Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

http://investigations.nbcnews.com/_news ... order?lite" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"Levison said he started Lavabit 10 years ago to capitalize on public concerns about the Patriot Act, offering customers a paid service — between $8 and $16 a year — that would encrypt their emails in ways that would make it extremely difficult, if not impossible, for law enforcement agents to decipher. He said that until he shut down, his small company was generating about $100,000 in revenue annually with about 10,000 users paying for the encryption service.

One who appears to have been a customer was Snowden: When the ex-NSA contractor invited human rights groups to a press conference at the Moscow airport on July 11, his message was communicated from a Lavabit.com email address — edsnowden@lavabit.com. Snowden himself told Glenn Greenwald of the Guardian last week that he found Levison’s decision to close rather than provide information to the government "inspiring" and asked why other larger companies such as Google "aren't fighting for our interest the same way small businesses are."

Levison stressed that he has complied with "upwards of two dozen court orders" for information in the past that were targeted at "specific users" and that "I never had a problem with that." But without disclosing details, he suggested that the order he received more recently was markedly different, requiring him to cooperate in broadly based surveillance that would scoop up information about all the users of his service. He likened the demands to a requirement to install a tap on his telephone. Those demands apparently began about the time that Snowden surfaced as one of his customers, apparently triggering a secret legal battle between Levison and federal prosecutors."

Cluck U wrote:http://investigations.nbcnews.com/_news ... order?lite

"Levison said he started Lavabit 10 years ago to capitalize on public concerns about the Patriot Act, offering customers a paid service — between $8 and $16 a year — that would encrypt their emails in ways that would make it extremely difficult, if not impossible, for law enforcement agents to decipher. He said that until he shut down, his small company was generating about $100,000 in revenue annually with about 10,000 users paying for the encryption service.

One who appears to have been a customer was Snowden: When the ex-NSA contractor invited human rights groups to a press conference at the Moscow airport on July 11, his message was communicated from a Lavabit.com email address — edsnowden@lavabit.com. Snowden himself told Glenn Greenwald of the Guardian last week that he found Levison’s decision to close rather than provide information to the government "inspiring" and asked why other larger companies such as Google "aren't fighting for our interest the same way small businesses are."

Levison stressed that he has complied with "upwards of two dozen court orders" for information in the past that were targeted at "specific users" and that "I never had a problem with that." But without disclosing details, he suggested that the order he received more recently was markedly different, requiring him to cooperate in broadly based surveillance that would scoop up information about all the users of his service. He likened the demands to a requirement to install a tap on his telephone. Those demands apparently began about the time that Snowden surfaced as one of his customers, apparently triggering a secret legal battle between Levison and federal prosecutors."

Yeah, they're seriously cracking down and good for him. Gov'mint doesn't like anyone flying under the radar or having information on them. One might think they have something to hide.

Glenn Greenwald's partner gets detained in London...

But they obviously had zero suspicion that David was associated with a terrorist organization or involved in any terrorist plot. Instead, they spent their time interrogating him about the NSA reporting which Laura Poitras, the Guardian and I are doing, as well the content of the electronic products he was carrying. They completely abused their own terrorism law for reasons having nothing whatsoever to do with terrorism: a potent reminder of how often governments lie when they claim that they need powers to stop "the terrorists", and how dangerous it is to vest unchecked power with political officials in its name.

Worse, they kept David detained right up until the last minute: for the full 9 hours, something they very rarely do. Only at the last minute did they finally release him. We spent all day - as every hour passed - worried that he would be arrested and charged under a terrorism statute. This was obviously designed to send a message of intimidation to those of us working journalistically on reporting on the NSA and its British counterpart, the GCHQ.

Before letting him go, they seized numerous possessions of his, including his laptop, his cellphone, various video game consoles, DVDs, USB sticks, and other materials. They did not say when they would return any of it, or if they would.

This is obviously a rather profound escalation of their attacks on the news-gathering process and journalism. It's bad enough to prosecute and imprison sources. It's worse still to imprison journalists who report the truth. But to start detaining the family members and loved ones of journalists is simply despotic. Even the Mafia had ethical rules against targeting the family members of people they felt threatened by. But the UK puppets and their owners in the US national security state obviously are unconstrained by even those minimal scruples.

