@majrod I usually ask isolationists to explain to me how the international economy works. When they couldn't explain in the past how it impacted them, I used to leave a little diagram but can't find that damn diagram for the life of me. And darn if 'm gonna draw that damn thing again.
I wonder if people could guess what percentage of the goods in their homes got there through the Suez Canal.
1 year, 2 months ago on Washington’s Half Ass Effort in Syria
@LaBelleHelene @RedWanderer Darlin, I'm a girl and you're not my type. :)
@majrod @FrancisMarion "Much of the righteous indignation over the Bush administration's Iraq "adventurism" disappears..."
LOL, M-rod, and do you notice how far people bend over backward to keep from calling the chem wpns in Syria WMD. It's as if the word is tabu. Doesn't serve the political agenda very well.
@FrancisMarion @LaBelleHelene "Is oil a factor in foreign policy?"
I love how people decry "it's about oil" when not one of them would trade in their cars for bikes to get them and their families to work, to the store, to church, to school, etc.
Of course it's about global oil markets. Just like it's about global banking. Just like it's about global points in the logistical critical path.
@LaBelleHelene @FrancisMarion @MedicSteve2"The biggest regret of all the presidency has to have been the intelligence failure in Iraq,"
One could drive a truck the size of the Pentagon through the hole left for the interpretation of that sentence.
For shits and grins, let's say the WMD was moved to another country before our forces got there. Bush's statement would still apply.
@LaBelleHelene @MedicSteve2 WMD wasn't found IN IRAQ is a more appropriate sentence.
@LaBelleHelene @MedicSteve2 China and India need for oil impacting price? Now this is one of your assertions with which I agree.
I think people can figure out a few more pieces of the puzzle by listening to former NSA whistleblowers who make it clear there's no real official channel for addressing their concerns - other than it boomeranging back in their faces.
For folks grappling with the Booz Allen aspect, one of the most respected whistleblowers - Bill Binney - offers possible insight in this long video. Go to 1:23:00 where he responds to a questioni in the audience about how to address possible abuse of power. Having lost all faith in the whistleblower process, his advice is to "infliltrate."
It was an uncomfortable video for me to watch as well (and I didn't have time for most of it) but for folks wanting to do some critical thinking.....
1 year, 2 months ago on Edward Snowden Charged under the Espionage Act – flees Hong Kong
Btw, meant to keep saying it's not just meaningless data......
I expect a class action suit will force the Supreme Court to revisit metatdata and the 4th Amendment. Willing to bet the ruling will change. It'll be interesting to check back on this thread in a year to see. I think the Snowden topic and 4th Amendment topic are related yet separate.
See my last post about other NSA whistleblowers.
Hey AC. Good post. I think we'll find out the answer to Snowden soon enough but the civil liberties question is more important I think. As for concerns about "up the flagpole" ya need to think about Wiebe, Binney, and Drake and how they were treated. Here's a great link on them:
Making authoritarin points? People of God nows what actual experience? These would be people with collective intel, legal, special operations, but particularly firsthand technical crypto experience who would understand better than anyone where the holes in the "firewall" and legal system are.
Sure the case law supports a lot of what you're saying, but those laws are based on outdated technical analysis IMO. These/we are people with clearances or prevous clearances who also don't mind objectively questioning conventional wisdom, regardless of its legal status.
Here's an example of something I'd like to see you explain away. http://kieranhealy.org/blog/archives/2013/06/09/using-metadata-to-find-paul-revere/.
Legal or not legal, have we become a surveillance state. I'm still waiting to hear the answer to that.
Hey Laura...yeah, let me try to get you some good information...a direct link may not be best (privacy issues) but some good articles that talk about Metadata for example....let me get back when I can....
Roger, Laura....I know. You have to hang out on techie sites where they explain it much better than I do. It's not just content.
You're right that the Metadata program is legal right now. That's why many feel comfortable defending it. Others who believe they can make the case to the Supreme Court metadata SHOULD get 4th Amendment protection -- I believe will win the day and I see the Metadata program being constrained in the future.
I'm of the opinion it is not just meaningless content and combined with the abuse of power we're seeing with the IRS and DOJ/journalism issue, have no trouble seeing an Admistration in the future abusing it. Binney - an NSA whistleblower - describes the Utah facility as turnkey totalitarianism.
"Metadata is not content. And while you can discern many things from it, you still do not have content. It is simply a means to identify targets to get a warrant" - Great quote, Laura. Extremely profound quote and is at the heart the entire national (substantive) disagreement.
I'll have to see if I can dig up some links but you've got many in the tech world challenging it. I'm not a techie but have a highly mathematical background myself and based on basic gaming for example, know it's problematic.
Sorry, Laura, I've been on a thread that goes for about 20 pages so it will take awhile to condense. :)
Let me start with Clapper. Clapper could be an entire thread in himself. He was asked a point blank question and perjured himself. He did not respond with "can we talk in closed committee" as I would've expected him to when asked the infamous Wyder question. Instead he answered flat out "No Sir." He's been completely crucified throughout the press for being caught in an unambigous lie. Snowden's leaks revealed how Clapper completely misled the country.
