anyone who thinks there isn't a disinformation campaign being conducted against Snowden

[cali]

is hopelessly naive.

and don't give me that shit about how I've been reading too many spy novels or listening to Alex whatshisface.

It's the first thing that anyone competent at the NSA or wherever would do. Hell, it's the first thing I'd do. We live in the age of appearances and setting the narrative.

That isn't to say that Snowden is a hero or that some negative things about him aren't factual, but it is to say that we really can't know what is or isn't true.

[arely staircase]

1. what is the disinformation exactly?

he didn't run off to China and Russia with two stolen laptops full of US secrets?

[Whisp]

3. I think it was Four stolen laptops of secrets.

that may well end up harming real people.

that's disinformation! four! four!

[arely staircase]

6. I stand corrected

nt

[mhatrw]

98. or not. n/t

[sibelian]

25. Well... if THAT was the disinformation...

it would be a little bit peculiar. Because he DID go to Hong Kong. And Russia.

Did he go to China as well? I missed that bit. It's all so dramatic and confusing!

[Tarheel_Dem]

2. Yup. You stick with that! I think some others may be proven "naive", but not who you think.

[NoOneMan]

4. Character assassination is not the same as disinformation

Every bit of info we are being presented with may be factual (I don't know) AND also part of a pretty evident character assassination campaign.

What I do know is that there is a very active, powerful campaign to discredit Snowden and keep this issue focus on who is he rather than what he may be revealing.

[JEB]

76. Now that is exqctly what I see happening.

He blew the lid off the privatized "security" schemes. They can't defend their actions so all they can do is attack the messenger.

[Thinkingabout]

5. Snowden is a scumbag, criminal, you can't soar with eagles when you dine with buzzards.

[sibelian]

26. Now, now, don't hold back.

Tell us how you really feel.

[Thinkingabout]

38. This is the starter course.

[sibelian]

42. ...

...WAITER!

[Th1onein]

53. Meh.....computer says no.

[Dragonfli]

71. It's all about the eagle! this ones for you!!!

[zappaman]

7. hahahahahahaha

I miss UNREC.

[Enrique]

8. why would anyone deny it?

The government's top people lie blatanty to Congress under oath, what would keep them from anonymously smearing Snowden, who they openly hate?

[L0oniX]

16. Some people keep trusting the gov ...like a battered wife keeps going back to the beater.

[KittyWampus]

31. and some liberals fall for ratfucking… like the fools they are.

[sibelian]

41. And some further still have a tendency to repeat the same thing over and over again...

As if motivated by nothing mroe than a generalised sense of having been thwarted, reflexively spurting out the same talking points continuously like molluscs spurting mucous into the ocean...

[DirkGently]

51. How bout giving the "ratfucking" theme a rest for a minute or two?

It doesn't get any more convincing with repetition. Plopping it into every thread comes across as a bit batty.

[HiPointDem]

90. insiders can't stop with the inside baseball. their concern is solely about which 'team' wins, not

what the general public really cares about.

[Dragonfli]

77. What is the root of your apparent beastiality fixation? Do you even know who ratfuckers were?

The Nixon Committee for the Re-Election of the President (CRP or "CREEP&quot , a private non-governmental campaign entity, used funds from its coffers to pay for, and later cover up, "dirty tricks" performed against opponents by Richard Nixon's employee, Donald Segretti. Segretti famously coined the term 'ratfucking'.

CREEP ran the show, and were also responsible for The White House Plumbers, sometimes simply called the Plumbers. A covert White House Special Investigations Unit established July 24, 1971 during the presidency of Richard Nixon. Its task was to stop the leaking of classified information to the news media. Its members branched into illegal activities working for the Committee to Re-elect the President, including the Watergate break-in and the ensuing Watergate scandal.

The irony is, in your ignorance you use CREEP "dirty trick" analogies to point at the victims of the new White House plumbers. You are actually describing the neo-liberal conservative authoritarian hobbyist plumbers wielding pipe wrenches to bash whistleblowers while posing as progressives posting smears calling the leakers "ratfuckers" of all things as well as traitors, racists, and all around "scumbags" on progressive boards.

Projection much?


