Live data from Hacker News

Groklaw legal site shuts over fears of NSA email snooping

theguardian.com

221–230 of 237 posts

Re: Groklaw legal site shuts over fears of NSA email snooping

#221
post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's the most bizarre part. First, Snowden steals his information from a Microsoft Sharepoint server? What are classified documents doing on a Sharepoint server? What is a Sharepoint server doing inside the network boundary at NSA? Next, they blew the recovery. If they negotiated with Snowden when he was in Hong Kong, they could have had him stand trial in Hawaii and won easily. Or alternatively, they could have do…

Virtually everything run by the government is to some extent botched. I can't think of a single department that is run properly, yet so many people claim the NSA knows everything. Sure they do.

Certain agencies within the military run very well (JSOC and Army Corps of Engineers come to mind.) On the civilian side, NRC, OMB, NSF, Department of State. NSA under Alexander is also very well run after the post 9/11 binge abated.

The recovery efforts for Snowden are probably coming out of White House, DoD CSS, CIA, and FBI. Not wild about their performance here.

Re: Groklaw legal site shuts over fears of NSA email snooping

#222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if you have other valid points, please take the conspiracy theories elsewhere. It just weakens your argument.

You're calling it a conspiracy theory simply because you have not followed what has actually happened. Every thing I wrote there is actual history.

> Every thing I wrote there is actual history.

The one thing I see that is an easily verifiable fact claim in your post, to wit, "the DHS was built to encapsulate all intel services under one branch, and under one puppet of the CIA cabal," is clearly false, since:

* At the time DHS was formed in 2002, all intel services were (as members of the "US intelligence community"), already had a single head, the Director of Central Intelligence. This did not change with the formation of DHS.

* Both before and after the formation of DHS, the agencies making up the US intelligence community were scattered among numerous cabinet level departments (in the post-DHS-formation period, this includes the Departments of Homeland Security, Defense, State, Energy, Justice, and Treasury), plus the CIA (which is not part of any department.)

* After the formation of DHS, in 2005, the DCI's role as head of the Intelligence Community was shifted to the newly created positon of the Direct of National Intelligence (DNI), a position separate from the leadership of any particular Intelligence Community member like the CIA.

Re: Groklaw legal site shuts over fears of NSA email snooping

#223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're calling it a conspiracy theory simply because you have not followed what has actually happened. Every thing I wrote there is actual history.

> Every thing I wrote there is actual history. The one thing I see that is an easily verifiable fact claim in your post, to wit, "the DHS was built to encapsulate all intel services under one branch, and under one puppet of the CIA cabal," is clearly false, since: * At the time DHS was formed in 2002, all intel services were (as members of the "US intelligence community"), already had a single head, the Director of C…

It was a coup. Who was the first head of DHS? Where did he come from? Who put him there? Why?

It goes all the way back to his role in 'Nam and who he worked for there...

Once they setup the structure, with the DHS, then later creating the DNI - they created a separate entity that serves the goals of the cabal, Carlye is just a main face of that.

It was all about creating a structure that put true power in the hands of something outside the previous branches.

Re: Groklaw legal site shuts over fears of NSA email snooping

#224
post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're getting better at this "This isn't America's worst; look at history" argument. I can tell it's been used on Hacker News quite a bit before :)

And yet it's not an "argument" so much as the cold, solid truth. There is like a 23-page DoJ PDF about the legal theory behind the NSA programs being discussed, an ongoing conversation at the POTUS level, an introductory guide by the NSA themselves into how some of those systems are meant to work, and much more. If this is a police state, it's not a police state that I've ever read about in my history books. You thin…

Maybe I was unclear; I completely agree with rayiner (and, by extension, you). I've even made the same exact arguments elsewhere, today even.

I meant that it's an argument in that an argument can be either true or false. But yes, you're right.

Re: Groklaw legal site shuts over fears of NSA email snooping

#225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every single thing that the USG has said since I have been paying attention - starting in 1986 - every single thing has been a lie. Sure it has. Every last little thing. Now if you said that there always seems to be some scandal going on, then guess what, I agree with you. And guess what, that sort of shit has been going on since the founding of the Republic. And guess what, you can find shenanigans in the history of…

> Sure it has. Every last little thing. Pedantic. With respect to every major event, and every scandal; the position of the USG has invariably been proven to be false. Iran-Contra, S&L, Gulf War, Iraq War, 2008 banking scandal, NSA (no not wittingly). So - while you think I am an "outrage junkie" -- how about I actually have principals and fuck the USG and others who are unscrupulous assholes. Yeah - I am upset about…

Yeah - I am upset about what is going on, and it's funny because you're comments are of the opinion I should just "get over it and realize that humans suck".

Sorry, that's not a position I'll take.

Then, and not coincidentally, you're doomed to eternal disappointment.

As for my own worldview, I adhere largely to three maxims: Hanlon's razor (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon's_razor), suggesting that one should never ascribe to malice what can be adequately explained by stupidity; public choice theory (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon's_razor); and a cynical reading of the Federalist Papers.

