Slashdot Mirror


Snowden Gave 15,000 Documents to Glenn Greenwald; Obama Cancels Russia Summit

sl4shd0rk writes "The American journalist Glenn Greewald, who published much of the initial info on illegal NSA programs, plans to release more revelations on the NSA spying machine in 10 days. 'The articles we have published so far are a very small part of the revelations that ought to be published,' Greenwald said on Tuesday. Greenwald further elaborated on public posturing which many nations are currently taking: 'The Brazilian government is showing much more anger in public than it is showing in private discussions with the U.S. government. All governments are doing this, even in Europe.'" The U.S. decided to pull out of a summit with Russia next month, citing the decision to grant Snowden asylum as a factor: "However, given our lack of progress on issues such as missile defense and arms control, trade and commercial relations, global security issues, and human rights and civil society in the last twelve months, we have informed the Russian Government that we believe it would be more constructive to postpone the summit until we have more results from our shared agenda. Russia's disappointing decision to grant Edward Snowden temporary asylum was also a factor that we considered in assessing the current state of our bilateral relationship. Our cooperation on these issues remains a priority for the United States, so on Friday, August 9, Secretaries Hagel and Kerry will meet with their Russian counterparts in a 2+2 format in Washington to discuss how we can best make progress moving forward on the full range of issues in our bilateral relationship."

531 comments

  1. Why are they putting a number on the amount of doc by elucido · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I don't understand why that information would ever be released. Are they trying to provoke the US government? I think so.

  2. Typical by war4peace · · Score: 1

    ...when bullies meet...

    --
    ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
  3. "Bilateral relationship" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    "The US government telling other countries what to do and then throwing a temper tantrum when it doesn't get what it wants."

    1. Re:"Bilateral relationship" by Creepy · · Score: 1, Interesting

      The irony is Obama isn't getting what he wants, either. Obama's personal agenda is to eliminate all nukes worldwide and disarming Russia would help further that plan. OTOH, he also has said that he is willing to eliminate all nukes in the US even if other countries don't (the most asinine thing I've heard from him... I can just imagine in a Russian voice "give us all your food or we drop nukes").

    2. Re:"Bilateral relationship" by Antipater · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Anyone else notice that instead of going to Russia, Obama decided to visit Sweden?

      --
      Everything is better with chainsaws.
    3. Re:"Bilateral relationship" by chill · · Score: 4, Funny

      That Swedish Bikini Team beats a shirtless Putin any day of the week. Even Obama knows that.

      --
      Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
    4. Re:"Bilateral relationship" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is a way of giving the Russians the finger in a particularly obvious manner. To the Russians, Sweden is the number one example of an unimportant country.

    5. Re:"Bilateral relationship" by Opportunist · · Score: 2

      Well, that's the US definition of "exchange of opinion". They meet with their partners and exchange their opinion for their own.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    6. Re:"Bilateral relationship" by Antipater · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I was going more for the "Sweden is helping us with Assange, while Russia isn't helping with Snowden" angle.

      --
      Everything is better with chainsaws.
    7. Re:"Bilateral relationship" by gmuslera · · Score: 4, Informative

      Consider that Sweden wiretapped russian international traffic for the NSA and vetoed EU investigation against US spying the message is clear. They are not stepping back even when is clear for everyone what they are perpetrating, just keep raising the bets.

    8. Re:"Bilateral relationship" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Obama's personal agenda is to eliminate all nukes worldwide and disarming Russia would help further that plan"

      Do you lot get paid by the pound of stupid or what?

      You *actually* believe Obama's personal agenda is disarmament of the federal government? Are you freaking kidding me? Really?

      You do understand that DHS has bought enough plain old fashioned BULLETS to fight the Iraq war like 200 times and enough to shoot every citizen in our country like 5 times right? You know this right? And you think Obama wants to disarm? Based on what exactly? What is your proof of this?

      And the worst part about all of this, truly, is that you stupid effing morons actually vote.

      Good grief we are screwed. Thanks so much you shitbirds for voting Democrat.

    9. Re:"Bilateral relationship" by joh · · Score: 2

      Anyone else notice that instead of going to Russia, Obama decided to visit Sweden?

      “Swedish military and civilian intelligence organizations are strong and reliable partners [of USA] on a range of key issues Due to domestic political considerations, the extent of this cooperation is not widely known within the Swedish government and it would be useful to acknowledge this cooperation privately, as public mention of the cooperation would open up the government to domestic criticism.”

      (From a leaked US cable)

    10. Re:"Bilateral relationship" by icebike · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Even in the US, Obama would never be given the elimination of all Nukes. Nobody is that stupid.
      He had no chance of getting that and neither did Jimmy Carter.

      But the clear winner here is Putin.

      He has American secrets withing reach if not already in-hand, plus he doesn't have to play kiss-ass with a buffoon in yet another pointless summit. Obama has no leverage here other than to pout.

      Worse, its his own doing!

      Instead of living by his campaign promises of open and honest government, under which he had an opportunity to rein in the excesses of post 9/11 security frenzy, he chose to double down or triple down, and start reading and archiving everyone's email, recording calls, and then insisting it was only meta-data.

      So he's forced to cancel his trip because he knows Putin will laugh in his face at demands to turn over Snowden.

      Even more telling: at precisely the point where Congress seems to be finally growing a pair: Obama unleashes his embassy closing of historic proportions, all based on an eavesdrop "conference call". (Like Al-Qaeda ever does that!).

      I suspect nothing will actually happen, because it is entirely a fabrication by the NSA/CIA to divert attention and justify their violations of law. Of course there is the equal probability that they are just being played by Al-Qaeda setting up a phony conference call and mentioning grandiose plans, knowing it would be monitored.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    11. Re:"Bilateral relationship" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've always read that, "We will eliminate all our nukes, that you know about." Or even "We will eliminate all our nukes, because we are sitting on a neutron bomb, and have an active Star Wars program."

      Capta: Protests

    12. Re:"Bilateral relationship" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Swedish Bikini Team

      Obigatory citation because I just can't help myself.

    13. Re:"Bilateral relationship" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      US governement is the true plague...

      live and let live ..someone said... and someone else said, look in your garden...

      here in Switzerland we have learned anything of good from you, as the rest of the world... it's so difficult learning something from us?!

      davegee

    14. Re:"Bilateral relationship" by frinkster · · Score: 1

      I can just imagine in a Russian voice "give us all your food or we drop nukes".

      I see that you are equating Putin's maturity level with my 4-year old child, who is going through a phase in which he destroys the things he wants when he is not allowed to have them. My tactic has been to calmly explain that I was saving the cookie for after dinner but now that he has destroyed it he will get no cookie after dinner. I think he is starting to understand and am pretty confident that long before age 5 he won't be destroying cookies anymore.

      I don't have any knowledge of Putin's age but I am pretty sure that he is an adult and if ~50 years of cold war brinksmanship has taught us anything it is that Russian leadership acts like rational adults when it comes to the use of nuclear weapons.

    15. Re:"Bilateral relationship" by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Not to worry. We learned to fund both sides of wars from you.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    16. Re:"Bilateral relationship" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Something something something innuendo about sexuality and the pros and cons of seeing Putin's naked torso vs. Russia's fucked up culture vs. the perfect "beard" of Swedish Bikini Team.

  4. no surprise there then by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    n/t

  5. Re: Why are they putting a number on the amount of by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This says everything

    http://youtu.be/P9EbAZdb7hQ

  6. Screw You Obama by Jherek+Carnelian · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Screw you Obama for giving Russia, with all their human rights problems like Pussy Riot, the moral high ground here. Screw you for making the US look like a bunch of mean-spirited whiners that have lost their shit because Snowden revealed the emperor has no clothes. It's going to be a long time, if ever, until we get back the home of the free and the land of the brave.

    1. Re:Screw You Obama by oodaloop · · Score: 4, Insightful

      until we get back the home of the free and the land of the brave.

      The what now?

      --
      Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
    2. Re:Screw You Obama by phantomfive · · Score: 4, Insightful

      How to know when someone doesn't understand Russia? Of all the human rights problems to list, they choose the (favorite hipster issue of) Pussy Riot. You don't think killing journalists or fixing elections is a little more worthy of note?

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    3. Re:Screw You Obama by bkmoore · · Score: 1

      Screw you Obama for giving Russia, with all their human rights problems like Pussy Riot, the moral high ground here. Screw you for making the US look like a bunch of mean-spirited whiners that have lost their shit because Snowden revealed the emperor has no clothes. It's going to be a long time, if ever, until we get back the home of the free and the land of the brave.

      yea, and you, Obama + Bush, have ruined all the good Yakov Smirnoff jokes. "In America you watch television. In America, television watch you!"

    4. Re:Screw You Obama by Mitreya · · Score: 4, Insightful

      for giving Russia, with all their human rights problems like Pussy Riot, the moral high ground here.

      The irony is palpable!

      "given our lack of progress on issues such as missile defense and arms control, trade and commercial relations, global security issues, and human rights and civil society in the last twelve months"

      I guess there is a lack of progress on both sides....

    5. Re:Screw You Obama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It also means that other countries that were holding out going full 1984 will now have an excuse to do it.

    6. Re:Screw You Obama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pussy Riot is a US PR stunt, probably run by the like of the Rendon Group, or whoever was responsible for the' Saddam stole incubators from Kuwaiti hospitals' scam.

    7. Re:Screw You Obama by tool462 · · Score: 1

      Strike that, reverse it.

    8. Re:Screw You Obama by Mitreya · · Score: 1

      until we get back the home of the free and the land of the brave.

      The what now?

      The slogan that many Americans instinctively trot out when they want to reassure themselves of being #1.

      If you stop and think about the slogans... you probably hate our freedoms.

    9. Re:Screw You Obama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sad but true...

    10. Re:Screw You Obama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He listed one example; he didn't say that was the most important issue or that it was the only one.

    11. Re:Screw You Obama by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2

      It started long before Obama. Around about 11/09/2001 in fact. Billions pissed away on a false sense of security are nothing to the freedoms lost and the lives and countries destroyed.

      We are still waiting for American to hit rock bottom so it can start on the long road to recovery.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    12. Re:Screw You Obama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I believe this was planned before now. It is a plan to get snowden cheaply. I pray that God almighty would protect snowden and all who speak and fight for the truth. A game is on board. My plea is that russia should do the world proud by keeping snowden or even giving him a permanent assylum. May God through the blessed virgin mary protect you with his angels Snowden. We love you bro!. don't worry you are safe under the God's guide. The truth will always set you free bro. Fear Nothing. (+).

    13. Re:Screw You Obama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ooh, you're so cool because your human rights violations are better than his human rights violations. You are the embodiment of the hipterism that you complain about.

    14. Re:Screw You Obama by RobbieCrash · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This is a perfect example of why left-wing politics are so unsuccessful. We need to stop trying to one-up each other, and focus on making whatever change is possible. If there is pressure on Russia for Pussy Riot or their anti-gay laws, and that pressure is maintained, there's a chance of changing those things. If we all start whinging about 'why don't you start caring about something else!' then the pressure drops, nothing changes; 500 voices yelling different things are a lot easier to tune out than 500 voices yelling the same. Just because the progress isn't aimed at what you, and many other people (myself included), feel is a bigger issue doesn't make it wrong.

      Causes need people and momentum, splintering movements destroys them. Just because it's not guided at the worst of the worst doesn't mean that the human rights violations against Pussy Riot ok.

      --
      Keep on knockin'
      https://robbiecrash.me
    15. Re:Screw You Obama by xclr8r · · Score: 1

      Should be "Land of the Free Home of the Brave." There is also a Bob Dylan/Johnny Cash album of the same title.

      --
      Beware of those who profit off the docile and persecute the unbelievers.
    16. Re:Screw You Obama by Desler · · Score: 1

      Billions? You're a few orders of magnitude off...

    17. Re:Screw You Obama by Desler · · Score: 2

      Send this communist terrorist to Gitmo! *cocks shotgun*

    18. Re:Screw You Obama by RenderSeven · · Score: 5, Funny

      He meant "the land of the free homes". Or is it "home of the land-free braves"? Im pretty sure there is a housing bubble and/or American Indian joke in there somewhere.

    19. Re:Screw You Obama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      "Everybody must get droned!"

    20. Re:Screw You Obama by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      If you're going to offer a "PROTIP" you should make an effort to be correct.

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    21. Re:Screw You Obama by phantomfive · · Score: 2

      I'm perfectly happy for someone to have different priorities.

      The annoying thing is when people rant without making an effort to understand the situation first. Do you remember after the Boston bombing, when people were being harassed for nothing more than being photographed with a suspicious backpack? That kind of thing happens when you don't make an effort to understand the situation.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    22. Re:Screw You Obama by wbr1 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This is a perfect example of why left-wing politics are so unsuccessful.

      You say that as if right-wing politics is so much more successful.

      The problem is neither right or left wing. The problem is that our politicians make a side show out of hot-button but ultimately not very important issues, so they can appear to differentiate themselves and 'take a stand for/against x'. In reality, they are sold to the highest bidder, working for an almost mutually shared agenda that is hidden behind all the bluff and bluster. Not many really bother to look deep when their standard of living is okay at least, and they have the lotto/tmz/vh1/football/whatever to keep them distracted.

      --
      Silence is a state of mime.
    23. Re:Screw You Obama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You were never in the land of the free to begin with. This place has been locked down as much as any other country since before you were born.

      Unless of course you are one of those gun nuts that think land of the free means you can shoot anyone freely if they piss you off, then sure enjoy your freedoms.
      I hope you realize that your guns are worthless if your own government went rogue on the country. (woops, that happened already)
      Good luck shooting down a titan missile.

      Free speech? Pfft, hardly. You'll still get arrested and/or put on a watch list in some government DB.

      "Land of the brave" is just hilarious.
      Early humans braving AN ICE AGE, that was brave. Some people in wooden toy boats sailing off the end of the planet? Who cares, it is turtles all the way down, everyone knows that, turtle is for dinner, lunch, supper, breakfast and tea!

      America is as screwed as any other country is right now.
      And they are even more Big Brother-ish than the UK was mistakenly labelled because some stupid report counted private cameras as CCTV.
      Welcome to your real country, the only country you have ever known.
      Stop thinking you were ever in the Matrix V.1, you weren't.

    24. Re:Screw You Obama by oodaloop · · Score: 1

      I was referring to my signature, which I sometimes forget people block.

      --
      Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
    25. Re:Screw You Obama by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      So what you are saying is you knew about Russian human rights problems before it was popular knowledge?

    26. Re:Screw You Obama by RobbieCrash · · Score: 1

      Oh, for sure. But the thing about it is, even without understanding the whole issue, a movement can make great progress if they have enough people that for one reason or another buy into it.

      The conservative attack on climate science is a perfect example of this. 90% of the people arguing against climate science have no idea what they're talking about, the other 10% just don't care that they're wrong. Somehow, despite the fact that they're all ignorant about it they've managed to get some kind of public debate about the legitimacy of the science going. They've been able to do this by ignoring the fact that some of them are advocating for nuclear energy, some people want more drilling, some people want more clean coal, some want to power the world by burning small children, some people think that melting ice caps aren't an issue, some people think that it's natural, some people think whatever. All of them have decided that their way of doing things doesn't matter, as long as we all understand that worrying about climate change is stupid.

      --
      Keep on knockin'
      https://robbiecrash.me
    27. Re:Screw You Obama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why don't you take your glasses off.

    28. Re:Screw You Obama by RobbieCrash · · Score: 1

      I'm less referring to governments than I am to social movements. Agreed about the soma, though.

      --
      Keep on knockin'
      https://robbiecrash.me
    29. Re:Screw You Obama by X0563511 · · Score: 1

      I don't see what Obama has to do with the NSA lying to congress, and the judiciary not doing a damn thing about it.

      --
      For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
    30. Re:Screw You Obama by Opportunist · · Score: 1, Troll

      home of the imprisoned, land of the cowards?

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    31. Re:Screw You Obama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LOL how is Obama giving Puting the moral high ground? Putin is harboring a traitor.

    32. Re:Screw You Obama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All of what you said is so...so...important to who? What the little person doesn't get is its all about the real basics. MONEY AND F*CKING CONTROL.

    33. Re:Screw You Obama by Dutchmaan · · Score: 1

      I so wish I had mod points for that one.

    34. Re:Screw You Obama by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      So?
      No matter who is behind it, it showed just how horrible the Russian government really is.

    35. Re:Screw You Obama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes Obama Owns or should own it, but Bush Started all that Obama is continuing. WE need to remember that both right and left are at fault and that our politicians are not working to help the American People, instead they are helping line their own pockets while helping their friends in the corporate world. All of this happened under Bush Jr. so that is why he has some of the blame. The fact that Obama campaigned on changing this and did squat is what he is to be blamed for.

    36. Re:Screw You Obama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Last time I checked, the NSA fell under the Executive Branch, no?

    37. Re:Screw You Obama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not that I give a shit either way, but what does Obama have to do with this? Crediting one man with the ability to tap the world's phones and all internet activity is silly. He's in it for the money and power, just like many before him. But the NSA has been around for many more years than Obama. I'd be amazed if Obama even knew what his own IP is.

      'Land of the free, home of the brave' is as 'land of the free, home of the brave' does. Yet you sit here and whine out "Screw you Obama". Sorta seems like you don't like yourself very much, seeing as how you curse the very thing that you do. I couldn't care less about what other countries think of my country. Our problem (in America) is that we don't fight for our rights, for fear of 'being like one of those bad countries that are failing today'. Oh the understanding that Gandhi had, and shared. The people have the real power. Every time you curse the government, you're basically showing that all you can think to do is whine. And that's probably exactly what they want us all to do, whine our way to hell.

    38. Re:Screw You Obama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Brave of the land and free of the home. Kinda sums up USA nowadays.

    39. Re:Screw You Obama by Lunix+Nutcase · · Score: 1

      Not that I give a shit either way, but what does Obama have to do with this? /quote

      Everything? The submission and the GP's comment are about a decision he made in canceling a summit with Russia over Snowden.

    40. Re:Screw You Obama by Clsid · · Score: 2, Informative

      I don't know what Kool-Aid are you drinking or if Al-Qaeda got into you, but even with all its faults, the US still is a great country. Do travel to crappy places in the world to realize that the standard of living in the US is still way higher than in a lot of places. And last time I checked the US economy still leads the world by a very wide margin. And I wonder what makes you come to a US website if everything is so screwed up, LOL.

    41. Re:Screw You Obama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      its actually started even before 9/11. That just allowed us to push the legislation through without anyone putting up to much of a fuss. look in to the Echelon system that was in use prior to 9/11. it really started in the 80's-90's and was finally "made legal" after 9/11

    42. Re:Screw You Obama by Errtu76 · · Score: 1

      I'm almost tempted to figure out where the option to unhide your signature is

    43. Re:Screw You Obama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      DUBYA DUBYA TWO.
      you know that war that we bailed everyone out of. yeah, we were both Free and Brave back then. Those brave men fought to protect those here at home, and the Constitution and Bill of Rights, and all that good stuff that Makes the United States of America , THE United States of America. so yes, there was a point that were were both Brave and Free.

    44. Re:Screw You Obama by grantspassalan · · Score: 2

      So?
      No matter who is behind it, it showed just how horrible the Russian government really is.

      Back in the Cold War days I never thought the time would ever come that someone blowing the whistle on the American Government's evil behavior would seek and find asylum in a communist country like China or Russia.

      --
      A sufficiently advanced simulation is indistinguishable from reality.
    45. Re:Screw You Obama by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Here's the thing, I'm not interested in making 'progress,' I'm not even sure what your movement is.

      What I want is for people to be less stupid, that is, do a little research, or at least be more aware that they don't know something. That will make me much happier than any liberal crusade of the moment.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    46. Re:Screw You Obama by avandesande · · Score: 1

      Isn't that what a summit is for, to resolve issues? The summit is cancelled because there are too many issues?

      --
      love is just extroverted narcissism
    47. Re:Screw You Obama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mr. Snowden indeed is a traitor to the American government, but he is a hero to the majority of the American people. Paul Revere was a traitor to the government of the King of England, but he was also a hero to the American people of his day. Being a traitor hero depends on whose side you are on.

    48. Re:Screw You Obama by s.petry · · Score: 1

      The fact that this makes movements unsuccessful is the reason that the government pays agent provocateurs.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    49. Re:Screw You Obama by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      I understand that feeling.
      Back then I never thought we would have "Papers Please" stops in the USA either.

    50. Re:Screw You Obama by RobbieCrash · · Score: 1

      If you're not interested in making progress, why should anyone give a shit about the election rigging or journalist killing?

      You seem to think that fixing government human rights abuses is probably a good thing, so we're apparently on the same side. You're just proving my point by saying you're uninterested because the exact focus of 'my' movement isn't the exact same as yours. Splintering off into a hundred laser-focused groups accomplishes nothing.

      Unless your only mission is to get people to admit they don't know everything about everything, in which case, good luck accomplishing anything on either side of the divide.

      --
      Keep on knockin'
      https://robbiecrash.me
    51. Re:Screw You Obama by FilatovEV · · Score: 1

      "If there is pressure on Russia for Pussy Riot or their anti-gay laws, and that pressure is maintained, there's a chance of changing those things."

      No, there isn't a chance to change those things using pressure. If they are changed, it won't be because of the pressure. Pressure only serves to irritate Russian Government and the general Russian population alike. But stupid American right-wingers do not care.

    52. Re:Screw You Obama by Rob+the+Bold · · Score: 1

      home of the imprisoned, land of the cowards?

      It's not that we're oppressed and chicken, it's just that we just got these really cool cellphones. Seriously, dude, there's a "how high can I throw my phone" app. I'm thinking revolution might slow down my upgrade cycle, not to mention 4G buildout.

      --
      I am not a crackpot.
    53. Re:Screw You Obama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm almost tempted to figure out where the option to unhide your signature is

      Sig was: "Home of the land. Free of the brave."
      [menu on top right with your nick in it] \ Accounts \ Discussions \ uncheck Disable sigs

    54. Re:Screw You Obama by Gilmoure · · Score: 1

      The Judean People's Front!

      --
      I drank what? -- Socrates
    55. Re:Screw You Obama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seems correct to me. That slogan was just pure arrogance all along, and now that we're doing things we made fun of the Soviets for in the past, no one can claim it's anything more than a lie.

    56. Re:Screw You Obama by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 3, Informative

      Do travel to crappy places in the world to realize that the standard of living in the US is still way higher than in a lot of places.

      Being better than someone or something else is not the same as being good.

      And I wonder what makes you come to a US website if everything is so screwed up, LOL.

      The quality of a website that happens to be US-centric or hosted in the US has nothing to do with the quality of the US as a whole.

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
    57. Re:Screw You Obama by MysteriousPreacher · · Score: 1

      Masterfully done, sir.

      --
      -- Using the preview button since 2005
    58. Re:Screw You Obama by sFurbo · · Score: 1

      When were the USA "home of the free"? I am assuming all dates before 1865 is ruled out. I also assume any date since 1918 is ruled out, due to various acts. This leaves a pretty small window, especially considering how far back it is. I am also sure I am missing some horrible cases in the intervening years, given the typical American reaction to threats. And given that reaction, "home of the brave" is not really faring any better.

    59. Re:Screw You Obama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "free homes" unless taken by the bank...

    60. Re:Screw You Obama by s.petry · · Score: 2

      Goes back further than that, but it's a bit harder to see. Slow changes at first, mostly in the education system with appointed officials in Universities and Colleges, and Government (State/Fed) agencies. You can't enslave an intelligent society.

      Even on /. where "geeks" should abound, a large number of people can't see a fallacy that smacks them in the face. They argue with false information instead of checking facts and hold irrational beliefs based on false information. *shrug* so far their plans have been working, but perhaps taking a bit longer than the globalist NWO people wanted. Not everyone went to sleep, and people do wander out of the cave on occasion.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    61. Re:Screw You Obama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why don't you watch this and get back to us.

    62. Re:Screw You Obama by s.petry · · Score: 1

      Thank you shill #21381675

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    63. Re:Screw You Obama by tlhIngan · · Score: 1

      How to know when someone doesn't understand Russia? Of all the human rights problems to list, they choose the (favorite hipster issue of) Pussy Riot. You don't think killing journalists or fixing elections is a little more worthy of note?

      Or how about the current anti-homosexual agenda that's sparking protests all around the world because of the 2014 Olympics. (Are they going to arrest all homosexual athletes? There's been no guarantee issued...).

      Hell, you'd think that Obama would spread a rumor that Snowden was gay or something.

    64. Re:Screw You Obama by aristotle-dude · · Score: 1

      How to know when someone doesn't understand Russia? Of all the human rights problems to list, they choose the (favorite hipster issue of) Pussy Riot. You don't think killing journalists or fixing elections is a little more worthy of note?

      Maybe because that is exactly what happens in the US too? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Hastings_(journalist) death seems suspicious to his wife. Apparently, he was about to break a really big story on the CIA just before his fiery high speed single vehicle car crash. According to a colleague, he was working on a story and had said that he was trying to stay off the grid as much as possible.

      --
      Jesus was a compassionate social conservative who called individuals to sin no more.
    65. Re:Screw You Obama by spire3661 · · Score: 1

      I want that too, but the plain fact is one man alone is nothing. You must move the masses to achieve your ends.