If the UK and US governments believe that tactics like this are going to deter or intimidate us in any way from continuing to report aggressively on what these documents reveal, they are beyond deluded. If anything, it will have only the opposite effect: to embolden us even further. Beyond that, every time the US and UK governments show their true character to the world - when they prevent the Bolivian President's plane from flying safely home, when they threaten journalists with prosecution, when they engage in behavior like what they did today - all they do is helpfully underscore why it's so dangerous to allow them to exercise vast, unchecked spying power in the dark.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... ned-uk-nsa" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

kalm wrote:
Yeah, they're seriously cracking down and good for him. Gov'mint doesn't like anyone flying under the radar or having information on them. One might think they have something to hide.

Glenn Greenwald's partner gets detained in London...

But they obviously had zero suspicion that David was associated with a terrorist organization or involved in any terrorist plot. Instead, they spent their time interrogating him about the NSA reporting which Laura Poitras, the Guardian and I are doing, as well the content of the electronic products he was carrying. They completely abused their own terrorism law for reasons having nothing whatsoever to do with terrorism: a potent reminder of how often governments lie when they claim that they need powers to stop "the terrorists", and how dangerous it is to vest unchecked power with political officials in its name.

Worse, they kept David detained right up until the last minute: for the full 9 hours, something they very rarely do. Only at the last minute did they finally release him. We spent all day - as every hour passed - worried that he would be arrested and charged under a terrorism statute. This was obviously designed to send a message of intimidation to those of us working journalistically on reporting on the NSA and its British counterpart, the GCHQ.

Before letting him go, they seized numerous possessions of his, including his laptop, his cellphone, various video game consoles, DVDs, USB sticks, and other materials. They did not say when they would return any of it, or if they would.

This is obviously a rather profound escalation of their attacks on the news-gathering process and journalism. It's bad enough to prosecute and imprison sources. It's worse still to imprison journalists who report the truth. But to start detaining the family members and loved ones of journalists is simply despotic. Even the Mafia had ethical rules against targeting the family members of people they felt threatened by. But the UK puppets and their owners in the US national security state obviously are unconstrained by even those minimal scruples.

If the UK and US governments believe that tactics like this are going to deter or intimidate us in any way from continuing to report aggressively on what these documents reveal, they are beyond deluded. If anything, it will have only the opposite effect: to embolden us even further. Beyond that, every time the US and UK governments show their true character to the world - when they prevent the Bolivian President's plane from flying safely home, when they threaten journalists with prosecution, when they engage in behavior like what they did today - all they do is helpfully underscore why it's so dangerous to allow them to exercise vast, unchecked spying power in the dark.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... ned-uk-nsa" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Ya' don't say?

viewtopic.php?f=10&t=36619" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



This administration has gone far beyond Bush...and yet the Libs just sit back and yawn.

Cluck U wrote:

kalm wrote:
Yeah, they're seriously cracking down and good for him. Gov'mint doesn't like anyone flying under the radar or having information on them. One might think they have something to hide.

Glenn Greenwald's partner gets detained in London...



http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... ned-uk-nsa" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Ya' don't say?

viewtopic.php?f=10&t=36619" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



This administration has gone far beyond Bush...and yet the Libs just sit back and yawn.

Anyone who supports Obama at this point is not a liberal. And I don't hear many conks up and arms over the issue either.

kalm wrote:

Cluck U wrote:
Ya' don't say?

viewtopic.php?f=10&t=36619" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



This administration has gone far beyond Bush...and yet the Libs just sit back and yawn.

Anyone who supports Obama at this point is not a liberal. And I don't hear many conks up and arms over the issue either.

The posturing before and after the recent elections by both Conks and Donks has been ridiculous. Anyone who voted for Obama, Bush, or any of the party hacks should be embarrassed. Fool me once...

Unfortunately, the circus will continue.

Cluck U wrote:

kalm wrote:
Anyone who supports Obama at this point is not a liberal. And I don't hear many conks up and arms over the issue either.

The posturing before and after the recent elections by both Conks and Donks has been ridiculous. Anyone who voted for Obama, Bush, or any of the party hacks should be embarrassed. Fool me once...

Unfortunately, the circus will continue.

It has been frustrating...
I gleefully voted for Obama in round one (McSame / Palin ticket was a joke)
But by the time round two rolled around I was dismayed

So I did that totally hysterical "Jill Stein" maneuver, which I'm still proud of
It looks like I'll be forced to start voting for people such as: Cheri Honkala in 2016

and I'm not kidding

kalm wrote:

Cluck U wrote:
Ya' don't say?

viewtopic.php?f=10&t=36619" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



This administration has gone far beyond Bush...and yet the Libs just sit back and yawn.

Anyone who supports Obama at this point is not a liberal. And I don't hear many conks up and arms over the issue either.

Then you aren't paying attention to the conk blogoshphere and talk radio.