Are you familiar with the incident? When asked the next day why he perjured himself, he replied with an even worse answer. He said it was the least untruth I can give.
As for Metadata, it's not content on te surface but hundreds of technical experts are coming out of the woodwork to show how it can be used to INFER content. Let me get back on the other stuff...
I was running out of space but there are numerous other issues as well. SCOTUS ruling on phone calls and no 4th protection. But especially analysis by super-mathematical analysts outside of govt who can show how dangerous Metadata is and why it should get 4th Amendment protection.
1 year, 3 months ago on Edward Snowden Charged under the Espionage Act – flees Hong Kong
Roger, Laura, I know you've been doing some good research on this. And I do agree there are many people who don't understand how intelligence really works. I definitely see where you're coming from and am usually the one defending the intelligence community.
Just fyi, though I am new to the discussion on this site, I"m not new to the intelligence world or this discussion. As I've mentioned on other threads, I've worked at the highest level of intelligence (NMCC) including periodic visits to the SitRoom and daily interaction with them. NSA was a key aspect of that fusion function and we dealt with the firewalls everyday.
I'm pretty familiar with FISA issues including the fact there've been blank check warrants. So far, no disagreement with you. And you're right that in 2006 much of this was revealed. But I think you've stopped at that shore and are not taking other national dynamics into account.
Just remembered I have a word limit so let me sum up some of those other variables: abuse of power at IRS, abuse of power by DOJ with regards to journalists, DOJ attempt to muzzle the press during "of the record," and especially Clapper's outright, bold-faced lie where he perjured himself on this topic.
Haha, good one, Laura. Couple of thoughts:
1) Go back and read where I said I didn't like either the Traitor OR the Hero monikor, both of which you've now used. I simply think it's an oversimplification to use either.
2) The overemphasis on Snowden keeps crowding out any discussion of the 4th Amendment. Can I ask...are you just as concerned about the Fourth Amendment?
2) Did you describe those leaking the Bin Laden raid or any other number of operational or political leaks as people breaking into someone's house, selling on the street, and becoming a hero?
4) Your post might apply to some wiki- anarchists that think all leakers are deities, but if you can't tell the difference between a defense hawk like myself who also respects the Constitution, then I don't know how objective this debate is going to be :)
We've turned into a surveillance state. Anyone that thinks you can't infer plenty from Metadata is fooling themselves. And anyone not paying attention to the massive abuse of power by this Administration regarding the IRS and chilling effect on journalists by the DOJ doesn't understand what has much of this country upset about NSA revelations. While it is currently legal under the last ruling by the Supreme Court, a ruling made a long time ago, it should no longer be. In fact I predict there will backlash and the Supreme Court will overturn their last ruling by the time all the class action suits and political backlash finishes.
And liars like Clapper are only making it worst.
(Cont'd from previous post) My own opinion? We've turned into the surveillance state of the former Soviet Union, which must be stopped.
Regarding my opinion on Snowden....the jury's still out. I'm not happy about many aspects. But I can definitely say there can be other explanations for why he has gone to the countries he has without being a spy. For one, it's the one way you avoid Interpol enroute to where one would ask for asylum.
Wish I had more time to debate with you folks as this is something all Americans should be debating. But at a minimum, just wanted to throw out another side to the debate. And good seeing everyone
Ahh, nice to see a number of people here whose opinions I respect. To play devil's advocate, though, I think folks are gonna have to process a great deal of ambiguity to figure out this puzzle.
First of all, I can't stand anyhing to do with Wikileaks, can't stand leakers, can't stand lawbreakers and liars, and yet the attempt to squeeze Snowden into a nice neat box isn't working for me. Whether that's hero on one side or traitor on the other. Anyone that's stuidied Ellsberg knows you can be the bad guy and the good guy all at one time.
What I think people should do is put Snowden on one side of the page, then break it into two columns: 1) pros and 2) cons. Then put NSA Programs on the other side of the page and break it into two columns: 1) what have been the DOMESTIC results of these programs (not talking about their effectiveness outside the US - as Alexander's silly 50 revealed) and 2) price we've paid in terms of hit to the Constitution/4th Amendment. (to be continued in next post...)
Excellet, thanks Tex! Would love to see the damn break today. Did you see some of our posts on the other Benghazi thread about CNN and MSNBC? <Big Smile>
1 year, 4 months ago on SOFREP on Newsmax TV Discussing Benghazi
The damn, the damn......:)
1 year, 4 months ago on UT Report: Benghazi Book Uncovers the Details Nobody’s Talking About
HOLY SHIT. MSNBC just did the Benghazi story (emails) at the top of the hour!! Andrea Mitchell. LOVE IT
I consider "crazy" the number one requirement for doing the People's bidding.
Ummm, I think we need a new approach. NCO sounds perfect to me! I'd love to see a Congress full of straight shooting NCOs....holy shit would that be fun to watch.