      --
      Good-bye
    66. Re:Screw You Obama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why? What pressure? What pressure can anyone put on a state where the two strongest institutions are the security/intelligence services and the military?

      You can put pressure on politicians in the US through protests and demonstrations because the mass of voters, however misled or distracted, has the power to vote them in and out of office. A demonstration that shocks and sways the voting masses can remove a government from power. Russia has no such thing; they will only be removed from power through either a massive economic disaster (with their energy reserves, very unlikely) or outside military intervention (also unlikely).

    67. Re:Screw You Obama by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      Good post/sig combo XD

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    68. Re:Screw You Obama by A_Non_Moose · · Score: 1

      You don't think killing journalists or fixing elections is a little more worthy of note?

      (sarcasm tag)
      That's one way, another is to sick the IRS after political opponents and the DOJ after reporters after a bit of judge shopping.

      What's a little voter suppression based on race, religion or political affiliation...it is not like it ruins lives like killing does?

      Ah, just another of several "phony scandals".
      (/st)

      --
      Have you read the moderator guidelines? Well, have you, PUNK? (and I want a Karma: Gnarly option)
    69. Re:Screw You Obama by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
      I had to go wiki what the "Pussy Riots" were...was hoping that it was safe for work...

      I'd never heard of this...so, a girl band in Russia gets arrested and jailed?

      Geez...why oh why couldn't this have happened to the Spice Girls, and saved the world from them????

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    70. Re:Screw You Obama by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      So I guess things aren't looking good for the mens' figure skating competition?

      http://instantrimshot.com/

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    71. Re:Screw You Obama by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      That's how I read it the first time. He meant Russia's lack of progress?

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    72. Re:Screw You Obama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "The conservative attack on climate science is a perfect example of this."

      The Climate Change crowd is not science it is a religion.

      And the conservative does not attack science, we like science. We attack political ideology that seeks to destroy the rights and liberties of the people by way of foolish nonsense like " we need to make the weather change".

      Sorry we don't buy into your bullshit and can do math. We also don't say things like 'some want to power the world by burning small children'.

      All the statist wants is more power and if you cannot see that I can't help you. And all of you climate change supporters, or whatever the hell you are calling yourself today, are statists. Go ahead genius, prove me wrong, you cannot. And hyperbole like 'some want to power the world by burning small children' is not an acceptable argument.

    73. Re:Screw You Obama by Beorytis · · Score: 1

      So you're saying Mr. Slugworth works for US?

    74. Re:Screw You Obama by Hatta · · Score: 3, Informative

      You say that as if right-wing politics is so much more successful.

      Are you kidding? The whole world is engulfed in right wing politics these days. Our "socialist" president is a Reagan Republican. The Tea Party had huge successes, while Occupy was effectively suppressed. In Canada and the UK there's Harper and Cameron. The whole of Europe is pushing austerity instead of bailing out the little guy.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    75. Re:Screw You Obama by Hatta · · Score: 2

      This is a perfect example of why left-wing politics are so unsuccessful.

      No, the reason why left-wing politics are unsuccessful is that people are easily scared, and conservativism is the politics of fear. Good policy is based on logic and evidence, not emotion and rhetoric. But emotion and rhetoric are what move people.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    76. Re:Screw You Obama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's the best part of slashdot, you don't even need to get an account to hide sigs, it's done automatically for all "guest" visitors.

    77. Re:Screw You Obama by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 1

      "Land of the Home, Free of the Brave"

    78. Re:Screw You Obama by dkleinsc · · Score: 5, Informative

      And last time I checked the US economy still leads the world by a very wide margin.

      You must have checked a long time ago, because by many measurements the US economy does not lead the world:
      - If you go by total GDP, then the US produces more than any single country, but produces less than the EU countries combined, and China is catching up rapidly.
      - If you go by GDP per capita, US is somewhere around 6-8th in the world, so if you mean "We produce the most stuff per person". Places that have a higher GDP per capita include Luxemburg, Norway, U.A.E., Qatar, Singapore, and Brunei, and possibly Switzerland.
      - If you go by median household income, then the US loses to Luxemburg, Norway, and Switzerland.
      - If you go by median wealth, then the US loses to approximately 14 other countries.
      - If you go by GDP growth, then we're not even close to the top of the list.

      It's not clear that the US has the best economy in the world. It is doing a heck of a lot better than a lot of other places, but it's not doing exceptionally well among other First World countries.

      --
      I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
    79. Re:Screw You Obama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What happened on November 9th?

    80. Re:Screw You Obama by SleazyRidr · · Score: 1

      Home of the land. Free of the brave.

      To save you the trouble of unhiding sigs. I'm partial to "Land of the sheep, home of the slave."

    81. Re:Screw You Obama by XcepticZP · · Score: 1

      Interesting you pick that example, AC. Rosa Parks didn't do her thing until 1955, a whole whopping 10 years after the end of "DUBYA DUBYA TWO". So no, you were most certainly NOT the land of the free in any remote sense back then.

    82. Re:Screw You Obama by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Wait a second. They have _mens_ figure skating?

      The Russians should just put an enforcer on the ice.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    83. Re:Screw You Obama by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Echelon was formalized under Truman, started under FDR.

      It was originally an agreement between the USA, the UK and Australia to end run all their domestic spying restrictions by spying on each others citizens and reporting the results back to the appropriate government.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    84. Re:Screw You Obama by dchinu · · Score: 1

      This is Informative, i am glad its showing it's colour

    85. Re:Screw You Obama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      LOL how is Obama giving Puting the moral high ground? Putin is harboring a traitor.

      Correction. President Barack H. Obama is the traitor to the United States of America. Edward Snowden exposed the truth yet the Government of the United States of America, namely President Obama, makes the claim that Snowden is the traitor. President Vladimir Putin and the People of Russia are standing up against the tyrannical actions of the United States of Amerika.

    86. Re:Screw You Obama by Princeofcups · · Score: 2

      I don't know what Kool-Aid are you drinking or if Al-Qaeda got into you, but even with all its faults, the US still is a great country. Do travel to crappy places in the world to realize that the standard of living in the US is still way higher than in a lot of places. And last time I checked the US economy still leads the world by a very wide margin. And I wonder what makes you come to a US website if everything is so screwed up, LOL.

      And more and more that wealth is being sold overseas. Just take a look at what American money has built in Dubai. Check out the opulent pools and hotels. That's all new construction, in the last decade, when major defense contractors and oil conglomerates started moving their headquarters out of the country (See Bush and Cheney). Your tax dollars at work. Meanwhile, we can't come up with enough money to give our citizens basic healthcare, or a livable minimum wage. Face it. This country is being cashed out, sold to the highest bidder. The rich have never been richer (with all their untaxable riches) and poor have never been poorer, and the trend is that not only will this continue, but it is accelerating. If you can't recognize a sinking ship, then enjoy your swim with the rest of the rats. Today will not last.

      --
      The only thing worse than a Democrat is a Republican.
    87. Re:Screw You Obama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Funny that you bring up Bush Derangement Syndrome, as your subsequent rant clearly demonstrates that you suffer from an acute case of Obama Derangement Syndrome.

      Two sides of the same partisan coin.

    88. Re:Screw You Obama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because the spice girls would never have the guts to protest the state taking over a major national religion.

    89. Re:Screw You Obama by amicusNYCL · · Score: 1

      Most Americans would actually say "Land of the Free and Home of the Brave", instead of switching the words Free and Brave.

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
    90. Re:Screw You Obama by LordLucless · · Score: 1

      You say that as if right-wing politics is so much more successful.

      No, he says that as if right-wing politics is unsuccessful for different reasons. I agree with what you say about politicians, but politicians these days are neither right-wing or left-wing. They appear to have no particular beliefs, other than that sufficient differentiation is required to get them elected.

      The GPs post was about why left-wing popular political pressure fails - because it's too diffuse. In my opinion, right-wing popular political pressure fails because it attempts too much - even if the prospect of a right-wing small government is good in the end, trying to shrink the government to match that ideal as rapidly as the right would like is impossible.

      --
      Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
    91. Re:Screw You Obama by LordLucless · · Score: 1

      The Tea Party had huge successes, while Occupy was effectively suppressed.

      The Tea Party had about as much success as Occupy. One was well, you say suppressed, I say ignored until it went away. The other was amalgamated into the political machinery. Net effect of both is effectively nil.

      The whole of Europe is pushing austerity instead of bailing out the little guy.

      ...because they've spend the last few decades bailing out the little guy with money they didn't have.

      --
      Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
    92. Re:Screw You Obama by Rakarra · · Score: 1

      So?
      No matter who is behind it, it showed just how horrible the Russian government really is.

      Back in the Cold War days I never thought the time would ever come that someone blowing the whistle on the American Government's evil behavior would seek and find asylum in a communist country like China or Russia.

      It's always good to seek asylum from countries who 1) CAN protect you (unlike, say, Sweden) if what you expose is really embarrassing, and 2) have an interest in protecting you should that embarrassment work out politically for them.

    93. Re:Screw You Obama by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Eh, I don't have such grand desires, if I just help out one guy I feel good.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    94. Re:Screw You Obama by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Unless your only mission is to get people to admit they don't know everything about everything, in which case, good luck accomplishing anything on either side of the divide.

      Nah, I just want people to get better informed. Or be slightly aware when they aren't.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    95. Re:Screw You Obama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Human Rights violations like Pussy Riot? You do realize that if that band tried their shit in the US, they'd have been in jail a hell of a lot quicker than in Russia. It's not exactly like they are innocent, they broke laws that are in place in both the US and Russia.

    96. Re:Screw You Obama by aralin · · Score: 1

      Any eastern european communist country in the 80's had uniformly for every citizen:

      1) Higher standard of living
      2) Lower unemployment
      3) Better healthcare
      4) Better education
      5) More personal freedom
      6) Less surveilance and government spying
      7) Better infrastructure
      8) Lower incarceration rates
      9) Less oppressive laws

      than 75-80% of americans have today. That is a third of century ago.

      Just because you happen to be fortunate enough, doesn't mean that the whole country is or even most of it is. The US is good enough country for the top 10-20%, it is great country for the top 1%. The rest can go fuck themselves.

      --
      If programs would be read like poetry, most programmers would be Vogons.
    97. Re:Screw You Obama by aralin · · Score: 1

      Also, subtract California and New York and the rest of USA is at the bottom for most of those measures.

      --
      If programs would be read like poetry, most programmers would be Vogons.
    98. Re:Screw You Obama by bfandreas · · Score: 1

      Isn't that what a summit is for, to resolve issues? The summit is cancelled because there are too many issues?

      Nope. Negotiations are done well in advance. these summits are only for shake-hands and grinning into cameras and presenting the results.

      Think about it: How much face time do you think they have at those summits? How much detail can be discussed? Not too much, I'd wager.

      Also putting "civil liberties" and whatnot on the agenda is a surefire way to ensure there is no progress whatsoever.

      --
      20 minutes into the future
    99. Re:Screw You Obama by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      If there is pressure on Russia for Pussy Riot or their anti-gay laws, and that pressure is maintained, there's a chance of changing those things.

      Not really, no. As far as most people in Russia are concerned, Pussy Riot should rot in prison for the rest of their lives, and openly gay men should be beaten unconscious - and when some guys in the West start campaigns to tell them otherwise, it is seen more as foreigners meddling in things that are none of their business. It also gives more credence to propaganda rhetoric of the ruling party, which is basically "vote for us, we'll protect you against the evil Americans spreading teh gays to undermine our great country".

      The only way to change that, long term, is to advance the entire society. It'll take a lot time and effort, and - crucially - the right kind of people in power. The ruling regime is actually playing those social conservative measures up as a populist card, at the same time reinforcing them to have more cards to play for the next election round. Simply put, they pander to the religious obscurantists and homophobes that are already plentiful today, while also making sure that there will be even more such people tomorrow. This needs to change first. Hence what GP said - focus on real, transparent democracy first. This will not have an immediate effect, but if maintained for long enough, it will get us there.

    100. Re:Screw You Obama by chris.alex.thomas · · Score: 1

      *hands up* !! I'll go quietly!!

    101. Re:Screw You Obama by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do travel to crappy places in the world to realize that the standard of living in the US is still way higher than in a lot of places.

      Being better than someone or something else is not the same as being good.

      The decreasing percentage of North Americans that can afford to travel anywhere. Members of the military/pseudo military aren't tourists (terrorists?).

      And I wonder what makes you come to a US website if everything is so screwed up, LOL.

      The quality of a website that happens to be US-centric or hosted in the US has nothing to do with the quality of the US as a whole.

      And you can bet the pointy end of the work done on this site isn't being done by North Americans - but most of the stupider comments are.

      High standard of living? Literacy? Low crime and imprisonment? Low debt? Anywhere but North America. Clearly all your travelling done on the couch in front of Fox with your head up your arse - or on jaunts to Mexico with your spudnik bros.

    102. Re:Screw You Obama by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

      Clearly all your travelling done on the couch in front of Fox with your head up your arse - or on jaunts to Mexico with your spudnik bros.

      What?

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
    103. Re:Screw You Obama by airdweller · · Score: 1

      "Any eastern european communist country in the 80's had uniformly for every citizen:
      1) Higher standard of living
      2) Lower unemployment
      3) Better healthcare
      4) Better education
      5) More personal freedom
      6) Less surveilance and government spying
      7) Better infrastructure
      8) Lower incarceration rates
      9) Less oppressive laws"

      5 through 9? Don't be ridiculous.

    104. Re:Screw You Obama by aralin · · Score: 1

      I lived there then, I live here now.

      5) If you work two jobs and on the weekends, you cannot even take a sick day, much less vacation, what good is it to you that you theoretically can? Back then we had more time to do with as we pleased and more actual options to do stuff, even though there was restriction on travel west of iron curtain.

      6) Seriously, the technology was not there. They might have followed you around, but only handful of people had their phones / homes bugged. The government actually restricted surveilance to only about 0.01% of population.

      7) This is hard to compare, a matter of opinion mostly. But for most rural america, the infrastructure is in aweful state. The police services, the social services, the medical stuff. Public transport is aweful. No really, I am in awe on how awful it is!

      8) Every state in present or history has and had lower incarceration rates that present day US.

      9) The number of laws in US that would send me to jail for high mandatory sentences for just living my life is enormous. Prosecutors can just pick and choose who they want to put in jail. Everybody is guilty of something. At least in there you were clearly a political prisoner and when the revolution came, you could count on your record to get striken down. Not here in US. Everyone pretends it is all legal.

      --
      If programs would be read like poetry, most programmers would be Vogons.
    105. Re:Screw You Obama by airdweller · · Score: 1

      I lived in the USSR and traveled extensively (dozens of cities in Russia, Ukraine, Estonia, Latvia, Armenia, Kazakhstan; Poland, Hungary).

      If you're talking about one of the satellite states like Poland or East Germany, I wouldn't argue with #5 (more personal freedom). I haven't lived there long enough to know well, but, at least on the surface, Warsaw, Krakow and Budapest in the early 80's looked much more "free" than the USSR. Unlike the USSR, where the Police or even the "People's patrol" could detain you if you had long hair, an ear ring (if you were a man) or your clothes were too "hippy", as well as force you to "fix" those "issues".

      As for #6 (Less surveillance and government spying): maybe you forgot what East Germany was infamous for (hint: the Stasi). The technology wasn't there, but what they could achieve just with the good old snitching was impressive. The rest of the "Communist" countries weren't that far behind.

      #7 (Better infrastructure): Even in Poland and Hungary with the exception of the "showcase" buildings, etc. the infrastructure wasn't in great shape (don't even start me on the Russian "infrastructure" - it's like Russia is always ready to fight a foreign invasion).

      #8 (Lower incarceration rates): I'm not sure whether to laugh or be sad. The USSR had about 10 million of people in prisons/camps/forced settlements between 1930's and 1950's. Starting with the 60's the government became smarter: they would just declare a dissident crazy, or not let him/her find any normal job, or - at best - force them out of the country.

      #9 (Less oppressive laws): This is getting ridiculous. In the 30's through the 50's people were shot or - at best - sent to Siberian work camps for just being nobility or well-off, or questioning _anything_. It got better in the 60's, but still couldn't be compared to the US.

      You must've been very young during those times. I can't find any other explanation for your naïveté.

      PS. The US isn't perfect, it has lots of problems, but - in that regard - it's still better than the USSR or its allies were. That said, I always find it very ironic when the Americans speak of the "Evil Empire" :)

    106. Re:Screw You Obama by airdweller · · Score: 1

      Just a note: that was a colleague of mine, and I could ask more people from the former Soviet countries to weigh in. There's a big community of them where I live.

    107. Re:Screw You Obama by aralin · · Score: 1

      1) There was a big difference between the USSR and the Satelites (Poland, East Germany, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia). I was not talking about USSR, but the better off satelites. There were also the worse off like Romania, etc...

      2) During 30's and 50's shit happened. But not during the 80's. I was talking specifically about 80's. I cannot say about any other period.

      3) You got me there on the Stalin and gulags, so yeah, you had one narrow case in history where it was still worse than US is today. Yay! Big whoop!

      4) Staasi, KGB, or other state police orgs in the satelites were pretty crafty, but even so, the surveilence pales compared to US now. It is many orders of magnitude worse in US by the amount of people covered and the amount of data collected. I give you it was not for lack of trying, but still, the end result was better back then.

      BTW I think you guys still drink the US cool-aid. You can oppress people much more effectively without saying that is what you do:

      - You can keep claiming that there is a freedom of movement, you don't require passports to move to another town, you let people cross borders freely, but look at the reality? If your economic and social policies prevent them from doing so anyway, what is the difference? 96% of Americans didn't have passport. Most of the poor never leave the state or even town they are born in.

      - You can say all you want that you have due process, but as long as the cop can plant 5 grams of meth and get you mandatory 5 year prison sentence if he things you are guilty of whatever else he things you did or just doesn't like you. If he really doesn't like you 50g of meth or half pound of crack will get you mandatory 10 years. If you are an immigrant, there is a 5 year mandatory for lying to immigration officer. I encourage you to try to get through US immigration process without a signle thing that could be constructed as a lie. Really google Mandatory Minimum Sentencing.

      - Don't get me started on the so called 'Department of Corrections'

      - Same with politics. At least the communists had the guts to stand up and say. We rule here, deal with it. In US you have this false choice, where both parties are in 100% agreement and on the opposite side from you on every single important issue. Really, lets have few more years of political discussion on gay marriage instead of any real topic.

      You can keep eating up the propaganda, but no matter how many times they repeat something. If you actually compare the end result, it's horrifying.
      Even if I would not be right on 2-3 of those 9 points or it would be a wash... think about it. Just the fact I can effectively compare those two gives me chills.

      ---

      Now if you live in parts of California, New England, couple other places, if you are in the upper middle class, making more than 75k a year for family, you know how to keep your head down and live within the system, life is very decent. Much better than it is or was for so many people in so many places. Maybe it's not Scandinavia good, but its very decent. And if that is your experience, you can think... yeah baby, American dream. Well, keep dreaming, pray you don't wake up.

      --
      If programs would be read like poetry, most programmers would be Vogons.
    108. Re:Screw You Obama by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      How to know when someone doesn't understand Russia? Of all the human rights problems to list, they choose the (favorite hipster issue of) Pussy Riot.

      Seriously, can the snobbery. You're shocked, shocked that the political imprisonment of a protest group known for grabbing media attention is a well known example?

      You don't think killing journalists or fixing elections is a little more worthy of note?

      You don't think you could same the same crap over the protesting of Russia's anti-gay laws? It's not like they're making it an capitol offense a la Uganda. Have some priorities, people!

    109. Re:Screw You Obama by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Seriously, can the snobbery. You're shocked, shocked that the political imprisonment of a protest group known for grabbing media attention is a well known example?

      Who said anything about shocked? To re-word my point, it's a shibboleth for ignoramuses.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  7. US Govt... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Throwing a tantrum cause the big baby didn't get its way.

    1. Re:US Govt... by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      More a school bully who's pissed that some geek ratted him out and is now sulking.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  8. dont piss russia off by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    last thing i want, being in alaska specifically is another "war" brought on by these little men throwing big fits about their fictitious entities.. in the case of "war" our state = easy target.

    1. Re:dont piss russia off by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      last thing i want, being in alaska specifically is another "war" brought on by these little men throwing big fits about their fictitious entities.. in the case of "war" our state = easy target.

      Because the best way to deal with a bully is to roll over and do what he wants.

      That always stops the agression, right?

    2. Re:dont piss russia off by chris.alex.thomas · · Score: 3, Funny

      well, just ask Sarah Palin to keep a close eye on them, just over there and you'll have plenty of time to know if those dammed ruskies are up to no darn good.....

    3. Re:dont piss russia off by maliqua · · Score: 1

      No one wants to attack Alaska,
      its cold and next to Canada, don't get me wrong its a wonderful place to live or visit, but a really terrible place to invade

    4. Re:dont piss russia off by lister+king+of+smeg · · Score: 1

      Really? We have gone into hostile hell holes for oil before why wouldn't Russia for the same reason Alaska too has oil and gold remember.

      --
      ---Saying gnome 3 is better than windows 8 not so much a compliment as it is damning with light praise.
    5. Re:dont piss russia off by dkleinsc · · Score: 1

      Have you ever heard of flouridation of water, Mandrake?

      --
      I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
    6. Re:dont piss russia off by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not much of either that's practical to extract at the moment actually. Production on the North Slope has steadily been dropping for years, and the easy gold was dug up more than a century ago.

    7. Re:dont piss russia off by airdweller · · Score: 1

      Russia has so much of their own "Alaska", they can barely keep it under control.

    8. Re:dont piss russia off by chris.alex.thomas · · Score: 1

      yes, I have great teeth as well, thanks!

      BTW: it's fluoridation, just sayin'

  9. All governments? by Threni · · Score: 2

    No. The UK government is working with the American government. I suspect most of them are. In public they have to act angry because many people are angry about it; it's illegal/immoral, and no-one asked for it. Privately they're either helping (favour for a favour) or benefitting from it, although a lot of politicians will be against it themselves, but having to go along with it because it's their own secret security services who are involved with only the knowledge of a handful of politicians at the top. Not easy to spin this to the public.

    Nothing's going to change out of all this.

    1. Re:All governments? by h4rr4r · · Score: 4, Funny

      I think you will find the NSA and the UK intelligence assisting each other is really "A favor for a favour".

  10. Re:Why are they putting a number on the amount of by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    One would think the US government cannot be provoked so easily and would never react in such a pathetic manner but we live in interesting times.

  11. Obama's got more backbone against the US itself by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Obama goes out of his way to avoid pissing off the Russians (stops expanding NATO, stops deploying missile defense in Europe), but is willing to break the US Constitution to spy on his own country.

    Yay hopenchange!

    1. Re:Obama's got more backbone against the US itself by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Vs what Mittens might have done about it, eh?

    2. Re:Obama's got more backbone against the US itself by aristotle-dude · · Score: 1

      Vs what Mittens might have done about it, eh?

      Strawman or do you have a crystal ball?

      --
      Jesus was a compassionate social conservative who called individuals to sin no more.
    3. Re:Obama's got more backbone against the US itself by airdweller · · Score: 1

      "Strawman or do you have a crystal ball?"
      Some people don't need crystal balls. They have brains.

  12. America needs to own up to its mistakes... by dryriver · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Come on, America. You let the whole world use the internet for over a decade, with everyone thinking/believing that their data is reasonably private. Now it turns out that - oops - you built giant digital systems capable of eavesdropping on, essentially, everybody; the whole fricking world. That is/was a SERIOUS mistake. Mistakes of this magnitude can only be fixed by someone credible taking responsibility for what has been done wrong, and seeing to it that the "mistake" in question - the digital snooping system that tracks everybody - being shut down, or at least constrained & regulated better. ---- What does America do instead? It goes after the "Whistleblower" who did something heroic by warning billions of innocent people: "Be careful what you do in the digital world. Your internet/phone data is not private any longer." ------ Own up to your mistakes, America. Then start the process of undoing said mistakes. ---- The cost of not doing this? America will go down in the history books as a superpower-bully, that is morally & ethically not much better than the USSR was in its heydays. ---- Own up to the mistakes. Then fix them.

    --
    Why did the chicken cross the road? Because Elon Musk put an AI chip in its head.
    1. Re:America needs to own up to its mistakes... by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 4, Insightful

      with everyone thinking/believing that their data is reasonably private.

      Everyone? I think not. If anyone believed such a thing, they were simply naive.

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
    2. Re:America needs to own up to its mistakes... by Mitreya · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Own up to your mistakes, America.

      "America" is not a person. Did you mean to say Obama?

      When Obama was elected, he made very different promises, including several very emphatic speeches about the need for protecting whistle-blowers. One could argue it was part of the reason he got elected...
      Politicians should sign their platform as a contract and be held criminally liable when they deviate from non-ambiguous promises as soon as they actually are elected.

    3. Re:America needs to own up to its mistakes... by Ralph+Wiggam · · Score: 2

      You let the whole world use the internet for over a decade, with everyone thinking/believing that their data is reasonably private.

      Seriously? When I started using the internet in 1992 as a 14 year old, I assumed that the NSA had access to everything on the internet. The Room 641A story in 2006 pretty much confirmed that.

    4. Re:America needs to own up to its mistakes... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You seriously ever thought the Internet was secure?