You do realize your posts merely serve to remind me of the parallels between now and the last time "plumbers" were called to stop leaks to the press:

[truth2power]

72. Great analogy! n/t

[sheshe2]

85. Some people keep trusting SNOWDEN...

like a DEVOTED wife keeps going back to CHEATING spouse~

A Simple twist of words~

[L0oniX]

93. Doesn't change the fact that this government has lied to us over and over.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

22. Lie blatanty to Congress? Even after this top-level guy swore to tell the truth?"

You're right.

No one should believe that they have any moral qualms against anonymously smearing Snowden.

[Thinkingabout]

60. Maybe same reasoning why Snowden lied through his hiring process, and just because others lie

Is not a defense for Snowden.

[Whisp]

9. Snowden did it to himself.

or are you suggesting that the IRC chats are all really made up stuff done by the NSA to discredit the noble heart?

Snowden is an asshole social security hating Ayn Rand loving Ron Paul money giving asshole.

[grasswire]

11. your breathless attacks say more about you than him.

Seriously.

[Whisp]

13. seriously, holding this kind of criminal to lofty titles says what then?

It's tough to prepare for The Egg. Some will hold on forever. There is no shame in admitting you have been wrong, if more did that it would be a better world, wouldn't it.

[grasswire]

17. so, you have been wrong? nt

[Whisp]

19. Snowden is a thief, criminal, traitor to his country. I am not wrong to say that.

and kind of daft too.

[grasswire]

20. there you go again...

Judge, jury, and executioner!

And the verdict is issued without any trial, without any evidence, and without any due process.

It's a bit like the queen in Alice In Wonderland. Although the queen didn't do armchair psychology IIRC.

[Whisp]

24. he did admit he got the job in order to steal...

but twist away.

it's kind of interesting to see it from my angle, what you are doing.

[sheshe2]

84. there you go again...

And the verdict of Sainthood has been issued without anyFacts, without any evidence, and without any due process.


Hmmmm~

[grasswire]

88. if you don't know the difference...

.....between a saint and a flawed person who nevertheless deserves our Constitutional protections while he awaits his fate, then you reveal a great deal.

Once again: "Beware those in whom the urge to punish is strong." -- Nietzsche

[sheshe2]

89. I do know that Snowden is flawed

I'm not the one that has claimed him hero~or Saint~

When he stops running and turns himself in he should have equal protection under the law



FYI see post #20 I changed a few words in their post~ I see nowhere that I was advocating the urge to punish him~ Why do you?

Once again: "Beware those in whom the urge to punish is strong." -- Nietzsche

Good bye~

[sibelian]

46. What is this weird thing you've all got about eggs?

Always with the eggs.

Perhap you have a fondness for eggs?

[Whisp]

48. always? are you the Eggman? n/t

[sibelian]

57. I'd have expected some other euphemism by now, I suppose...

But there you go.

Personally I think the entire narrative is getting a little scrambled.

[KittyWampus]

34. breathless? How is an attack typed on the internet 'breathless'?

[sibelian]

47. an ATTACK?

Why are you ATTACKING PEOPLE?!?!?!??!?

Ooooooooh, you're MEAN.

[JI7]

12. it was suggested in another thread that Snowden did that to cover for himself from the NSA

and how it was very clever of him to have faked all of that so they owuldn't be on to him or some shit like that.

[Whisp]

14. wow. that's desperate. n/t

[Bobbie Jo]

43. not to mention batshit bizarre.nt

[sibelian]

28. Gosh! He gets worse and worse with every post.

What do you think of his girlfriend?

[Whisp]

30. I think she's Polish and strips floors for a living.

[Summer Hathaway]

59. Have you noticed

that the people who have raised Snowden to sainthood status are the only ones who are posting replies about his GF, his pizza preferences, etc.?

It's a juvenile attempt to equate legitimate questions about who Snowden is, and what his motives are, with some undue curiosity about his personal life.

And. It's. Not. Working.

But don't take my word for it - do a web search for such banal comments, and then check who is posting them. It's not those with valid queries about the man; it's his ardent supporters, who are literally spamming discussion threads with this BS rather than admit that no one is the least bit interested in such trivia.

[nineteen50]

68. Who just happened to

expose a lying spying government program.

[mhatrw]

100. OHMIGOD, some guy who is beside the point posted some dumb shit on the internet

5 years ago!