Cluck U wrote:

kalm wrote:
Yeah, they're seriously cracking down and good for him. Gov'mint doesn't like anyone flying under the radar or having information on them. One might think they have something to hide.

Glenn Greenwald's partner gets detained in London...



http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... ned-uk-nsa" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Ya' don't say?

viewtopic.php?f=10&t=36619" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



This administration has gone far beyond Bush...and yet the Libs just sit back and yawn.

Democratic Underground has been in an uproar since Snowden's revelations. There are many, many liberals upset. It is the corporatists that are yawning

It's hopeless. The People let government out of the box it should've been kept in a long time ago. They did it in the name of safety and security. And it's never going to be back in it.

JohnStOnge wrote:It's hopeless. The People let government out of the box it should've been kept in a long time ago. They did it in the name of safety and security. And it's never going to be back in it.

That's something I think we can all agree on

dbackjon wrote:

Democratic Underground has been in an uproar since Snowden's revelations. There are many, many liberals upset. It is the corporatists that are yawning

Stop.

Obama lied about his foreign policy...he has been as bad, or worse, than Bush. Obama wanted to stay in Iraq, but Iraq told him to go pound sand and that the U.S. would have to stick to Bush's exit timetable. Of course, Obama then told everyone that he got us out of Iraq.

Obama has been trying desperately to extend our stay in Afghanistan...all the while telling America that he is winding down that operation (2 years after his own "Mission Accomplished"). We've suffered twice as many casualties in Afghanistan under Obama than we did under Bush...and counting.

Furthermore, Obama has used many hundreds of drones to kill people, including Americans, in countries with which we are supposed to be allied. If Bush caused Iraqis to hate us and turn to terrorism, Obama has caused a host of new terrorists and America haters in Pakistan. And, Obama, after hearing criticism about the killing of civilians in drone attacks, simply unilaterally declared that anyone of a non-defined, "fighting age" (which is not our idea of fighting age, 18, since very young Muslins can be considered potential enemies) killed in the vicinity of a drone attack was automatically a terrorist. IF BUSH DID THAT YOU"D BE LINING THE STREETS AND PROTESTING FOR/DEMANDING HIS IMPEACHMENT!

Transparency? Jailing or holding accountable the big, bad Wall Street folks? How many...uhhhh, that would be ZERO.

Obama has sidestepped Congress, and the American people, more than any other President in history.

And now Obama is creating, and using - AGAINST AMERICANS - the largest spying/surveillance operation ever created by any country...far surpassing anything the Germans or Russians ever built. Grounding and searching the plane of another country's President? Are you kidding me? Again, if Bush did that, the Libs would be demanding his resignation and giving daily updates on how America's president is a maniacal cowboy.

Instead, the Libs simply have a tummy ache about Obama. Upset, yeah...but they won't abandon their man despite their man being one of the biggest, egotistical, right-wing jackazzes ever to hold office.

Toss you a few cookies...and then continue to deal with the big corporations.

That picture of Bush/Reagan laughing, with the caption that says, "We told them it would trickle down" needs to be replaced with, Obama and his cronies laughing about, "I told them I'd go after Wall Street!", or, "CHANGE, can you believe they fell for that!"

John, when you start calling for Obama's dismissal, I'll take you and your uproar seriously.

Cluck U wrote: Stop.

Obama lied about his foreign policy...he has been as bad, or worse, than Bush. Obama wanted to stay in Iraq, but Iraq told him to go pound sand and that the U.S. would have to stick to Bush's exit timetable. Of course, Obama then told everyone that he got us out of Iraq.

Obama has been trying desperately to extend our stay in Afghanistan...all the while telling America that he is winding down that operation (2 years after his own "Mission Accomplished"). We've suffered twice as many casualties in Afghanistan under Obama than we did under Bush...and counting.

Furthermore, Obama has used many hundreds of drones to kill people, including Americans, in countries with which we are supposed to be allied. If Bush caused Iraqis to hate us and turn to terrorism, Obama has caused a host of new terrorists and America haters in Pakistan. And, Obama, after hearing criticism about the killing of civilians in drone attacks, simply unilaterally declared that anyone of a non-defined, "fighting age" (which is not our idea of fighting age, 18, since very young Muslins can be considered potential enemies) killed in the vicinity of a drone attack was automatically a terrorist. IF BUSH DID THAT YOU"D BE LINING THE STREETS AND PROTESTING FOR/DEMANDING HIS IMPEACHMENT!