      I don't recall the US Government ever saying any such thing. The only thing they've promised to do is run it so that the data goes though, which it does. They never said they wouldn't be able to read it all.

      And again with the USSR comparisons. Holy shit, do you people completely lack historical understanding and perspective? Even if the NSA had a complete file on me, including my deepest darkest perversions, I'd prefer to live in the US and not in the USSR. The only reason the USSR looks any better is because they never had an Internet to start with. They didn't make it past the early 90's.

    5. Re:America needs to own up to its mistakes... by vadim_t · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No, I think America is pretty apt here.

      Obama isn't the dictator of the US. Congress, lobbyists, the NSA and other people are also at fault here, as well as the general population for not being vigilant enough. This sort of thing doesn't happen just because Obama wants it, other people have to agree.

    6. Re:America needs to own up to its mistakes... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well you could say that people who voted for Obama need to own up to their mistakes. Granted, they probably did vote for him to do something different than what he had done, so their responsibility only goes just so far.

      On the other hand, the first tip off of how shitty he was going to be was all of those stupid Hope posters going around. It's amazing that even the jaded American consumer can be suckered by slick marketing when they really, really want to believe that something is true, despite all of the evidence to the contrary.

    7. Re:America needs to own up to its mistakes... by Tolkienfanatic · · Score: 0

      The reason he got elected was the color of his skin. Nothing more and nothing less.

    8. Re:America needs to own up to its mistakes... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Welcome, my fellow American comrades, to the USSA

    9. Re:America needs to own up to its mistakes... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm an American and I have nothing to do with it.

    10. Re:America needs to own up to its mistakes... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Again. The whole reason the the Internet was released was for monitoring and paid for by us! Brilliant!

    11. Re:America needs to own up to its mistakes... by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      Or you could realize we elect a president not a dictator. There are a lot of other folks involved, nor would most of the other candidates done anything differently.

    12. Re:America needs to own up to its mistakes... by houghi · · Score: 1

      Vote me into office and I will just do that. I promise.

      Signed - Every politician in the world -

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    13. Re:America needs to own up to its mistakes... by T.E.D. · · Score: 1

      Actually, I've noticed a rather serious backsliding in the competence of the USA's foriegn policy in about the last year or so.

      I know there are those folks who are die-hard partisans for the other party. To hear them, every decision made, past present or future was/is/will be either utter incompetence or malice of the level that would make Sauron blush.

      But for the rest of us, frankly we handled things about as well as could reasonably have been done right up until the Syria uprising started a year ago. Since then, well, I'm mystified. Suddenly we can't make decisions, can't actually perform any useful actions, but are chock full of ideas for things other soverign entities really must be doing right now. I'd say a big "fuck you" to that, and it's my own damn country I'm talking about!

      If you are looking for someone to blame, well, one might notice that a year ago is (perhaps not so coincidentally) about the time John Kerry took over the State Department from Ms. Clinton. This is the same John Kerry who somehow managed to lose an election to the worst president in US history, while being a war hero running during two wars. Should it really shock anybody that he can't manage the State Department any better than he managed his election campaign?

    14. Re:America needs to own up to its mistakes... by PSXer · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure if I would use the word 'mistake'. They didn't accidentally snoop on everyone's data. The only mistake they made was that they got caught.

    15. Re:America needs to own up to its mistakes... by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      And deciding to not probe too deeply is pretty much tacit agreement. Congress has tacitly agreed with both GWB and Obama to basically sit on its hands and give only the most meaningless of nods towards holding the Executive to account for the powers that were granted to it after 9/11. Either the entirety of the House Intelligence Committee are sub-80 IQ cretins or they knew damned well that the Administration had adopted on obscenely liberal interpretation of the laws in question. While the former might be appealing to those who have general dim views of their Congresscritters, I think the latter is the case. Whether it's an outright case of being "on the take" in some way to industries related to intelligence or simply being browbeaten and not wanting to be seen as aiding the terrorists, they sat on their useless asses and didn't do their jobs.

      As I wrote elsewhere, it's always been the case that the Executive, whether it be Emperor, King or President, will always grab as much power as it can by virtually any means possible. In a system like the United States, that usually means having the DoJ go through the laws with a fine tooth comb scouting out every turn of phrase and every punctuation mark to create legal interpretations to justify whatever it is the Administration plans on doing. Such legal interpretations, it is clear, do not even have to be very good, they simply have to exist. And apparently the interpretations don't even have to be made available.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    16. Re:America needs to own up to its mistakes... by gmuslera · · Score: 1

      Thats what every pathological killer would do if caught, try to kill all the witnesses.

    17. Re:America needs to own up to its mistakes... by mspohr · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Great idea but it's not gonna happen.
      The US won't admit it even made a mistake. The politicians (both R and D) are doubling down on the "national security" threat and they see nothing wrong with violating the 4th amendment. The Constitution is trash to them.
      At best, we may get some "reassurances" that they won't look at our data (unless we have something to hide).
      We do have to thank Snowden for exposing this surveillance... now we all know just where we stand (and hopefully will take personal measures to guard our privacy.)
      The US has been a superpower-bully for many years and will hang on to that role to the end.

      --
      I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
    18. Re:America needs to own up to its mistakes... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      not being vigilant enough

      The only thing US voters are truly vigilant about is their government bennies. They indulge some NIMBY and BANANA tendencies as well and call it environmentalism, but the main thing is Medicare and SS.

      As long as the hospitals can keep bilking Medicare and the SS deposits keep appearing we are good. The rest would cut into Desperate Housewives time.

    19. Re:America needs to own up to its mistakes... by dpidcoe · · Score: 1

      Wait, that also implies that Bush didn't singlehandedly start two wars, throw "terrorists" into gitmo to be held indefinitely, and crash the economy. Are you sure that your logic is correct there?

    20. Re:America needs to own up to its mistakes... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, us Americans were all in on it, you caught us.
      Oh, wait, no we weren't! In fact, we had no fricking idea, and they used our money to build it!
      Your government probably knew more about it than I did....

    21. Re:America needs to own up to its mistakes... by DeathMagnetic · · Score: 1

      The problem with blaming "America" is that no one is held accountable for their own share of the problem. It's very easy for any individual, even the president, to throw up their hands and blame the system without taking any responsibility for anything. It's about time we start naming names and holding real people accountable for the actions of our government. Speaking from a totally non-partisan point of view, the president seems like as good a starting point as any to expect real accountability and direct action. We elected him to be a leader, not to deflect attention elsewhere just because the problems aren't all his fault. Nothing will ever substantively change as long as we keep appealing to "America" or "the NSA" or even "the general population" to magically self-correct. Apologists for our leaders on both sides of the aisle are who have allowed us to get to where we are today.

    22. Re:America needs to own up to its mistakes... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Obama isn't the dictator of the US.

      He is dictator of the executive branch, and therefore over the NSA. So the "buck stops with him" (to quote Obama himself).

    23. Re:America needs to own up to its mistakes... by RabidReindeer · · Score: 2

      I'm an American and I have nothing to do with it.

      Yes you are. You're either fighting it, voicing your disapproval about it, approving it to others, or approving it by your silence. Even claiming you don't care has something to do with it.

      So one way or another, on one side or another, you have something to do with it.

    24. Re:America needs to own up to its mistakes... by RabidReindeer · · Score: 1

      The reason he got elected was the color of his skin. Nothing more and nothing less.

      Actually, I had been hoping that if a member of the opposing party took over, he'd roll back some of the excesses of the previous administration, blow the covers off of others, and just generally get the country out of its post-9/11 jelly-belly mindset and shine some light on the cockroaches.

      So you might say I was HOPING for a CHANGE.

      Didn't get one, though. The lights are still out, the roaches run rampant and the "opposing side" turns out to simply be the same side with a different cartoon figure. Race had nothing to do with it.

    25. Re:America needs to own up to its mistakes... by grantspassalan · · Score: 1

      with everyone thinking/believing that their data is reasonably private.

      Everyone? I think not. If anyone believed such a thing, they were simply naive.

      The Internet and other digital infrastructure and the enormous data warehouses filled with supercomputers are necessary infrastructure for the coming New World Order. When the present currencies and financial systems based on debt collapse, they will be replaced by a new cashless, centralized system controlled by the international world bankers. The infrastructure now being built and tested will be necessary to keep track of every single financial transaction done on this planet.

      --
      A sufficiently advanced simulation is indistinguishable from reality.
    26. Re:America needs to own up to its mistakes... by s.petry · · Score: 1

      You let the whole world use the internet for over a decade

      I think it's time to do away with the sun dial and stick markers and get a clock and calendar.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    27. Re:America needs to own up to its mistakes... by joh · · Score: 1

      You let the whole world use the internet for over a decade, with everyone thinking/believing that their data is reasonably private.

      Seriously? When I started using the internet in 1992 as a 14 year old, I assumed that the NSA had access to everything on the internet. The Room 641A story in 2006 pretty much confirmed that.

      There's still a difference in thinking that the NSA can have access to everything (but uses this only in very specific cases) or that it does this as a matter of course, with secret laws and secret courts, lying about it and even stores data of people who are in no way suspicious. It's a matter of scale and of trust.

    28. Re:America needs to own up to its mistakes... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      with everyone thinking/believing that their data is reasonably private.

      Everyone? I think not. If anyone believed such a thing, they were simply naive.

      You my friend do not know the difference between fact and speculation

    29. Re:America needs to own up to its mistakes... by cheekyjohnson · · Score: 1

      I do know the difference, and that's why I believe those people were naive. How could anyone think that the government wouldn't abuse its power if we gave them such an extraordinary amount of it? Given the fact that history is rife with examples of abusive governments, these people are naive. It is not merely "speculation"; even before the Snowden leaks, anyone with a brain already had strong reasons to believe that it was highly probable that the government was abusing its power.

      --
      Filthy, filthy copyrapists!
    30. Re:America needs to own up to its mistakes... by LordLucless · · Score: 1

      Politicians should sign their platform as a contract and be held criminally liable when they deviate from non-ambiguous promises as soon as they actually are elected.

      It's very easy to argue against something when you only read half of it.

      --
      Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
    31. Re:America needs to own up to its mistakes... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When Obama was elected, he made very different promises, including several very emphatic speeches about the need for protecting whistle-blowers. One could argue it was part of the reason he got elected...

      And how is leaking classified information regarding details on the US spying on *other countries* whistle-blowing?

      As soon as Mr. Snowden ventured from the US citizen conversation, it stopped being whistle-blowing and became treason for idealogical reasons.

    32. Re:America needs to own up to its mistakes... by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Regarding Syria. It's Sunni vs. Shea. We don't really mind if the Sunni/Shea war starts up again. Why do you think we really went into Iraq? We won't have to invade Iran, Iran will invade Iraq. We will give Iraq just enough weapons to maintain the stalemate. Like we did in the 80s and Switzerland did in the 100years war.

      Of course they can't say that out loud or it would make all the effort worthless.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    33. Re:America needs to own up to its mistakes... by aralin · · Score: 1

      It has an easy fix, we need a capital punishment and forfeiture of all assets for any politician who swears to and then fails to uphold the constitution. Not just does something illegal or unconstitutional, but fails to actively act to prevent anyone acting against it. So some 5-10 thousand executions later, and significant replenishment of the US treasury I should add, we elect new leaders who would be a little more careful about what they do after they get sworn in. Simple, really.

      --
      If programs would be read like poetry, most programmers would be Vogons.
    34. Re:America needs to own up to its mistakes... by bfandreas · · Score: 1

      Wait, that also implies that Bush didn't singlehandedly start two wars, throw "terrorists" into gitmo to be held indefinitely, and crash the economy. Are you sure that your logic is correct there?

      Nope. He didn't. He had an awful lot of help inside and outside of the US. The POTUS is not a dictator. He has however the choice of his advisors and I'm fairly certain his immediate circle won't go ahead with something as elaborate as the preparation of the Irak war(which was a masterful execution of legal, diplomatic and PR trickery...with no meaningful plan whatsoever what should happen after Saddam got ousted). He can do very little directly. But he can influence a lot. Which simply takes longer and may fail.

      --
      20 minutes into the future
    35. Re:America needs to own up to its mistakes... by bfandreas · · Score: 1

      Politicians should sign their platform as a contract and be held criminally liable when they deviate from non-ambiguous promises as soon as they actually are elected.

      It's very easy to argue against something when you only read half of it.

      ...given how hard it is to legally prove something as perjury I would not be too astonished if such a scheme would be introduced. And applied electively to politicians who currently are in opposition.

      Another vague law on a federal level is just what the US needs.

      --
      20 minutes into the future
    36. Re:America needs to own up to its mistakes... by Xest · · Score: 1

      ""America" is not a person. Did you mean to say Obama?" ...

      "When Obama was elected"

      Who do you think elected him? What country are those people the citizens of? That's why when people say America, they mean America. You elected him under your system of representation so you're responsible for him.

    37. Re:America needs to own up to its mistakes... by bfandreas · · Score: 1

      Regarding Syria. It's Sunni vs. Shea. We don't really mind if the Sunni/Shea war starts up again. Why do you think we really went into Iraq? We won't have to invade Iran, Iran will invade Iraq. We will give Iraq just enough weapons to maintain the stalemate. Like we did in the 80s and Switzerland did in the 100years war.

      Of course they can't say that out loud or it would make all the effort worthless.

      Oh, it is far more complicated than that. It is not only religious, it also has Ba'ath, tribal and clan affiliations. And there are those who would love to have a western style democracy. There is very little good/bad down there. Lotsa grey and who turns out to be what is very hard to predict. Which is the reason why it is a very bad idea to send weapons because who would you give them to?

      Same goes for Egypt. Who do you want to support? The former government who had no clue about the democratic proces, showed very little interest in that but still was democratically elected? Or the military who currently seems to be pulling the strings from backstage?

      There are times when you can do very little by diplomacy. Especially with an unrelyable and unstable negotiation partner. There are times when you can do very little militarily. Once you've crushed their forces then what?
      As frustrating it may be sometimes all you can do is damage control and give humanitarian aid to those who need it. These are the realities when dealing with failed and failing states in a worlds that doesn't lend itsself to distinctions like good and bad. In all honesty, all Kerry can hope to achieve is to get NATO/UN/a coalition to establish no-fly zones, maintain refugee camps, help coordinate the distribution of refugees(in case of Syria Turkey would very much appreciate any help since the border is swamped with Syrian refugees) and all the other non-glorious pesky BS.


      Seriously, proper foreign policy is complex and can't be represented in mere headlines and news tickers beneath a Fox-style talking head news show.

      --
      20 minutes into the future
    38. Re:America needs to own up to its mistakes... by Triv · · Score: 1

      "America" is not a person. Did you mean to say Obama?

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

    39. Re:America needs to own up to its mistakes... by neonKow · · Score: 1

      That doesn't make what the NSA is doing right.

      We shouldn't have to be paranoid to know what our own government is doing to its own citizens. We're not asking for national or military secrets here. If the NSA is monitoring and recording everything they can get their hands on, then they should be up front about it and be prepared to provide some good reasons to do so. They shouldn't be hiding it, and they certainly shouldn't be lying to Congress about it when confronted about it.

      So, congratulations for being a paranoid, tech-saavy 14 year old, but I would like my non-tech saavy friends who are busy becoming doctors or artists to have the same right to privacy without having to look over their shoulders.

  13. Small and vengeful and afraid by fustakrakich · · Score: 5, Insightful

    That is what describes the world's rulers today. This reaction against Snowden and Manning confirm that.

    --
    “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    1. Re:Small and vengeful and afraid by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That is what describes the world's rulers today. This reaction against Snowden and Manning confirm that.

      The only mistake here is it sounds like this may have been different in the past. If there was ever any pretension that it was different, the Whiskey Rebellion should have put an end to that and the Alien and Sedition Acts confirmed it.

      At this point the veneer has just worn so thin that most people can see through the façade. Perhaps propaganda is a lost art, or maybe the People just have better communications tools and won't have the wool pulled over their eyes any longer by a fascist media establishment.

      BTW, you forgot 'hypocritical'. The USG is still sheltering Luis Posada Carriles (just one example). Meanwhile it wants Snowden back when every likelihood is he'll be tortured like Manning was (independently determined by Amnesty International, the UN, and the EU ministers).

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    2. Re:Small and vengeful and afraid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not sure how trying to arrest someone who is giving up Top Secret materials is "small and vengeful". He did something technically much more illegal than what Manning did. They want his ass back so that he doesn't turn into a faucet of even more classified material. Just because you want to see that stuff doesn't mean that the government just stops enforcing the law.

      In fact, I'd wonder what the hell was going on if they didn't try and arrest these guys. Sure, they might have had a good reason to do it, but presumably someone made a determination that this material could be dangerous or damaging. If they want to argue that it wasn't, they can easily do that in a courtroom.

      You're reading these actions in light of your own narrative of the government as being wrong. The government doesn't agree with you, and in any event, has a responsibility to enforce the law. It's no more vengeful than trying to get any other wanted person back here for trial.

    3. Re:Small and vengeful and afraid by fustakrakich · · Score: 3, Interesting

      You're reading these actions in light of your own narrative of the government as being wrong.

      The government is wrong. But that means squat in a 'might makes right' world. I choose not to curry favor with that authority. You choose as you see fit.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    4. Re:Small and vengeful and afraid by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      The only mistake here is it sounds like this may have been different in the past...

      You're right. Adding the word 'today' was erroneous.

      As far as 'hypocritical' goes, I thought it went without saying. The dictionary is full of words that can describe 'the little man'. I was just trying to keep it brief. The header is a stolen quote from another blog which describes the situation quite well.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    5. Re:Small and vengeful and afraid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey, thats unfair, Posada was\is a freedom fighter, just the kind that blows civilian planes and coincidently is present at US president assassinations. That doesn't make him a terrorist or anything

    6. Re:Small and vengeful and afraid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They want his ass back so that he doesn't turn into a faucet of even more classified material. Just because you want to see that stuff doesn't mean that the government just stops enforcing the law.

      I take it you are not following the news? How many billions of dollars is Snowden worth to you? Your country is hemorrhaging international goodwill all over the world in an attempt to capture ONE criminal, exactly at a time where that goodwill is already tanking based on these revelations. Goodwill is what allows you to have power and that power is worth billions perhaps trillions of dollars. There is no world where that makes sense for your country. It's not about putting the genie back in the bottle either - Snowden has been gone long enough that he has had plenty of time to tell everything he intends to tell. It can't even be about intimidating other whistleblowers, since the US'es thunder followed by loud cries of self-pity can only serve to embolden other would-be whistleblowers.

      The only motive left is blind revenge for its own sake. There is no other explanation for why your country would weigh getting Snowden higher than talks that could lead to nuclear disarmament. Snowden the man is nothing compared to nuclear disarmament, or rather he would be if your leaders were making rational decisions.

      You guys got caught with your hands in the cookie-jar, and screaming loudly in anger at your mother's eyes that saw you do it only makes things worse for you. Don't steal the cookies if you can't tolerate getting caught.

    7. Re:Small and vengeful and afraid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People just have better communications tools and won't have the wool pulled over their eyes any longer by a fascist media establishment.

      Until the Powerful master this new medium as well.

      There is, fundamentally, nothing unique about the Internet. Printing press, radio... it has happened before, and nothing prevented the Powers' takeover in those areas. The Powerful are the problem -- until they are permanently gotten rid of, with measures in place to ensure that such a class never arises again, humanity will always be slaves to the few.

    8. Re:Small and vengeful and afraid by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 1

      If they want to argue that it wasn't, they can easily do that in a courtroom.

      Unless, of course, it's classified and it's not legal to even *mention* it in a courtroom.

      The government doesn't agree with you, and in any event, has a responsibility to enforce the law.

      So, the government has a responsibility to enforce *every* law, no matter what that law might be? You might want to consider the consequences of that position carefully before staking it out. Numerous historical examples spring to mind.

  14. Assange vs Mannings vs Snowden vs Greenwald by G3ckoG33k · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I can see how both Mannings and Snowden have broken the law. If you work in intelligence or in the army you cannot expect to get away with that. You need to be a journalist I guess. What are the chances for Snowden to avoid going to prison if he returns home? Zero. Therefore it is quite clear Snowden will try to avoid it, no matter how ''correct' or 'righteous' he may be.

    Should the journalist Greenwald publish what they have? Well, isn't it his job to do so?

    Is Assange a journalist? Hmmm. In a way, I guess. At least a hard-to-tell-kind-of-guy with a penchant for reluctant women yet locked up in an Ecuadorian dump.

    1. Re:Assange vs Mannings vs Snowden vs Greenwald by cold+fjord · · Score: 3, Insightful

      What are the chances for Snowden to avoid going to prison if he returns home? Zero. Therefore it is quite clear Snowden will try to avoid it, no matter how ''correct' or 'righteous' he may be.

      Not necessarily. I don't know that I agree with the view, but there is another: Give Snowden Immunity

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    2. Re:Assange vs Mannings vs Snowden vs Greenwald by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      Is Assange a journalist?

      I'd say yes, but remember, he wasn't always in favor of leaks.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    3. Re:Assange vs Mannings vs Snowden vs Greenwald by Hatta · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I can see how both Mannings and Snowden have broken the law.

      So has Obama. He deserves the same treatment Manning and Snowden will receive.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    4. Re:Assange vs Mannings vs Snowden vs Greenwald by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In this particular instance, I don't see where Obama has broken the law. The Patriot Act allows the government to conduct these type of programs. As a strict interpretation of the the Constitution sure, but we changed the rules many years ago. Terrorists were going to get us, so we didn't care.

    5. Re:Assange vs Mannings vs Snowden vs Greenwald by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's cute to try and make an equivalence, but one is the president, and the others, particularly Snowden leaked classified info to China and Russia in a childish fit of pique.

      And the president didn't break the law, also he doesn't run the NSA. Furthermore, the electronic eavesdropping was signed off by FISA, congress and the supreme court.

      Troll better next time.

    6. Re:Assange vs Mannings vs Snowden vs Greenwald by Hatta · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That's cute to try and make an equivalence, but one is the president,

      If the president does it, it's legal? Is that the argument you're going for?

      And the president didn't break the law

      The Constitution is the highest law of the land. Violating the Constitution is breaking the law. Impeachment may be our only recourse under the law, and our government is too corrupt to deliver justice, but Obama is a criminal all the same.

      also he doesn't run the NSA

      The president is commander in chief of the military, and the NSA is a branch of the DOD. Obama is responsible.

      Furthermore, the electronic eavesdropping was signed off by FISA, congress and the supreme court

      ALL of whom have conspired to violate our Constitutional rights. That's how little the rule of law matters in the US anymore.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    7. Re:Assange vs Mannings vs Snowden vs Greenwald by spacepimp · · Score: 1

      If there was a chance of a fair trial, and public discussion about the situation you'd be surprised about what he might do. However if the USA was the country to offer a fair trial by jury, then he might never have leaked this to begin with. The others who tried to go through the system failed, were victimized and suffered for this.

    8. Re:Assange vs Mannings vs Snowden vs Greenwald by spacepimp · · Score: 1

      Whoever leaked the intelligence about our ability to listen to a conference call by the "Legion of Doom" is somehow free from persecution however. I find it odd that one leak is sanctioned while another is vilified.

    9. Re:Assange vs Mannings vs Snowden vs Greenwald by Hatta · · Score: 4, Insightful

      we changed the rules many years ago.

      No, "we" didn't "change the rules". The corrupt pieces of shit in government decided on their own to ignore the rules. There's a difference.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    10. Re:Assange vs Mannings vs Snowden vs Greenwald by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's cute to try and make an equivalence, but one is the president,

      If the president does it, it's legal? Is that the argument you're going for?

      And the president didn't break the law

      The Constitution is the highest law of the land. Violating the Constitution is breaking the law. Impeachment may be our only recourse under the law, and our government is too corrupt to deliver justice, but Obama is a criminal all the same.

      also he doesn't run the NSA

      The president is commander in chief of the military, and the NSA is a branch of the DOD. Obama is responsible.

      Furthermore, the electronic eavesdropping was signed off by FISA, congress and the supreme court

      ALL of whom have conspired to violate our Constitutional rights. That's how little the rule of law matters in the US anymore.

      I--and millions of other Americans--disagree that anything that has been revealed is wrong or illegal. I'm proud to live in a country that looks out for it's own citizens and strives to maintain a strong foreign policy.

    11. Re:Assange vs Mannings vs Snowden vs Greenwald by Hatta · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Then you have an inability to read plain English. The 4th amendment is clear, no warrants shall issue without probable cause and without specifically describing the places to be searched and things to be siezed.

      There are two justifiable opinions here:
      1) Generalized surveillance is bad, so the NSA must be stopped.
      2) Generalized surveillance is good, so the Constitution must be amended to allow it.

      Those are the ONLY defensible positions. Encouraging the government to break the law makes you nothing but a craven authoritarian.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    12. Re:Assange vs Mannings vs Snowden vs Greenwald by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Reluctant women? They're trying to charge him for taking a condom off during sex, not rape. Do the research. Takes two minutes, tops.

    13. Re:Assange vs Mannings vs Snowden vs Greenwald by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The "journalist" label is a red herring. Go read the First Amendment again.

