYTHING we read about spy stuff is even remotely real? You want spy stories, read Clancy or DeMille.

I'm sorry, but I think that newspapers are a poor place to look for news.
 
2013-07-01 11:02:27 AM

Sudo_Make_Me_A_Sandwich: JohnAnnArbor: Glenn's vetting isn't sounding so hot, either.

He spent weeks talking with Snowden over the internet, flew to Hong Kong to meet with him personally, and used his sources to verify that the documents were legitimate. I don't know what else he could have possibly done.


It is being reported now that Snowden went into the NSA with the intention of stealing documents and that he was in contact with the Freedom of the Press Foundation (Glenn is on the board) before he even took the job.  (Link)

Maybe it means something, maybe it don't.
 
2013-07-01 11:03:09 AM

BigNumber12: skinink: "...and also suggested that Barack Obama is gay (which he isn't)."
For some reason it seems funny that they had to thrown in the remark that Obama isn't gay, as if there is a rational doubt that Michele Obama isn't a real wife but just a beard along with the kids.

A respectable journalist wouldn't have gone with the absolute, but would have noted that no evidence of his gayness has been revealed at this time.


Only the Sith speak in absolutes.
 
2013-07-01 11:04:28 AM

texdent: [goodcomics.comicbookresources.com image 614x513]


By far the best comic series ever made. The last Frankenstein issue is the apotheosis of the form.
 
2013-07-01 11:06:19 AM

darwinpolice: I dated a girl who gave me a fast and very painful reverse ferret once.

Best night of my life.


I thought you looked familiar.
 
2013-07-01 11:06:59 AM
Wow a published article about an almost published article.
 
2013-07-01 11:07:39 AM
I don't know why the source is seen as "unreliable". After all, the mainstream media agrees with the guy:

www.missinfo.tv
 
2013-07-01 11:09:04 AM

sage254: I don't know why the source is seen as "unreliable". After all, the mainstream media agrees with the guy:

[www.missinfo.tv image 437x597]


Poor, culturally forgotten James Buchanan.
 
2013-07-01 11:10:15 AM
insaniquariumguide.com
 
2013-07-01 11:17:36 AM

PonceAlyosha: sage254: I don't know why the source is seen as "unreliable". After all, the mainstream media agrees with the guy:

[www.missinfo.tv image 437x597]

Poor, culturally forgotten James Buchanan.


The man who let the Union fall apart?  He should be happy all we did was forget about him instead of cursing his name to this day.
 
2013-07-01 11:18:02 AM

vygramul: Langston: Nothing tipped them off about this guy? That's supposed to be "Vetting a Source 101" for journalists

Didn't stop them from running with Snowden's story before they found out how trustworthy he is, and now look where we are.


History will show that Snowden is nothing more than an attention whore, grossly over-exaggerating the technical capabilities of an approved govt surveillance program resulting in zero infringement of lawful citizens rights.  Snowden willfully and intentionally obtained access to boilerplate information in order to publicly denigrate and embarrass the country.  The people that are using him as their source material are running out of anything truly significant, and the countries that he's run to are tiring of his juvenile antics.  Chinese were happy to get rid of him.  Russians can't wait to see him go.  Ecuador might not even want him.  He's an ass, and a stupid ass at that.  Just as they did with Assange, and this nutcase Madsen, people will eventually forget about them and they'll die lonely pathetic fools.  They're all narcissistic egomaniacs looking for glory, and feeding on the simplicity and stupidity of the average American sky-is-falling conspiracy theorist.  Sad really.

Did I mention attention whore?
 
2013-07-01 11:18:20 AM

sage254: I don't know why the source is seen as "unreliable". After all, the mainstream media agrees with the guy:

[www.missinfo.tv image 437x597]


It's like when people called Clinton the first black president. (He's not.)
 
2013-07-01 11:19:32 AM
I get it

encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com
 
2013-07-01 11:20:39 AM

James!: Sudo_Make_Me_A_Sandwich: JohnAnnArbor: Glenn's vetting isn't sounding so hot, either.

He spent weeks talking with Snowden over the internet, flew to Hong Kong to meet with him personally, and used his sources to verify that the documents were legitimate. I don't know what else he could have possibly done.

It is being reported now that Snowden went into the NSA with the intention of stealing documents and that he was in contact with the Freedom of the Press Foundation (Glenn is on the board) before he even took the job.  (Link)

Maybe it means something, maybe it don't.


Snowden held jobs with the CIA, NSA, and other contractors long before this. That was when he learned that things were going on that he felt needed to be exposed. He took his last job to get back in to do that.
 
2013-07-01 11:23:39 AM

Nem Wan: Snowden held jobs with the CIA, NSA, and other contractors long before this. That was when he learned that things were going on that he felt needed to be exposed. He took his last job to get back in to do that.


Do you know what he actually did there?  Like, his actually day to day work?  He wasn't an analyst. He didn't have access to 'data'. He is a password reset, sys-admin. That's it.  Nothing more.  He was grasping at straws and I'm fairly certain that he wasn't on to anything till this reporter got a hold of him. He's a pawn in a greater scheme to slander the government.
 
