EVERY SINGLE INSTANCE of a discussion instigated regarding Greenwald's character
is an attempt to deflect attention from the NSA.
THAT'S IT.
I notice that certain individuals have now attempted to appropriate the term "misdirection", and similar related terms, in a series of flailing, ludicrous attempts to portray the position of anyone making this blatantly apparent fact clear as somehow manipulative.
Greenwald's character is OF NO CONSEQUENCE.
Accusations of "narcissism" and similar have no value other than to change the focus of discussion.
There is NO-ONE ON THIS BOARD who already undertands this that is going to be fooled by repeated attempts to portray Greenwald as self-interested or politically "inappropriate". Everybody already understands that it doesn't MATTER.
We already had this stupid discussion months ago. A small cohort of losers are smarting over their loss.
There are NO WAYS of addressing how Greenwald's character affects what his actions have revealed, because there are NO WAYS IN WHICH HIS CHARACTER AFFECTS WHAT HIS ACTIONS HAVE REVEALED.
CASE. CLOSED.
For 87th fucking time.
= new reply since forum marked as read
That being said i hate the nsa as much as libertarians
thanks for the link I might have missed it.
World's no fuggin rose garden today -- and won't be tomorrow either
Only game in town is to help folk figure out how to grab a few facts, then get em try something, guess why it didn't work as well as hoped, and try something else -- day after day
Usually doesn't matter so much what we "believe in" -- what matters is gettin out there to push and pull
I used to do that, it about drove me nuts.
It's not that sort of thing, not something you can control, you have to go with the flow and not get stuck.
It's very entertaining, and informative, but it is always a mistake to start trying to control what happens, what people think, because it's just not that kind of place, there is nothing to coerce with but words, and it quickly becomes clear that words are just noise unless somebody listens. Attention is the currency on the web, and in the end attention is voluntary.
And can you believe that someone is capturing and saving all this for us as we speak? Our immortality is being assured.
Thank you for paying attention to what I said.
all gonna die
!" Thanks Obama!
What is pathetic is how they see themselves as the grand poobah to decide that it is too late to do anything about this.. from your link..
"Specifically, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) said the court granted a motion to modify the most recent primary order authorizing the 215 phone records program to ensure that the metadata will only be queried after a judicial finding that there is a "reasonable, articulable suspicion" that the selection is associated with an international terrorist organization "absent a true emergency." In addition, the motion limited the query results to metadata within two hops of the selection term, rather than the prior three."
Like they don't want anything to be done about it because that might take away some whining opportunities.
What's more, its' a typical maneuver/exploit used by right-wing conservative nutjobs as well. Always trying to change the subject and/or making direct personal attacks against the messenger (usually totally OT) whenever ''a certain individual'' is being criticized and held to the same standard we held his predecessors.
That was what stood out to me when all this first began. Here. On DU. Teabagger tactics being used against people -- in Greenwald's case -- a man who is the very epitome of a patriot. To sacrifice all, not knowing where it will lead because he couldn't stand by and watch while these bastards raped the Constitution. These are the folks that can. They turn their heads away while the screams of the victims continues unabated.
These people -- these DLCers, these DINOs -- they are not like the Democrats when I was a member. They're really liberal Republicans. Obama even admits it. They don't understand this kind of principled behavior. They have no soul with which to feel nor to understand the depth of depravity they have sunk to. None. All they have are goals. Wins is what they count. They are not any kind of Democrat I want to be a part of.
They're people who see no need to criticize the murder of innocent women and children via drones. They see no problem with the murder of US citizens sans due process. Cops now blatantly torture, maim and kill us -- even with electrical torture devices -- and not a single word has been uttered from our so-called leaders. They must be in agreement that these people had it coming. Because these are the people who remain silent because it's ''politically practical'' to do so.
- The only good thing I can say without a doubt that has come to me from all this, is that it has opened my eyes. Wide.
K&R
say what's what.. and if you don't bow down to that bullshit.. you're a "loser". Hahahahahaahaha
P.S. the case is not fucking closed.
You see, there's a reason why Fox "News"
isn't exactly regarded as a bastion of "journalistic" integrity. We don't readily accept their slanted reporting at face value, and Greenwald has certainly emulated a number their slimeball tactics.
The messenger matters, no matter how much you want to shut down the discussion with the pathetic name calling.
Case closed, my ass. 
That's what you get for posting before office hours.
I know how you feel.
I remember the (very appropriate in my view) reaction around here to the revelations regarding John Poindexter's Total Information Awareness (TIA) program. Now, Poindexter is indeed one of the creepiest figures in history of national security and intelligence ... but in my naivety I thought this reaction represented a Democratic consensus view on civil liberties and privacy.
Apparently, this is not the case, and I find that amazing. Apparently, it really is OK (in the minds of some) to do this sort of stuff if "our guy" is doing it. Justifications and rationales tend to get very technical sounding, but I don't buy them. (I worked in that national security world for over a decade ... I know how the rules have changed, and how relaxed the approach to securing Constitutional protections has indeed become. Don't expect my approval or acquiescence.)
I don't really give a damn about Snowden's, Greenwald's, or Assange's political leanings. I'm not sure I actually like any of these guys. I'm not sure I dislike them. But by their work I have learned some things about how the government (even under the leadership of "our guy"
operates that trouble me immensely. I find the relationship between private security contractors and federal agencies disturbing ... particularly when that relationship focuses on suppressing dissent and punishing activists. (I also note that, curiously, that focus seems to be on dissent from the left ... threats of assassination, coup de tat, etc. from the right seem to draw a relatively mild reaction from federal agencies.)
And I find all that especially disturbing given the increasingly cavalier approach to the 4th and 5th Amendments typical of courts these days. Ya wanna know butt hurt? Imagine a Chris Christie armed with these powers of nearly unfettered surveillance, backed by the currently fashionable loosened interpretation of the 4th and 5th Amendments.
This is one area of policy in which I am at odds with the Administration, and evidently a good chunk of the Democratic Party's rank and file. There are other policy areas ... I find current environmental policy weak at best, and am completely opposed to the KXL pipeline as an example. I am distrustful of the cozy relationship between bankers and Congress, as well as the Administration, and the "too big to jail" approach that seems to have been taken. Etc. Still, I remain a Democrat, and each week gives me another opportunity to find gratitude in the election and re-election of Barack Obama.
But then, I do not expect the Party, its leaders, or its membership to perfectly agree with my views. Will I actively support Hillary? Not likely. She is too removed from my interests on too many issues for me to be that enthusiastic. Will I crawl across broken glass to vote for her against any Republican you can name? Ya damn betcha. I was never very keen on them, but in this day and age, those f'ers are whacked. (To paraphrase Jack Nicholson: "... I imagine a man ... and then remove reason and accountability."
So I remain a Democrat, but my vote can be picked off by a realistic alternative that better represents my core issues ... and the surveillance thing really is one of those. So far, that realistic alternative has not presented itself ... but I note that there seems to be a large number of Democrats who feel similarly under-represented on these matters. It is likely that in time a viable alternative may develop, in which case the Democratic Party will be short of a sizable chunk of its supporters.
The virtually non stop assaults on the character of Greenwald, et al do absolutely nothing to address my concerns, nor energize my diminishing enthusiasm. Those assaults may (or may not be) warranted, but they help not at all with the issue at hand. Indeed, the determination to focus on those aspects of the story (and not on the issues and their implications) rather reinforces my position.
Take it as you will.
Trav
that practices it on a regular basis.
You would think that individuals who claim to be "smarter than the average bear" wouldn't stoop to such puerile behavior, but I guess they have their orders. 