      Back? OK, now you should realise: it would be unconstitutional to pass a law that protected a class of people called "journalists", and not others, on the basis of "who they are" rather than "what they've done". That would mean the government was deciding who was/wasn't a journalist, and if that's not "abridging the freedom of the press" I don't know what is.

    14. Re:Assange vs Mannings vs Snowden vs Greenwald by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Furthermore, the electronic eavesdropping was signed off by FISA, congress and the supreme court

      ALL of whom have conspired to violate our Constitutional rights. That's how little the rule of law matters in the US anymore.

      Ummm, the USSC *is* the defining authority on what is and is not Constitutional. Or do you want to ignore the rule of law? ;-)

    15. Re:Assange vs Mannings vs Snowden vs Greenwald by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And yet the Supreme Court ruled that metadata given to 3rd party companies openly isn't protected and can be considered constitutional. The general public doesn't know how these programs are used yet, and if we tell the enemies and criminals how to avoid getting caught, they will be more successful and willing to try. And I wouldn't be sure if half of this country wants there to be more successful terrorist attacks to 'prove' that Obama is weak on terror, can't secure the country, and Democrats need to be voted out.

      I am more pissed at the security of the NSA, or the fact that no one is investigating who helped Snowden get access to all of these files and bring them out.

    16. Re:Assange vs Mannings vs Snowden vs Greenwald by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Amen, Hatta! Just so!

    17. Re:Assange vs Mannings vs Snowden vs Greenwald by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When he took off the condom that is when she became reluctant

    18. Re:Assange vs Mannings vs Snowden vs Greenwald by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then you have an inability to read plain English. The 4th amendment is clear, no warrants shall issue without probable cause and without specifically describing the places to be searched and things to be siezed.

      There are two justifiable opinions here:
      1) Generalized surveillance is bad, so the NSA must be stopped.
      2) Generalized surveillance is good, so the Constitution must be amended to allow it.

      Those are the ONLY defensible positions. Encouraging the government to break the law makes you nothing but a craven authoritarian.

      There is no plain English in the 4th amendment that explains how surveillance in general is a search. The FISA warrants are required because of the FISA Act of 1978. We had to make special laws to protect against wiretapping, there is no constitutional protection, sorry fella.

      God, I love how there's an old EFF page for every single deluded NSA rant here on /. This is like a running joke.
      https://ssd.eff.org/foreign/fisa
      Almost like those people telling you to encrypt your stuff and not go crazy with cloud services knew what they were talking about this whole time right?

      The founding fathers thought you should be secure in your person and effects, and you are. If you managed to explain what the hell the Internet actually is to our founding fathers, I think you'd have a hard time explaining how your notion of privacy fits on it. They might think you were asking for the equivalent of legal protections from eavesdropping on your smoke signals.

    19. Re:Assange vs Mannings vs Snowden vs Greenwald by Pav · · Score: 1

      I wonder how many Russians would trade 3 or 4 September 11's to escape rule by the spymaster Putin and move to a genuine democracy. If Americans stand for this surveilance then they're in grave danger of the same... even more so given the NSA is probably screening out starry-eyed idealists as potential leakers. If I were a sociopath I know where I'd be looking for work right now... they're probably signing up in droves - the opportunities for the exercise of power are pretty clear. Perhaps the majority of Americans do want to hide in their own supermax to keep safe from the terr'ists... it will be sad to see another nation implement their own Standford Prison Experiment, especially since human nature is so predictable.

    20. Re:Assange vs Mannings vs Snowden vs Greenwald by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is that really the same person? If so, well done sir!

    21. Re:Assange vs Mannings vs Snowden vs Greenwald by jwhitener · · Score: 1

      I agree with your sentiments but disagree with how clear you think the 4th amendment is given past case law.

      General mass meta data searches have been ruled to be constitutional time and time again. And it doesn't matter how you happen to read the 4th amendment, it matters how the courts read it.

      You can be mad at the President for breaking what you feel the spirit of the 4th amendment is all about, but you can't claim he did anything illegal. Courts decide what is legal or illegal.

      Where I wish people would direct their anger is the process by which a lot of these court decisions get made. The chief justice appoints judges to a secret court, a court which then hears an arguments from one side only (the government spy agencies), who then make a secret ruling allowing for who knows what....

      That whole secret court process needs to be challenged.

  15. an extradction treaty by Max_W · · Score: 1

    I know that Russian government has been asking the US government for years to conclude an extradition treaty. The US always refuses.

    It is understandable why. And in this case it is also, sort of, understandable.

    Such figures as Pussy Riot, Snowden, etc. were a good news story weeks. They entertained us. Is it fair instead of a payment for the show to put them in cages?

  16. Translation ... by gstoddart · · Score: 5, Interesting

    we have informed the Russian Government that we believe it would be more constructive to postpone the summit until we have more results from our shared agenda

    He of the "Nobel Peace Prize for nothing more than saying he'd be interested in talking" is taking his ball and going home until the US gets their way.

    I'm not saying Russia isn't moving a little backwards over the last bunch of years, but let's not pretend that the US wouldn't grant asylum to someone leaving Russia under similar circumstances and call it defending freedom and liberty.

    I view this as a diplomatic temper tantrum. 'Shared Agenda' in modern US diplomatic speak is code for "what we want".

    I think you might see more and more countries deciding they are tired of being strong-armed into complying with what the US wants. Especially with the revelations of just exactly the scope of their spying and other activities.

    This is like the guy you discovered screwing your wife cancelling your dinner invitation because you hurt his feelings when you kicked him out of your house -- there's a lot of "woe is us", but don't keep playing that victim card too much.

    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    1. Re:Translation ... by Mitreya · · Score: 4, Insightful

      He of the "Nobel Peace Prize for nothing more than saying he'd be interested in talking"

      Oh, no!
      Nobel Peace Prize for nothing more than being not Bush

      US wouldn't grant asylum to someone leaving Russia under similar circumstances and call it defending freedom and liberty

      I do not disagree with you, but Russia probably wouldn't be embarrassed by someone like Snowden coming forward. They don't pretend to be "free".

    2. Re:Translation ... by gstoddart · · Score: 1

      but Russia probably wouldn't be embarrassed by someone like Snowden coming forward. They don't pretend to be "free".

      No, but they'd make the same bluster about making sure he stands trial and being a traitor the US is making now.

      And, as I said, in the same situation, the US probably would (and likely has) grant asylum to someone fleeing Russia. And then it just becomes more hypocrisy .

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    3. Re:Translation ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He of the "Nobel Peace Prize for nothing more than saying he'd be interested in talking" is taking his ball and going home until the US gets their way.

      Actually, he's taking his ball and going to Sweden.

    4. Re:Translation ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He got the Nobel Peace Price for being a brother.

    5. Re:Translation ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      but Russia probably wouldn't be embarrassed by someone like Snowden coming forward. They don't pretend to be "free".

      No, but they'd make the same bluster about making sure he stands trial and being a traitor the US is making now.

      ...

      Like hell they would.

      They'd give him a 9mm headache on about the second day and be done with it.

    6. Re:Translation ... by stymy · · Score: 1

      Russians don't bother asking for extraditions. I remember when a Russian spy (Alexander Litvinenko) defected to the UK in 2006, some polonium founds its way into his coffee.

    7. Re:Translation ... by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      And, as I said, in the same situation, the US probably would (and likely has) grant asylum to someone fleeing Russia. And then it just becomes more hypocrisy .

      We've been there for some time. We've granted asylum to terrorists wanted in Venezuela and Cuba, and are denying the extradition of the ex-president of Bolivia to answer charges of genocide.

      And then we lose our shit when a whisteblower applies for asylum.

  17. Public vs. Private Discussions by khr · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The Brazilian government is showing much more anger in public than it is showing in private discussions with the U.S. government

    Private discussions are probably much more along the lines of "How much do you charge? Can we get a discount on this technology?"

    1. Re:Public vs. Private Discussions by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

      Most discussions with most nations are along the line of "the boss wants a Swiss bank account with $10 million in it and an aid package we can skim from."

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
  18. "If you won't play MY way, I'M GOING HOME!" by wierd_w · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Is president Obama going to throw a little temper tantrum too? Perhaps stamp his little feet, and hold his breath until he turns purple?
    --Maybe he will tell his mommy, or the secret service!

    Seriously. Tactics like this (Cancelling a peace negotiation summit, over ASYLUM being GRANTED!) only serve to clearly demonstrate that Obama was never interested in peaceful relations with Russia, only with getting its way. All it does is say loud and clear to Putin that his distrust of the US missile infrastructure being constructed in the middle east is indeed a threat to russian national security, that the US is unwilling to have to compromise on anything.

    If they cant play by their rules, they will stop their feet, cry, and go home.

    This is the fucking pinnacle of childishness.

    1. Re:"If you won't play MY way, I'M GOING HOME!" by tnk1 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If you read even the summary, you know that the summit wasn't just cancelled for the asylum thing. They were probably going to cancel it anyway, because there are some big disagreements on the summit items. It just so happens that they can sneak in a notice of the US government's public displeasure while cancelling for other reasons.

      That's what we call "diplomacy". It's basically cheap shots over wine and cheese.

    2. Re:"If you won't play MY way, I'M GOING HOME!" by wierd_w · · Score: 1

      If that is what you call "Diplomacy", i'd hate to see what you call being petulant.

      The fact that other forms of negotiation have failed are exactly why peace talks MUST go forward. If your REAL goal really *IS* trying to secure a mutually beneficial relationship with another, then using passive aggressive and outright childish tactics while presenting an aire of civility only sours the situation, and is disadvantageous to any such goal.

      The mere fact that the US even considered putting something so clearly spiteful on the reasons to cancel list, indicates bad faith on the part of the US, and justifies Putin's rather wild accusations about US malfeasance concerning the missile defense system, which is what the whole snit that Obaminator's visit was all about. ---Supposedly.

      "If you wont play MY way, I'll take MY ball and GO HOME!" is not a "Negotiation tactic." It's a petulant ultimatum.

      At this point, I think Putin should up the ante, and tell the US that it wont get another chance at a peace summit for another decade, if it cant grow the fuck up.

    3. Re:"If you won't play MY way, I'M GOING HOME!" by tnk1 · · Score: 1

      Well... if you are going to get a head of government/state in a room with another one, you better be productive. That's how that works. Neither Obama and Putin wants to be in a room at a table for days, getting nothing done. They actually have other important things to do.

      You will have also noticed that Kerry and whoever the Foreign Affairs minister of Russia is are going to get together and try and chat more. That's the 2+2 thing. In the end, that is generally the level where the real stuff gets done anyway.

      So, never fear, this doesn't mean the summit won't happen (assuming they can figure out some way to make progress), it just means that they sent the agenda back to the drawing board.

      And diplomacy uses things like calling home ambassadors "for consultations" as a way to show displeasure as well. There is a whole set of actions where you are expected to read between the lines in diplomacy.

      In any event, petulant comes when they stop being passive aggressive, and just start sending demands and ultimatums. We aren't doing that, nor would we do that over someone like Snowden. Snowden's effectively a spy, in terms of how we would treat him. Sounds bad, but really isn't. If Russia claims him for their own, he'll probably be allowed to live there like any other defector. No one starts wars over spies who are caught. We won't like it, and we will probably mention that we may not cooperate when someone does that to Russia, but nothing worse will come of it unless something else was brewing on an important topic.

      Snowden will eventually run out of things he knows that can embarrass the US or provide intelligence. At that point is truly when the rest of his life begins. The US government will never forget about him, but as long as he doesn't end up somehow on US soil, they'll probably stop going to great lengths trying to get him.

    4. Re:"If you won't play MY way, I'M GOING HOME!" by kiwimate · · Score: 1

      I think you may not be familiar with how international diplomacy works, as well as giving rather too much credit to Russia.

      The U.S. was pretty close to cancelling the summit anyway, for a number of reasons. The different viewpoints on Syria were already straining relations, and the Kremlin's treatment of dissidents has also been awkward to say the least. This was merely the tipping point. Russia, for their part, was not unaware of this, and it's quite likely they did this at least in part to provoke exactly this response so the U.S. would look bad.

      Russia, in the meantime, is doing what any other nation would do and is looking to what they can get out of Snowden. They made a coldly impersonal decision and determined the political value of giving him temporary asylum was greater than the political value of turning him over to the U.S. They likely don't care about his well-being, and they are certainly not all that fussed about any kind of ideology or they'd have given him permanent asylum.

      Temporary asylum is a big carrot to the outside world who want to believe the U.S. is the baddie and Russia is the goodie, and a massive stick to Snowden. They will pump him as much as they can, and then simply refuse to renew his temporary asylum. Alternately, once everyone's forgotten about it all, they may simply let him stay (but not with permanent asylum) as it really doesn't cost them all that much.

      Edward Snowden has been reduced to a diplomatic pawn, and Russia has no qualms about that. Don't forget that about a month ago they sentenced Aleksei Navalny for trumped-up embezzlement charges, after he exposed rampant high level corruption in the Kremlin. Perhaps we could be equally outraged by that injustice?

    5. Re:"If you won't play MY way, I'M GOING HOME!" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is president Obama going to throw a little temper tantrum too? Perhaps stamp his little feet, and hold his breath until he turns purple?
      --Maybe he will tell his mommy, or the secret service!

      Obama reminds me of "Neville" on the television show "iCarly".

    6. Re:"If you won't play MY way, I'M GOING HOME!" by 0111+1110 · · Score: 1

      Neither Obama and Putin wants to be in a room at a table for days, getting nothing done.

      If they had nothing to talk about then maybe they shouldn't have scheduled a meeting in the first place. And Putin didn't cancel. Obama did. Shortly after Snowden was granted asylum.

      --
      Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
    7. Re:"If you won't play MY way, I'M GOING HOME!" by 0111+1110 · · Score: 1

      They likely don't care about his well-being, and they are certainly not all that fussed about any kind of ideology or they'd have given him permanent asylum.

      He didn't apply for permanent asylum. While I agree that it is highly unlikely that Putin or other politicians care what happens to Snowden the people who actually made the decision to grant him temporary asylum may. They are just regular government workers in whatever department makes such decisions. Presumably the Russian equivalent of the USCIS/INS. So the people responsible for actually making such decisions may not be sociopaths and may actually have genuine empathy for other human beings. They may genuinely not want to see this 30 year old guy spend the rest of his life in prison or even be executed just for embarrassing the US. I think most normal human beings would feel that way. I'm not sure why motive is so intensely important to the pro-government people, but the people actually granting the asylum may have had genuinely humanitarian motives, regardless of how Putin may personally feel about it.

      --
      Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
    8. Re:"If you won't play MY way, I'M GOING HOME!" by Xest · · Score: 1

      Obama and Putin have never gotten along. Obama went behind Putin's back shortly after coming to power and did deals with Medvedev after Putin had told him "no". Putin has never forgiven him.

      Honestly it's like a playground, they're both children quite frankly.

  19. Re: Why are they putting a number on the amount of by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And in other news

    Hard drive shredders at record prices

  20. Security and Business competition by Okian+Warrior · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Reading into Glen Greenwald's comments and some of his other statements, it would seem that much of the spying is used not for security purposes, rather it's to give an edge to certain select US businesses.

    If this is true, it would be huge. Citizens don't count for much in terms of US policy decisions, but an unfair boost to chosen businesses would tick off every other business in the US and abroad - the economic ramifications would be nothing short of tectonic.

    I don't understand why that information would ever be released. Are they trying to provoke the US government? I think so.

    There really is a difference between short-term advantage and long-term gain, and it's one of the ways to measure intelligence. If Glen should withhold the information for fear of ticking off the US government, he gives up the potential benefits of a future where the US has been forced to stop such corrupt and illegal practices.

    The long-term gain is enormous and long-lasting, the short-term pain is fleeting and ephemeral. That's why he is releasing the information.

    In the long run, we're all better off by having this information out in the open.

    1. Re:Security and Business competition by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Compared to every other country on the planet? Really? Shit, only the foxnews crowd believes that the Chinese cyberwar is military in nature; it's completely economic and successful.

    2. Re:Security and Business competition by cold+fjord · · Score: 5, Informative

      Reading into Glen Greenwald's comments and some of his other statements, it would seem that much of the spying is used not for security purposes, rather it's to give an edge to certain select US businesses.

      Unless you can point to something firmer, you probably have that garbled. The situation is rather more subtle than that.

      Why We Spy on Our Allies - By R. James Woolsey, a Washington lawyer and a former Director of Central Intelligence.

      Boeing Called A Target Of French Spy Effort
      Airbus' Presentation on Boeing 787 - Bad CI Ethics?

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    3. Re:Security and Business competition by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So true.

    4. Re:Security and Business competition by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

      That's what they paid for, right?

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    5. Re:Security and Business competition by Gilmoure · · Score: 1

      Marine Corp. General Smedley Butler: War Is A Racket. Y'all should take a peep at this. Lays it out pretty well and is short and quick to read.

      --
      I drank what? -- Socrates
    6. Re:Security and Business competition by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      China has the fastest developing military on the planet.

      The cyber activites is a major part of why they can improve so fast. China have access to future and current NATO technolgies trough a combination of innefective western security and a Chinese urge to become powerfull.

      China is becomming a major threath to all the countries in the regions. It will trigger a arms race and build new alliances.

    7. Re:Security and Business competition by TWiTfan · · Score: 1

      Reading into Glen Greenwald's comments and some of his other statements, it would seem that much of the spying is used not for security purposes, rather it's to give an edge to certain select US businesses.

      If this is true, it would be huge. Citizens don't count for much in terms of US policy decisions, but an unfair boost to chosen businesses would tick off every other business in the US and abroad - the economic ramifications would be nothing short of tectonic.

      At least it would finally put to rest that stupid idea that there is, or will ever be, a real "free market." If the U.S. and China have proven nothing else in their spying scandals of late, it's that the big corporations in any given country function in anything BUT a free market of honest competition.

      --
      The cow says "Moo." The dog says "Woof." The Timothy says "Thanks, valued customer. We appreciate your input."
    8. Re:Security and Business competition by cold+fjord · · Score: 0

      Major General Smedley Butler, United States Marine Corp, was an extraordinarily brave and devoted Marine who served the United States in an exceptional manner while in uniform, earning two Congressional Medals of Honor - the highest American medal for bravery on the battlefield. Out of uniform and in the realm of politics, however, citizen Butler involved himself in leftist fringe politics. I would be inclined to follow Major General Butler anywhere on the battlefield, but nowhere near a voting booth. In this regard he is like Chomsky, a man of exceptional virtual in his field, but a political crank (popular though he may be) and genocide denier.

      . . . . Back in the 1930s, the U.S. Communist Party recruited a former Marine Corps general, Smedley Butler, to give speeches on the eve of World War II denouncing military preparedness as a capitalist racket. The idea was that by persuading an individual man of valor to propound shameful views, those views would somehow become less shameful. It didn’t work then. I doubt it will work now. - Wesley Who?

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    9. Re:Security and Business competition by FriendlyLurker · · Score: 2
      As a highly decorated General who had worked his way up through the ranks due to natural ability to assess complex situations succinctly and act accordingly, he was certainly extremely well qualified to tell the American public exactly what he has been doing during his long and "successful" career in their name.

      Major General Smedley Butler not only told it how it is, and gave more than a few examples to explain his point - all of which you seem to have ignored. The fact that you call his assessment of his lifelong job "leftist fringe politics" only reflects on how deep and far you have your head buried in la la propaganda land. A General like Smedley Butler would have no place for you on his battlefield you would only be a danger to yourself and others. You deserve to stay where you already are - in the war propaganda department, where convincing others of an alternative la la reality is easier if you believe in it yourself.

    10. Re:Security and Business competition by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      That Woolsey piece is not really doing you any favors.

      "My European friends, get real. True, in a handful of areas European technology surpasses American, but, to say this as gently as I can, the number of such areas is very, very, very small. Most European technology just isn't worth our stealing ... Why, then, have we spied on you? ... because you bribe. Your companies' products are often more costly, less technically advanced or both, than your American competitors'. As a result you bribe a lot ... Why do you bribe? ... It is because your economic patron saint is still Jean Baptiste Colbert, whereas ours is Adam Smith ... you have much greater difficulty than we in innovating ... It's so much easier to keep paying bribes"

      It's just paragraph after paragraph of jingoistic bullshit implying that the only reason that Europeans could be mad about US espionage is that it makes it harder for them to practice their endemic corruption in foreign markets. Later on he goes to say that sometimes the bad guys might use technology for bad purposes and that Europe cannot be trusted to keep that in check, so that makes us the Good Guys for spying on them.

    11. Re:Security and Business competition by erikkemperman · · Score: 1

      Just a quick correction.. Disagree with Chomsky all you like, but he's definitely no holocaust denier. What happened was he wrote an essay on free speech, that wound up as preface in some nutjob's book. When this came out, he decide to let it be -- because his (Chomsky's) point had been all along that if one is truly committed to free speech then one should defend it most of all for views one disagrees with.

      --
      Gosh, thanks. That must be why the other ships call me Meatfucker -- GCU Grey Area (Eccentric)
    12. Re:Security and Business competition by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      Bullshit. Just not the holocaust, the Cambodian genocide. Not that it should matter much.

      It's worse then denier though. He was an active denier and helped try to suppress the information while it was going on. Basically a less competent, volunteer Goebbels for Cambodian Maoists.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    13. Re:Security and Business competition by dbIII · · Score: 1

      At least it would finally put to rest that stupid idea that there is, or will ever be, a real "free market."

      The expensive corn syrup in your drinks that are wrecking your kids livers at twice the rate too much sugar would do it is a big fat example of how it is not a free market. Cane sugar shipped in from Brazil, Jamaica, Australia or even (the horror!) Cuba would undercut the local sweeteners sold by big campaign donors, so the market was restricted instead of "free". The unintended consequences are runaway obesity and industries that have grown so lazy that they could no longer survive in anything resembling a free market.

    14. Re:Security and Business competition by erikkemperman · · Score: 1

      Ok.. Do you have something to back that up? The man is pretty old now, he said a lot of things about a lot of subjects.

      All I am aware of re Cambodia is that he wrote about the US "actions" there during the Vietnam war, and later that he and another scholar did a comparative analysis on coverage of Cambodian genocide by the Khmer and the one in East Timor by the Indonesians. Their point, iirc, was not so much that Cambodia wasn't a huge crime -- obviously it was -- but that Timor got a whitewash in Western media.

      I could be wrong of course, enlighten me.

      --
      Gosh, thanks. That must be why the other ships call me Meatfucker -- GCU Grey Area (Eccentric)
    15. Re:Security and Business competition by sjames · · Score: 2

      So just how evenly do you believe the NSA is spreading the advantages amongst U.S. businesses? Do you believe MonNPop ever get the advantage? What do those businesses do in return for the advantages? Is it strictly legal? Are they paying for it or is that the taxpayer's burden while they dodge their taxes?

    16. Re:Security and Business competition by bfandreas · · Score: 1

      There have been plausible allegations concerning industrial espionage and Echolon back in the 90ies. This is hardly new. It's still despicable and one would wonder how one would ally with somebody who does this to you. The usual excuse for these things is that everybody does it. But that does not make it ok.

      Whenever you hear a politician running on a "moral" platform remember that by "moral" they mean who and how you fuck. Nothing else.

      --
      20 minutes into the future
    17. Re:Security and Business competition by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      The 'denier' link in the GGP spells it out nicely.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    18. Re:Security and Business competition by cold+fjord · · Score: 1

      Labeling isn't actually the same as providing evidence. If you're worried about the tone, I see little restraint applied in attacking the US or UK.

      --
      much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
    19. Re:Security and Business competition by philip.paradis · · Score: 1

      Let's be perfectly clear on one point. All wars are rooted in economic objectives, regardless of any hand waving to the contrary. Analysis and debate of the ethics, morality, wisdom, etc of such conflicts are left as an exercise to the reader (along with any attempted associated bettering of society), but in the final analysis everything traces back to fundamental human nature. Humans are a beautiful species in many respects, but also a very nasty one; the global dominance of homo sapiens is backed by this nastiness.

      --
      Write failed: Broken pipe
  21. Congress considers Snowdon to be a whistleblower by umafuckit · · Score: 5, Informative

    Congress clearly considers Snowden to be a whistleblower, or they wouldn't be voting on proposals to restrict the activity of the NSA http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2013/07/24/plan-to-defund-nsa-phone-collection-program-has-broad-support-sponsor-says/ Yet Obama continues to label Snowden's actions as espionage. He knows this bullshit, because apparently he's taken down from the internet his promise to protect whistleblowers http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/26/obama-whistleblower-website_n_3658815.html Good thing we have the Way Back Machine, then, isn't it? http://web.archive.org/web/20090227184741/http://change.gov/agenda/ethics_agenda/

  22. Re:Why are they putting a number on the amount of by rwven · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They're acting like spoiled, jilted children. I'm frankly ashamed of this sham of a government we have running the "show" at the moment. I use quotes because it's a circus, not a government. The american politicians of 1776 would have these morons in irons for the rest of their lives. Well, more accurately the poiticians of 1776 would have these morons surrendering after a bloody 4 year war for independence.

  23. That explains a lot by Rougement · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The White House has been unbelievably quiet through all of this. First, Obama "welcomed" a discussion. Then, he got caught lying with "the nobody is reading your emails" line. Then, Clapper got caught lying. I think they're keeping quiet because they have a good idea what is coming next. They can't afford to get caught lying again.