Transparency? Jailing or holding accountable the big, bad Wall Street folks? How many...uhhhh, that would be ZERO.

Obama has sidestepped Congress, and the American people, more than any other President in history.

And now Obama is creating, and using - AGAINST AMERICANS - the largest spying/surveillance operation ever created by any country...far surpassing anything the Germans or Russians ever built. Grounding and searching the plane of another country's President? Are you kidding me? Again, if Bush did that, the Libs would be demanding his resignation and giving daily updates on how America's president is a maniacal cowboy.

Instead, the Libs simply have a tummy ache about Obama. Upset, yeah...but they won't abandon their man despite their man being one of the biggest, egotistical, right-wing jackazzes ever to hold office.

Toss you a few cookies...and then continue to deal with the big corporations.

That picture of Bush/Reagan laughing, with the caption that says, "We told them it would trickle down" needs to be replaced with, Obama and his cronies laughing about, "I told them I'd go after Wall Street!", or, "CHANGE, can you believe they fell for that!"

John, when you start calling for Obama's dismissal, I'll take you and your uproar seriously.

As an original Obama voter I savored the cookies his first 4 years
They were few and far between

The last two years have been an absolute disaster in my opinion
Obama has made "a few" social advances - thank god - as we attempt to extract ourselves from the stone age of Bush social policies but that is all he's managed to not f*ck up / a few social advancements

that's it...



I'd love to see the list (I know I've seen it before) of all the great things Obama has "changed"
a list of accomplishments would be nice to see...

anybody..?

Chizzang wrote:

Cluck U wrote: Stop.

Obama lied about his foreign policy...he has been as bad, or worse, than Bush. Obama wanted to stay in Iraq, but Iraq told him to go pound sand and that the U.S. would have to stick to Bush's exit timetable. Of course, Obama then told everyone that he got us out of Iraq.

Obama has been trying desperately to extend our stay in Afghanistan...all the while telling America that he is winding down that operation (2 years after his own "Mission Accomplished"). We've suffered twice as many casualties in Afghanistan under Obama than we did under Bush...and counting.

Furthermore, Obama has used many hundreds of drones to kill people, including Americans, in countries with which we are supposed to be allied. If Bush caused Iraqis to hate us and turn to terrorism, Obama has caused a host of new terrorists and America haters in Pakistan. And, Obama, after hearing criticism about the killing of civilians in drone attacks, simply unilaterally declared that anyone of a non-defined, "fighting age" (which is not our idea of fighting age, 18, since very young Muslins can be considered potential enemies) killed in the vicinity of a drone attack was automatically a terrorist. IF BUSH DID THAT YOU"D BE LINING THE STREETS AND PROTESTING FOR/DEMANDING HIS IMPEACHMENT!

Transparency? Jailing or holding accountable the big, bad Wall Street folks? How many...uhhhh, that would be ZERO.

Obama has sidestepped Congress, and the American people, more than any other President in history.

And now Obama is creating, and using - AGAINST AMERICANS - the largest spying/surveillance operation ever created by any country...far surpassing anything the Germans or Russians ever built. Grounding and searching the plane of another country's President? Are you kidding me? Again, if Bush did that, the Libs would be demanding his resignation and giving daily updates on how America's president is a maniacal cowboy.

Instead, the Libs simply have a tummy ache about Obama. Upset, yeah...but they won't abandon their man despite their man being one of the biggest, egotistical, right-wing jackazzes ever to hold office.

Toss you a few cookies...and then continue to deal with the big corporations.

That picture of Bush/Reagan laughing, with the caption that says, "We told them it would trickle down" needs to be replaced with, Obama and his cronies laughing about, "I told them I'd go after Wall Street!", or, "CHANGE, can you believe they fell for that!"

John, when you start calling for Obama's dismissal, I'll take you and your uproar seriously.

As an original Obama voter I savored the cookies his first 4 years
They were few and far between

The last two years have been an absolute disaster in my opinion
Obama has made "a few" social advances - thank god - as we attempt to extract ourselves from the stone age of Bush social policies but that is all he's managed to not f*ck up / a few social advancements

that's it...



I'd love to see the list (I know I've seen it before) of all the great things Obama has "changed"
a list of accomplishments would be nice to see...

anybody..?

He's been in office 4 years, 7 months.

God help us all / It feels like eternity





(are you sure...?
how could that be, tell me it's over soon)

Chizzang wrote:

Cluck U wrote:
The posturing before and after the recent elections by both Conks and Donks has been ridiculous. Anyone who voted for Obama, Bush, or any of the party hacks should be embarrassed. Fool me once...

