The Entire Snowden NSA Cache Exposed Once and for All

The Hidden Code in the Snowden-Greenwald Mockery

I just finished reading an article titled Forget Metadata … The NSA Is Spying on EVERYTHING . It is a good article, and it is true. For the last nine months we have been reading one headline after another on Edward Snowden’s documents exposing NSA from A to Z. 99% of these documents have not been published. No matter. 100% of the facts have been known for almost a decade - details not withstanding and do not matter. Do you really need headline after headline churning out some meaningless and useless information? We have it for you: All exposés, one hundred percent, and in one place. Here it is, starting with NSA spying on world leaders:

NSA spies on Germany’s Merkel. NSA spies on France’s Hollande. I tell you what: everyone who has ever worked for FBI counterintelligence and or CIA and or NSA could tell you: The United States has been spying on all world leaders and state heads for many decades. Period. Now, help yourself and add to the sensationalized headlines: NSA spies on Turkey’s Erdogan. NSA spies on Russia’s Putin. NSA spies on Bolivia’s Morales. Basically, fill in ‘NSA spies on …’ with every world leader and political figure. There. Now you have 11.5% of Snowden-Greenwald’s fluffily sensationalized documents.

Another set of sensationalized no-news news headlines deals with NSA engaging in Industrial espionage: Edward Snowden Claims NSA Engages In Industrial Espionage In New Interview

I tell you what: Snowden has exposed a practice that is as old as the Roman Empire. Industrial espionage has been utilized and performed by every empire and every government for thousands of years. To cover another 8.3% of Edward Snowden documents you can list US industrial espionage by target countries: NSA spies on China’s industry. NSA spies on Russian industry. NSA spies on … Just fill in the dots, and you now have an additional 8% of Snowden’s so-called explosive documents.

Snowden has exposed computer hardware companies on the NSA’s partners list as well:  NSA intercepts laptop deliveries to install spyware . The companies include Cisco, Dell, Western Digital, Seagate, Maxtor, but also international companies such as Samsung andHuawei. To find out about other so-far-not-disclosed documents, go grab a list of all major computer hardware companies and list them: Apple, HP, Lenovo, … just fill in the dots, and you have it. I believe this should take care of 6.1% of so far undisclosed documents.

Snowden’s major revelations, dripping slowly, one after another, point to NSA monitoring and spying on people via social networks: NSA spies via Facebook. NSA spies on Google. Time to publicize another 14.9% of Snowden’s cache: NSA spies on Yahoo. NSA spies on Twitter. NSA spies on … Just fill in the dots by including all the major social networking sites and forums. Done.

Snowden has also exposed what we have known for a long time: NSA spies on News organizations! Wow! NSA Spied On Al Jazeera Communications . Here is a list of equally explosive news organizations NSA is spying on: New York Times, Washington Post, L.A. Times … Please fill in the dots with every single news organization in the U.S. and the world.

Snowden documents and leaks include NSA’s spying on international organizations such as the United Nations. Aren’t you shocked (Not)? Has anyone ever doubted the fact that the U.S. has been monitoring all major international organizations? Let me list a few: HRW, Amnesty, Committee to Protect Journalists … Please don’t wait for Snowden and his handlers to put out this old news and make millions of dollars. Just go ahead and list every single international organization. And you have it.

Lately, Snowden seems to have reached the end of his major networking and computer name dropping list. Seriously. He is now leaking NSA’s nonstop spying on game applications. I kid you not. Here it is: Angry Birds' used for NSA, British spying efforts. Other similar game and software companies will follow. I’ll save you the suspense: NSA is spying on Sesame Street software. NSA is spying on Mickey Mouse software. NSA is spying on Woody Woodpecker games and software. NSA is spying on Pink Panther applications. NSA is spying on … just fill in the dots, and you’ve got it.

