Re: shills - the ONE document
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On Saturday, October 17, 2020 1:10 AM, <jamesd@echeque.com> wrote: ...
What was the key and critical document that Snowden discovered, and why was it key and critical, the document whose contents no mainstream source will mention, the document he was not supposed to have access to.
recall that one of the charges against Snowden was "hacking his superior's password". that of course sounded absurd, given the security controls in use at NSA. (E.g. smartcards and certificates) turns out the "hacking passwords" was removing interactive authentication from the encrypted certificate. this was done for "integration & automation" purposes, but had the side benefit of letting Snowden masquerade with higher privs as desired... (less fun than another conjecture: manipulating Windows smartcard sessions, e.g. setting scremoveoption to "No Action" instead of "Force Logoff"...) that's not the most significant fact, merely a trivia. so tell us james, what is this document? :) best regards, j. random cypherpunk
On Sat, 17 Oct 2020 01:42:22 +0000 coderman <coderman@protonmail.com> wrote:
that's not the most significant fact, merely a trivia. so tell us james, what is this document?
:)
to recap, snowden allegedly got tons of documents, then handed them to a bunch of corrupt journos led by greenwald. Those journos got a website paid for FUCKING EBAY-PAYPAL-NSA-MAFIOSO omydiar. Same journos were of course on the payroll of ebay-paypal-NSA and their 'job' was to filter snowden documents, which they dutifully did. And so they published 1% of snowden docs or something like that. so James story is either going to be some more, possibly entertaining nonsense, OR he will just keep quiet...
best regards, j. random cypherpunk
On 2020-10-17 12:53, Punk-BatSoup-Stasi 2.0 wrote:
to recap, snowden allegedly got tons of documents,
Snowden got tons of documents, all of which but one his job entitled him to get, but one document, that he was not supposed to be able to get, made all the difference, a document you are somehow unable to identify and whose content you are somehow unable to mention. NSA shill detected.
On Sat, Oct 17, 2020 at 01:19:49PM +1000, jamesd@echeque.com wrote:
On 2020-10-17 12:53, Punk-BatSoup-Stasi 2.0 wrote:
to recap, snowden allegedly got tons of documents,
Snowden got tons of documents, all of which but one his job entitled him to get, but one document, that he was not supposed to be able to get, made all the difference, a document you are somehow unable to identify and whose content you are somehow unable to mention.
NSA shill detected.
On that standard, I too am an NSA shill. If you want to pin Juan to being a shill, you might consider creating a multiple choice question re anger - Juan could be considered an "anger shill" :D
On Sat, Oct 17, 2020 at 01:19:49PM +1000, jamesd@echeque.com wrote:
Snowden got tons of documents, all of which but one his job entitled him to get, but one document, that he was not supposed to be able to get, made all the difference, a document you are somehow unable to identify and whose content you are somehow unable to mention.
NSA shill detected.
On 2020-10-17 13:44, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
On that standard, I too am an NSA shill.
But you probably don't know what document I refer to, while if bat soup believes what he says he believes, he should know.
On Sat, 17 Oct 2020 13:19:49 +1000 jamesd@echeque.com wrote:
On 2020-10-17 12:53, Punk-BatSoup-Stasi 2.0 wrote:
to recap, snowden allegedly got tons of documents,
Snowden got tons of documents, all of which but one his job entitled him to get, but one document, that he was not supposed to be able to get,
lawl - you, like me, and the rest of the 'public', know exactly nothing about what snowden actually did, actually could access, et cetera.
made all the difference, a document you are somehow unable to identify and whose content you are somehow unable to mention.
NSA shill detected.
so which document is that? Go ahead, link it or copypasta it and when I see it, I will vanish, disolve in the ether, or something. Go ahead, embarrass yourself some more =)
On 2020-10-17 13:52, Punk-BatSoup-Stasi 2.0 wrote:
you, like me, and the rest of the 'public', know exactly nothing about what snowden actually did, actually could access, et cetera.