[Cali_Democrat]

10. hahahaha

You're funny.

[sibelian]

36. ......

Perseverence is a wonderful thing.

[baldguy]

15. Anyone who accepts without question the portrait of Snowden that Greenwald has painted

is beyond naive, and has obviously never had to deal with the slightest bit of douchebaggery in their life.

[grasswire]

18. oh, I've been seeing quite a bit of douchebaggery right here in the last week or so. nt

[sibelian]

37. I've no interest in any portrait of Snowden at all.

What do you think of the NSA's surveillance programme? Just curious.

[Life Long Dem]

21. What's with all these Snowden post if it's not about Snowden

Jeez. But seriously. Take Snowden out of the picture and this story would have faded away over a week ago. Or take Snowden out of the picture so some can get back to bashing on Obama that it's all his fault. Talk about disinformation. No problem when some here jump all over stories full of disinformation just to dis Obama.

[sibelian]

39. It's a little difficult to keep Obama out of it

when the vast majority of the freaked out Snowden-obsessed Obama supportes will ONLY see the story as potentially "anti-Obama".

I'm anti-surveillance and I've tried quite hard to avoid any mention of Obama. I actually wish the pro-Obama crowd would get that, but they're so paranoid it's almost impossible to get it across to them.

[sheshe2]

49. It's a little difficult to keep SNOWDEN out of it

Last edited Wed Jun 26, 2013, 11:23 PM - Edit history (1)

when the vast majority of the freaked out OBAMA -obsessed SNOWDEN supporters will ONLY see the story as potentially "anti-OBAMA"

I'm anti-surveillance and I've tried quite hard to avoid any mention of SNOWDEN. I actually wish the pro-SNOWDEN crowd would get that, but they're so paranoid it's almost impossible to get it across to them.

A simple twist of words~

Pot to Kettle~

[sibelian]

106. Well, there may be some similar to what you suggest, but I can't see 'em.

[Life Long Dem]

52. Those damn Obama supporters... they must be paranoid

I myself know an NSA agent is sleeping under my bed at night just to spy on me. Because I know they spy on us.

[Tarheel_Dem]

66. That is an excellent question. If it ain't about Snowden, why the umpteenth thread?

[mhatrw]

101. Because the NSA's corporate media talking points are to keep this

all about the personalities and proclivities of Snowden and Greenwald.

[Tarheel_Dem]

102. And it seems to be working! Look what we're talking about.

[L0oniX]

23. Before you know it no one will give a crap about anything the NSA is doing. That's what they want.

[railsback]

29. People stopped giving a crap way back in 2006

[sibelian]

40. Yes, Bush was doing so many awful things at the same time people pretty much lost track...

...which is a pity.

[RedCappedBandit]

27. Psh, I have nothing but complete trust in the M$M!

[backscatter712]

32. Character assassination is tactic #1 to shoot the messenger and redirect any discussion.

It's classic propaganda and psy-ops. Goebbels would be proud!

[Link Speed]

44. Damned effective, ain't it?

Witnessed and affirmed by about half the replies to this OP.

Kind of unsettling.

[backscatter712]

73. Despicable is what it is.

Character assassination is a fucking shitty thing to do to someone.

Anyone who participates in this nasty "sport" is fucking scum. Pure and simple. Fucking scum. Depraved, bullying, fucking evil.

[Th1onein]

58. It's the same thing Nixon tried to do to Ellsberg. History repeating itself.

[backscatter712]

75. Exactly, hence the plumbers and the break-ins to Ellsberg's psychologist's office...

The character assassins here are similarly evil.

[arely staircase]

62. i think it is more character suicide in snowden's case

nt

[ljm2002]

33. If people haven't figured that out by now...

...they are not going to.

Of course there is a huge smear campaign against him. Since he has turned on his masters, and he has something they don't want revealed... but have no power to stop... they must resort to the next best thing, which is to very publicly kill (smear) the messenger.

[kentuck]

35. It's very subtle anymore...

Hell, they may say he stole a Super Bowl ring...

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

45. It's not working. The NSA is in trouble despite the distractions and smears.

[sibelian]

55. It's probably making everything worse.

Keeping Snowden in the spotlight keeps the NSA in the spotlight, too. It's not really avoidable.