What else could be made to sound juicy and outrageous? It is possible that NSA has contracts with commode manufacturers to have them install mini tracking microchips to track your pooping pattern. NSA is very interested in our bowel movements. Bowel movements can tell a lot about a person. Once they have our pooping pattern you never know how they may use it. I kid you not. Don’t write it off. Your poop matters-to the NSA.

Since 2004, through several honorable whistleblowers, the NSA’s extensive and warrantless spying has been known to us. Period. Since my grandmother’s era, not only the NSA, but also the FBI and the CIA have been monitoring world leaders, including their diplomatic figures in the U.S. and elsewhere. Since the Roman Empire nations have been engaged in Industrial-Commerce Espionage and Spying. Didn’t Katharine Gunn expose spying on the United Nations in 2003? Surely she did. No worries, Snowden wants all credit for her work. Didn’t NSA’s Russell Tice sacrifice his career to inform us of NSA’s massive illegal spying in 2004-2005? Of course, he did. But Snowden wants all the credit for that as well. Didn’t William Binney expose NSA’s warrantless spying of Americans in 2002? Aha. So what, Snowden wants to make it not so: he wants that credit as well. How about Mark Klein of AT&T exposing the corporate-NSA collusions on illegal spying in 2006? Mark, who? Snowden doesn’t know such a man exists.

Let’s go back to my first paragraph in this commentary. Now we all know: NSA spies on everyone via every piece of hardware, every bit of software, every network, every ISP, every news outlet, every game, every cartoon, possibly through every poop hole. The hidden code in the Snowden-Greenwald Mockery appears to be one objective; one message: Be Afraid, people, be very Afraid. You are watched every second of every minute, and everywhere. You live in a Panopticon State, so watch out (all the time) and behave accordingly. Oh, also, give us your money.

Okay people,  many of you have known the facts about the out-of-control US intel agencies for years. Please don’t let a Mega Charlatan make billions of dollars by suckering you into purchasing what you already have. Please don’t allow a few Mid-Level Charlatans to make millions of dollars by misleading and misdirecting you. Shoo the Lower-Level Charlatans like you’d shoo flies. Charlatans will capitalize on anything, and turn anything into a commodity (Including snake oil); only if you let them. Let’s not let them.

# # # #

Sibel Edmonds is the Publisher & Editor of Boiling Frogs Post and the author of the Memoir Classified Woman: The Sibel Edmonds Story. She is the recipient of the 2006 PEN Newman's Own First Amendment Award for her “commitment to preserving the free flow of information in the United States in a time of growing international isolation and increasing government secrecy” Ms. Edmonds has a MA in Public Policy and International Commerce from George Mason University, a BA in Criminal Justice and Psychology from George Washington University.

Part II: David Miranda’s Detainment: The Calico Kitten in Wag-The-Dog?

Part I: The Doomsday Insurance Cache That Was, and Then Never Was

Dear Mr. Snowden, It’s Time to Come Out & Take a Stand Publicly as to Your Intentions

Establishment-Made Heroes, Blind Seekers of Saviors & Suckers

Green-Light for Greenwald: Government Duplicity or Government Duality?

Greenwald-Omidyar Venture: Blurring Lines Between Being A Source & Being A Journalist

Greenwald Goes on Record: “I Don’t Doubt PayPal Cooperates with NSA!”

BFP Report- Omidyar’s PayPal Corporation Said To Be Implicated in Withheld NSA Documents

Checkbook Journalism & Leaking to the Highest Bidder

FB Like

Share This

This site depends….

This site depends exclusively on readers’ support. Please help us continue by SUBSCRIBING, and by ordering our EXCLUSIVE BFP DVDs.


  1. Mark Green says:

    Great article Sibel.

    It’s exactly what I posted here a month or so ago.
    I said, do we really need the rest (99%) of the cache that everyone has been pontificating about?
    We got the gist of it in the 1% released. NSA is spying on heads of state around the world using all available technological means.
    NSA is spying on all Americans, warranted or unwarranted, using all available technological means.
    The remaining 99% are just more details of the above, that’s all.