Re: Groklaw legal site shuts over fears of NSA email snooping

#226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While the NSA stuff is really bad, what Groklaw is doing is absurd and should be called such.HN seems happy to point out that more people die from furniture than terrorism, but yet unwilling to correct people with similarly misguided opinions when it comes to this. 1)Groklaw doesnt' depend on anonymous tips. The site could simply put up a huge disclosure statement on a web form that THE NSA might get what you say. Or…

Groklaw isn't an organization, its a personal project, and its not shutting down because of the impact of the NSA revelations on Groklaw's mission, but because of the personal impact on the site operator. Groklaw is shutting down because Pamela Jones , in the wake of the NSA revelations, has made a "personal decision [...] to get off of the Internet to the degree it's possible".

Yes, but she also made it clear that she often gets tips from sources that prefer to remain anonymous. Given that she comments on some pretty high-level court cases, this makes her a target.

Take the Apple vs Samsung cases for example. It's very clear that these cases have become national political issues that have reached the desk of POTUS. What's to stop someone with close relations high up with relations to Obama, such as Tim Cook or an employee with close relations to the NSA due to collaboration between Apple and the NSA to ask a favor to figure out a leak that informed one of her blog stories? Given that parallel construction is official policy, we would have no way of knowing whether or not a corporate leaker was caught due to NSA involvement.

Re: Groklaw legal site shuts over fears of NSA email snooping

#227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While the NSA stuff is really bad, what Groklaw is doing is absurd and should be called such.HN seems happy to point out that more people die from furniture than terrorism, but yet unwilling to correct people with similarly misguided opinions when it comes to this. 1)Groklaw doesnt' depend on anonymous tips. The site could simply put up a huge disclosure statement on a web form that THE NSA might get what you say. Or…

> HN seems happy to point out that more people die from furniture than terrorism, but yet unwilling to correct people with similarly misguided opinions when it comes to this. This logic is broken. While more people may die from furniture than terrorism, what the NSA is doing is ensure that ZERO people are free. Period. You are not free when you simpl cannot communicate with another human being via electronic means wi…

>We have zero moral standing on any issue.

I'm afraid this and related claims are a little hyperbolic without an itemized list.

Re: Groklaw legal site shuts over fears of NSA email snooping

#228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're succumbing to slippery slope hysteria. Probably your whole life, the government has overstepped the boundaries of the 4th amendment when it came to poor black people. But I bet if I told you a few years ago about that, you wouldn't have said it made "the entire concept of America" dissolve for you. And rightfully so. The fact that some people in the government do some things you think should be illegal, does n…

> It should be noted that the surveillance programs seem pretty designed to stay on the right side of existing Supreme Court precedent. I am pretty sure that what is slowly being revealed by Greenwald from Snowden's files is proving this to be false.

Supreme Court ruled phone metadata is not entitled to Fourth Amendment protection. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smith_v._Maryland

Re: Groklaw legal site shuts over fears of NSA email snooping

#229
post #159

Fear. Shame. Doubt. These are the means by which the few control the many.

To be truly free, one first shed fear and shame. To free yourself from the powers of the few, you first have to step away from the social control of the many. This social control comes from peers ratting each other out. It's conditioning designed into modern, industrial education. Since the many are busy watching each other, the few can step back, secure in knowing that the web of social fear and shame will keep people in line. (This web of fear and shame is what we're building our "social networks" out of).

So the first step is free yourself from your own fears and shame.

You free yourself from fear by accepting the possibility of what you fear. Then you tune into the experience of fear itself, and let it go. People stay afraid because they don't want to tune into the specific emotion of fear. Where are you experiencing fear in your body? Is it tension in your chest? Is something sharp in your gut? Is it a tremor on your back? If it feels uncomfortable, then you're on the right track. Truth is hidden within the things we don't want to see.

You free yourself from shame by letting go of pride. When you have no pride, you have no shame. When you have no shame, then you can act impeccably. This is also called acting with integrity.

It's only when you let go of fear and shame that compassion can open up. Most people's notion of compassion are really driven by fear, shame, and guilt. That's not compassion, merely co-dependency. I appease your fear, and you don't mention my shame, and we'll get along just fine. We'll even call it being "nice."

If you want to change the world, first change yourself. Instead of fighting for power, own the power over yourself.

Do you own your fears, or do your fears own you?

Re: Groklaw legal site shuts over fears of NSA email snooping

#230
post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And yet it's not an "argument" so much as the cold, solid truth. There is like a 23-page DoJ PDF about the legal theory behind the NSA programs being discussed, an ongoing conversation at the POTUS level, an introductory guide by the NSA themselves into how some of those systems are meant to work, and much more. If this is a police state, it's not a police state that I've ever read about in my history books. You thin…

Maybe I was unclear; I completely agree with rayiner (and, by extension, you). I've even made the same exact arguments elsewhere, today even. I meant that it's an argument in that an argument can be either true or false. But yes, you're right.

Ah, sorry.

I did misunderstand, and felt I had to speak up accordingly. Some of my highest-voted posts on HN have been the ones where I've had to patiently remind people that America now is leaps and bounds better than America in almost any other decade by almost any conceivable measure.

Not every measure, for sure. But the history of America is one of constant (if slow) overall improvement; why throw that away? But now I'm preaching to the choir...

Post reply on HN