That Snowden is in exile tells us he speaks the truth, that the documents he released are real. The deep state wants as few people as possible to know what is in those documents, which also tells us that they are real. And here you are, telling us to pay no attention to those documents, revealing whose side you are on.
On Sat, 17 Oct 2020 15:52:22 +1000 jamesd@echeque.com wrote:
On 2020-10-17 13:52, Punk-BatSoup-Stasi 2.0 wrote:
you, like me, and the rest of the 'public', know exactly nothing about what snowden actually did, actually could access, et cetera.
That Snowden is in exile tells us he speaks the truth, that the documents he released are real.
yes, like I said, snowdens 'revelations' were all known before snowden revealed anything.
The deep state wants as few people as possible to know what is in those documents, which also tells us that they are real.
that must be the reason why snowden 'published' only 20 docs through his completely-corrupt, journo-govt-shills. The 'ex' CIA agent, 'ex' NSA agent, 'ex' US military scumbag snowden could have released the documents to the public, but he explicitly chose not to. Instead he gave them to the mainstream media. I guess you didn't get that memo either. The mainstream media are the propaganda department of the deep state, your employers.
And here you are, telling us to pay no attention to those documents, revealing whose side you are on.
I'm telling you that snowden and his mainstream media accomplices are witholding tons of information. They are shills like you, and actually enemies of the public pretending to be the 'good guys'. Notice that snowden himself constantly repeats that none of his 'revelations' caused any harm to the US govt, nor to any child murdering psycho aka US 'soldier', etc. Also, the 'public' of this list is waiting for you to link "the one document". But you can't do it because your boss doesn't allow you to. What a tragedy.
On 2020-10-17 16:53, Punk-BatSoup-Stasi 2.0 wrote:
snowden and his mainstream media accomplices When you refer to them as "accomplices", you imply that Snowden did something wrong, that he wronged someone.
Who did he wrong? If he wronged someone, he wronged the NSA. Your choice of words reveal you are emotionally identifying with the NSA.
On Sat, 17 Oct 2020 18:50:45 +1000 jamesd@echeque.com wrote:
On 2020-10-17 16:53, Punk-BatSoup-Stasi 2.0 wrote:
snowden and his mainstream media accomplices When you refer to them as "accomplices", you imply that Snowden did something wrong, that he wronged someone.
Who did he wrong? If he wronged someone, he wronged the NSA.
snowden is withholding important information from the public in order to protect the US government, US military industrial complex etc. snowden himself repeats all the time that his 'revelations' did not harm the NSA. Contrary of course to what NSA shills(i.e. you) screech.
Your choice of words reveal you are emotionally identifying with the NSA.
My choice of words reveals that I'm siding with the public who should have got all the documents, instead of the snowden-journo-accomplices who got them. Snowden gave a few documents to the journos so that the journos could filter them. Snowden himself explain his modus operandi all the time. Furthemore, snowden himself acknowledges that some people are not happy with the way he 'handled' things. He says he could have published the stuff direcly but he didn't because he's a 'responsible NSA asshole'. But to his credit snowden doesn't call these critics, critics HE KNOWS ARE RIGHT, "shills".
Snowden released information that showed what had widely been suspected,
yet another stupid, shilling lie. Snowden released information that was already known.
and what we had heard on grapevine from a friend of a friend, but, more importantly, he revealed that the NSA had been breaking the law.
LMAO
Bush by presidential order gave NSA broad authority to spy on Americans.
so the NSA wasn't breaking 'the law'. And notice your usage of 'the law' as if it wasn't anything but dictates of your nazi government. Then again, since you are a shill of the US government you refer to their criminal dicates as 'teh law'.
he eventually revoked that order,
yet-another-lie
Which everyone suspected, but no one had proof of until Snowden.
that is a lie 2006 how ATT is part of the NSA network. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Room_641A "The existence of the tap was revealed by former AT&T technician Mark Klein and was the subject of a 2006 class action lawsuit by the Electronic Frontier Foundation against AT&T" 2013 how your cuntry is ruled by the geheimnis stats polizei https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/08/dea-and-nsa-team-intelligence-launderi... 2012 https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/oct/10/supreme-court-telecoms... "US supreme court finalizes gift of immunity to the telecom giants" et cetera In other words, you are a lying piece of shit james. And a US govt shill.
