Do you have adblock enabled?
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.

(Washington Post)   No, Glenn Greenwald did not say, "I'll get you my pretties, and your little dog too"   (washingtonpost.com) divider line 32
    More: Followup, Glenn Greenwald, real character, vows  
•       •       •

4125 clicks; posted to Main » on 20 Aug 2013 at 12:53 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

2013-08-20 01:26:25 PM  
8 votes:

vernonFL: BullBearMS: Are you trying to claim that possession of documents leaked by a whistle blower is a crime?

The Supreme Court disagrees

Classified documents?

If someone gives me classified documents and I don't give them back to the government, but instead make those documents public little by little, the Supreme Court said that is okay?


Yup.

Decades ago, Daniel Ellsberg leaked a Top Secret report showing that our leadership had lied us into the Vietnam war. He gave this proof to the New York Times. They began publishing the report in segments.

Nixon tried to shut them down and charge people with espionage.

Nixon got biatch slapped by the Supreme Court.

Only a free and unrestrained press can effectively expose deception in government. And paramount among the responsibilities of a free press is the duty to prevent any part of the government from deceiving the people and sending them off to distant lands to die of foreign fevers and foreign shot and shell.
-Justice Black
2013-08-20 01:40:57 PM  
4 votes:
2013-08-20 01:24:04 PM  
3 votes:
Edward Snowden's Real Impact

Snowden "is very pleased with the debate that is arising in many countries around the world on Internet privacy and U.S. spying. It is exactly the debate he wanted to inform."


Princess Leia: The more you tighten your grip, Tarkin, the more star systems will slip through your fingers.
2013-08-20 09:44:57 PM  
2 votes:

tirob: BullBearMS: tirob: BullBearMS: tirob: Then why the f**k doesn't he publish it, for crissakes?!

Why shouldn't he keep giving them more rope?
.
Because if you do what Greenwald does, which is repeatedly to promise to publish blockbuster revelations, and to follow that up by publishing material which is not a revelation and which falls well short of being blockbuster, you acquire a reputation of being a bullsh*t artist.  Or at least I think you do.

Since the stories in The Guardian and in the Washington Post enabled by Snowden's whistle blowing have shown our leadership to be lying out of their ass at every turn, I'm not sure what you think a revelation would be.

Which of the stories you refer to would you characterize as blockbuster revelations?  That the NSA collects our telephone metadata (dates from 2006, btw)?  That the NSA cooperates with its British and German counterparts?  That the NSA spies on EU diplomatic missions?  That the NSA has broken privacy rules several thousand times during the course of its millions of investigations?  That the NSA checks out peoples' Facebook pages and Twitter accounts?  Some of the stories are interesting, and several of them have some disturbing elements to them, but I wouldn't go so far as to say that any of them are blockbusters.


You mean that providing undeniable proof of what was going on, as in FISA court orders, wasn't a blockbuster?

There were reports of what was going on, but the government steadily lied and blocked any lawsuits from going forward in Federal courts by claiming nobody could prove they were being spied on so nobody had standing to sue.

The court didn't address the constitutionality of the FAA itself, but instead ruled that the plaintiffs-a group of lawyers, journalists, and human rights advocates who regularly communicate with likely "targets" of FAA wiretapping-couldn't prove the surveillance was "certainly impending," so therefore didn't have the "standing" necessary to sue. In other words, since the Americans did not have definitive proof that they were being surveilled under the FAA-a fact the government nearly always keeps secret-they cannot challenge the constitutionality of the statute.

Now that tactic will no longer work. Anyone on Verizon has undeniable standing to sue since we have a court order showing the government's order to Verizon to hand over all their customer's data.

That's not just a blockbuster. It's a farking game changer.
2013-08-20 03:08:37 PM  
2 votes:
I see the Short-Attention Span™ trolls are out in force today

PS - if you don't hate the federal government you .. are the weakest link.
2013-08-20 03:08:26 PM  
2 votes:

James!: BullBearMS: James!: Again, England detained a Brazillian.  Yet it's somehow an indictment of Obama?

Obama didn't admit he knew about it in advance, as has Cameron?