    This just came out today, from Snowden’s cache:
    CSEC (Canada’s equivalent to NSA) has been snooping on unsuspecting Canadians at local airports using WiFi signals.

  2. Thanks, Sibel, but Snowden & Greenwald will make the big bucks exposing, one by one, that the NSA was spying on celebrities. Pop stars. Movie stars. TV personalities. Sports idols. The world has thousands of celebrities and they each have millions of fans. It doesn’t matter that we all know that the NSA was spying on every single one of them–each of them is a hot story worthy of over-the-top publicity. First the major media breaks the “news,” then the Twitter storm follows.

    What??? The NSA was spying on Justin Bieber??? OMG!!!

    It’s inevitable, and as unstoppable as Fukushima. But at least you tried, which is more than TEPCO ever did.

  3. samadams73 says:

    Lets face it.. if Snowden or Greenwald were REALLY thorns in the sides of the “powers that be”, we would not be hearing from them. So, perhaps what they are relating is not damaging, but rather of some value to someone or something outside of the charlatans? A longer way to say a limited hang-out by the gov’t. Numb us and overwhelm us to the point we can’t react.

  4. colinjames says:

    Somebody sounds a little p.o.’d… And I don’t blame her. All the sacrifices Sibel, Mark, Russ, and so many others have made in the name of public service, truth and honor, all the suffering they’ve endured, and along-comes-a-hero, so we thought, and really all that happens is a few douchebags stand to make a ton of dough, have their ‘ordeals’ dramatized on the silver screen, becoming celebrated figures and soaking up the limelight- while the REAL whistleblowers search for real solutions while really informing the public, because their consciences demanded it. At a loss to their careers, probably almost universally, not to mention the real ordeals they and their families endured at the hands of the state. WTF.

  5. Sorry, but Snowden has described in more detail the actual NSA programs, and has galvanized the public in a debate about the NSA and government surveillance. Why minimize what he has done or endured or the risks to his personal safety that he faces, merely because those courageous whistleblowers (including you, Sibel) who preceded him and disclosed so much, received much less coverage in the media while suffering so much? Your argument should be with those who stand to profit commercially and use the profits for their personal benefit, something not proven for Greenwald or Poitras, even if one has good reason not to trust Omidyar.

  6. american1975 says:

    The thing that Snowden has brought to the table that others have not in thousands of documents that the Government can’t simply ignore or deny. You can disparage a person’s integrity or motives- NOT the documents themselves. They are literally PROOF. Greenwald’s drip, drip, drip of releases keeps the story ALIVE and might actually force some change, something a document dump would not. The highly manipulated and controlled “news” media would have long buried and forgotten this story otherwise. You can attack Greenwald/Snowden’s ultimate motives- but their actions and their effect have been all for the public good- whether their is personal profit behind them or not.

    • With all due respect American1975, and I don’t disagree with you. But I do have an issue with the coverage, so far, of this leaked information. The actual documents. Where are they? I’d like to read them, yet I’ve not found a link or site someone can go to and actually read through the documents that The Guardian, the New York Times and even Glenn Greenwald are commenting on. While I don’t doubt that the documents reveal what they claim to show, we all know one of the propaganda tricks is “how” they word things. Often key points are hidden behind how they word things, so having access to the actual documents is important, to me, in understanding fully what’s been, and continues to be done.

      • american1975 says:

        I agree when ever they write a report the actual documents should be released so we can decide for ourselves without having to simply accept the media filter bias.

      • Ribbit-Mark says:

        american1975 summed it all up very nicely.
        “The actual documents. Where are they?”

        Patience is a virtue. Many of the original documents are now available online, free of charge, if you know where to look for them.

