Snowden has the goods on everyone

Originally posted by Archie

Snowden is, to my mind, an example of an ethical hacker which is why I take everything he's saying at face value.

This is dangerous.

You should always question anything that comes from the MSM.
Failure to question it will only leave you open for easy manipulation.
Keep this in mind.

reply to post by opethPA

We're talking here about the crimes that are protected with so called 'laws'. That's how it works, 'legal crime' so to speak.
It's impossible to blow a whistle without braking the so called 'law'.

Originally posted by TheBlackHat

I am pretty sure all these leakers are really operations in themselves, to spread disinformation and mainly to neutralize the left. To me it makes sense..also look at the facts..all these leakers are brought to you courtesy of the MSM..and nothing has changed since they all materialized overnight...NOTHING.

Sadly I cannot help but lean strongly towards variations of your assessment.
It does seem very scripted and planned.

I have been speculating a lot the last few days about the story and I continually find myself in disbelief and having to hold my nose from the stench of dead fish.

reply to post by DiscreteParticle


I agree that something is not right.

However, its not exactly impossible for a non degree contractor to get their hands on classified information or clearances, especially in the technology sector. So I wouldn't say that is the final nail on the coffin.

In addition he wasn't immediately dismissed by any government agency and Booz Allen Hamilton confirmed his employment and position.

Originally posted by muzzleflash

Originally posted by Archie

Snowden is, to my mind, an example of an ethical hacker which is why I take everything he's saying at face value.

This is dangerous.

You should always question anything that comes from the MSM.
Failure to question it will only leave you open for easy manipulation.
Keep this in mind.

Maybe I should have said "is in the tradition of", for example, en.wikipedia.org...

You should try to remember that not everything is a conspiracy. It leaves you open to seeing things that aren't there. Keep that in mind.

But anonymous is a collective. Kill everyone "in" anonymous and there would still be anonymous. There are, as we speak, individuals performing anonymous ops, who aren't in anonymous, but yet are still anonymous.

reply to post by amazing


You're right but from what I've seen, all they do is pretty low-level screwing around. I wouldn't expect any major leaks out of those guys. Most that have been arrested for hacking crimes have been teenagers and, sorry kids, but I'm not sure they've got the experience (or the access) to pull off something like Snowden did.

double post...sorry

Originally posted by Archie

Originally posted by muzzleflash

Originally posted by Archie

Snowden is, to my mind, an example of an ethical hacker which is why I take everything he's saying at face value.

This is dangerous.

You should always question anything that comes from the MSM.
Failure to question it will only leave you open for easy manipulation.
Keep this in mind.

Maybe I should have said "is in the tradition of", for example, en.wikipedia.org...

You should try to remember that not everything is a conspiracy. It leaves you open to seeing things that aren't there. Keep that in mind.

edit on 13-6-2013 by Archie because: link

It's not like that.

You cannot justify believing in TV without question by merely stating a strawman fallacy "Not everything is a conspiracy".

Right not everything is, but SOME things ARE.
How do you know for sure this isn't one of those few instances where it is??
You don't.

Originally posted by Archie

Originally posted by TheBlackHat
I am pretty sure all these leakers are really operations in themselves, to spread disinformation and mainly to neutralize the left. To me it makes sense..also look at the facts..all these leakers are brought to you courtesy of the MSM..and nothing has changed since they all materialized overnight...NOTHING.

Firstly, the theory that Wikileaks, Anonymous and Snowden are operations in themselves. I'm just wondering how much you know about the hacker culture.

Wikileaks began as a website with a focus on social justice and government transparency where whistleblowers could anonymously and securely upload documents. This is the site Manning contacted. A rift came about when Assange decided to take the Manning trove to the MSM rather than allowing Wikileaks to publish exclusively. A lot of people in the community can't forgive him for doing that. He did it to get get back at Bush, whose policies he disagreed with, and to focus attention on the work of Wikileaks. Some said he did it out of vanity. No conspiracy here.

You sound very sure of everything...Too sure. Wouldn't a more logical explanation be that Assange is a an intelligence asset, he certainly acts like one. Or didn't you know this is how intelligence agencies work, they use plants and informers, moles and double agents to infiltrate organisations.

But WL has changed things - it's helped put corrupt bankers in prison in Iceland, has helped expose corrupt CEOs of corporations in small African nations. Not bad going if you ask me. I suspect you want grand conspiracies complete with Illuminati coming out. Good luck with that. Me, personally, I think the fact we're all being spied on constantly by the US and friends is pretty freaking grand, but each to their own.

Ohh be still my beating heart, Wikileaks told us Africa was full of corruption did it..I never knew that before Wikileaks told me...and Iceland had a population of about 250,000 how does anything that goes on their have an bearing on the rest of us...clearly it doesn't...but it's a good distraction..."oh look things are getting fixed in Iceland, lets all SIT AND WAIT until common sense and justice spreads to every other country"...