Obama isn't fighting for powers much more extreme than those just misused by Cameron?

Lawyers for the Obama administration are arguing that the United States will be irreparably harmed if it has to abide by a judge's ruling that it can no longer hold terrorism suspects indefinitely without trial in military custody.

So you'd like to change the subject then?


The subject isn't the misuse of power by the leaders of supposed democracies?

Why is Obama fighting for the power to toss anyone he likes into military prisons without charges or a trial, until the end of the "war on terror"?

If you remember, his lying ass claimed he didn't want that power when he signed it into law on New Year's eve, hoping everyone was too drunk to notice he'd done it.

He claimed he was going to veto the law as it was being drafted, for that matter.

Thankfully, a Federal Judge he appointed himself immediately found it to be Unconstitutional.

Yet now he is fighting to regain a power he claimed not to want?

Why do you think defending a lying ass politician is more important than defending your nation from abuse of power?
2013-08-20 02:37:15 PM  
2 votes:

tgambitg: It really was all about sending a message to journalists...


resources3.news.com.au
That's not a message....

This is a message:
www.insideedition.com
2013-08-20 02:15:51 PM  
2 votes:

Cubansaltyballs: BullBearMS: Oh, here's a new one just from today.

Obama administration asks Supreme Court to allow warrantless cellphone searches

How can anyone think these asshats need reigning in?

I know, right! He should totally be impeached because that reporter's boyfriend got detained.


An Obama shill who defends his constant push for warrantless spying on Americans?

Shocking.

The Obama administration is urging the Supreme Court to halt a legal challenge weighing the constitutionality of a once-secret warrantless surveillance program targeting Americans' communications

and

The Obama administration is urging Congress not to adopt legislation that would impose constitutional safeguards on Americans' e-mail stored in the cloud.

and

The Obama administration told a federal court Tuesday that the public has no "reasonable expectation of privacy" in cellphone location data, and hence the authorities may obtain documents detailing a person's movements from wireless carriers without a probable-cause warrant.

and

The Justice Department, saying "a person has no reasonable expectation of privacy in his movements (.pdf) from one place to another," is demanding the justices undo a lower court decision that reversed the conviction and life sentence of a cocaine dealer whose vehicle was tracked via GPS for a month without a court warrant.

and

The Obama administration is seeking to make it easier for the FBI to compel companies to turn over records of an individual's Internet activity without a court order

and

The Obama administration is drawing up plans to give all U.S. spy agencies full access to a massive database that contains financial data on American citizens

and

The Obama administration for the first time responded to a Spygate lawsuit, telling a federal judge the wholesale vacuuming up of all phone-call metadata in the United States is in the "public interest," does not breach the constitutional rights of Americans and cannot be challenged in a court of law.

How anyone with pretenses of being liberal makes excuses for this behavior is beyond me, but the Obama shills are retarded like that.
2013-08-20 01:58:57 PM  
2 votes:
Oh, here's a new one just from today.

Obama administration asks Supreme Court to allow warrantless cellphone searches

How can anyone think these asshats need reigning in?
2013-08-20 01:45:21 PM  
2 votes:
I can't figure out how/why some people keep bringing this up as a first amendment violation that the supreme court is clear on.

A Brazilian citizen was flying from Germany and was detained by British officials when he stopped in England on his way to Brazil. You guys are aware that the constitution is not an international set of laws, but moreover a set of laws for America and its citizens. Also, the supreme court has no jurisdiction over England, Brazil, or Germany.

You retards are aware of that aren't you? Ok... maybe you're not, which would explain why so many of you complain about not being able to get a job with your degree in art history with a minor in interpretive dance from Arizona State.
2013-08-20 01:26:18 PM  
2 votes:
Interesting that so many would label Greenwald as the troublemaker in this case.

But, slaves will be slaves.
2013-08-20 01:15:33 PM  
2 votes:

James!: So Greenwald admits that he has secret documents belonging to the British government yet still thinks he gets to be indignant about them detaining his husband?


Are you trying to claim that possession of documents leaked by a whistle blower is a crime?