  7. iwantpeace13 says:

    While I am yet to make my mind up on Snowden I honestly hope that he is not in this for profit. I just find it funny that other whistle blowers have talked to him in person and noe have pressed him on any of the issues (as far as I know) that Sibel has issues with. In some ways I see the anger at Snowden (not Greenwald) as unjustified, atleast till more is known about his montives. Is it his fault that his whistle blowing made big headlines compared to other NSA whistle blowers? Not likey. Was it the US governments? Maybe.

    I don’t see what they could gain from the publicity though and the revalations have certainly harmed Australia (an AMerican ally and the country I live in). Relations are very bad with our neigbor Indonesia over boat people and haveing Snowden leak that our government was spying on Indonesia and how they where doing it caused even more outrage (likly mostly theatrics for the politicians in Indonesia but not so much for the common Indonesians already angry at Australia).

    It would be nice if Snowden publically spoke about his thoughts on how much info has been released and if he feels that his mission has been accomplished. Greenwald, whom many respected before all this (many still do) is risking his credability and career (as well as the credability of other journilists and whistleblowers) if he is really in this for profit. But I guess money and fame can corrupt anyone. I just hope it has not corrupted this lot.

    • Mark Green says:

      “It would be nice if Snowden publically spoke about his thoughts on how much info has been released and if he feels that his mission has been accomplished.”

      He already told us in Dec 2013 that his mission has been accomplished.

  8. Judith Williams says:

    I am with you Sibel–what they have to gain by this is an increase in the fear factor that is already paralizing the public. Where are the people who would stand up to all the loss of our liberties? Hiding behind closed doors afraid of speaking out. Isn’t this how it always begins? Tell the people they have something to fear. So, now the people have PROOF (SO WHAT!) they will continue to buy the technology that allows all the spying. I threw away my cell phone when I learned that it is a major way of tracking all of us (that was at least 4 years ago). Still, there is no where to hide. They are no doubt tracking what we say on here. The difference, to me, is that the internet goes both ways and I can learn and talk about what is going on from it. Why do we need these iphones or cell phones? I guess I am old but we all got along fine without them only a few short years ago. I don’t have a TV and have not missed it at all. If even the 20% who are awake hit them with what they understand and don’t buy these gadgets it would help. Buy the book or watch the movie that Greenwald etc intend to put out? People who come to this site are not apt to do so anyway are they?

    • Judith, I agree with everything yo said. I too am old, don’t have a TV, and have never owned a cell phone. I read that the average person in the US sees a million ads a year, but I rarely see any–I’ve even got AdBlock on my computer.

      The most important part of an analyst’s work, in my opinion, is separating the wheat from the chaff–deciding what’s important and what isn’t. To the extent that we can eliminate the unimportant distractions, we have more time and energy to focus on things that might really matter, and there are certainly enough of them to keep us occupied (pun intended).

      Sibel is an analyst by profession. Boiling Frogs Post allows low income people like me to have access to skills that usually cost governments more than my annual income in monthly wages for someone with those capabilities. In our age of information overload, it isn’t how much information one has, but knowing what information is useful and what isn’t. We can’t connect the dots if we think every pixel on the screen is a dot.

      Those seeking sensationalism won’t look here, they’ll look to the mainstream media and its celebrities. And they’ll be fooled over and over and over again, each time bemoaning the fact that they let themselves be fooled once more. What do they say about a fool and his money? In our capitalist consumer society, many people believe that the more something costs, the more valuable it must be. That got us into a situation where cars became more valuable than clean air, flavored drinks more valuable than pure water, and dangerous pharmaceuticals more valuable than healthy food. That got us nuclear power–the most expensive (and dangerous) way to boil water ever invented.

      Better measures of value are usefulness and scarcity. There are precious few people like Sibel and the whistleblowers in her organization, but there are millions of fools.