Unfortunately, the circus will continue.

It has been frustrating...
I gleefully voted for Obama in round one (McSame / Palin ticket was a joke)
But by the time round two rolled around I was dismayed

So I did that totally hysterical "Jill Stein" maneuver, which I'm still proud of
It looks like I'll be forced to start voting for people such as: Cheri Honkala in 2016

and I'm not kidding

Me too, but I voted for Willie Nelson the second time.

dbackjon wrote:

Cluck U wrote:
Ya' don't say?

viewtopic.php?f=10&t=36619" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



This administration has gone far beyond Bush...and yet the Libs just sit back and yawn.

Democratic Underground has been in an uproar since Snowden's revelations. There are many, many liberals upset. It is the corporatists that are yawning

Cluck U wrote:

kalm wrote:
Anyone who supports Obama at this point is not a liberal. And I don't hear many conks up and arms over the issue either.

The posturing before and after the recent elections by both Conks and Donks has been ridiculous. Anyone who voted for Obama, Bush, or any of the party hacks should be embarrassed. Fool me once...

Unfortunately, the circus will continue.

I voted for Obama in 2008 but in 2012 I couldn't do it. I knew in 08 that he was full of it but he didn't try to persuade anyone. He is worst than Bush.

Ibanez wrote:

Cluck U wrote:
The posturing before and after the recent elections by both Conks and Donks has been ridiculous. Anyone who voted for Obama, Bush, or any of the party hacks should be embarrassed. Fool me once...

Unfortunately, the circus will continue.

I voted for Obama in 2008 but in 2012 I couldn't do it. I knew in 08 that he was full of it but he didn't try to persuade anyone. He is worst than Bush.

How could you tell he was full of it in 2008? He didn't try to advance any new campaign ideas or policy proposals at all. So there was really nothing to "doubt".

Here's the 2008 Obama/DNC election campaign in a nutshell:

Abortion, abortion, war on women, destroy Romney, protect Big Bird, abortion abortion war on women.

CID1990 wrote:

Ibanez wrote:
I voted for Obama in 2008 but in 2012 I couldn't do it. I knew in 08 that he was full of it but he didn't try to persuade anyone. He is worst than Bush.

How could you tell he was full of it in 2008? He didn't try to advance any new campaign ideas or policy proposals at all. So there was really nothing to "doubt".

Here's the 2008 Obama/DNC election campaign in a nutshell:

Abortion, abortion, war on women, destroy Romney, protect Big Bird, abortion abortion war on women.

I'm guessing one of these doesn't belong...

ASUMountaineer wrote:

CID1990 wrote:
How could you tell he was full of it in 2008? He didn't try to advance any new campaign ideas or policy proposals at all. So there was really nothing to "doubt".

Here's the 2008 Obama/DNC election campaign in a nutshell:

Abortion, abortion, war on women, destroy Romney, protect Big Bird, abortion abortion war on women.

I'm guessing one of these doesn't belong...

Don' t stop him he's on a roll
(Like when the Germans Bombed Pear Harbor)

Hey look, a few posts back I was saying Obama had be president for 6 years
(or eternity) whichever comes first...

CID1990 wrote:
Here's the 2012 Obama/DNC election campaign in a nutshell:

Abortion, abortion, war on women, destroy Romney, protect Big Bird, abortion abortion war on women. Xenophobic racism. Dream Act.

FIFY

CID1990 wrote:

Ibanez wrote:
I voted for Obama in 2008 but in 2012 I couldn't do it. I knew in 08 that he was full of it but he didn't try to persuade anyone. He is worst than Bush.

How could you tell he was full of it in 2008? He didn't try to advance any new campaign ideas or policy proposals at all. So there was really nothing to "doubt".

Here's the 2008 Obama/DNC election campaign in a nutshell:

Abortion, abortion, war on women, destroy Romney, protect Big Bird, abortion abortion war on women.

He's a politician promising to change Washington, how else was I to interpret that as BS?

Also, Romney and Big Bird were 2012.

Chizzang wrote:

ASUMountaineer wrote:
I'm guessing one of these doesn't belong...

Don' t stop him he's on a roll
(Like when the Germans Bombed Pear Harbor)

Hey look, a few posts back I was saying Obama had be president for 6 years
(or eternity) whichever comes first...

on both!

kalm wrote: And I don't hear many conks up and arms over the issue either.

I meant to put 2012 obviously

But please, continue to make hay over it.

It was the most empty campaign in terms of substance or policy in the history of the country, and that's saying something given the campaigns of Tyler and Taft