On 2020-10-18 05:05, Punk-BatSoup-Stasi 2.0 wrote:
snowden is withholding important information from the public
You don't know what he is withholding, and what he did release is red hot and radioactive - proof of explicitly illegal conduct by the NSA, in that what they had been doing with the fig leaf legal excuse of a presidential order, they went right on doing when that order was retracted to stop them from doing it.
On Sun, 18 Oct 2020 14:28:18 +1000 jamesd@echeque.com wrote:
On 2020-10-18 05:05, Punk-BatSoup-Stasi 2.0 wrote:
snowden is withholding important information from the public
You don't know what he is withholding, and what he did release is red hot and radioactive
haha, well you little piece of shit, your game gets tiring.
proof of explicitly illegal conduct by the NSA,
or else you're fully mentally retarded? Keep repeating the same garbage, over and over? Go ban some gay porn, sonny.
Hi, jamesd@echeque.com wrote:
On 2020-10-18 05:05, Punk-BatSoup-Stasi 2.0 wrote:
snowden is withholding important information from the public
You don't know what he is withholding, and what he did release is red hot and radioactive - proof of explicitly illegal conduct by the NSA, in that what they had been doing with the fig leaf legal excuse of a presidential order, they went right on doing when that order was retracted to stop them from doing it.
Perhaps, i have missed something although i have read all available pieces from Snowden/Greenwald, but except for two screenshots <https://imgur.com/a/EQ99Ny7> from the Citizen One video, more "original" pictures of TUMULT, the stage0 component from the TURBULANCE architecture, are never released by Snowden, Greenwald and the others. -- Katana
On 2020-10-18 18:16, Katana wrote:
Perhaps, i have missed something although i have read all available pieces from Snowden/Greenwald, but except for two screenshots <https://imgur.com/a/EQ99Ny7> from the Citizen One video, more "original" pictures of TUMULT, the stage0 component from the TURBULANCE architecture, are never released by Snowden, Greenwald and the others.
What was released was the top level document ordering and authorizing illegal activities after Bush retracted his presidential order authorizing those activities. The rest is just boring detail, particular examples of those activities.
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On Monday, October 19, 2020 6:34 AM, <jamesd@echeque.com> wrote: ...
What was released was the top level document ordering and authorizing illegal activities after Bush retracted his presidential order authorizing those activities. The rest is just boring detail, particular examples of those activities.
James, what we consider "illegal" is not in the eyes of those in power. remember that the whole showdown between Gen. Hayden and HPSCI Roark was over the "reasonableness" standard regarding privacy. the stance changed to "warrantless surveillance is *reasonable* in the context of anti-terror." obviously we don't agree, but to claim this authorization was some watershed malfeasance is misguided. we're still waiting on the supreme court to weigh in on this "reasonableness"... best regards,
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On Monday, October 19, 2020 6:34 AM, <jamesd@echeque.com> wrote:
What was released was the top level document ordering and authorizing illegal activities after Bush retracted his presidential order authorizing those activities. The rest is just boring detail, particular examples of those activities.
On 2020-10-20 01:11, coderman wrote:
James, what we consider "illegal" is not in the eyes of those in power.
If the president signs an executive order rendering it illegal, it is illegal in the eyes of those officially in power, bringing existing law and constitutional precedent making it illegal in play. Of course, as has become apparent during the Trump presidency, official power is less than it seems. Who actually has power is unclear and disputed, but that is itself a situation of rampant illegality. If power is not official, it is crime and treason. Of which we have been seeing a great deal during the Trump presidency. If power is unclear and disputed, the issue is going to be resolved by violence, quite possibly violence that may well begin very shortly after November the third, as people disagree on who gets to count the votes.
participants (5)
-
coderman -
jamesd＠echeque.com -
Katana -
Punk-BatSoup-Stasi 2.0 -
Zenaan Harkness