But the guys who formed Wikileaks were part of a wider hacking subculture, one that believed strongly in a free internet, open source software, social justice, ethics. These people are the ones that create open source software such as Linux, an operating system to rival Microsoft and Apple but that computer geeks can change and fiddle with and add to all they like because it is not owned by anyone but created by many. In fact I am using a version of it now.

Except the computers are hardwired with backdoors when they are manufactured...Dell being one that admitted to it way back.

From what I have read and heard from Anonymous, the majority are teenagers that are digital natives but are more limited in skill when compared with the 'ethical' hackers. While some of them do have a strong focus on social justice, such as the Steubenville Anon, a lot like to get their lulz from DDOSing websites of people or organisations they dislike. The majority of Anonymous, I would think, are kids in their parents' basements so keep that in mind when you next hear them boasting of some great document trove they're about to release but you never know. One day they might follow through. Their marketing is pretty good. A lot, however, have been arrested and I'm pretty sure there are one of two 'Agent Anonymouses' around these days. So no conspiracy here either just loud-mouthed, somewhat talented kids, by and large.

From what you read...exactly...you heard first in the MSM. Also you state Anonymous are teenagers..well how do teenager manage such a widespread PR campaign..and Im not talking YouTube im talking the MSM. Also as i said intelligence agencies would find a supposedly faceless org like Anonymous even easier to infiltrate, than something like Wikileaks, to spread disinfo, false flags..or set and manipulate the left's agenda..your either very naive or trying to convince everyone of utter BS. The bottom line is both Wikileaks and Anynomous look like set ups from the go get..not saying everyone involved in these orgs knows that, they wont, many of them probably suspect it after Assange started doing his 15 minutes of fame bit though.

Snowden is, to my mind, an example of an ethical hacker which is why I take everything he's saying at face value. Greenwald is also a lawyer - and they most definitely know how the NSA, FBI and CIA works because a lot have been harassed by them for years. They know the tactics, the software, you name it and so that is a distinct advantage now.

I'd advise you to re-read your own words and see how they can be used to discredit your argument.

edit on 13-6-2013 by TheBlackHat because: (no reason given)

reply to post by TheBlackHat


Educate yourself. There's plenty of non-MSM sources to choose from. That's all I have to say.

BTW, thanks on behalf of the computer geeks I've shown this thread to. They laughed their asses off. Jokes going to be on you, my friend.

Originally posted by Archie
reply to post by TheBlackHat

 

Educate yourself. There's plenty of non-MSM sources to choose from. That's all I have to say.

BTW, thanks on behalf of the computer geeks I've shown this thread to. They laughed their asses off. Jokes going to be on you, my friend.

WOW you were very quick to get your geek friends...to read my post and have a good old laugh at it...I mean have a look at the time stamps between my post and your response to it??? Perhaps your Geeky friends, if they exist at all, need to digest a post before jumping on a bandwagon, in the space of a few minutes..but isn't that how sheeple usually behave.."look this is rubbish, so lets all laugh at it"...That kind of talk sounds like a smear to me. We will see how many other posters agree with you over me.

So your stating Wikileaks changed things significantly..and that Anonymous is a bunch of kids that happen to gain repeated widespread media attention..who also have changed things significantly??/

You couldn't possibly be that stupid.....so Im assuming your paid to talk b0llox...You even indicate as much in this post...

www.youtube.com... Never mind the complicity of Google and Facebook...Go on and laugh then with "all your friends"...that's a very old smear used to discredit the conspiracy of UFO's and the truther movement, because your a laughting stock if you dont believe tower 7 collapsed all due to fire, obviously your nuts to not believe...obviously...

If we are repeatedly told by the MSM that Chinese manufactures are planting spy chips into exported computer products, then wouldn't it make sense that the US is doing the same thing...Now have a good laugh at the bl00dy obvious..They have already admitted to PRISM, but that will be the tip of the iceberg.

P.S. Who every is paying your wages, tell them im willing to talk absolute cr4p aswell, if the price is right...But for everyone else, dont sweat it, you'll easily be able to see through all the bu775hi7 if i ever do get paid top dollar.

reply to post by Bilk22


Why isn't anyone talking about the same leak that happened on May 10, 2006 when USA Today broke the story?

Originally posted by Archie
reply to post by TheBlackHat

 

Educate yourself. There's plenty of non-MSM sources to choose from. That's all I have to say.

BTW, thanks on behalf of the computer geeks I've shown this thread to. They laughed their asses off. Jokes going to be on you, my friend.

Laugh it up while you believe TV without question.