    1. Re:That explains a lot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or the left hand has no idea what the right hand has been up to, but the cookie jar just slammed shut on it and world turned ugly.

    2. Re:That explains a lot by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

      Snowden said he could listen to conversations without raising alarms. I hope there are some embarrassing conversations of powerful people.

      Only through public embarrassment and further exposure of lies will the beast start to shift away from the abyss. Hit the powerul and make them, themselves, notice.

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    3. Re:That explains a lot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Afford?
      At this point, they can do anything they want to. The public has had their rights stripped away and have shown that they care more about the new Hollywood blockbuster.
      I agree that this is the reason for the silence, but the people have shown that they don't give a shit.
      Also, anyone think that the timing is a little off for the "worldwide terror alert"?

    4. Re:That explains a lot by Rougement · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Sure, there are millions of people who are essentially apolitical, don't expect everyone to be up in arms about this. Still, you're misrepresenting the millions more who ARE very concerned. It'll take awhile to filter through party affiliations (many dems are struggling to find a way to spin this, many repubs are loathe to go on the offensive bearing in mind their guys started us on this path) but this is way too big a deal to sweep under the rug and I bet there's a lot more to come out yet.

    5. Re:That explains a lot by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      That's the administration's strategy for handling scandals. Multiple layers of plausible sounding denials over time. Low-information voters hear one of the denials along the way, it sounds sensible so they believe it long after further information has come out to prove that denial false.

      Pay attention you can see they use that strategy, effectively, to contain fallout from a lot of different scandals.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    6. Re:That explains a lot by jez9999 · · Score: 1

      First, Obama "welcomed" a discussion. Then, he got caught lying with "the nobody is reading your emails" line.

      Out of interest, in what way did he get caught on that? I thought he claimed the email recording was just metadata.

    7. Re:That explains a lot by BigTunaTim · · Score: 1

      That's EVERY administration's strategy. People who make it into national politics didn't get there by being above-board and honest.

    8. Re:That explains a lot by Rougement · · Score: 1

      He's lying through omission. Actually he said phone calls, not email. What he didn't mention is that just about everything the NSA can get its hands on is bring stored for future use. Seems like a fairly important detail to leave out.

    9. Re:That explains a lot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The President gets his intelligence information from the NSA. That's the NSA's job. It's not surprising that the president supports the NSA. The NSA isn't going to say "Hi Mr President! Today we stepped over the rights of every US citizen and wiped our asses with the constitution!"

      The problem is the NSA is corrupt. They've been caught lying to the President and to Congress several times this month alone. It's almost comical. They say one thing, and someone brings out a document from the gigantic leaked stat that immediately makes them out as blatant liars. The other problem is that it's going to be very difficult to drive a wedge between the NSA and the rest of the executive branch. They have little to no oversight and their own secret court system that's above the law. We've created a monster that's going to be nearly impossible to get rid of.

    10. Re:That explains a lot by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Different administrations have different strategies for dealing with scandals, though.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    11. Re:That explains a lot by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      Out of interest, in what way did he get caught on that? I thought he claimed the email recording was just metadata.

      The weasel words are obvious. They aren't "targeting" your email, they're just trying to collect every bit of information from every person they can. And now "bulk collection" doesn't mean just collecting emails, you have to actually read them as well.

  24. Re:Fuck you! Obummer is the messiah! by evendiagram · · Score: 2

    Obummer is good! Obummer is great! We surrender our souls as of this date!

    You seem to be having a lot of fun bashing on Obama but you should cast your net wide. It's a concerted effort between a handful of large players in the power structure.

  25. Greenwald won't survive by jlbprof · · Score: 1

    Greenwald will be dead before this is released. An accident of course.

    --
    I go out of my way to complicate the simple things, so that I can simplify the complicated things.
    1. Re:Greenwald won't survive by lister+king+of+smeg · · Score: 1

      Greenwald probably has a insurance against this happening like all of the document being released at once in in the even of his death. If he doesn't snowden would just send a copy to someone else. If I were him I would send it to eff, aclu, wikileaks the pirate party, hell i would send it to the pirate-bay even (let them try to take down a torrent of all of it) or just dump it on mega i'm sure dotcom would love to get back at the US gov for screwing him over.

      --
      ---Saying gnome 3 is better than windows 8 not so much a compliment as it is damning with light praise.
    2. Re:Greenwald won't survive by spacepimp · · Score: 1

      Greenwald will be dead before this is released. An accident of course.

      Then all of the information in it's entirety will be leaked to the public. There were multiple people who received this information... Unless each and every source is known the data becomes public. They should be afraid. 15000 documents is a bit more than the 42 slides which initially we were warned of.

  26. Anger in public by PPH · · Score: 4, Funny

    Its all a show to reassure their respective citizens that they are complying with the laws and looking out for their best interests.

    Captain Renault: "I am shocked, shocked to find that gambling is going on in here!"

    Croupier: "Your winnings, sir."

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  27. US-Russia? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "The Brazilian government is showing much more anger in public than it is showing in private discussions with the U.S. government. All governments are doing this, even in Europe."

    I wonder if this also describes the US-Russia relationship that is being portrayed in public, compared to the discussions being had in private.

    1. Re:US-Russia? by maliqua · · Score: 1

      well naturally thats how politicians work, the question is who is being lied to and who is being told the truth

  28. I don't believe in god... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But god save us all. Will this madness end? What the fuck is wrong with the world? Cancellation of the Russia summit? I hope the holy fist of baby Jesus punches these clowns in the face. There is nothing intelligible to add to this nonsense. We are all just watching it unravel in fear. :(

    TLDR: "Fuck."

  29. Re:Why are they putting a number on the amount of by MightyMartian · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I dunno. This sort of nonsense started pretty early on.

    Alien and Sedition Acts

    --
    The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  30. someone declare war already by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    someone declare war on the USA so i can move to where you are and enlist

    1. Re:someone declare war already by BigTunaTim · · Score: 0

      If there's any justice in this world you'll die in a car fire tonight.

  31. The case of the 29 year old hacker by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What was it Obama said again about scrambling jets to get a 29 year old hacker?

    Amusing to see administration now activly throwing stones at US / Russia relations for an issue not worth a few thousand pounds of jet fuel.

    1. Re:The case of the 29 year old hacker by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well he turned 30. So I guess Obama will be scrambling the jets anyway.

    2. Re:The case of the 29 year old hacker by RabidReindeer · · Score: 1

      Well he turned 30. So I guess Obama will be scrambling the jets anyway.

      He already did. He just used French jets was all. Remember Uruguay?

  32. Re: Why are they putting a number on the amount of by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    And in other other news: John Lewis has just said that he supported Snowden and compared his leaks to the civil disobediance during the Civil Rights era. I'll bet Obama is wishing that he didn't give him the Presidential Medal of Freedom and call him the "conscience of the United States Congress".

  33. Hope by ThatsNotPudding · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I only hope Greenwald and his colleagues at The Guardian have also setup a Dead Man's switch to release everything worldwide in case of some 'tragic accident' ala Michael Hastings.

    Otherwise, by saying 'in ten days', he's only started the countdown clock to his execution.

    1. Re:Hope by phantomfive · · Score: 3, Insightful

      So, let's assume that in ten days, Greenwald and his colleagues aren't dead. Are you going to adjust your beliefs to match the new evidence?

      That is the difference between the nutcases and the merely paranoid.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    2. Re:Hope by intermodal · · Score: 1

      I find it disturbing that I had to scroll through so many potshots at government officials to get to the first instance of this idea. I'm sure the potshots were also warranted, but this is the part that really bugs me.

      --
      In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
    3. Re:Hope by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, let's assume that in ten days, Greenwald and his colleagues aren't dead. Are you going to adjust your beliefs to match the new evidence?

      Of course he will, Greenwald's survival will be the rock solid proof that the entire Snowden case is a decoy to distract us from the really dark secrets.

    4. Re:Hope by dwpro · · Score: 2

      Snowden didn't give specifics, but he did say this in response to the question:

      2) How many sets of the documents you disclosed did you make, and how many different people have them? If anything happens to you, do they still exist?

      All I can say right now is the US Government is not going to be able to cover this up by jailing or murdering me. Truth is coming, and it cannot be stopped.

      http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/17/edward-snowden-nsa-files-whistleblower

      --
      Millions long for immortality who do not know what to do with themselves on a rainy Sunday afternoon. -- Susan Ertz
    5. Re:Hope by intermodal · · Score: 1

      be that as it may, I sincerely doubt the government is above trying.

      --
      In SOVIET RUSSIA... erm...NSA AMERICA, the Internet logs onto YOU!
    6. Re:Hope by airdweller · · Score: 1

      So, let's assume that in ten days, you learn some logic. It won't help, will it?

    7. Re:Hope by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Please extrapolate on what you mean.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    8. Re:Hope by Uberbah · · Score: 1

      So, let's assume that in ten days, Greenwald and his colleagues aren't dead. Are you going to adjust your beliefs to match the new evidence?

      We bombed Al Jazeera offices under Bush, Obama personally called to keep a journalist imprisoned in Yemen, before going to wage a bigger war on the press and whisteblowers than Nixon and Reagan and Bush combined. Oh, and there was that triffling matter of assassinating an American citizen for political speech and then the man's son for no particular reason.

      So, going to adjust the snobby response? It's not like it would be totally obvious if every investigative journalist started turning up dead in small engine plane crashes.

    9. Re:Hope by phantomfive · · Score: 1
      See? This is the kind of stuff that makes you look stupid instead of paranoid.

      Oh, and there was that triffling matter of assassinating an American citizen for political speech and then the man's son for no particular reason.

      Really? No particular reason? You may say it's unconstitutional (probably correctly), but there was definitely a reason he was killed. Don't be blind.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  34. Re:Why are they putting a number on the amount of by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    The slaveowning aristocratic hypocrites who made a mockery of "liberty" would be too outraged that Black people and women could vote and become president to care much about someone leaking classified info to foreign governments. Although if they thought about it they'd be upset about that as well.

  35. Re:Why are they putting a number on the amount of by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It was a bit more than 4 years. Perhaps you'd like to read up about it. There was also a good documentary series on Netflix I watched a while back, but I can't remember what it was called. It was mostly a live action re-enactment with narration, more a miniseries than a documentary really. Not much rah rah America but more historically accurate including even a sympathetic look at Benedict Arnold and his reasons for defecting. About 8 hour-long episodes iirc covering the period of time from shortly after the French and Indian War through the ratification of the Articles of Confederation. Then there was the whole War of 1812 mess.

    Moral of the story: revolution can happen, not everyone will support you, your reasons may not even be as righteous as you think they are, and it will be long, drawn out, and very bloody, and you'll probably lose unless an ally like late 18th century France sympathizes with you.

  36. Re:Why are they putting a number on the amount of by chill · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They're trying to make the point of the furor and debate over the last month was triggered by only a small amount of data. A good portion of the conversation has been an attempt to deflect the attacks to Snowden himself, instead of what the information showed.

    Still, it resulted in multiple Congressional hearings; a very close vote to defund aspects of the PATRIOT Act; and a public act of perjury by the DNI.

    His point is all that was prompted by only the tip of the iceberg, and they still have the entire polar expanse to uncover.

    He could also be putting various public officials on notice that they better not lie to the public about what they knew and approved of, because he can quite possibly publicly call them on it.

    --
    Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
  37. Re:Congress considers Snowdon to be a whistleblowe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    You confuse "believes there was illegal activity so Snowden is a whistleblower" with "knew what was going on and that it was not illegal and are now acting to cover their asses from the masses".

  38. Slashdot naivete by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Why do you naively believe that the US will ever stop such spying? Every industrialized country on earth does it including the UK, Brazil, Russia, Germany, France, Italy, et al.. because they can and because they have the technological wherewithal to do it.

    For a site filled with supposed tech enthusiasts I'm seeing an awful lot of naivete and misunderstanding of technology. Once you invent a technology it doesn't get uninvented.

    1. Re:Slashdot naivete by lightknight · · Score: 2

      Indeed. Everyone does it, so that makes it okay, right?

      --
      I am John Hurt.
    2. Re:Slashdot naivete by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

      Well, that escalated quickly.

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    3. Re:Slashdot naivete by demachina · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yes everybody does it but the NSA has taken it to a level completely unprecedented thanks to the vast troves of information flowing through the worlds fiber optics now and the fact they have tapped nearly all of it.

      The real problems start when governments start spying on its own citizens, with no limits, and with modern technology. Its now possible to spy on just about everything everyone does, email, phone, social networks, credit card purchases, what books you read, how much electricity you use, where you go and to keep that information indefinitely. Its quite possible they can use the now ubiquitous camera's and microphones we all carry all the time to listen to and watch everything targetted people are doing.

      It is now possible to use this information along with machine learning to automatically spot people who have almost any kind of interest, habit, bias or political leaning. You just need to compose the right query.

      When does it get really bad. When the NSA, or someone with access to the NSA firehose, starts spying on the all the politicians, journalists and judges that form the government that is supposed to oversee them. Once you have dirt on all of them you control them. Once you control them the checks and balances essential to a democracy are completely gone.

      You will quickly find yourself in a totalitarian state, something the U.S. and U.K. have been rushing towards at breakneck speed since 9/11. Only thing stopping it is if the people with all this power engage in self restraint. Chances are some of the powers that be, have been and will be haven't and wont.

      --
      @de_machina
    4. Re:Slashdot naivete by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nice straw man, but there is a fundamental difference between sitting there defenseless and violating people's rights.

    5. Re:Slashdot naivete by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It has nothing to do with right and wrong beyond a certain point. It has to do with survival. Ultimately, you can be moral - and dead - or immoral and alive.

    6. Re:Slashdot naivete by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Equestria Girls established that a single Element of Harmony is something humanity "will not have the power to defend themselves" against. So yes, a rainbow unicorn land will be quite sufficient.

    7. Re:Slashdot naivete by cayenne8 · · Score: 1

      ndeed. Everyone does it, so that makes it okay, right?

      I have no problem with our country, the US, spying on other countries, hell, I expect it to.

      The problem is...the Fed Govt. wiping its ass with the Constitution and spying on its own citizenry.

      Yes, every country spies on other countries...we'd be stupid not to too.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    8. Re:Slashdot naivete by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      We've invented guns and yet the real world is not a game of Grand Theft Auto.

      We've invented nukes and yet the whole planet hasn't been glassed.

      Aren't we mature enough to choose when it's appropriate to use these technologies?

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    9. Re:Slashdot naivete by King_TJ · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Who here is stating a belief that the U.S. will stop all spying?

      The goal here is to demand some accountability.... To say, "Look.... We know you have spy agencies, like all nation do. And while we might not care for spying on the whole, it's an unfortunate necessity to have our own organization to counter what the rest of the world still wants to do to us. BUT, there's NO excuse for putting resources and taxpayer dollars into warrantless spying on our own citizens, on our own soil!"

      It appears to me that a good bit of what's happening now is Federal govt. paying private contractors to build some of these spying tools and to actually DO the spying for them. That way, government is able to claim it is following the Constitution and doing nothing wrong. (They're simply getting information handed over to them by a private party.) Then, govt. simply invests in the computer power to process and save all of this information that was "given" to them.

    10. Re:Slashdot naivete by demachina · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Bruce Sterling had some great lines in his recent piece The Ecuadorian Library

      On the role of the FISA court in controlling the NSA:

      "It's like a cardboard steering wheel in the cockpit of a Predator drone"

      Most people don't realize the FISA court is appointed entirely by one person, the chief justice of the Supreme Court, John Roberts. Its a bizarre anomaly, a critical protector of the American Constitution completely controlled by a single person. If he or one of his successors goes bad, the Constitution can be eviscerated overnight and since its completely secret we probably wouldn't even know it.

      --
      @de_machina
    11. Re:Slashdot naivete by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You think the NSA has been recording more information then governments like China?

    12. Re:Slashdot naivete by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Chances are some of the powers that be, have been and will be haven't and wont.

      That sentence made my eyes bleed.

    13. Re:Slashdot naivete by demachina · · Score: 1

      As far recording goes within their respective countries it sound like the NSA and China are probably on par. China is censoring much more heavily and probably acting on the traffic with a heavier hand than the NSA.

      NSA almost certainly dwarfs China in recording global fiber optic traffic. First a lot of it flows through the U.S. and second the NSA has cuts deals with governments and telecoms all over the world to get more access. China is probably trying to play catch especially through Huawei, and subsidizing telecom in places like Africa, but I wager they are far behind the NSA.

      Not sure why the world trusted the U.S. government, tech and telecom companies with so much, while they feared China, since the NSA's voracious appetite for information has been no secret for a long time. Maybe it was just the U.S. pioneered the Internet and it was so cool, so everyone forgot you can't trust the U.S. with your comm traffic.

      --
      @de_machina
    14. Re:Slashdot naivete by demachina · · Score: 1

      It is a correct sentence though isn't it :)

      Pedants this is your chance to strike.

      --
      @de_machina
    15. Re:Slashdot naivete by XcepticZP · · Score: 2

      Ahh, nationalism... That and any sort of group-think. That sort of thinking is exactly why we can't have nice things as a society.

    16. Re:Slashdot naivete by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Law enforcement doesn't solve the problem of there being criminals. It manages the problem. Shining a light on shady practices does the exact same thing. If this whole thing wasn't hurting the shady people, the US government wouldn't be so flippin' crazy mad about the whole thing as they clearly are. This IS law enforcement, the problem is just that there is no police force, so it's up to individuals to keep abuses in check. Like normal law enforcement, it's not perfect, but it's something.

    17. Re:Slashdot naivete by WOOFYGOOFY · · Score: 1

      what do you mean 'goes bad' ? Roberts IS bad.

    18. Re:Slashdot naivete by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      The best way to troll pedants is call them pendants. They just can't resist that.

      To write worsely, more practice you need. One missing comma isn't going to enrage an pendants.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    19. Re:Slashdot naivete by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes everybody does it but the NSA has taken it to a level completely unprecedented thanks to the vast troves of information flowing through the worlds fiber optics now and the fact they have tapped nearly all of it.

      Just as further proof, remember that supposed flooding in Thailand that stopped all the hard drive production a couple years ago? That was just a NSA cover up. They were secretly buying all the hard drives they could so they could try and backup my porn collection.

      There you have it, the uncensored truth!

    20. Re:Slashdot naivete by TheDarkener · · Score: 1

      Reminds me of a quote I heard on Slashdot by a commenter back in 2000...

      'Programmers always wonder whether or not they can do something...but hardly ever whether they *should*.'

      --
      It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
    21. Re:Slashdot naivete by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course it is not okay. But, who is going to punish the governments?

      They continue because they know the can get away with it, even if it is wrong.

    22. Re:Slashdot naivete by The+Snowman · · Score: 2

      It appears to me that a good bit of what's happening now is Federal govt. paying private contractors to build some of these spying tools and to actually DO the spying for them. That way, government is able to claim it is following the Constitution and doing nothing wrong.

      If I pay a hit man to murder someone for me, and he follows through, who is guilty of murder? Both of us. Paying contractors to violate the Constitution does not absolve the government of its responsibility to abide by it.

      --
      24 beers in a case, 24 hours in a day. Coincidence? I think not!
    23. Re:Slashdot naivete by Richy_T · · Score: 1

      But it's been going on for a long time. It must have been at least 20 years ago that it was revealed that the US was spying on UK companies and vice versa and then they just exchanged data.

      I guess somebody said "Yes, technically but for all intents and purposes, you may as well just spy on your own people". And the intelligence agencies said "Good point" and did so.

    24. Re:Slashdot naivete by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Once we invented the constitution it doesn't get uninvented. Remember that when we pull the trigger.

    25. Re:Slashdot naivete by cayenne8 · · Score: 1

      That sort of thinking is exactly why we can't have nice things as a society.

      I kinda like my society. I don't really care about yours, whatever country that is....

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    26. Re:Slashdot naivete by dbIII · · Score: 1

      subsidizing telecom in places like Africa

      They don't have to go that far to be cheaper than the huge Cisco markups. Knowing the Chinese, they'd be making a small profit on every unit whether it had a secondary role of spying or not, and still come far under the Cisco price.

    27. Re:Slashdot naivete by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I guarantee people like me who have never broken a law, been arrested, never intended to (yeah I know we break laws every 5 mins). But who are a fringe group of "radicals" will never have power in this country.

      And the worst I would do to you is allow you and your peers to form your own government and grant you the freedom to delegate your cities infrastructure as you saw fit. I would also permit you to engage in commerce without extreme levels or regulations at the federal level. You would be free if I was in charge to sell your t-shirts on the side of the road and live the dream.

      Here we are not. -captcha severe (thats where its at)

      -another random American.

    28. Re:Slashdot naivete by TranquilVoid · · Score: 1

      You are using self-interest to justify the same behaviour that you are condemning with ethics.

      Perhaps you can supply a solid argument why it is both ethical for a government to spy on other countries yet unethical to spy on itself, but using your own argument, wouldn't the U.S. government be stupid not to spy on its own citizens when they spy on it?

    29. Re:Slashdot naivete by bfandreas · · Score: 1

      That sort of thinking is exactly why we can't have nice things as a society.

      I kinda like my society. I don't really care about yours, whatever country that is....

      And I wonder why there are no tourists coming from the US of A. Lotsa Canadians, tho. Never thought there were that many of them...

      --
      20 minutes into the future
    30. Re:Slashdot naivete by elucido · · Score: 1

      It appears to me that a good bit of what's happening now is Federal govt. paying private contractors to build some of these spying tools and to actually DO the spying for them. That way, government is able to claim it is following the Constitution and doing nothing wrong.

      If I pay a hit man to murder someone for me, and he follows through, who is guilty of murder? Both of us. Paying contractors to violate the Constitution does not absolve the government of its responsibility to abide by it.

      So if a foreign allied government does the spying for the US government on US soil and gives the information to the US government then what?

    31. Re:Slashdot naivete by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And it's practically impossible to contact this court unless you are one of the select few who bring cases to it.

    32. Re:Slashdot naivete by cayenne8 · · Score: 1

      Perhaps you can supply a solid argument why it is both ethical for a government to spy on other countries yet unethical to spy on itself, but using your own argument, wouldn't the U.S. government be stupid not to spy on its own citizens when they spy on it?

      Because there are US constitutional protections for the citizens against this type activity by the govt.

      There is also a Constitutional mandate for the Fed govt to defend this nation, and foreign intelligence gathering is a part of that.

      Easy-peasy.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    33. Re:Slashdot naivete by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And "because they can" becomes "because so can everyone else" which then becomes "and so we must." Imagine being the only country in a region that had no military. That's effectively what the situation would be if governments didn't do this kind of spying.

    34. Re:Slashdot naivete by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Excuse me, "If" he goes bad???? The barn door is wide open, the horses are gone, and, in fact, the thing is on fire. The only question now is - repair or rebuild?

    35. Re:Slashdot naivete by XcepticZP · · Score: 1

      Newsflash, we're part of the SAME society. You see what I mean about group-think? Most people abhor selfishness when in public, yet seldom refuse to admit that nationalism and groupthink is exactly that, just projected onto a bigger scale.

  39. Re:Congress considers Snowdon to be a whistleblowe by Ralph+Wiggam · · Score: 5, Informative

    Yet Obama continues to label Snowden's actions as espionage

    Snowden has been charged with two things- theft of government property (4 laptops) and giving classified information to a person without security clearance. The later charge was created by the Espionage Act of 1917. It is not "espionage" in any common use of the word. Nobody, including Snowden, has denied that he did those things.

    It is Obama and the Executive Branch's job to enforce existing law. They're doing that. If the Judicial Branch rules that Snowden's actions were justified, then he'll walk free.

  40. Re:Why are they putting a number on the amount of by RoknrolZombie · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Well, the initial stories said that Snowden had acquired the information and intentionally waited until after the last election to release it. The reasons that I remember being given were that Snowden had HOPED for some CHANGE in the Government and for some wacky reason thought that Obama would be the one to do it. Apparently the data was released after he determined that the hope and change thing wasn't gonna happen.
     
      Right now it sounds to me a lot like blackmail - the documents will continue to be released as long as the US Gubmint starts acting like spoiled brats. We can see that this hasn't changed, so we can expect documents to continue to be released. If they're smart they'll break up the data from least to most damaging and release it in that order...the more the US resists decency, the worse their reputation will get until the Americans (or hell, other countries) get together to kick some ass.

  41. Russia acted admirably in regards to Snowden by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    it seems like most of the world, excluding us politicians/warwhores, really feels snowden acted. responsibly and in good faith. despite Snowdens motives do not loose sight of the fact that the NSA has redefined the law to suit their needs regarding metadata capture. this is not acceptable and needs to be answered by top brass. the NSA is not the law but they are acting as if.

    regarding obamas playground tactics, that is very poor. he cannot deny the NSA has acted outside the law yet he pretends the problem is with Putin and his decisions. this is the act of a coward and politician and not a man with a conscience. at least Putin considered Snowden does have some rights regardless. tricky as this was to navigate politically I think Russia did the right thing and did so with prudence and regard.