2013-07-01 11:35:06 AM

Nem Wan: James!: Sudo_Make_Me_A_Sandwich: JohnAnnArbor: Glenn's vetting isn't sounding so hot, either.

He spent weeks talking with Snowden over the internet, flew to Hong Kong to meet with him personally, and used his sources to verify that the documents were legitimate. I don't know what else he could have possibly done.

It is being reported now that Snowden went into the NSA with the intention of stealing documents and that he was in contact with the Freedom of the Press Foundation (Glenn is on the board) before he even took the job.  (Link)

Maybe it means something, maybe it don't.

Snowden held jobs with the CIA, NSA, and other contractors long before this. That was when he learned that things were going on that he felt needed to be exposed. He took his last job to get back in to do that.


Obviously CIA hired him and then sent him to spy on NSA.
 
2013-07-01 11:35:58 AM

rikkitikkitavi: He's a pawn in a greater scheme to slander the government.


Yes, because if there is one thing Americans never do, it's talk shiat on the government. Also, slander has to be untrue.
 
2013-07-01 11:37:35 AM
www.theblindcard.com

Oiy.

 
2013-07-01 11:38:39 AM

PonceAlyosha: rikkitikkitavi: He's a pawn in a greater scheme to slander the government.

Yes, because if there is one thing Americans never do, it's talk shiat on the government. Also, slander has to be untrue.


yeah. and?
 
2013-07-01 11:39:05 AM
Really?  Because the civil war could have been postponed again for five years if only Buchanan had been magic.  The war was coming since 1776, we were only putting off the problems for 90 years.  Plus the war ended slavery for good.  Putting off the war would have only postponed the end of the institution.


NEDM: PonceAlyosha: sage254: I don't know why the source is seen as "unreliable". After all, the mainstream media agrees with the guy:

[www.missinfo.tv image 437x597]

Poor, culturally forgotten James Buchanan.

The man who let the Union fall apart?  He should be happy all we did was forget about him instead of cursing his name to this day.

 
2013-07-01 11:39:22 AM

rikkitikkitavi: History will show that Snowden is nothing more than an attention whore, grossly over-exaggerating the technical capabilities of an approved govt surveillance program resulting in zero infringement of lawful citizens rights.  Snowden willfully and intentionally obtained access to boilerplate information in order to publicly denigrate and embarrass the country.


So your going for the official "Snowden revealed nothing which was both true and important, and is a traitor for revealing such true, important stuff" official line, are you?
 
2013-07-01 11:40:35 AM

skinink: "...and also suggested that Barack Obama is gay (which he isn't)."
For some reason it seems funny that they had to thrown in the remark that Obama isn't gay, as if there is a rational doubt that Michele Obama isn't a real wife but just a beard along with the kids.


You're saying gay people can't straight marry?
 
2013-07-01 11:47:06 AM
Has the Telegraph always had that Daily Mail feel about it?
 
2013-07-01 11:54:58 AM

orbister: rikkitikkitavi: History will show that Snowden is nothing more than an attention whore, grossly over-exaggerating the technical capabilities of an approved govt surveillance program resulting in zero infringement of lawful citizens rights.  Snowden willfully and intentionally obtained access to boilerplate information in order to publicly denigrate and embarrass the country.

So your going for the official "Snowden revealed nothing which was both true and important, and is a traitor for revealing such true, important stuff" official line, are you?


More like, Snowden illegally revealed the exist of a program, but limited explicit details or anything of significant worth (because he's a dolt and doesn't really know) at the behest and assistance of someone else - who could possibly be indicted if this espionage plan by the Guardian against the US govt is, in fact, what it appears.  The details were then grossly-over exaggerated and used to exploit the public. He's a criminal, yes.  And he's a stupid pawn that was used badly by Greenwald.
 
2013-07-01 11:57:25 AM

James!: heinrich66: Love all the reverse skepticism about individuals ... Greenwald, Snowden, et al, and not the institutions.

Because the government works so well! Because the world is in such great shape! The world is a mess, and it couldn't possibly be because of complete system corruption at all levels....

Why not be skeptical of both?


What form does the skepticism take though? Do individuals and institutions really need to be on equal footing when it comes to the public's imagination? It's like saying one should be equally afraid of mosquitoes and bears -- because both do harm.
 
2013-07-01 11:58:46 AM

3rdtimearound: Has the Telegraph always had that Daily Mail feel about it?


It only *looks* like they copied the logo.
 
2013-07-01 12:00:41 PM
Guardian/Observer pulls front-page NSA story after source turns out to be a fruitloop who thinks Obama is gay
www.adiumxtras.com

Just follow your nose.  It always knows (about bat-shiat crazy anti-government lunatics)
 
2013-07-01 12:05:17 PM

heinrich66: James!: heinrich66: Love all the reverse skepticism about individuals ... Greenwald, Snowden, et al, and not the institutions.

Because the government works so well! Because the world is in such great shape! The world is a mess, and it couldn't possibly be because of complete system corruption at all levels....

Why not be skeptical of both?

What form does the skepticism take though? Do individuals and institutions really need to be on equal footing when it comes to the public's imagination? It's like saying one should be equally afraid of mosquitoes and bears -- because both do harm.


I'm really not following your train of thought here.  I'm sorry.
 
Displayed 50 of 81 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report