Because believing in TV makes you 1337 right?
At least question it for the sake of your own competency.

You cannot justify blind faith with blanket fallacies and ridicule.

@Archie

So you believe the USA couldn't extradite Assange...from its closest ally the UK...where he supposedly was holed up for at least a year before fleeing to a foreign embassy for protection...seriously, you only believe that Assagne is just someone on an ego trip...When all the evidence says otherwise.

Also..did you not notice, whenever people were suspecting Assange of being a fraud, a very conveniently timed, and obviously bogus, rape allegation appeared, one where the complainant had previous connections to the CIA, (The mainstream media some how knew all this of course and trumpeted it loudly), if they were really setting him up I doubt they would have made it so blatantly obvious...All this exorcise did was give Assange instant credibility once again among the left. Of course he supposedly skillfully managed to evade extradition to Sweden.

In fact the Assange saga, smells very closely to this new's guy's predicament. Look at what they both have in common.
Both men have a sketchy back story,
Both men supposedly get their hands on top secret info...(info that always ends up making no significant impact other than to passify the left or be used to identify real whistle blowers like Manning)
Both men became over night messianic figures, to the left.
Both men were promoted by the Guardian because its a left of center paper, (but still owned by the establishment, like all major media is)
Both men take refuge in countries/territories that have a track record of cooperation with the states and then ...
Both men take further refuge in foreign embassies etc.

In other words you have a pattern of almost identical behavior...not just behavior but all the leaks amount to zip in real terms.

Assange has pretty much lost all credibility among the left now anyhow, so the left needed a new messiah..and miraculously one appears.



I await with baited breath to be proven wrong...

Originally posted by Libertygal
If I am not mistaken, he said in his original interview that he "could have" obtained material on individuals, but his design was not to target individuals, that that would not accomplish anything. He said his goal was to expose the system, not people, so I have some doubts? So far, he has done exactly that, so I expect he is true to his word.

Now, are there other programs they do not want exposed? Most assuredly, and they could guarantee him life insurance as much as info on individuals could.

ETA: I just had another thought that has been running around in my head. It is known he went to WaPo first, and they refused to carry the story. The IRS comes seemingly out of nowhere, and admits they have been improperly targetting certain groups. At the time, no one could explain WHY the IRS did that? What made them come out and admit what they were doing and isaue an apology? Could it be fear of Snowden whistleblowing on them, too? One has to wonder, as closely timed as the two events were, as well as the rest of the "scandalanche". Now the State Department sex scandal? It's all tumbling out, too conveniently to be coincidental.

We all knew someone was behind it, perhaps he has been the trigger, threatening either out yourselves, or I will.

It's something to consider. Perhaps he used his own resources.

edit on 12-6-2013 by Libertygal because: ETA

I do believe there was an audit of some kind that was supposed to come out and they did not want snoopy types to suss it out and bring it to our attention so they purposefully released it ahead of that report. Nonetheless, I do believe the art of distraction is important and we are having so many scandals come out at once it's almost as if the people will be numb to it and not care.

reply to post by TheBlackHat


That is a very interesting way of putting things.

Thanks for sharing your questions and concerns. I also find it quite a set of bizarre 'coincidences'.

As I have been saying for the last few days, this whole thing reeks and I am in a near-constant state of suspicion and disbelief.

But at the same time I am already aware that virtually all of these media outlets run a script and pretend to not be. This alone causes me to question everything their script tells us.

reply to post by lacrimaererum

So?
There were laws that kept women and blacks from voting. You don't think those should have been broken?

Originally posted by zilebeliveunknown
reply to post by opethPA

 

We're talking here about the crimes that are protected with so called 'laws'. That's how it works, 'legal crime' so to speak.
It's impossible to blow a whistle without braking the so called 'law'.

Not really but certain people here either have never dealt with getting a clearance and knowing what you go through\agree to or are just so caught up in the emotional side of this they refuse to see reality.

Being a whistle blower is not against the law and most companies have policies in place to prevent retribution for that. Releasing unauthorized classified information is a different story.

Of course I said one possibility for him is he should be found guilty, labeled a criminal and be granted immunity if these events play out the way they are right now.. Not sure why that is a problem.

reply to post by TheBlackHat


What strikes me as odd about Snowden is his meteoric rise in the ranks and fast shuffle through the various agencies/employers. He seems too young to have risen so far and a high-school dropout to boot? I want to believe that he's legit but maybe that's the problem. Too many of us want someone to believe who will (and can) challenge the monolithic power of the corrupted state.

You may be right about all this. This could be a grand fishing expedition with dissidents as the real targets. Wasn't it just recently that the new information complex up in Utah went in to operation? As it stands now I'm giving this 50 -50 chance of being legit. If not then we're all in for a terrifying and tyrannical future.