  9. I find Ms. Edmonds’ harsh tone and her repeated assertions that nothing new has been revealed by Snowden’s revelations to be factually false. Beginning with the very first story which emerged from the Snowden cache—the FISA court order to Verizon—we now have verifiable, documented evidence—not allusions, allegations or assertions—that the secret state is scooping up all our electronic communications. Shooting the messenger (Snowden) or implying that he has disparaged others who came before him—Binney, Drake, Tice, Klein—or Ms. Edmonds herself, is intellectually dishonest. In fact, if you care to look into the history of previous NSA revelations, those of journalists Duncan Campbell (1988) and Nicky Hager (1996), you’ll find that NSA’s exposure goes back decades. Why no mention of Ramparts magazine? They published the very first story on NSA in 1972! Casting aspersions on Snowden or, as some have in the so-called “alt media” that Snowden is a “false flag” engaged in a “limited hangout” operation with puppet masters Greenwald and Poitras pulling the strings (Welcome to Alex Jonestown!) does nothing but muddy the waters and play into the hands of our overlords. Should more of the documents have been published in full? Of course they should! You seem to be implying Ms. Edmonds there’s “Nothing to see here, move along!” Is this what the “irate minority” has come to? “Snowden wants all credit for her [sic] work.” Do you have proof of this charge, or do a series of evidence-free allegations and hunches now the benchmark for serious research into the machinations of the US secret state? “Hidden code”? Are you kidding me! What breezy comment will be on offer here if further releases disclose that NSA and their CIA-FBI partners really have constructed a new and improved Security Index, “Main Core,” exposed by journalists Christopher Ketchum and Tim Shorrock? Should we yawn and go back to sleep? If you’re not afraid and sickened by what’s been done to our former Republic, you’re not paying attention.

    • First you say that Sibel’s “repeated assertions that nothing new has been revealed by Snowden’s revelations” are “factually false,” and then you write, “if you care to look into the history of previous NSA revelations, those of journalists Duncan Campbell (1988) and Nicky Hager (1996), you’ll find that NSA’s exposure goes back decades.” So which is it?

      From the harsh tone of your personal attack on Sibel, I’d guess that you never read her book, Classified Woman, to learn exactly how sickened Sibel is by what has been done to our plutocracy (which was never a republic, by the way), how closely she’s been paying attention, and how much she has done about it.

      Far from suggesting we “yawn and go back to sleep,” Ms. Edmonds has been teaching us some very important techniques, such as how to authenticate sources and documents, how to assess the value of the information they contain, and how to avoid being distracted by spectacles or trivia. But you’d know that if you’d been paying attention.

      • You know, in 2009, when I began on writing about Obama I had similar people making similar assertions using similar adjectives. It is truly sad. The saddest thing for me: outside our very small irate minority this is what most people are, and this is how they think. The banality of masses when it comes to critical macro issues. They want everything packaged in the most simplistic terms yet in flashiest wrapping. It is like “Ants on a log floating down the river, letting the current take them wherever it may.” When I hear and see this kind of people I lose all hope and optimism for the needed (Real) changes. Then, someone like you pops up, and I get back on my hose again with hope:-) So, thank you for keeping the hope alive.

    • Antifascist: If you don’t want the hard, and harsh sounding, truth, please tune in to one of the hundred mainstream and quasi alternative outlets, and you will get all the mild and pretty sounding analysis (or lack of). My stand was way too “harsh” for the Bush Admin & its DOJ-Ashcroft. It has been too “harsh” for the US mainstream media. It’s been extremely “harsh” for foundations financed and run by Soros and alike.

      What can I say? I am a very “harsh” kind of a person. But you know what: The real truth has never been popular. Never. Not now, and not throughout the history. That’s the nature of real truth. Now, being the fair person that I am, I will offer you a full refund for your whatever subscription, and send you on your way to the banal mainstream & quasi outlets where you can get earful of “non-harsh” lies. E-mail my admin, and let’s put you in a happier place. On this forum, for this home of irate minority, I am not seeking uniformed agreement, however, I cannot stomach mediocrity to the point of ugly banality. It takes away from the truthful beauty of this site & forum. Farewell & tata.