    1. Re:Russia acted admirably in regards to Snowden by MightyMartian · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The fact is that the Founding Fathers expected the Executive to push the envelope, and understood that is the nature of power. While I can certainly fault GWB and Obama (and indeed many Presidents who have judiciously interpreted laws in their favor to act in any way they pleased), the real fault here lies with Congress, which has, on the national security front, by and large let two consecutive Administrations do whatever they want. Yes, lies were to told to Congress, but it's not just Congress's right, but its duty under the Constitution to not simply take the Administration's word for things.

      Congress may express surprise and exasperation at what the Administration has actually been up to, but I think it strains credibility to imagine that they were truly that taken aback. Essentially no one since 9/11 has wanted to be seen to be opposed to the "War on Terror", and so they have completely abrogated that most fundamental of obligations; which is to act as a check on the power of the President. Even now, as they decry the abuse of the authority granted to the Executive through legislation, they still want to flay Snowden for the crime of showing just how fucking useless they are.

      He should be receiving a Congressional Medal of Honor and a Nobel Peace Prize for having shown the world not just what the US government, but numerous allied governments have been up to, and finally stirring the pot sufficiently that Congress is actually suggesting, however belatedly, that they never intended that legislation be interpreted so liberally,

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    2. Re:Russia acted admirably in regards to Snowden by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The fact is that the Founding Fathers expected the Executive to push the envelope, and understood that is the nature of power.

      Seriously? The Founders who wrote the Constitution to strictly limit the powers of the Federal government to those enumerated in the Constitution expected the President to "push the envelope"?

      Can you point to a federalist paper or any other document to support that?

    3. Re:Russia acted admirably in regards to Snowden by MightyMartian · · Score: 2

      If they didn't expect the three branches of government might prove excessive in their use of powers, they wouldn't have built checks and balances into the Constitution. The Constitution isn't a document that says "We sure hope the Executive doesn't abuse its power", it's a document that says "Here is how the other two branches can take the Executive to task and mitigate any abuses if and when they occur." The Constitution may have been an idealistic document, but it wasn't written by naive men. They knew very well that endowing any particular branch of the governemnt with great power would invite substantial abuses.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    4. Re:Russia acted admirably in regards to Snowden by czernabog · · Score: 1

      He should be receiving a [...] Nobel Peace Prize

      Why give him something so meaningless? I mean, look who got one of those in 2009...

    5. Re:Russia acted admirably in regards to Snowden by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      at least Putin considered Snowden does have some rights regardless.

      Have you even met a Russian before? Putin is considered by most of the country to be sort of the new-style Soviet leadership. Or they have a saying, that is sort of "there is no ex-KGB"....

      Russian government isn't being gracious hosts, they're just thinking "how did we get so fucking lucky?"

    6. Re:Russia acted admirably in regards to Snowden by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My bad, I misunderstood your statement to mean:

      "The fact is that the Founding Fathers expected the Executive to push the envelope [and succeed, despite the Constitution]"

      Instead of:

      "The fact is that the Founding Fathers expected the Executive to push the envelope [and fail, because of the Constitution]"

      --------------

      "Transparency and the rule of law will be the touchstones of this presidency."
      -- President Barrack Obama, January 23, 2009

    7. Re:Russia acted admirably in regards to Snowden by LordLucless · · Score: 1

      He should be receiving a Congressional Medal of Honor and a Nobel Peace Prize for having shown the world not just what the US government, but numerous allied governments have been up to, and finally stirring the pot sufficiently

      That's the problem with the Nobel Peace Prize, really. It assumes that peace is a good thing. That's not an unreasonable assumption, but sometimes, creating conflict (as Snowden, Manning, Assange, and basically all whistleblowers in history have done) is sometimes more desirable. Peace at all costs eventually becomes a worship of the status quo.

      --
      Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
    8. Re:Russia acted admirably in regards to Snowden by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      Exactly. But my larger point is that for the checks to work properly, the branches of government have to actually do their job.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  42. Re:Why are they putting a number on the amount of by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They never speak about it because it scares the shit out of world wide governments when information about how many pages of paper were used gets to the powerfull Audubon and save the tree groups. This latest paper disaster will be handled soon as tree hugging classes are over.

  43. Re:Congress considers Snowdon to be a whistleblowe by umafuckit · · Score: 5, Informative

    Snowden has been charged with two things- theft of government property (4 laptops) and giving classified information to a person without security clearance. The later charge was created by the Espionage Act of 1917. It is not "espionage" in any common use of the word.

    I'm not expert on the Espionage act, but the Wikipedia tells me that the original Act made the following a crime:

    1. To convey information with intent to interfere with the operation or success of the armed forces of the United States or to promote the success of its enemies. This was punishable by death or by imprisonment for not more than 30 years or both.

    2. To convey false reports or false statements with intent to interfere with the operation or success of the military or naval forces of the United States or to promote the success of its enemies when the United States is at war, to cause or attempt to cause insubordination, disloyalty, mutiny, refusal of duty, in the military or naval forces of the United States, or to willfully obstruct the recruiting or enlistment service of the United States. This was punishable by a maximum fine of $10,000 or by imprisonment for not more than 20 years or both.

    Snowden hasn't done either of things and there is no basis for Obama to be pursuing him based upon the Espionage Act. He has not handed sensititve secrets to the enemy, either directly or by way of the media. So unless you are aware of another part of the Espionage Act, it seems that Obama is stretching its definition to pursue Snowden.

  44. Re:Why are they putting a number on the amount of by Opportunist · · Score: 1

    If they saw what's going on today, I guess they'd even consider rewording the eight amendment to allow it in certain special cases, like these.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  45. Re: Why are they putting a number on the amount of by Opportunist · · Score: 2

    Maybe he regrets it, but maybe he finds comfort in the fact that at least for once one of his decisions was actually right.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  46. Re:Congress considers Snowdon to be a whistleblowe by Guppy06 · · Score: 1

    The votes failed, and Congress (or at least the folks on the intelligence committees) knew about these programs the entire time.

    It's not White House versus Congress or Republican versus Democrat. Everyone's on the same page except the voters, and everyone wants Snowden waterboarded to the fullest extent of the unpublished law.

  47. Re:Why are they putting a number on the amount of by gmuslera · · Score: 1

    Is worse than that. Is not just an abstract enemy. Is someone that killed a lot of people, buried the bodies, and now is complaining about anyone that goes with a shovel to the forest, as is something bad that we are doing with them. Good part of the crime is already done, and odds are high that you notice some of this just when you become the next victim if nothing of this is uncovered.

  48. Not that this would ever happen... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If a majority of US allies and enemies simultaneously offered asylum to Snowden then maybe there would be a change of strategy by the US, hopefully for the better. But probably not going to happen, because of the polytricks.

  49. Re:Congress considers Snowdon to be a whistleblowe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh boy oh boy! What a mistake it was to trust this guy... Not much different from a conning Nigerian scammer. After 8 years of W and his rethuglican retinue we all wanted a messiah so bad, that we bought this guy's speeches hook line and sinker... The alternative might have sucked a lot, but boy we at least knew what he was and knew not to vote for him... But I voted for this guy! Oh my God! I do regret. The question now is who to vote for... the libertarians have some really dangerous and whacky ideas... so not them. Those Greens are ok but they won't win...

  50. Re:Fuck you! Obummer is the messiah! by Opportunist · · Score: 0

    *shrug*

    If the Reps ruled today, we'd have Dems doing exactly the same. And we'd most certainly have exactly the same shit going down.

    It never ceases to amaze me that a lot of US Americans still think voting for Kodos would have been any better.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  51. Queen side Castle by GerryHattrick · · Score: 2

    Don't EVER try playing chess with Russians. You will lose in some very unexpected way, and they will buy you a drink, and challenge you to swallow the whole gherkin.

    1. Re:Queen side Castle by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Unless your name is Anand, or Fischer. Then you win.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    2. Re:Queen side Castle by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just like we lost in October of 1962...

  52. Re:Fuck you! Obummer is the messiah! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    False dilemma is false. Criticizing Obummer is not endorsing the Repuglicans no matter how much it makes his fanbase butthurt.

  53. Re:Why are they putting a number on the amount of by amicusNYCL · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Your idiocy is showing.

    --
    "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
  54. Brasil needs Fighter Jets? Planned insurgency? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How far must we allow Corporations to continue to distabilize areas of the globe for Power and Profit? Can we lock them up or worse?

  55. Re:Why are they putting a number on the amount of by houghi · · Score: 1

    And that is the issue right there. The 1776 politicians and people took action and were willing to die for it. We now would be upset if we would miss the game of our favorite sports-team while eating our favorite fast food. Not a new idea

    --
    Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
  56. Thanks by Okian+Warrior · · Score: 1

    Thanks - that's pretty insightful.

    I am reading into Glen's statements (I said so in the post), so no I can't point to anything firmer.

    I would like to see more evidence, though. Your first link talks about two known incidents - it would be good to have more information so we can tell who is right without speculation. The real situation may be closer to what I wrote, the WSJ extrapolation from two incidents, or something completely different.

    We'd be better off with more facts.

  57. Re:Why are they putting a number on the amount of by thinkingrodent · · Score: 1

    You slam him, yet neglect to mention you'd be there with him asking him to pass the bag of Cheetos. Hell, I'd probably be there too. If you think you have no ego, you have a very big ego.

  58. Re:Why are they putting a number on the amount of by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 0

    Criticizing Obama is racist, period. Didn't we, as a culture, learn this in the 2008 and 2012 elections? Did you not tune in to the news?

    --
    Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
  59. Re:Why are they putting a number on the amount of by i+kan+reed · · Score: 2

    And France didn't so much sympathize as want to screw over the English holdings in the Americas after the French and Indian war.

  60. Re:Fuck you! Obummer is the messiah! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Exactly. Same s___, different party.

  61. No, it won't be huge by Pollux · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If this is true, it would be huge. Citizens don't count for much in terms of US policy decisions, but an unfair boost to chosen businesses would tick off every other business in the US and abroad - the economic ramifications would be nothing short of tectonic.

    I hate to be the cynic, but no, it wouldn't be huge. Politics has become the greatest spectator sport of the 21st century. Everyone has an opinion about what's wrong, but no one's willing to act on it enough to create substantial change.

    We nearly hanged Nixon (and Ford for pardoning him) for Watergate. We have bigger scandals than Watergate happening today, scandals involving the usurption of our civil liberties by our own government, but no one's doing anything about it except complain. Like the boiling frog, we've become so acclimiated to these changes that I doubt we'll be able to leap out of the situation before it kills us.

    1. Re:No, it won't be huge by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      Indeed. Nixon was crucified for the crime of spying on his (perceived) political opponents. The last two presidents have one-upped Nixon by basically asserting pretty much anyone anywhere in the world with an Internet or phone connection is an enemy. So degraded has the political scene in Washington become that the only time anyone wants to oust a President is if he lied about getting a blowjob from an intern.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    2. Re:No, it won't be huge by sFurbo · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Imagine the effects on Microsoft if they were doing industrial espionage on companies for NSA. No semi-large foreign company would dare to buy any Microsoft product again - it would mean they would massively handicap themselves in regards to their American competitors and customers. Now extrapolate to the entire US computer industry.

      While spying on the American population seems to not make anybody angry enough, cutting off all large foreign customers for the computer industry would make a splash.

    3. Re:No, it won't be huge by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey give us a break! some of us a jealous!

    4. Re:No, it won't be huge by Gr33nJ3ll0 · · Score: 1

      Frogs actually jump out at some point. :)

    5. Re:No, it won't be huge by cayenne8 · · Score: 1

      We nearly hanged Nixon (and Ford for pardoning him) for Watergate. We have bigger scandals than Watergate happening today, scandals involving the usurption of our civil liberties by our own government, but no one's doing anything about it except complain.

      Well, you see...I saw it on the new the other day, that these are just phony scandals, that are detracting from the important issues of the day...???

      And well, if you question that, they you sir must be a racist. And our great US news agencies certainly are NOT racist and hence, tow the line on this story (and other similar ones).

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    6. Re:No, it won't be huge by dkleinsc · · Score: 5, Insightful

      We nearly hanged Nixon (and Ford for pardoning him) for Watergate.

      More precisely, the Democrats in Congress nearly impeached and removed Nixon from office with the expectation that this would be followed up by criminal charges. It wasn't going to hang Nixon, but it was going to lock him up for a while. Gerald Ford's pardon was a damn shame, because it cemented the idea in Washington that the president is above the law (no matter what Stephen Seagal does). I'm reasonably certain part of the story was that the Clinton impeachment scared Democrats into making a tacit agreement with Republicans: Don't go after our crimes, we won't go after yours. And because there is no other party with any real power, the result is that both Democratic and Republican presidents can commit crimes with impunity. The intelligence agencies happily collect / create enough dirt on anyone else who might challenge them as well.

      It's not about the citizens accepting what's going on. It's about the citizens hating what's going on, but seeing no viable paths to changing it. If you elect new congresscritters or a new president, that will simply change which don is currently in charge. If you protest on the street, your protest will be ignored by the media and you may well get your ass kicked by police. If you petition your government, you will get a form letter in response. If you file a lawsuit, it will be dismissed out of hand because of state secrets privilege. If you try a criminal approach, you'll be shot down by a heavily militarized police force. If you form an organization that starts having any kind of real effects, then you and your group will have assets frozen, and if you're truly effective then you will be the target of a worldwide manhunt regardless of the law or treaties or diplomatic concerns.

      --
      I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
    7. Re:No, it won't be huge by microbox · · Score: 1

      Frogs do leap out of slowly warming water

      Sorry to rain all over your simile.

      --

      Like all pain, suffering is a signal that something isn't right
    8. Re:No, it won't be huge by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nixon was pardoned because public trials of top-ranking officials often end badly. Look at Egypt--the trial both inflamed the passions of the secularists and emboldened the religious. Rather than provoking the two sides to come together, the trial drove a wedge of animosity between them.

      Prosecuting Nixon could have torn out country apart, or at least left it battered. At least, that was the fear.

      And the office of the President _is_ above the law. Can you imagine Congress passing an otherwise legitimate law which had the effect of putting a Supreme Court Justice into jail? It would create an existential threat to our system. Nixon wasn't above the law, but President Nixon was. It's difficult to separate the man from his office because these institutions are fundamentally fictitious, like all law is fictitious.

      It's why Congressmen traveling to and from the Congress have certain criminal immunities. Sometimes they have to be above the law in some sense, otherwise you give the law enforcers an enormous amount of power.

    9. Re:No, it won't be huge by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also, finding needles in haystacks isn't that hard. And anti-terrorism is more like finding a needle in a huge stack of needles, anyhow.

      Most of these similes and metaphors are just ways to obscure the real issues. If you're discussing a complex subject and similes and metaphors start to be thrown around, it's probably best to just walk away. Maybe spend that time researching the scholarship and primary sources. Or at least reading Slashdot.

    10. Re:No, it won't be huge by dbIII · · Score: 1

      Can you imagine Congress passing an otherwise legitimate law which had the effect of putting a Supreme Court Justice into jail

      I can imagine such a thing and I imagine it would be called "Magna Carta".

    11. Re:No, it won't be huge by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Didn't Microsoft enable the Stuxnet attack? Expect a Persian Linux distro sometime soon.

    12. Re:No, it won't be huge by Glarimore · · Score: 1

      I'm reasonably certain part of the story was that the Clinton impeachment scared Democrats into making a tacit agreement with Republicans: Don't go after our crimes, we won't go after yours. And because there is no other party with any real power, the result is that both Democratic and Republican presidents can commit crimes with impunity.

      While I think the agreement you mention is likely true, I think that getting your dick sucked in the oval office is a notably less heinous of a crime than what occurred during Watergate, and I don't really think the two can be compared.

    13. Re:No, it won't be huge by sjames · · Score: 1

      But if you see someone preparing for an act of violence against the government, you might be inclined to convince yourself you saw something more innocent and go about your business...

  62. Why not boycott Sochi, then? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Look, we're obviously pissed off at Russia for multiple reasons, so why the FUCK don't we boycott Sochi?

  63. Re:Why are they putting a number on the amount of by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Human nature hasn't fundamentally changed in a few centuries. People were greedy before 1776, they were greedy on 1776 and we are still greedy today. The only relevant difference is that they didn't have this type of control at their fingertips back in 1776.

  64. This reminds me of a story by T.E.D. · · Score: 1, Insightful

    I remember something that happened years ago uncannily like this whole Snowden affair.

    Remember a decade back, when there was a guy running for POTUS as a decorated war hero at a time we were involved in two wars? The other side made some rediculous attacks on his war record. So did he react like a war hero? Perhaps attack his assailants in some way? Heck no! He sat around for months taking no action other than whining impotently about the lack of help from his opponent who wasn't even (provably) directly involved.

    This is pretty much exactly how we've been handling this whole Snowden affair. Did we just send folks out to arrest him? No. So did we instead just quitely bide our time waiting for him to try to move to some non-shithole country so we can arrest him (in the meantime, leaving him effectively in a large jail)? Nope. We just sit on our ass for months whining impotently that Russia, who we tweak at every opportunity, should go out of their way to help us. Funny how similar these situations are.

    So about that incompetent POTUS candidate...I wonder whatever happened to him.

    1. Re:This reminds me of a story by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He has more power than the president in that position. Odd.

      Either way we are quite fucked lol. This is normal bullshit. But its getting old. And a great majority of people are wisening up to it. Not just geeks.

    2. Re:This reminds me of a story by T.E.D. · · Score: 1

      He has more power than the president in that position. Odd.

      Ever since he's taken over state (Jan of this year) our entire foreign policy strategy has looked exactly like this. I wasn't like that before. We helped push Mubarak out when it became obvious that he was going to go, and supporting him any further would just hurt us. We not only militarily forced Quadaffi out, but we managed to arrange things so that everyone else was *begging* us to do it, so we could come in "reluctantly". That one was a master stroke. Now all we do whine loudly that people who don't like us much should do what we want them to do (Syria, Israel & Palestine, Russia, China). You tell me what else changed in the last 8 months to cause this?

      Yesterday I was listening to a former Regan admin offcial (James Baker perhaps?) on NPR, and he was saying how happy he was so far with Kerry at State because he felt Obama kept Clinton on too "short of a leash" (his words, not mine). So yes, according to that Republican at least, policy is being much more directed by Kerry lately.

    3. Re:This reminds me of a story by Xest · · Score: 1

      Do you live on a different planet or something?

      "We helped push Mubarak out when it became obvious that he was going to go"

      No you didn't, the people of Egypt and their military did. At best America issued a few "strongly worded statements".

      "We not only militarily forced Quadaffi out, but we managed to arrange things so that everyone else was *begging* us to do it, so we could come in "reluctantly""

      France had launched it's first strikes against Gaddaffi's forces when Obama and Hillary were still fumbling about with indecisiveness as the people of Benghazi were otherwise only hours away from carnage.

      You barely even helped. Apart from some initial cruise missiles and some drones in the sky providing surveillance it was an Anglo-French-Qatari affair as it was they who were doing all the bombing runs and all of the rest of the surveillance as well as providing all the on the ground training and delivery of weapons. Of course, the people who really did the bulk of the work though were the rebels themselves though.

      "You tell me what else changed in the last 8 months to cause this? "

      So there you have it, nothing has changed and that's the point. This is Obama's modus-operandi. The press and other leaders call it "patient and considered" but in reality he's indecisive and fumbling. There are any numbers of occasions where if he was a strong leader he'd have been more decisive and stood up for his point but instead just stayed quiet - the battles in Syria have been going on over 2 years and he still doesn't know what he's doing and the worst part? He finally decided to arm the rebels only after the extremist groups had gained loads of power because no one else was coming to help. Had he decided to arm the rebels a year or 18 months ago then the moderates would've been in a far stronger position than they are now. His fumbling only made the situation worse - he should've armed early, or made a commitment not to intervene full stop. He did neither and created a shit storm as he did nothing about chemical weapon attacks something he previously called a "red line" - we know one thing, Obama's red-lines are probably the least scary thing on the planet.

      I'm not a fan of the other extreme - the Bush-Cheney hot-headed kill everything ideology but dawdling about without making a decision is entirely about Obama not Kerry or Clinton and there have been a number of occasions where this trait has caused problems. Hell, you only have to look at Guantanamo, how many years behind is he on that? A strong leader who meant what he said would've trivially had that closed years ago.

      FWIW I also believe this is why the NSA seems to be running the show, because Obama doesn't have the decisiveness to determine when to say no.

    4. Re:This reminds me of a story by T.E.D. · · Score: 1

      We helped push Mubarak out when it became obvious that he was going to go" No you didn't, the people of Egypt and their military did.

      ...

      You barely even helped. Apart from some initial cruise missiles and some ...

      This right here is exactly what I'm talking about. You're proving my point wonderfully. We did just enough that to ensure that things went the right way, but not enough to put our fingerprints all over everything. The Libyans can righly claim that the revoultion was theirs, not the USA's, and so can the Egyptians. This is precicely the kind of foriegn intervention the USA should be doing: no more than absolutely nessecary, but no less either.

      I'll admit it isn't a huge jump from that philosopy to today's "we just do absolutely nothing but complain about foriegn leaders", but it is certianly a qualitative difference. Try asking a Syrian refugee if you don't see it.

  65. Re:Why are they putting a number on the amount of by rwven · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I don't think we've hit that tipping point "yet." I still have hope that we never will. You're correct in that things have changed. What it took then and what it would take now are different animals.

    I was making a specific point though, which you've highlighted, and which escaped a lot of other people, I think. The people who did what they did in 1776 would not stand for what our government is doing to/against us now. They fought for a LOT more than the garbage we're sucking down willingly now. Our government is completely off base and way outside the lines of what should be considered acceptable.

    They're acting like the rotten kids who get caught with their hand in the cookie jar, and then throw themselves on the floor screaming in rage at their parents, because they hope their show of emotion will distract from the sin they just commited. We're being led by a pile of toddlers.

  66. Re:Why are they putting a number on the amount of by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

    I trust their constitution more than the crap any politician since then would do. Have you seen the sickening declarations of rights most governments have? "Flowery praise for right ABC, except..." where the exception is crafted to continue business as usual. Loopholes big enough for a truck because they were designed that way.

    --
    (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
  67. Critical thought by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He already did account for that outcome in his terse statement. The modal language "otherwise" indicates a conditional statement. Here it is in more crowd appropriate terms:

    If DeadSwitch = false {
    Assasination.TimerStart()
    }
    else {
    State = safe
    }

    Assuming his premise, if in ten days Greenwald is not dead, it merely proves existence of a Dead Man's switch. It does not show any need to adjust beliefs as this outcome has already been accounted for within the existing belief. QED

  68. Re:Why are they putting a number on the amount of by lgw · · Score: 1

    Your first comment really didn't make sense. Now there's enough context to see the point you're making - and sure enough someone else in the thread said the same, and not as a joke. Sigh.

    --
    Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
  69. Re:Why are they putting a number on the amount of by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Exactly. There's a reason England was shortly afterward horrified for and in bed with the French monarchy.

    No monarch truly sympathizes with a bunch of dirty peasants getting all uppity.

  70. Scandisk errors... by Wierdy1024 · · Score: 0

    My guess is Glenn Greewald's PC suddenly suffers some corruption and the few most secret pages of those documents mysteriously get corrupted or turn to blank...

  71. Re:Why are they putting a number on the amount of by Rob+the+Bold · · Score: 2

    You slam him, yet neglect to mention you'd be there with him asking him to pass the bag of Cheetos. Hell, I'd probably be there too. If you think you have no ego, you have a very big ego.

    All of you guys can share my Cheetos when you sign my cold, dead online petition. That'll show 'em.

    --
    I am not a crackpot.
  72. Re:Congress considers Snowdon to be a whistleblowe by Major+Ralph · · Score: 1

    I don't think Obama/Biden have kept any of those listed promises. If that's not a giant cockslap to the face of Americans, I don't know what is.

    --
    I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer.
  73. Re:Why are they putting a number on the amount by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Guardian and Glenn Greenwald are members of the press. Their job is to release information that may be pertinent to people out there. They're not trying to provoke the US or damage its position, they're simply reporting objectively. The US put itself at risk when they secretly performed the reported actions, knowing that it would damage them if it ever came to light.

    You have to admire Glenn Greenwald's courage though, putting himself up not just against the American government, but fellow members of the American press who threatened to have Mr. Greenwald arrested. Makes one wonder about the overall legitimacy and objectivity of the American press.

  74. Re:Why are they putting a number on the amount of by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He could also be putting various public officials on notice that they better not lie to the public about what they knew and approved of, because he can quite possibly publicly call them on it.

    I wouldn't do this. Release the information strategically where they would predictably like and cover-up in front of congress, then release immediately release the follow-up information that proves that they willfully lied to congress and the people.

    I think what we will see is that the PRISIM program was a two-way data sharing program not just ISP's giving data to the NSA, but sharing that data so each company could make better use of it in their own way. If you look at the big players, while they compete in some areas, they pretty much have their own set of services that each does best and by working together everyone involved is able to stay on top. I don't believe that companies like Google who spent billions developing products given away to consumers in exchagne for data would just willfully hand it over to the Feds for free. I think we will also see evidence of corporate espionage and insider trading as rewards for cooperation and the politicians involved getting data for campaign advertising and gerrymandering.

  75. Re:Why are they putting a number on the amount of by spacepimp · · Score: 0

    So says the Anonymous Coward making Cheetos/mothers basement and World of Warcraft jokes? 2006 called they said: Grow up and look around you sack-less little bitch. Your jokes are old and the coward thing speaks volumes.