The Supreme Court disagrees.
2013-08-20 01:14:48 PM  
2 votes:
Go, Greenwald.
His actions will determine the history of the Western civilization.
Save freedom of speech/press
... while the government tries every dirty trick of chew off one more bit of freedom out of our lives.
2013-08-20 01:14:18 PM  
2 votes:
2013-08-20 01:13:47 PM  
2 votes:
So Greenwald admits that he has secret documents belonging to the British government yet still thinks he gets to be indignant about them detaining his husband?
2013-08-20 01:10:19 PM  
2 votes:

steverockson: Greenwald has two motivations.
1. He hates America.
2. $$$


So are those crimes?
2013-08-20 01:00:09 PM  
2 votes:
From the Thanks for helping department:

Guy Who Wrote Legal Memos Defending US Torture Defends NSA Because It Takes Too Long To Obey The Constitution

John Yoo, of course, is somewhat infamous for being the author of the so-called "Torture Memos," while he was Deputy US Attorney General for President George W. Bush, giving the Bush administration a horrific legal "justification" for torture.

You go Yoo
2013-08-21 04:03:54 AM  
1 votes:

BullBearMS: tirob: 'm not an expert on these issues, but I seriously doubt that a lawsuit that challenges the constitutionality of warrantless wiretapping of communications between Americans and people overseas will get very far on the merits.

Well, it's good that you can admit you have no idea what you are talking about.


I assume that you know more than I do about the subject.  That being the case, would you be interested in telling me whether you think that such a lawsuit would get anywhere, and if so, why?

What I *do* know is that once you start talking about communications across international borders, it has historically been much more difficult for us to invoke the Fourth Amendment protections that we're used to here.  Back in the days of letters, for example, people here who got mail from overseas would now and again find that the envelopes had been cut open and resealed.  Legally.  Without any kind of warrant to do so.  From my own experience I can tell you that CBP recently opened and resealed a small, innocuous package I got from abroad.  Whose contents had been declared.  I suppose I could have filed a class action suit about that, but I'm pretty sure that any judge I had taken it to would have dismissed it out of hand.
2013-08-20 05:18:51 PM  
1 votes:

The Irresponsible Captain: It sounds like this Greenwald guy is an arsehole. It also sounds like some bureaucrats got their knickers in a twist over the reporting and tried to intimidate someone.

I think they all deserve what's coming.


This.

As a culture, Americans seem to need squeaky clean heroes before we can get behind a movement? That's not how anything constructive gets done.

You have to actually get a little grimy, hold your nose, and choose the jerk who best represents your current best interests. Kinda like hiring a lawyer. If I want to get something done with a lawyer, I don't hire choirboys. Politics is like that.

Politics makes for strange bedfellows. Greenwald is an arse, but he's an arse probably holding the keys to information about government misdeeds paid for with OUR DIME.

Repeat after me: THERE ARE NO GOOD GUYS IN THIS DRAMA. No one is a saint in this, you need to at least listen to the jerk who best represents getting to the truth of the matter.

This week it may be Greenwald, noise and persecution complexes aside. Try to separate the messenger from the message.
2013-08-20 03:18:50 PM  
1 votes:

d23: BullBearMS: Only a free and unrestrained press can effectively expose deception in government. And paramount among the responsibilities of a free press is the duty to prevent any part of the government from deceiving the people and sending them off to distant lands to die of foreign fevers and foreign shot and shell.
-Justice Black

The court is owned by the Corporate-Government complex now.  You can't expect them to understand this!!


Guaranteed that one of the first things the NSA did with their new post-9/11 toys was to go straight for the emails of Supreme Court Justices and any others that could eventually hold them accountable. This is J Edgar Hoover 101.

Somebody getting out of line? Just dig up some dirt in their email, reverse engineer a federal wiretap that "discovers" this person's involvement with an escort agency, leak that info. to the New York Times, and problem solved. Just ask Eliot Spitzer.
2013-08-20 02:45:57 PM  
1 votes:
Again, England detained a Brazillian.  Yet it's somehow an indictment of Obama?
2013-08-20 02:38:00 PM  
1 votes:

Evil High Priest: 4tehsnowflakes: Greenwald's initial reaction to the British detention of his partner (he called it a clear attempt at intimidation) was, "I'm going to fix their ass."