      • carolcrumlish says:

        Sibel, you certainly do not need to justify your approach. This piece is marvelous–and hilarious. You smashed the issue all the way to kingdom come. End of story. Let’s now get back to pressing matters like how to deal with the fascistic system that is burgeoning all around us. A big salute to you, Sibel.

      • Interesting reply. Criticize repeated evidence-free assertions vis-a-vis Snowden and… you’re invited to go elsewhere—marvelous! Isn’t that the nature of an amen-corner?

        No one (least of all yours truly) has ever impugned the heroic work you’ve done exposing the myriad monsters lurking at the heart of the US secret state. (And for those fan boys who invite me to read your book, I have and found it highly instructive as to the criminal nature of our so-called “democracy”). That said, the “told-you-so” character of your latest post doesn’t advance the surveillance story one iota, not a single jot. Should questions be raised as to Greenwald’s motives? Of course they should; based on facts and evidence not hunches or unproven allegations.

        Is Omidyar a billionaire slime ball? It goes without saying he’s a billionaire so of course he is! But doesn’t it also behoove us to see what Greenwald and Poitras produce before we reject it out of hand? In other words, shouldn’t evidence guide our opinions and not as our masters do, “fix the facts to fit the policy”?

        The documents released so far, prove—not in theory, not by assertion, but through facts and evidence—that the US Constitution is little more than an historical relic and that our alleged three co-equal branches of government is an millionaires old boy’s and girl’s club held in check by latter day J. Edgar Hoover’s armed with new and improved “Secret and Confidential” files.

        As important as Russ Tice’s revelations on your show were, he doesn’t have the documents to prove it, Snowden may and that’s an important distinction. Saying so doesn’t impugn Russ Tice or question his integrity; just the opposite, it impels us to dig deeper. Here’s another question which some may consider impolite: Would Senator Bernie Sander’s have written a letter to NSA demanding answers as to whether the agency is spying on members of Congress without Snowden’s revelations about the dragnet? If this is evidence on my part of “mediocrity” and “ugly banality,” well, that’s your opinion and you’re welcome to it. I refuse to be so cynical to the point of claiming there’s nothing new under the sun.

        “The real truth has never been popular.” Very true, but also besides the point.

        It’s not just the capitalist media and the fake alternatives that need to be kept honest. The so-called “alt media” also needs to be called out when specious claims are made.

        A recent podcast (see Tom Secker’s ClandesTime, No. 14, actually drew the fallacious parallel between Edward Snowden and—wait for it!—Lee Harvey Oswald as “evidence” that Snowden is a “false flag”! Why? Well, both were “stationed in Japan” dontcha know and landed in Russia! Anyone with even a cursory knowledge of the JFK case and the CIA’s false defector program find such drivel beyond insufferable.

        You haven’t made such claims, but fact-free assertions you have made such as “Snowden wants all the credit” for the work of others is false. Where is the evidence that Snowden has disparaged other whistleblowers and sought all the “glory” for himself? Is it impolite to ask? Sorry, I’m asking so guilty as charged.

        You can, as you did, invite me to leave but that’s not my style; I have a thick skin and can handle the heat. Besides, I would, believe or not it’s your call, actually miss many of the fine features you produce.

        • “Would Senator Bernie Sander’s have written a letter to NSA demanding answers as to whether the agency is spying on members of Congress without Snowden’s revelations about the dragnet?”

          Too funny. Suppose, Antifascist, that I demand that you stand on your head and bounce up and down. Is there anything that I can do if you don’t? Of course not. It wasn’t a viable demand because it didn’t have an “or else.” If I’d had a gun and said, “Stand on your head or I’ll shoot you!” it would have been a viable demand because there would have been a way to enforce it. You can make requests and petitions without having an “or else” to back them up, but not demands. Bernie Sanders has no way to punish the NSA if they don’t respond to his request–he can’t fire them or defund them. And if everyone in Congress agrees to disband the NSA, the Supreme Court could rule that it was unconstitutional.