[Marr]

50. The disinformation campaign is that this is *about* Snowden at all.

I don't care one bit about his personality, or his motives, or whether he calls his mommy on Mothers' Day. He's not the issue.

There are always people who fixate on the leaker and not the leak. Some of them have, historically, been paid to do it. Others are just suckers. But they're all just trying to change the subject.

[markiv]

95. ^ astute observation nt

[FarCenter]

54. Whatever it was, it seems to be over.

Snowden has dropped off the front page of most websites. Wherever he is, he doesn't seem to be able to communicate with his former press contacts. It's unclear whether he is able to contact Assange and wikileaks.

[randome]

56. The Wikileaks attorneys have declined to represent him.

That should tell us something about Snowden's credibility. If even Wikileaks doesn't want him, there must not be much there.

Game over.

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font]
[hr]

[Th1onein]

61. You wish the game was over. I do, too, in fact.

I wish like hell I wasn't being spied on. Some people just don't give a shit about that, it seems.

[sofa king]

105. Their statement is short and interesting:

Further Statement From Baltasar Garzón
Wednesday June 26, 15:00 BST

Madrid, 25 June 2013

PRESS RELEASE FOR MEDIA AND OTHER INTERESTED PARTIES

This serves to state that the Law firm ILOCAD has decided not to represent Mr. Snowden, whose whereabouts are unknown. We continue to represent Mr. Assange and WikiLeaks as senior legal counsel in the defence of the fundamental right to freedom of information and expression. In this vein, we are satisfied with the recently approved draft resolution by the Committee Legal Affairs and Human Rights of the Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly. It states that those who disclose criminal acts in the public interest should be protected from retaliation and persecution from those who commit them.

Baltasar Garzón

Director of ILOCAD S.L. Law Firm


http://wikileaks.org/Further-Statement-From-Baltasar.html

________________________________


Let's break that down:

1) This firm will not represent Snowden;*

2) We continue to represent Assange and Wikileaks;

3) We approve of this draft statement: "those who disclose criminal acts in the public interest should be protected from retaliation and persecution from those who commit them."

Now, if all three of those statements are operative by themselves, can they be re-ordered? Because if one does, the statement seems to go a bit further:

2) We continue to represent Assange and Wikileaks;

3) We approve of this draft statement: "those who disclose criminal acts in the public interest should be protected from retaliation and persecution from those who commit them."

1) This firm will not represent Snowden.
______________________________________________________

I sort of doubt that Julian Assange et al would disagree that these (re-re-)disclosures were in the public interest, in the sense that this time it made the front page.

So, just maybe, we can make a shadowy guess that the Wikileaks attorneys concluded that Snowden was working for some interest other than the public interest. That they think he has a boss.

I know that's twisting a tall glass of lemonade out of a garnish, but that's what I think I see, right now, today, this year. Who in the hell knows what's really going on.

* I don't know what to make of the "whereabouts unknown" clause. It could be that at the time the statement was drafted he was in transit. It could be that it's a subtle tip of the hat in the direction of the question of nationality that arises when one is a spy working for a foreign nation. I guess most likely it's simply an up-front, "don't come asking us about him" shield.

[Narkos]

63. Of course, black helicopters, world government, etc etc etc etc etc etc etc

[pnwmom]

64. Why do you think the Wikileaks attorneys have declined to represent him

and are saying his whereabouts are unknown? (After Wikileaks said Harrison was with him at all times.)

Is this part of a disinformation campaign?

[Incitatus]

65. With tens of thousands working for the intelligence industry, it would be naive

to rule out the possibility that some of those employees are given the job of posting on various sites across the web to influence public opinion.

[HiPointDem]

91. oh man that has become verrrrry obvious in the last few weeks

[L0oniX]

96. THIS^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

There are cops and military DU members too.

[MrMickeysMom]

67. Well, there ya go, cali... Zombies gotta...

... wait, someone in authority hasn't told them yet...

I'm with those here who noticed that Snowden has become the target of distraction, and in the meanwhile, no one seems to be upset over how we've rolled over and spread em in the effort to hunt for red October or something.

It's pitiful how people don't care about civil liberties. It's scary where we are with removing them bit by bit until we don't have an inkling where they came from to begin with.