  76. Bullsh&t! by s.petry · · Score: 1

    Sorry, but your point is both wrong and irrelevant. The problems we see today are not just 13 years old, but go back much further. Your ignorant claim requires only a few hours of study to resolve. Go get some books and read!

    Arguing that Bush was worse than Obama, or attempting to place ownership at all, is the type of idiocy that we simply don't need currently. Not only is it wrong, but the argument distracts from what we must do to correct things.

    By the way, the statements regarding trying to place blame goes to both of you.

    --

    -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

  77. Re:Why are they putting a number on the amount of by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    You're also forgetting that the ones fomenting, organizing, and bankrolling the rebellion were wealthy landowners who were not part of the English aristocracy and felt like they were being shafted by the English with taxes and a whole other bag of injustices. Yes, it was fought by the peasants, but it was supported by the wealthy. Do you think the wealthy have ANY reason to complain about the current state of affairs?

  78. Re:Fuck you! Obummer is the messiah! by s.petry · · Score: 1

    What a shock to see an anonymous person make a false claim in an ad hominem attack. No, not really...

    --

    -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

  79. Re:Fuck you! Obummer is the messiah! by MysteriousPreacher · · Score: 2

    I sometimes get the impression that a president, or a leader in general, serves as a lightning rod for criticism. Kind of like building shitty products, and instead of fixing them, creating a complaints department to be yelled at.

    --
    -- Using the preview button since 2005
  80. Re:Why are they putting a number on the amount of by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    True, mod parent up. Although the revolutionary sentiment was there, in the end it was a political move to stick it to England.

  81. Re:Why are they putting a number on the amount of by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You are exactly correct about what they deserve and should get except keep in mind that the elites would use your efforts to burn your home, torture your family and justify your actions based upon if a single person actually harmed them or even threatened to do so. You must be smarter than they are. The fight will be harder than a 4 year war for independence and it will be in need of more cunning. First targets have to be the absolute removal of the 50 or so agencies that do this spying. They have to be defunded and their staff needs barred from federal service and their leadership needs treated to a Nerenburg Trial and hanged. Your Congress Critteers need the heat and those around the world need to know you have to apply all of the pressure you have at your disposal to help us in the USA because we lose this fight and you are done too!

  82. Let's not forget by whoever57 · · Score: 1

    Let's not forget that the US government publicised the fact that it could listen to satellite phones and, specifically Bin Laden's conversations. Was anyone punished for that leak?

    Perhaps Nixon was right when he claimed that, "When the president does it, it's not illegal"?

    --
    The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
    1. Re:Let's not forget by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      Perhaps Nixon was right when he claimed that, "When the president does it, it's not illegal"?

      There was a leak today about the scary yet nonsensical plot that the puppet regime of Yemen supposedly foiled against Al Qaeda (due to NSA intercepts, no doubt). Think that'll get somebody imprisoned even though Obama has used Espionage Act prosecutions against leakers more than every other President combined?

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  83. Re:Why are they putting a number on the amount of by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

    That strawman collapsed under the amount of weight you tried to put on him.

    --
    "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
  84. when is that bitch Obama... by strstr · · Score: 1

    going to go on the run? Snowden should be sitting here enjoying American freedom, while the entire administration is being probed and shut down. remember, Barack Obama is responsible for much greater crimes than just PRISM and the electronic communications monitoring. think energy weapons, secret rape, and secret torture with electromagnetic weapons.

    http://www.obamasweapon.com/

    1. Re:when is that bitch Obama... by strstr · · Score: 1

      at issue here is, Barack Obama must feel pretty threatened for his criminality. that's why he wants to get ahold of Snowden so badly. He is protesting Russia, instead of trying to move forward and figure out what to do about the abuses of the US government. he isn't doing anything about it, because this threatens to uncover crime and abuse that he's responsible for himself. I refer you to my website, just keep in mind that Obama loves his electromagnetic weapons chest. He is raping and penetrating my body right now, and there's nothing I can do. He won't stop, get the FBI or CIA off me, till I die.

      http://www.obamasweapon.com/

    2. Re:when is that bitch Obama... by BigTunaTim · · Score: 1

      Haloperidol is your friend. Take it.

    3. Re:when is that bitch Obama... by strstr · · Score: 1

      education is your friend, random information spouting dick wad. try doing your homework next time, too.

      Is the NSA Conducting Electronic Warfare On Americans?

      Jonas Holmes May 19, 2006 CHRONICLE ARTICLE

      Russ Tice, former NSA intelligence officer and current Whistleblower, was to testify before the Senate Armed Services Committee this week. Apparently the testimony, Mr. Tice wanted to give, makes General Hayden’s phone surveillance program look like very small potatoes. Mr. Tice’s testimony is expected to reveal further illegal activity overseen by General Michael Hayden which even loyal and patriotic NSA employees view as unlawful. I think the people I talk to next week are going to be shocked when I tell them what I have to tell them. IT’S PRETTY HARD TO BELIEVE, Tice said. I hope that they’ll clean up the abuses and have some oversight into these programs, which doesn’t exist right now. According to Mr. Tice, what has been disclosed so far is only the tip of the iceberg. What in the world could Russ Tice be talking about! To figure it out let us take a look at Russ Tice’s work at the NSA.

      According to the Washington Times and numerous other sources, Mr. Tice worked on special access programs related to electronic intelligence gathering while working for the NSA and DIA, where he took part in space systems communications, non-communications signals, electronic warfare, satellite control, telemetry, sensors, and special capability systems. Special Access Programs or SAPs refer to Black Budgets or Black Operations. Black means that they are covert and hidden from everyone except the participants. Feasibly there would be no arena with a greater potential for abuse and misuse than Special Access Programs. Even now Congress and the Justice Department are being denied the ability to investigate these programs because they don’t have clearance. To put it in CNN’s Jack Cafferty’s words a top secret government agency, the NSA, the largest of its kind in the world, is denying oversight or investigation by the American people because investigators lack clearance. To add a layer of irony to the Black Ops cake this travesty is occurring in America, the supposed bastion of Freedom and Democracy, which we are currently trying to export to Iraq.

      It just gets scarier. The Black Ops that Mr. Tice was involved in related to electronic intelligence gathering via space systems communications, non-communications signals, electronic warfare, satellite control, telemetry, sensors, and special capability systems. For greater insight as to the impact of these programs readers should review decades old FOIA authenticated programs such as MKULTRA, BLUEBIRD, COINTELPRO and ARTICHOKE. Radar based Telemetry involves the ability to see through walls without thermal imaging. Electronic Warfare is even scarier if we take a look at the science. NSA Signals Intelligence Use of EMF Brain Stimulation. NSA Signals Intelligence uses EMF Brain Stimulation for Remote Neural Monitoring (RNM) and Electronic Brain Link (EBL). EMF Brain Stimulation has been in development since the MKUltra program of the early 1950's, which included neurological research into "radiation" (non-ionizing EMF) and bioelectric research and development. The resulting secret technology is categorized at the National Security Archives as "Radiation Intelligence," defined as "information from unintentionally emanated electromagnetic waves in the environment, not including radioactivity or nuclear detonation." Signals Intelligence implemented and kept this technology secret in the same manner as other electronic warfare programs of the U.S. government. The NSA monitors available information about this technology and withholds scientific research from the public. There are also international intelligence agency agreements to keep this technology secret.

      The NSA has proprietary electronic equipment that analyzes electrical activity in humans from a distance. NSA

    4. Re:when is that bitch Obama... by BigTunaTim · · Score: 1

      I'm sorry, I wasn't clear enough in my first post. YOU ARE FUCKING NUTS. Remote neural monitoring... lol. Pseudoscientific quackery is not education.

    5. Re:when is that bitch Obama... by strstr · · Score: 1

      I reviewed your profile. every post you make is a troll or flame of another person. I'm so sorry, but you must be the one in need of Haldol. go tranquilize yourself up, because I don't think anyone cares about you.

      now, who says this isn't real? do you know that PhD scientists exist that say it is real? how about Cheryl Welsh over at mindjustice.org, who is also listed as one of six non-lethal weapons experts in the world. she happens to run a mind control and electromagnetic weapons website, all about people being targeted, spied upon, and abused with these weapons. there are also articles in the Washington Post about it. plus, there are PhD psychologists like Dr. Carole Smith who say it exists, and numerous other articles.

      you are a noob who wouldn't even fight if you were told how you were being illegally spied on, and you apparently aren't worried if the government had a weapon that could invade your mind, torture, or hurt you from miles away -- you got no protection from this, and all you want to do is troll other people for talking about it. pity dude.

    6. Re:when is that bitch Obama... by BigTunaTim · · Score: 1

      You're right. I'm not worried about the government having a weapon that can invade my mind because my mind is functioning properly. I'm beginning to think you don't actually need Haloperidol, you're just really, really gullible. EMF? Really? It doesn't get much more stereotypically paranoid than that. PS. appeals to authority aren't valid arguments. Having a doctorate does not exclude one from the risk of developing mental illness.

    7. Re:when is that bitch Obama... by strstr · · Score: 1

      Hmm. There are plenty of government exclosures about it, too. MKULTRA, when the CIA went around drugging Americans, experimenting on people, testing and development neuro weapons of all kind, including drugs and electromagnetic devices. They have publically disclosed weapons which make people sick, weapons which beam voices into peoples heads, and devices and patents are in the portfolio of the US Air Force. They have a patent that specifically mentions mind reading satellite technology. See, those neurons of yours broadcast radio waves, each and every neuron is readable from afar, and computers have been capable of reading this energy and now can decode every signal in your brain and body. This is in use everywhere, and energy weapons, synthetic telepathy, and all that garbage are in wide spread use by the police now. I don't need a PhD to tell me it exists, I know the state and police have it. I have evidence, audio and video recordings of staff members using it during a US Department of Justice investigation that was going on in 2006/2008 in Oregon. I have evidence of physical injury from being targeted during a set up, severe mutilation to my muscle tissue.

      It's a lot of peoples opinions that the US government has erected a massive energy weapon that facilitates this on a global scale. There is also evidence that it targets more than humans - it can target and destroy entire buildings. I really and digging the evidence that they found about the World Trace Center being completely demolished with a microwave directed energy weapon - the videos proof shows the entire structure turning to dust, being pealed away, and dust being controlled with directed energy weapons. This same system can facilitate synthetic telepathy, remote torture, and injury. more info @ http://www.drjudywood.com/ (watch her entire video presentation).

      IMO this is irrefutable.

  85. Re:Congress considers Snowdon to be a whistleblowe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All acts of the NSA are military acts. It's operated under the Department of Defense.

  86. Don't worry... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hillary will be our next president and she'll fix everything.

    LOL, I crack myself up.

  87. Re:Congress considers Snowdon to be a whistleblowe by Ralph+Wiggam · · Score: 1

    Why wouldn't you look up the text of the actual law?

    http://www.firstworldwar.com/source/espionageact.htm

    1D- Whoever, lawfully or unlawfully having possession of, access to, control over, or being entrusted with any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blue print, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, or note relating to the national defence, wilfully communicates or transmits or attempts to communicate or transmit the same and fails to deliver it on demand to the officer or employee of the United States entitled to receive it;

    The original bill specifies a 2 year sentence for violating that, but I have read that the Snowden is facing 10 years under that charge. It's entirely possible that the law was amended in the century since it was enacted.

  88. It's worse than that. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "I use quotes because it's a circus, not a government."

    It's worse than that. The U.S. government is extremely corrupt. The U.S. government has killed or caused the death of 11,000,000 people since the end of the 2nd World War.

    Mao Tse-tung is estimated to have killed or caused the death of 50,000,000. Stalin killed or caused the death of 27,000,000. Hitler, 20,000,000. So, the U.S. government is not the worst by that measure, but is still extremely corrupt.

    However, the U.S. government has interfered with or bombed more than 27 countries since the end of the 2nd World War. The U.S. government holds the record for invasion and interference. Apparently all that violence was as least partly motivated by profit.

    Do some research. Don't just accept or reject what someone says. Read A People's History of the United States. The U.S. has a long history of violence.

    Why is there an al-Qaeda alert? Is it possible that the alert is only motivated by trying to get the illegal activities of the NSA out of the news?

    1. Re: It's worse than that. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its not like they'll tell you their secret that they be the one's planning a.... if it went out it would be censored and you'd disap...

      Brb.someone at my door

  89. Re:Congress considers Snowdon to be a whistleblowe by Hatta · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It is Obama and the Executive Branch's job to enforce existing law. They're doing that.

    Perjury is against existing law. When can we expect prosecutions of the DNI for perjuring himself in front of Congress?

    The 4th amendment is also existing law, and Obama isn't enforcing that one either. It's clear at this point that Obama's oath to defend the Constitution is completely broken, and he deserves impeachment at best.

    Whether or not Snowden gets punished for breaking the law matters much less than whether or not Obama gets punished for breaking the highest law of the land. He won't, and that is how we know the rule of law is meaningless in the United States.

    --
    Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
  90. Re:Why are they putting a number on the amount of by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Some of those founding fathers wanted a stronger central government (Madison), including some who went to far as to call for a King! (Hamilton)

  91. At least something positive... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's good to finally see the United States at least acknowledge their lack of progress in human rights.
    Their support for terrorist groups, drone strike assassinations, torture in Guantanamo, medieval prison system, and their assault on whistleblowers, has shamed the United States.
    It how the Russians can put some real pressure on Washington, to make some real progress on these issues.

  92. Re:Fuck you! Obummer is the messiah! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What a shock to see an anonymous person make a false claim in an ad hominem attack. No, not really...

    Notice: If you post anonymously do not expect a reply.

    Time to change that sig of yours, you pompous ass, you.

  93. Obama's Only Friend by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Perhaps Obama should schedule a trip to Havana and have a beer and cigar with Fidel. At least then Obama could boast that he DOES have a friend in the world.

  94. Will Obama make Greenwald's car blow up too? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They already silenced the journalist investigating McChrystal by making his car explode repeatedly.

    Clearly this administration will kill anyone and everyone that opposes them. I hope Greenwald can get his revelations out to the public soon.

  95. Re:Why are they putting a number on the amount of by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He could also be putting various public officials on notice that they better not lie to the public about what they knew and approved of, because he can quite possibly publicly call them on it.

    Ha, that's pretty good. They might end up telling the truth for once, even about stuff he couldn't call them on, because they don't know what he knows.

  96. Re:Why are they putting a number on the amount of by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Civil War on Drugs, by The Whitest Kids U Know?

  97. Re:Fuck you! Obummer is the messiah! by s.petry · · Score: 1

    Am I to be shocked that you don't know the definition of "expect"? Naw, that's not a shock to me either. I'm willing to bet that you can go 0 for 3, and "no" I have no problem showing your intellectual failure.

    --

    -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

  98. I really don't get it by X-Ray+Artist · · Score: 1

    I guess I have read too much or too little about the "Snowden Issue". I can't find where he disclosed anything vital. As far as I know he didn't sell any military secrets (troop locations & make up). No selling of weapons, defensive or offensive. I also can't find where he sold any cryptographic or cryptoanalytic technology. As far as I can tell, he told people that an agency of the U.S. Government was collecting information about communications of US citizens and Non-US citizens without their knowledge. How does this make him a traitor?

    --
    I would have a sig but I am too busy updating programs and restarting my computer
  99. Re:Fuck you! Obummer is the messiah! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sorry, kiddo. I didn't vote for that retard Dubya.

  100. Re:Fuck you! Obummer is the messiah! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Some us really had hoped for hope and change.

    Are you liberals really that dumb to be so easily swayed by politician platitudes?

  101. Re:Why are they putting a number on the amount of by boorack · · Score: 1

    My guess is that Snowden is side-show in overall USA-Russia relations, albeit a good pretext for both Obama and Putin. Syria is propably the most important issue impacting USA-Russia relations. Anti-ballistic missile shield aimed squarely at Russia might be another one.

  102. How to skip the law system by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    USA spy on european citizens, and some european countries spy on usa citices, so USA can avoid the usa law, and europe can avoid the europe law.

    Its the only thing that I get from this. Everyone is breaking the "spirity of the law" using the other countries as proxy. Basically, all our laws are void now. What do you think can't happend to you? put cocain on your house? moved to a third wourld country to be tortured? they have freed his hands to do anything they want or need.

  103. Re:Why are they putting a number on the amount of by gmuslera · · Score: 1

    Suppose that you have in your neighbourhood someone with a lot of weapons. Then the maid tells you, and gives you evidence, that he stole from you and other people you know, but you don't do anything, because he have weapons, and people could get hurt. But the maid that warned you know from a lot of more things that he did, several probably worse than the things you know already, like, don't know, killed a bunch of friends and have them buried in the backyard, kidnapped some childs and have them enclosed in the basement, and/or that accident that killed your grampa, was him, and wasn't an accident. Would you prefer to keep ignoring what he is doing and risking to be you, or your children their next victims or knowing, reporting him to the police or at least be prepared for when he targets you? You think that things will improve just ignoring what he does?

  104. Greenwald Goes To Jail? by cmholm · · Score: 1

    A side issue: material classified by the US Government is by definition the property of the US Government. It's one thing for a newspaper to publish classified material that someone has given them. But, to retain material which they reasonably know to be - ah - misappropriated makes them knowingly in possession of stolen property. In this case, Mr. Greenwald appears to be saying that he, personally, is in possession. How long will it be until he finds out which subsections of 18 USC he'll be charged with breaking?

    --
    Luke, help me take this mask off ... Just for once, let me butterfly kiss you with my own eyes.
    1. Re:Greenwald Goes To Jail? by 0111+1110 · · Score: 1

      A side issue: material classified by the US Government is by definition the property of the US Government...But, to retain material which they reasonably know to be - ah - misappropriated makes them knowingly in possession of stolen property..

      You cannot own information. Information is not property. And even if it were property Snowden did not delete the files. He copied them. That means the government still has all of their precious information. No one took it from them. I would also argue that a government cannot have property rights. It cannot really own anything. A government exists to serve the people. Anything the government claims to own is really the property of every US citizen. It belongs to all of us. If anything the government is attempting to keep from us what is rightfully ours. We are the ones paying for all of that information.

      --
      Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
    2. Re:Greenwald Goes To Jail? by cmholm · · Score: 1

      Normally, what you say would be correct, which is why most publications and media produced using tax dollars isn't copyrighted... we already paid for it, and shouldn't pay again, other than for nominal distribution costs, if that. For classified material, not so fast. The Federal Government owns the IP and gets to set the terms by which it/they part with that information, until Congress and/or the SCOTUS says otherwise.

      --
      Luke, help me take this mask off ... Just for once, let me butterfly kiss you with my own eyes.
  105. Truth is treason in the empire of lies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    "With national bankruptcy looming, politicians from both parties continue to make multi-trillion dollar promises of "free" goods from the government, and hardly a soul wonders if we can still afford to have troops in - this is not a misprint - 130 countries around the world. All of this is going to come to an end sooner or later, because financial reality is going to make itself felt in very uncomfortable ways. But instead of thinking about what this means for how we conduct our foreign and domestic affairs, our chattering classes seem incapable of speaking in anything but the emptiest platitudes, when they can be bothered to address serious issues at all. Fundamental questions like this, and countless others besides, are off the table in our mainstream media, which focuses our attention on trivialities and phony debates as we march toward oblivion.

    This is the deadening consensus that crosses party lines, that dominates our major media, and that is strangling the liberty and prosperity that were once the birthright of Americans. Dissenters who tell their fellow citizens what is really going on are subject to smear campaigns that, like clockwork, are aimed at the political heretic. Truth is treason in the empire of lies. -- Dr Ron Paul - "Revolution: A Manifesto"

  106. Re:Why are they putting a number on the amount of by buchner.johannes · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What happened so far:

    The US government
      * violated the privacy of Americans and foreigners by collecting information on all their communications, regardless of whether they are being investigated or not
      * executes people in foreign countries without any trial
      * tortures people in foreign countries without any trial
      * invades foreign countries by fabricating evidence
      * pursues journalists and whistle-blowers through all possible legal and diplomatic channels of pressure
      * arbitrarily withdraws the passport of their own citizens without any legal process
      * arbitrarily withdraws the right to fly in the US without any legal process
      * demands extradition, trials of foreigners and fair treatment based on international law, but refuses it to others

    Then, when these things turn up
      * nobody is being held accountable [e.g. Bush, Rumsfeld]
      * no compensation for the victims [e.g. torture victims, invaded countries]
      * no guarantees it will not happen again

    You can do whatever you want within your borders, and choose the rules you want to live by. But don't take your stupid decisions out on everyone else. And for the love of god, EU & UN, stand up to this bully.

    --
    NB: The message above might reflect my opinion right now, but not necessarily tomorrow or next year.
  107. Re:Why are they putting a number on the amount of by chihowa · · Score: 5, Interesting

    If they're smart they'll break up the data from least to most damaging and release it in that order...the more the US resists decency, the worse their reputation will get until the Americans (or hell, other countries) get together to kick some ass.

    That's a dangerous strategy, though. It may end up just inducing a tolerance in the people if the damage is ramped up slowly like that. Already, we're seeing signs of that with the DEA's admission that systematic perjury and the outright fabrication of evidence is "a bedrock concept" in their cases. The public's response to that has been pretty mild and the whole thing seems to have blown over already. I'm not sure exactly what would be shocking enough to provoke a response from the public at this point.

    --
    If you want a vision of the future, imagine a youtube comments section scrolling - forever.
  108. Re:Fuck you! Obummer is the messiah! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you are going to be a pedant about it, then you should note your sig is now meaningless. No one on slashdot "expects" a reply regardless of AC status or not.

  109. Re:Why are they putting a number on the amount of by dryeo · · Score: 2

    The American Constitution, especially the Bill of Rights, as designed is totally broken as it is impossible to follow so the politicians have to ignore it which becomes a habit along with courts that rule that, eg "Congress will make no law" actually means something completely different.
    Look at Snowden, no-one is bitching that he is hiding in Russia due to practicing his first amendment rights, everyone agrees that when the Constitution says something that actually it means something else. Free speech except in the case of child porn, national security, bad words etc.
    My Country wrote our Bill of Rights (and the rest of our constitution) to avoid the American mistake of writing one that sounds good but is routinely broken which just encourages the politicians to break it more instead of changing it. Shit they couldn't even have been bothered to amend it to make the Air Force legal, an amendment that would have passed easily.
    A law or constitution that can not be followed is worthless.

    --
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
  110. Obama the brat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Gotta just live this spoiled brat of a President we have. Before he became president he was in favor of government whistle blowers even. What a hypocrite .

  111. oblabl pulls out of summit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    everyone check out on utube,......"Obama snubbed by Russians" video.........not one person would shake his hand when he walked through for the last summit meeting......watch his face........but were going to cancel because of Mr. Snowden.............more like YOU WERE'NT INVITED !!!

  112. Re:Why are they putting a number on the amount of by anagama · · Score: 1

    The 4th Amendment is clear and understandable. It took twisted SCOTUS logic to eviscerate it.

    destroy the THIRD PARTY DOCTRINE and everything the NSA is doing is suddenly illegal.

    The Supreme Court of the US has basically confused "perfect information security" with "reasonable expectation of privacy" over the last 30 or 40 years.

    It is well-settled that when an individual reveals private information to another, he assumes the risk that his confidant will reveal that information to the authorities, and if that occurs the Fourth Amendment does not prohibit governmental use of that information. Once frustration of the original expectation of privacy occurs, the Fourth Amendment does not prohibit governmental use of the now-nonprivate information

    https://www.casetext.com/case/in-re-application-of-the-united-states-for-an-order-pursuant-to-18-usc-167-2703d/ Scroll down to page 133.

    In other words, because a 3d party MIGHT breach confidentiality, the Feds can FORCE them to breach confidentiality.

    Funny thing though, if the NSA was a person, it would have waived its privacy interest in the Snowden documents by sharing them with a 3d party (Booz Allen), but it doesn't feel that way, even threatening Congressman Grayson into stopping printing the slides for his staff -- reason? Still Classified. One rule for them, one rule for us.

    --
    What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
  113. Re: Why are they putting a number on the amount of by cs668 · · Score: 2

    The American peasants of that time were wealthy landholders compared to the European peasants. So much so that it is hard to make the statement that you did. Because although it is true, it is not the whole story.

  114. Re:Fuck you! Obummer is the messiah! by Rakarra · · Score: 1

    How dare you insult the Glorious Leader. Messiah Obummer is bringing the world hope and change.

    I'm getting tired of this strawman. Only ultra-conversations believe that liberals worship Obama. Most that I've heard from consider him fairly disappointing, but they don't have anyone else to support in the election.

  115. Re:Congress considers Snowdon to be a whistleblowe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's also Obama's power to grant a pardon for federal crimes.

    It's one of the very few things he can do, himself, without reference or approval or consultation or affirmation from *anyone*.

    That's why this is a telling test case for Obama. He can't hide behind the law, or the deficit, or his advisors, or an obstructionist congress. The decision to pursue Snowden is his personal choice. He could call off the hunt any time he liked, for the price of a single press statement.

  116. Even in Europe by manu0601 · · Score: 1

    The Brazilian government is showing much more anger in public than it is showing in private discussions with the U.S. government. All governments are doing this, even in Europe.

