Charlie Brooker summarizes richard snowden and the NSA ... hilariously!

No comment necessary



Simply brilliant.

If the above link does not work in your country use this putlocker link.

The fact that a top secret program has an official logo and sign is highly suspect, like they wanted to get caught out eventually. Raise paranoia, make people scared, etc. that's the main game here methinks.

reply to post by ZeuZZ


odd blocked in my country...Iam in the UK lol

reply to post by boymonkey74


Ok I will putlocker it and add it to the OP quickly.

Tick tock tick tock, I hope this gets uploaded before the edit time expires ...

Originally posted by ZeuZZ
reply to post by boymonkey74

 

Ok I will putlocker it and add it to the OP quickly.

It'll be much appreciated, geezer. I'm always keen to hear what Charlie has to say on any subject.

The longer Snowden goes without releasing any real meat, the more suspect this whole episode becomes and the less likely anything of substance will get released. I keep reading and hearing about polls stating that 2 out of three people think Snowden is a criminal. This event is a non-starter or planted as a distraction from something else.

The youtube link does not work due to Copyright by channel four is there another way to view this vid ?

reply to post by ZeuZZ


Richard Snowden? I thought it was Edward.

Awesome, it uploaded in time. OP updated

Cheers OP funny as feck as always.
William Vague lol.

Wow, that was pretty funny. You brits got a nice sense of humor. Loved the bit about how the cia couldn't listen to that$h! for more than few minutes. Well played sir.

This is ridiculous, channel four sent me an email saying if I do not remove the youtube video in the next hour I will get a copyright strike So I'm afraid i had to delete it, it's obviously too 'politically controversial' ...

THANK # the putlocker link in the OP will work forever!

Originally posted by Bilk22
The longer Snowden goes without releasing any real meat, the more suspect this whole episode becomes and the less likely anything of substance will get released. I keep reading and hearing about polls stating that 2 out of three people think Snowden is a criminal. This event is a non-starter or planted as a distraction from something else.

It's not surprising the media is climbing on for a lot more ride than the quarter seemed to
buy, aren't they?

As much as I notice a slant in certain intel analysts out there, and some obvious flaws
showing the bias, I'm working up an intro for a thread soon to maybe paint a different
picture of this Snowden matter. The analyst in question is famous (infamous) in mostly
equal measure; BUT for an accurate take on global cointel ops he's almost always
100% on it. For geopolitical shenannigans he's also historically accurate-- unpleasantly so.

I don't dangle carrots for long, but count on a thread maybe nobody wants to buy into,
because it's so predictably plausible in context. It'll have "Hangout" in the title, and
absolutely nothing to do with Black Sabbath's rumpus room. Have to work at this now.

Off Topic: I can't help it--- Happy 13th, nice job lads: finally made Billboard #1 !

Originally posted by frazzle
reply to post by ZeuZZ

 

Richard Snowden? I thought it was Edward.

Huh? Nope. It's always been Richard. You must've switched dimensions there for a second. But it probably only happens when you enter this thread... Like that book from Neverending Story. Do you have that movie where you come from?

Charlie brooker is an endless source of inspiration. His weekly rants on 10'O'Clock live are like a breath of fresh air in a cesspit.

Originally posted by Bilk22
The longer Snowden goes without releasing any real meat, the more suspect this whole episode becomes and the less likely anything of substance will get released. I keep reading and hearing about polls stating that 2 out of three people think Snowden is a criminal. This event is a non-starter or planted as a distraction from something else.

First, there will be a plan of release of information. There is supposedly more to come, and you don't want to be releasing news on a fast news day when it could be buried. You also want to allow time for it to sink in, for governments to release statements, and potentially embarrass themselves, when you then release something that contradicts their assurances.

If everything was released in a torrent of information most of it could be ignored or overshadowed by other revelations. It's better to drip feed the information to the public.

Also, I would suggest looking into those polls. A poll by a news outlet is BS, especially if that news outlet is just another propaganda mouthpiece of the establishment.

You'll notice that within 48 hours of the first story breaking there were British and American polls both suggesting that people we okay with it, while all the comments on various articles showed that people were anything but okay about it. So how do we explain the obvious discrepancy between the commenting public, and the people polled?

I would suggest that they polled a few hundred OAP's, or even polled a few hundred NSA or GCHQ workers. Or they could have just gone the whole hog and made up the numbers for pure propaganda.

All the polls I've seen on this seem to be vastly one-sided. Some of those conducted by "Pew" are considerably suspicious, when you consider that company and the people involved in it, with proven links to various governments - and all pretty wealthy and well-connected socialites too.

If you believe the polling, then you're naive at best. This is all easily manipulated, and the fact that Pew managed to create a survey, conduct it, manage the data and then release some graphics detailing how the public thinks this is all okay, and all within 48 hours, tells me it's the biggest pile of steaming Horse manure I think I've seen this year.

If you read through the comments on various sites from the BBC to the Guardian, it's clear that public opinion is against this, almost entirely. There are occasional shills who arrive to try to smear Snowden, but they seem to shut up when people call them out on it and point out their posting habits.

I saw one comment pointing out that there seemed to be a concerted effort by an organized group to attack and tarnish Snowden while expressing their support for any and all spying by the NSA, and the Guardian highlighted that comment, almost seeming to support the notion that there was a clear effort underway to sway public opinion and divert the discussion.