[MrScorpio]

69. Snowden is like someone who ever asks me if "that dress" makes them look fat...

Where I always give my standard reply, "No, it doesn't... You don't need any help in that department."

[freedom fighter jh]

70. Maybe the right response . . .

. . . is to insist on changing the subject away from Snowden's character and back to what he revealed.

Even if the worst that is said about him is true, it doesn't change the fact that all Americans are subject to a surveillance program that is unconstitutional and a threat to democracy.

Treat the character issue as the distraction it is.

[truth2power]

78. Yes, the character issue is a distraction. And they're working overtime.

[Dragonfli]

80. Exactly! It isn't about Snowden, Obama, Glenn Greenwald, God or Satan

It is about "the fact that all Americans are subject to a surveillance program that is unconstitutional and a threat to democracy."
They do not vilify whistleblowers simply for the satisfaction of hanging the villain in the town square, they do it so that we discuss the personalities rather than the issue.

[sheshe2]

74. anyone who thinks there isn't a disinformation campaign being conducted against OBAMA

is hopelessly naive.

and don't give me that shit about how I've been reading too many spy novels or listening to Alex whatshisface.

It's the first thing that anyone competent at the NSA or wherever would do. Hell, it's the first thing I'd do. We live in the age of appearances and setting the narrative.

Pot Kettle, cali~

Just saying~

[ucrdem]

82. ^ ^ thread winner

[sheshe2]

83. Why thank you ucrdem~

I got tired of writing and decided to use INSERTS ~

[L0oniX]

97. Reframe winner.

[mhatrw]

103. Of course there is. But do you think the fact Obama smokes

makes him a disaster as President?

Do you think the fact that he campaigned against Bush's security state, then embraced it makes him a hypocrite who is unfit for office?

[sabrina 1]

79. Yes, of course there is. And against Glenn Greenwald also. You must remember that we know

that 'Security Contractor' was exposed, more than one actually, for proposing a smear campaign against Greenwald. HB Gary was that contractor. They had to shut down that operation, for a while.

But I wonder who got that contract? If there was money in smearing Greenwald we can be sure that someone else got the contract.

The exposed proposals were being made to Bank of America and the Chamber of Commerce.

Obviously someone else got that contract.

Criminalizing and smearing journalists, there's money in it, apparently.

[ucrdem]

81. Et tu, cali?

How hard is it to believe that DU members who consider this sorry RW saboteur to be a sorry RW saboteur are, who'd a thunk it, right?

[sheshe2]

86. +1~

[ucrdem]

87. thanks sheshe!

[Savannahmann]

92. More than a generation ago, I worked as a Mall Security Guard.

At that time, I went through a school run by the State, and they told us that if we had to use our batons (Night stick) on someone that the best thing to do was to tell any witnesses that the guy we had beaten was a child molester. Everybody hates a child molester, and that would change their opinion, and the way they reported the event.

Original version. "They beat that man half to death for nothing, I mean he was doing nothing."

After the Child Molester claim. "The bad man would not give up, he just kept fighting, and the security people were trying to get him to stop."

So if it was an unwritten rule, in common enough practice back in the 1980's, that they felt comfortable telling rent a cops, to do it, why would it have left the normal practice now?

I wish I could say that I was joking, or lying. But the guy who told me was a police officer who was teaching the course as a second job.

No, I never did it.

[markiv]

94. 'We live in the age of appearances and setting the narrative'

translation 'we live in an age of lies'

[boilerbabe]

99. yes and here at DU even. I will refrain from naming names because everybody knows who they are.

[LiberalAndProud]

104. This would make an interesting poll, cali.

I haven't yet read other responses, but for the record, I believe there is an active effort afoot to discredit both Snowden and Greenwald. It speaks to their accusations, as a truth-telling campaign about the extent of our government's surveillance activities would be ...

too revealing. ...


Pardon the pun.

[Summer Hathaway]

107. Anyone who thinks that a disinformation campaign

against Snowden is even remotely necessary at this point is the one being naive.

His actions speak for themselves.

How ironic to see the same people who believe all of Snowden's claims about a massive abuse of power at the NSA (which he has never come close to proving) are now saying, "We can't really know what is or isn't true."