    "especially in Europe" may have been more appropriate. The Evo Morales plane story shed light on how European governments are now US pets. Que se vayan todos.

  117. Re:Why are they putting a number on the amount of by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The US has the UN in their pocket. Forget about that one. They leverage other stuff to get the UN votes they need, or don't.

  118. Dialogue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Politicians are constantly talking about dialogue being a good thing. But then when it comes time for some much needed dialogue, they refuse to talk.

    GO TALK TO PUTIN OBAMA. HAVE AN OPEN DEBATE ON THE LEAKS.

  119. Re: Why are they putting a number on the amount of by NemoinSpace · · Score: 0

    thanks for not actually saying anything but succeeding in being a real dick about it. I get in these moods too when conversing with morons who wouldn't know what to think if you unscrewed their heads and filled them in.
    oh, what was my point again? doesn't matter whether snowden is hero or zero. You're a dick.

  120. should have just released them without the fanfare by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now he'll probably have his car randomly blow up in the middle of nowhere where he never actually drives.

  121. Re: Why are they putting a number on the amount of by donscarletti · · Score: 1

    Damn right they would, a black man calling himself president of all things. Though 1776 congress would have to consider giving him a flogging then get to work finding his owner, since an educated, well spoken and presented house slave like that must still be worth a lot to his master.

    --
    When Argumentum ad Hominem falls short, try Argumentum ad Matrem
  122. Re:Congress considers Snowdon to be a whistleblowe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes he has. Just because you don't have a top secret clearance and are enjoying it, doesn't mean that he hasn't broken the law and the rules he agreed to when getting a clearance.

    And it has interfered with the operation of the armed forces. Once the enemy knows what we are doing and can change their tactics to avoid getting caught, it is pretty easy to see how they will become more successful going forward.

  123. Re:Why are they putting a number on the amount of by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    poiticians of 1776 would have these morons surrendering after a bloody 4 year war for independence.

    LOL, yeah they were a real group of honest morons. They set it up to be this way, and you apparently forgot your history, because they too were involved in cutting deal with other countries and influencing how those countries should become like us.

    The people that stole this country (U.S) didn't climb from under a rock to call it there's. They were obviously British (for the most part) and were heavily tied into the British Empire even after the Independent war. They had there business connections, and could cut in on what the British Empire had going.
    Your notion is that the US wasn't involved in anything, and was an alienated country, that is completely false.

  124. Re:Congress considers Snowdon to be a whistleblowe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The enemies are us. The regular people, the people who don't own "property". The mob, the unruly masses.

  125. Wrong by dbIII · · Score: 1

    People still buy Boeing after they ripped off Airbus designs at the US taxpayers expense and were found guilty in court of doing it.

    1. Re:Wrong by DocHoncho · · Score: 1

      I think the primary difference is that 747's don't have secret back doors built in to allow the NSA free access to the entire IT infrastructure (or at least the entire Windows based side) of whatever company uses them.

      --
      Celebrity worship is a poor substitute for Deity worship and costs more to boot.
    2. Re:Wrong by sFurbo · · Score: 1

      Exactly, thank you.

    3. Re:Wrong by delt0r · · Score: 1

      I am sure there is at least one website somewhere that probably blames Sep 11 on NSA remotely hacking and flying those aircraft into the towers. With chem trails!

      --
      If information wants to be free, why does my internet connection cost so much?
    4. Re:Wrong by DocHoncho · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but they're wrong. Everyone knows it was the Reptoids, sheesh.

      --
      Celebrity worship is a poor substitute for Deity worship and costs more to boot.
  126. Obama The Walking Dead by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Obama and his 'Regime' are dead!

    BUTT zombie faggot Obama and his LBTG Regime walk on.

    Yes Obama and your Faggot Regime, Walk ON, Walk On and OFF the Cliff of Redemption to your deaths.

  127. Re:Why are they putting a number on the amount of by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It wasn't after the LAST election, it was after the 2008 election that Snowden hoped Obama would do something about surveillance (because of campaign statements, reasonably) and of course did not want to ruin his life by being a whistleblower. Unfortunately, he was disappointed and then took steps accumulate documents since he wanted his whistleblowing to have the most impact. He didn't WANT to sacrifice so much, so he waited.

  128. Re:Why are they putting a number on the amount of by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm sorry. If there's anything I can do I will. Right now the power is not in our hands.

    -Random American citizen who finds it worse to live in here than out there with the threat of random assassination.

  129. Re:Why are they putting a number on the amount of by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There are a great many innocent USAmericans that should not be punished for the actions of a corrupt and evil government. I did not vote for the swine. I have always been in outraged opposition to them. I am powerless.

    Don't make me a double victim just because some subhuman trash are abusing power in my name.

    Help me. Get me out of this fucking country.

  130. Re:Why are they putting a number on the amount of by betterprimate · · Score: 2

    Revolution will happen when the people who have been systematically divided have something to fight for in solidarity.

  131. Re:Congress considers Snowdon to be a whistleblowe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Snowden has been charged with two things- theft of government property (4 laptops) and giving classified information to a person without security clearance. The later charge was created by the Espionage Act of 1917. It is not "espionage" in any common use of the word.

    If you want to play that game, wiretapping was only made illegal and regulated in the 70's.

    https://ssd.eff.org/foreign/fisa

  132. Re:Congress considers Snowdon to be a whistleblowe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is Obama and the Executive Branch's job to enforce existing law. They're doing that.

    No, they are not. Perjury is a felony, and they are ignoring it. The Attorney General Eric Holder himself has committed multiple perjury before congress and is not just getting off with a slap on the wrist at most, but is still the head of the Department of Justice. How can the Department of Justice be supposed to do its job with an openly corrupt felon at its head?

    Of course it can't. That's why various NSA officials have felt fine also committing perjury before congress and will continue to do so without fear of retribution.

    As long as they don't prosecute the felons in high-level positions that are readily accessible, the extradition theatre surrounding Snowden is pure smokescreen.

  133. Re:Why are they putting a number on the amount of by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And the worst part of all: This got downmodded!
    Probably because nobody noticed the humor in the last paragraph... despite the emoticon.

    How anyone could object to standing up to your abusive enemies and saying no... or to defining the NSA as our collective enemy... is beyond me.

  134. Re:Why are they putting a number on the amount of by sjames · · Score: 1

    It is every citizen's duty to report crimes they know about, ESPECIALLY if the authorities are the criminals.

  135. Re:Why are they putting a number on the amount of by bfandreas · · Score: 1

    You can do whatever you want within your borders, and choose the rules you want to live by. But don't take your stupid decisions out on everyone else. And for the love of god, EU & UN, stand up to this bully.

    While it is true what you wrote a lot of these things were done by proxy. Supposedly to keep their hands clean and stay on the right side of the law(whichever side that may be).The result is that a lot of other countries are complicit.
    Most of the Western World has cooperated with the US in their spying. Because ter'rists OHMIGOD!
    A lot of the torturing was done by third party countries that were not so squeamish with CIA officials(or propably inofficials, heh) reaped the results.

    We are pretty much all fucked.

    --
    20 minutes into the future
  136. Re:Fuck you! Obummer is the messiah! by bfandreas · · Score: 1

    Even tho the POTUS has a lot of power because he is head of the executive branch and head of state(most countries keep those separate) he has very little legislative power. In fact he is unable to accomplish a lot of worthwhile things without substantial cooperation by both houses.
    So your assessment is propably quite right. I always wondered why anybody would go to great pains to get that job. It doesn't seem to be worth it.

    --
    20 minutes into the future
  137. Re:Why are they putting a number on the amount of by elucido · · Score: 1

    It is every citizen's duty to report crimes they know about, ESPECIALLY if the authorities are the criminals.

    Report to who?

  138. Re:Why are they putting a number on the amount of by elucido · · Score: 1

    Suppose that you have in your neighbourhood someone with a lot of weapons. Then the maid tells you, and gives you evidence, that he stole from you and other people you know, but you don't do anything, because he have weapons, and people could get hurt. But the maid that warned you know from a lot of more things that he did, several probably worse than the things you know already, like, don't know, killed a bunch of friends and have them buried in the backyard, kidnapped some childs and have them enclosed in the basement, and/or that accident that killed your grampa, was him, and wasn't an accident. Would you prefer to keep ignoring what he is doing and risking to be you, or your children their next victims or knowing, reporting him to the police or at least be prepared for when he targets you? You think that things will improve just ignoring what he does?

    Unless you know someone bigger with even more weapons to go to for protection then you can't do anything like that if you don't have weapons. Glenn Greenwald can't do a damn thing to stop the NSA.

  139. Re:Why are they putting a number on the amount of by elucido · · Score: 1

    What happened so far:

    The US government

      * violated the privacy of Americans and foreigners by collecting information on all their communications, regardless of whether they are being investigated or not

      * executes people in foreign countries without any trial

      * tortures people in foreign countries without any trial

      * invades foreign countries by fabricating evidence

      * pursues journalists and whistle-blowers through all possible legal and diplomatic channels of pressure

      * arbitrarily withdraws the passport of their own citizens without any legal process

      * arbitrarily withdraws the right to fly in the US without any legal process

      * demands extradition, trials of foreigners and fair treatment based on international law, but refuses it to others

    Then, when these things turn up

      * nobody is being held accountable [e.g. Bush, Rumsfeld]

      * no compensation for the victims [e.g. torture victims, invaded countries]

      * no guarantees it will not happen again

    You can do whatever you want within your borders, and choose the rules you want to live by. But don't take your stupid decisions out on everyone else. And for the love of god, EU & UN, stand up to this bully.

    I don't believe journalists have any power to stop intelligence agencies or governments from doing anything.
    Glenn Greenwald is completely ineffective. Snowden leaking to journalists will be completely ineffective. The only way to stop a government is with a government.

  140. Re:Why are they putting a number on the amount of by elucido · · Score: 1

    You can do whatever you want within your borders, and choose the rules you want to live by. But don't take your stupid decisions out on everyone else. And for the love of god, EU & UN, stand up to this bully.

    While it is true what you wrote a lot of these things were done by proxy. Supposedly to keep their hands clean and stay on the right side of the law(whichever side that may be).The result is that a lot of other countries are complicit.

    Most of the Western World has cooperated with the US in their spying. Because ter'rists OHMIGOD!

    A lot of the torturing was done by third party countries that were not so squeamish with CIA officials(or propably inofficials, heh) reaped the results.

    We are pretty much all fucked.

    So what is the point of scaring people by giving dirty secrets to the media? The media can't stop any of it.

  141. In a barrel. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're right. Anybody with the courage and brains to look at the world straight on knows you're right.

    But you'll never convince the little fishies. They don't want to know or live in a world where their authority figures aren't reassuring father-knows-best types. They have a vested interest in playing the soul-shrinking shell game wherein truth is a magical, infinitely variable substance they use to suit their immediate needs while they duck and cover from reality.

    Lost causes, all of them. Truth doesn't care. You either get on side with all the amazing beauty and terrible ugliness of reality, or you fade into nothing. If one rejects the creation, the creation has no problem returning the favor.

  142. In a barrel 2 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That being said,

    Judy Wood is compromised.

    Check this out:

    http://www.blogtalkradio.com/sottnet/2013/05/05/no-ordinary-inside-job-the-911-psy-ops

    Hard to listen to, but also telling.

    I'd guess that Wood was descended upon and driven around the bend after coming forth with a few good insights. At this point, she's completely lost the thread and is currently playing the part of a managed tar ball. No mastery over herself. A sad, but all too common story. People catch hold of the truth, get a bit of public exposure and they either die in car wrecks, or if they're mentally unstable and don't have a strong support network, they get mind-raped and redirected for cointelpro purposes. Wood sounds like she's about two inches from total breakdown in that interview, and a good portion of the material in her book is just plain wrong. A great way to bury those insights which do have value.

    An object lesson in the MIC damage control systems at work.

    Also, Santilli is one creepy dude.

    http://cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php/topic,31273.0.html

  143. Re: Why are they putting a number on the amount of by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Their rock - there is the where

  144. Re:"Bilateral relationship" - surveillanc partner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sweden's 'Swechelon' surveillance machinery intercepts communications from Russia.

  145. Re:Why are they putting a number on the amount of by bfandreas · · Score: 1

    So what is the point of scaring people by giving dirty secrets to the media? The media can't stop any of it.

    That's why the media is supposed to be the fourth estate. Keep the people informed so they vote with their...votes.
    That's the theory. ATM the US media is in dire straits. Either they give the consumers what they want. Which seems to be news about people, bite-sized snappy headlines and barely justifiable opinions. Background information seems to take the back seat. Which is why bloggers and Twitter are such a big threat since journalism now has such a low quality standard that anybody can do it. And the other side of the "informed public" medal is the public. Voters tend to judge their officials by their words, not by their deeds. Take Obama for instance. While campaigning for his first term he said some very nice things. But now he is just another lawyer who made it big in politics. Guantanamo Bay still is synonymous with a travesty of justice. Extra-judicial killings via drones has become worse. He started a war on whistleblowers(but not on corporate whistleblowers, the DOJ still hands out a nice percentage of the takings to them). Federal law still is an overcriminalized vague mess and it is becoming worse. Foreign relations are still damaged. And they are not damaged because they were caught. They are damaged for what they did. He faced a major rebellion in the house over the NSA spying affair and yet he has the gall to make light of it on some late night TV talk show. That performance propably earned him a couple of brownie points with the public but not by doing something about the sad state the US currently is in.

    Obama is a major disappointment. Everybody had assumed he knew better than that. For goodness sake, he has a strong background in constitutional law. And yet right under his nose all of the above happened. If W feigned ignorance on all that everybody would concur. Obama does not have that luxury.

    --
    20 minutes into the future
  146. If it's so not news, why the hate for Snowden? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject.

  147. Nope. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    She said "I hope you're wearing" "Nope" "Oh, well go on then".

    I guess you never get laid, then. If the go-ahead and direct involvement of the partner, if female, constitutes rape of her...

  148. "If you've got nothing to hide" turn around by Plumpaquatsch · · Score: 1

    If the US has nothing to hide, why are they so worried what Snowden could tell others?

    --
    Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
  149. Re: Why are they putting a number on the amount of by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Then get the fuck out. No one is keeping you here. Or is reaping the benefits of all you disparage more valuable to you than the words tha spew from you now?

  150. Re:Congress considers Snowdon to be a whistleblowe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Arguably, he did convey information with intent to interfere with the operation of the armed forces of the United States. Just that the interference he intended to come from the people of the United States.

    Trouble with laws is that they are written so broadly as to include nearly all edge cases and 'let the courts sort it out'.

  151. Re:Why are they putting a number on the amount of by sjames · · Score: 1

    Since the government is corrupt, report it to We the people.

  152. Re:Why are they putting a number on the amount of by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I just have one question for Obama: U mad bro?

    lol, what an arrogant, vindictive, childish little bitch.

  153. Re:Congress considers Snowdon to be a whistleblowe by Ralph+Wiggam · · Score: 1

    Why is property in quotes?

  154. Re:Why are they putting a number on the amount of by sjames · · Score: 1

    The shenanigans started early, but the opposition was a lot stronger then.

  155. Re:Why are they putting a number on the amount of by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What happened so far:

    The US government

      * violated the privacy of Americans and foreigners by collecting information on all their communications, regardless of whether they are being investigated or not

      * executes people in foreign countries without any trial

      * tortures people in foreign countries without any trial

      * invades foreign countries by fabricating evidence

      * pursues journalists and whistle-blowers through all possible legal and diplomatic channels of pressure

      * arbitrarily withdraws the passport of their own citizens without any legal process

      * arbitrarily withdraws the right to fly in the US without any legal process

      * demands extradition, trials of foreigners and fair treatment based on international law, but refuses it to others

    Then, when these things turn up

      * nobody is being held accountable [e.g. Bush, Rumsfeld]

      * no compensation for the victims [e.g. torture victims, invaded countries]

      * no guarantees it will not happen again

    You can do whatever you want within your borders, and choose the rules you want to live by. But don't take your stupid decisions out on everyone else. And for the love of god, EU & UN, stand up to this bully.

    Now you know what it is to be "Black In America". Your list of US Government abuses are the same abuses that Black Americans face everyday! As a Black man living in America all of these outrageous acts are daily occurences in my life. Welcome to the "real" America. Don't worry; Like us, you will grow accoustomed to the abuse, humiliation, official oppression, and trerror ! When no one cares or listens you adjust....

  156. Re:Why are they putting a number on the amount of by kcorey · · Score: 1

    That information needs to be released because the powers that be in American government and the military-industrial complex are getting away with murder, quite literally. They're committing crimes that the constitution was originally formulated to prevent.

    They've taken the roles of "private citizen" and "public servant" and reversed the meanings so that we can find out all about what a "private" citizen gets up to, but we have /no/ idea what "public servants" are doing.

    They lie, they misdirect, they steal, they kill, start wars, violate international law, and they make us wonder if Ed Snowden should be tried as a "traitor", and good folks such as yourself to wonder why we're all so excited about this.

    The bottom line is that they are trying every single thing they can (most of which I expect we don't know about) to hide this, to distract us all from their crimes, and to shift blame onto a twenty something instead of with the people who ordered the crimes in the first place.

    "Run, Forrest! Run away! Hurry!"

    The main reason that I know this is wrong in moral terms? The fact that I'm worried about expressing my opinion because it differs from that of the criminals in Washington.

    Shame on them for doing it, but *triple* shame on us for letting them do it.

    -Ken

  157. For the truly paranoid, get out your tin foil hat by Odjur · · Score: 1

    Snowden's name being released was probably the single greatest gift anyone could have given Obama. Snowden is a distraction, pure and simple. Why he leaked them does not matter. The only thing that matters is what the documents show. By coming forward, Snowden actually gave the media something to focus on other than the recent events of USG. If his intent was simply to inform the populace and start a ball rolling, he actually did damage to his cause by revealing his name so early in the process. Between Benghazi and the IRS goings on, Obama and his administration were already on the hook. It kind of makes you wonder (in a silly tin foil hat kind of way), if Snowden's name needed to be released at all. If the documents are legitimate, is it possible that they would have withstood scrutiny on their own without attaching the name of the whistleblower? Release information concerning activities government agencies have been doing legally under current laws that will spark lots of debate, piss off many, and keep the media wrapped up in an orgasmic emotional frenzy that can not be directly tied to those already in trouble over situations that can be directly linked to them. But since this is so big, focus on the other issues is lost. At then end of the day, what will actually change in regards to the NSA, FISA, etc.? I'd put my money on slap on the wrist(a few heads will roll), public apology, a few people getting up on soapboxes to get elected, and then everything goes back under the cover of darkness. Yeah.... It's actually quite easy to take the trip down that rabbit hole. It's easy to see the benefits. Alright.... flame away.....

  158. Amerizm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Amerizm. It is the new form of Nazism or Fascism. Sieg Heil Amerizica.

  159. Re:Why are they putting a number on the amount of by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    America was under attack by the world wide jihadists. We had to and continue to have to defend ourselves

  160. Re:Why are they putting a number on the amount of by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who the hell is Snowden to release information he took an oath to protect? I hope they hunt him down and someday bring him to justice.

  161. Re: Why are they putting a number on the amount o by wlbeen · · Score: 1

    Seems that youtube took down the video gave the link to. Try again?

  162. Re: Why are they putting a number on the amount o by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Seems that youtube took down the video gave the link to. Try again?

  163. Re:Why are they putting a number on the amount of by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    America is not a country, it's a business.

  164. Re:Why are they putting a number on the amount of by elucido · · Score: 1

    So what is the point of scaring people by giving dirty secrets to the media? The media can't stop any of it.

    That's why the media is supposed to be the fourth estate. Keep the people informed so they vote with their...votes.

    That's the theory. ATM the US media is in dire straits. Either they give the consumers what they want. Which seems to be news about people, bite-sized snappy headlines and barely justifiable opinions. Background information seems to take the back seat. Which is why bloggers and Twitter are such a big threat since journalism now has such a low quality standard that anybody can do it. And the other side of the "informed public" medal is the public. Voters tend to judge their officials by their words, not by their deeds. Take Obama for instance. While campaigning for his first term he said some very nice things. But now he is just another lawyer who made it big in politics. Guantanamo Bay still is synonymous with a travesty of justice. Extra-judicial killings via drones has become worse. He started a war on whistleblowers(but not on corporate whistleblowers, the DOJ still hands out a nice percentage of the takings to them). Federal law still is an overcriminalized vague mess and it is becoming worse. Foreign relations are still damaged. And they are not damaged because they were caught. They are damaged for what they did. He faced a major rebellion in the house over the NSA spying affair and yet he has the gall to make light of it on some late night TV talk show. That performance propably earned him a couple of brownie points with the public but not by doing something about the sad state the US currently is in.

    Obama is a major disappointment. Everybody had assumed he knew better than that. For goodness sake, he has a strong background in constitutional law. And yet right under his nose all of the above happened. If W feigned ignorance on all that everybody would concur. Obama does not have that luxury.

    Please cite the Constitution. What specific quote says the media is the fourth estate?

    Even if the Constitution said that, the media has absolutely no power and no authority to make arrests. What good is telling the media if the media cannot arrest anyone?

  165. Re:Why are they putting a number on the amount of by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Read the book "Ponzi Planet" then you will understand all.

  166. Re:Why are they putting a number on the amount of by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "We the people", not "you the government" is who we should blame. Take responsibility and call your governor and let them know what you think about your issues. For the Snowden bullshit; complain about the patriot act and what the government is doing to protect us from terrorists. Educate those that think the government has the storage capacity to retain all communications that we do. All they really do is collect header information.

  167. Hegemony by NewYork · · Score: 1

    US Administration is seeking Obedience, not Peace from Rest of the World.

  168. Re:Why are they putting a number on the amount of by bfandreas · · Score: 1

    Please cite the Constitution. What specific quote says the media is the fourth estate?

    Even if the Constitution said that, the media has absolutely no power and no authority to make arrests. What good is telling the media if the media cannot arrest anyone?

    I haven't got a clue what you are on about. Who said something about arresting somebody?
    Media is there to keep the other 3 estates honest and the public informed. That's their job. And that's what I said. And because they fill in that role they are colloquially called the fourth estate.

    --
    20 minutes into the future
  169. Re:Why are they putting a number on the amount of by ai4px · · Score: 1

    Ohh you mean like the Spanish American war? Surely you don't think the US would use it's military might to orchestrate a coup and force other countries into agreements like the 99 year lease of the Panama canal zone? Nothing new here, unfortunately.

  170. Re:Why are they putting a number on the amount of by IndieVoter · · Score: 1

    Good repost of all things MoveON. The fact that you can summarize complex issues in one line indicates you are unable or unwilling to think on your own. Try posting to Rush's or MS/NBC sites. They are your kind.

  171. The real blame.... by IndieVoter · · Score: 1

    One thing that seems to be left out of this debate. We, the voters of the US elect our government. We believe what MS/NBC or Fox (take your pick) tell us. We substitute real debate for screaming heads, because it is more fun to watch while we drink beer. For those who blame Bush. What, you put up Al Gore and then the hapless John Kerry and expect to win? DNC is run by morons. For those who Blame Obama. Obama can talk, that is all. Has no experience running anything, and has never even had a real job for christsake. Yet two competent leaders, McCain (tough surviver of a POW camp) and Romney (who ran an Olympics) couldn't even handle Obama in a simple debate? RNC has their head up their anal cavity. So, you expect that the IRS will NOT be used for political extortion? You expect that the NSA will NOT be used for political advantage? We are getting the government we deserve from the politicians we trust.

  172. Re:Fuck you! Obummer is the messiah! by MysteriousPreacher · · Score: 1

    Yeah, it does seem odd. Certainly I think Obama squandered the initial wave of support he had. Seeing things from the outside, and knowing he can't just pull levers to change whatever he wants, I remain largely disappointed by his administration. Some good stuff done, but right now he seems to be lurching well in to becoming president of an Orwellian nightmare.

    --
    -- Using the preview button since 2005
  173. Re:Congress considers Snowdon to be a whistleblowe by Uberbah · · Score: 1

    It is Obama and the Executive Branch's job to enforce existing law. They're doing that.

    Did you type that with a straight face? Where's the criminal prosecutions for Bush's/ATT&T's violations of FISA? The immunity passed in 2008 was civil, not criminal.

    Reagan and the first Bush sent almost a thousand bankers to jail over the S&L crisis. The mortgage bubble was 70 times as large, and fraudulent documents have been used to steal homes from hundreds of thousands if not millions of people.

    The only person to have gone to jail for Bush's torture program was one of the men who confirmed it's existence, John Kiriakou. When the U.N. Convention Against Torture, proudly signed by that commie pinko Ronald Reagan, requires the prosecution of those who commit torture.

    So, I ask again....did you type that with a straight face? And if you really want to hang your hat on the Espionage Act of 1917, then where the hell are the prosecutions of Rove et all for outing Valerie Plame?

    Acting as if this is just about the rule of law is laughable, when you look at all the laws they are either violating or ignoring.

  174. Beams. Motes. by Uberbah · · Score: 1

    and the Kremlin's treatment of dissidents has also been awkward to say the least

    We've mentally tortured one whisteblower (Manning), upgraded petty trespassing and vandalism charges into a terrorism prosecution against a nun over 80 years old, and planned on shooting OWS leaders in the head, if necessary.