Yes.  The story that launched Greenwald to international notoriety is all about how knowledge of people's secrets gives power over them, and how that kind of power is dangerous because it tempts the wielder to act like a bully and abuse the power.  In this chapter, Greenwald's own actions illustrate that the power he now wields -- from his knowledge of and ability to control the release of the Snowden documents -- has puffed him up with a somewhat exaggerated sense of his ability to make governments regret their actions.

So in your eyes, the bully in this little drama is the journalist whose partner was detained for 9 hours for no reason. Interesting.


Not at all.  I am firmly behind the ACLU's foreign-dwelling champion Glenn Greenwald in all this, although his books reveal a Naderish anti-corporate streak.  I merely pointed out the irony that his own remarks illustrate that power corrupts.  And yes, I think sending his lover to get the secret files and having him travel through the UK was stupid.  Of course they were going to search the guy.  Aren't there thousands of obscure people all over the world who would have gladly volunteered to be his courier?
2013-08-20 01:56:38 PM  
1 votes:

Cubansaltyballs: My favorite thing about this whole discussion is that news media people are all in an uproar about journalism being under attack and blah blah blah.

The truth is, those cable news asshats have done far more damage to journalism than any govt actions could. They sit there for hours on end with their agendas, their props, and their bullsh*t. They haven't been journalists for a looong time... they're more like rodeo clowns.

/there are real journalists out there
//just not on cable tv or the guardian


Obama didn't just wiretap the AP and then have to back peddle furiously when he got caught at it?
2013-08-20 01:50:18 PM  
1 votes:
My favorite thing about this whole discussion is that news media people are all in an uproar about journalism being under attack and blah blah blah.

The truth is, those cable news asshats have done far more damage to journalism than any govt actions could. They sit there for hours on end with their agendas, their props, and their bullsh*t. They haven't been journalists for a looong time... they're more like rodeo clowns.

/there are real journalists out there
//just not on cable tv or the guardian
2013-08-20 01:44:28 PM  
1 votes:

rikkitikkitavi: Greenwald has some serious personal issues and quite an axe to grind with all forms of authority.


The kinds of "authority" that are on exhibit should be had issues with, to state it awkwardly. When the Guardian is forced to smash its hard drives under threat of government thugs who say, "You've had your debate, there's no need to write any more," we've gone beyond what anyone should put up with. I hope Greenwald tears everyone involved several new ones.
2013-08-20 01:28:10 PM  
1 votes:
It really was all about sending a message to journalists...
d23 [TotalFark]
2013-08-20 01:27:53 PM  
1 votes:

BullBearMS: Only a free and unrestrained press can effectively expose deception in government. And paramount among the responsibilities of a free press is the duty to prevent any part of the government from deceiving the people and sending them off to distant lands to die of foreign fevers and foreign shot and shell.
-Justice Black


The court is owned by the Corporate-Government complex now.  You can't expect them to understand this!!
2013-08-20 01:22:18 PM  
1 votes:

d23: James!: mr0x: His actions will determine the history of the Western civilization.

Hyperbole is the greatest thing ever.

The stupidest statement in the history of the world.


I will literally smash through this computer and rip out your soul. LITERALLY!
2013-08-20 01:19:16 PM  
1 votes:

BullBearMS: James!: So Greenwald admits that he has secret documents belonging to the British government yet still thinks he gets to be indignant about them detaining his husband?

Are you trying to claim that possession of documents leaked by a whistle blower is a crime?

The Supreme Court disagrees.


The Supreme Court of England?
2013-08-20 01:15:08 PM  
1 votes:
What a queer turn-up.

Also: Every party in this story is contemptible.
2013-08-20 01:12:10 PM  
1 votes:
It sounds like this Greenwald guy is an arsehole. It also sounds like some bureaucrats got their knickers in a twist over the reporting and tried to intimidate someone.

I think they all deserve what's coming.
2013-08-20 12:58:26 PM  
1 votes:
Greenwald has some serious personal issues and quite an axe to grind with all forms of authority.
 
Displayed 32 of 32 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report