TXAZZ!! If anyone can help on this, you can! I don't do FB, tweet, etc.....can you push it out to those mediums if you have time? Wait, I just rememberd that Laura also has a big following out there, LOL.....Thx, TX!
Note: Acosta and John King don't show up in the middle of the day unless it's of significant national political concern. I also hear it was someone at ABC that broke the story about the revisions. The MSM is starting to wake up...
Holy mackeral.....CNN, Bob Acosta, and John King felt a need to jump on and start reporting on the revisions and emails that have now been obtained. The Democrat on Fox, Kirsten Powers (sp) is saying the rest of the MSM has finally caught on. I sense the damn is getting close to breaking.
I don't know how someone was able to finally find this but they've tracked 12 different revisions to the talking points and proof that half of the substantive information was redacted by the time the last version was completed.
That's what I call willful attempt to mislead the public.
Nick, you're behind on the funding issue. Lamb and others testified that resourcing was not the problem. That issue was put to rest way back when Lamb testified, and again during Hicks' testimony on Wed.
I agree with your first 13 words, LOL. And I agree about it being a smokescreen, but when you say both sides......I'm sure there are those who are chasing this for purely political reasons and could give a shit about the people in harms way.......but for those who DO care about the people in harms way (plus I spent a lot of time deployed myself).....there is no other way to get answers but to go through a political process.
The way it works in our system is that when enough citizens are riled up, they pressure their Representatives to hold hearings to get answers. Unfortunately, the crazies also get caught up in that firehose/process.... but for legitimate concerns, there is no other way. Even if there existed NO bias in the media and censorship wasn't occurring, the citizenry would still have to go through the Hearing Process in the Congress.
I think when folks work too hard to appear apolitical, they can bark alot but can't get the final action required.
Wow, I hadn't heard that yet and I'm trying to stay on top of Benghazi while crashing at work...thanks for digging that up!
Nick, disregard my smart ass reading comprehension comment as I believe your questions are serious and not just cynical. I ran out of edit time to change it. Thanks.
I'm going to tell you the video had absolutely nothing to do with the terrorist attack in Benghazi. That was made 1000% clear during the hearings....which I watched. Perhaps you didn't have time to watch the whole hearing yourself....but even I was surprised at how unambiguosly and unequivocally that fact was established on Wednesday.
I'm not interested in obfiscating the topic by talking about the rest of the Muslim world.
Nah, I'm pretty good at seeing all the angles. I take the time to investigate from MANY sources. And that's for ALL issues, not just this one.
I'm thinking you might have missed some of the past threads (months ago)....or perhaps you have an issue with reading comprehension, but all your questions have been addressed ad-noseum.
That's the whole purpose of Select Committees. The White House knows that without that centralized process, they can feed different answers to the five different committees right now, and no one can deconflict the inconcistencies. They figure there won't be enough political will to approve a Select Committee....which is why Wolf's 60% is significant. He's got momentum and after a lot of people pushed this info out into the ether tonight....I'm guessing he'll pick up a bunch more in the coming days. If we get a Select Committee, then people's asses can get subpoena-ed....including the President.
That's like another of the many things that boggles the mind. When her defenders said,"but her signature is on ALL emails going out of here"....I would've responded with, "so, are you saying NONE of her signatures mean nothing then?"
Oh, and you really need to drop the following quote:
"No matter how you look at it, they were, in fact, protests occurring in cities throughout the Muslem because of the video."
The hearings made it abundantly clear EVERYONE on the ground knew it was terrorism and the protest thing was totally made up. Totally.
Somewhat good post but me thinks you need to dig a little deeper than what you're being spoonfed. Try reading all the Benghazi threads on this site......that would answer all your questions.
T9, I love all your posts like this. You definitely have those natural leadership genes. Would love to see people like you run for office. Grounded people who will shoot straight is exactly what we need. Plus it helps that you make me laugh hard.
(Sorry this is a duplicate....but we can do me than just whine about this subject for anyone that wants to help...)
Frank Wolf has been calling for a Select Committee and I just heard an update from him that may be encouraging. His bill asking for the Select Committee has 60% of the Republican House Members signed on and his 141st Member signed on a few hours ago. It would probably help for people to email or call their Representatives and ask them to join the bill.The reason the Select Committee is so important is because currently there are five different committees handling various aspects, and the White House is telling each of them different things. The left hand basically doesn't know what the right hand is doing. A Select Committee would allow all that disparate energy to be focused, and it would also allow subpoena power
I just tracked down his bill. Take a look at it and you can see who the 141 co-sponsors are at the bottom left of the page. If you happen to have a Representative that's not on that list, it would help to contact them and pressure them to get on. Would help to get this disseminated as well.
If you have time, send it throughout your network.http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/113/hres36For example:Cosponsors139 cosponsors (139R) (show) Aderholt, Robert [R-AL4]Barletta, Lou [R-PA11]Brady, Kevin [R-TX8]ETC