          There never were three co-equal branches of government. One branch, the judiciary, was always supreme–that’s why its highest level was called the Supreme Court, otherwise known as “the highest law of the land.” It’s members aren’t subject to any electoral process, and it has the “Divine Right of Kings” in that its edicts cannot be appealed. As Gore said after the 2000 “election,” the only way to appeal a Supreme Court decision is by armed revolution.

          Sibel’s aim in this essay was not to “advance the surveillance story” but to bring some needed perspective to it.

          “Is Omidyar a billionaire slime ball? It goes without saying he’s a billionaire so of course he is! But doesn’t it also behoove us to see what Greenwald and Poitras produce before we reject it out of hand?”

          You just keep right on digging through that pile of manure–there’s got to be a pony in there somewhere. LOL

          “The documents released so far, prove—not in theory, not by assertion, but through facts and evidence—that the US Constitution is little more than an historical relic…”

          Actually, the Constitution of the United States of America is a lot more than an historical relic–it is a betrayal of this country’s revolution–a counterrevolutionary document:

          The Counterrevolutionary Constitution – by Mark E. Smith

          It established the plutocracy you refer to as a “millionaires old boy’s and girl’s club.” That plutocracy has not been and cannot be held in check by anyone because it is answerable only to money, i.e., to itself.

          If you still believe, without facts or evidence, that the USA is a Constitutional republic, nothing Sibel writes will penetrate your self-described “thick skin.” Ben Franklin lied. What the Constitution gave us was a Constitutional plutocracy–a Constitutional tyranny–rule by the rich. Documents proving precisely what crimes our government has committed haven’t changed it in the past and won’t in the future. In other words, there’s no pony, Tommy, just an enormous pile of horseshit.

  10. This blog post came across as a bit of a rant to be perfectly honest. A major part of this blog post comes across as… “well – we told you so first” – almost over competitive in a way.

    Whichever way you want to slice it – Snowden has made NSA surveillance (which is the REAL scandal here) incredibly mainstream, which can only be a good thing. He did this because he has a massive amount of hard evidence. Something which previous leakers and whsitleblowers did not.

    • LOL “…bit of a rant…” “…almost over competitive…”

      I’ll bet if you keep trying, Mantell, you can get the same deal as Antifascist did above.

      My first computer was a Commodore64. That’s 64KB. Now I have an 8GB flash drive on my key ring. Previous leakers didn’t have the massive amount of evidence because the NSA didn’t have that massive amount of evidence and it would have taken a truck to transport what they did have.

      The real scandal here, in my opinion, isn’t NSA spying, but mainstream preoccupation with celebrities. Snowden has become a celebrity. Football is incredibly mainstream, but I’m not sure that’s entirely a good thing. Obama is incredibly mainstream and he still has millions of supporters, but I don’t think that’s necessarily a good thing either. Fukushima, which is threatening the survival of everyone and every living creature on the planet, doesn’t get as much mainstream coverage as the Super Bowl. Is that a good thing?

      Truth is often very unpopular. Back when the mainstream believed that the sun revolved around the earth, saying otherwise simply wasn’t acceptable. It made you a heretic. But that “heresy” was still true, even if only a few people dared to think it, no less say it aloud.

      BFP is here for us heretics. It isn’t competing with the mainstream, trying to be mainstream, or hoping to win over the mainstream. And as Sibel has made quite clear, those who prefer the mainstream are welcome to it.

      As far as I can determine (which isn’t very far), Snowden is a good guy who tried to do the right thing. But some problems seem to have arisen with the way he went about doing it. That might not be his fault. I also happen to think that Julian Assange was a good guy who tried to do the right thing, and who also encountered some problems along the way. Sibel Edmonds, on the other hand, rather than looking for a big publisher, just wrote her book, published it herself, and went on from there. She had enough problems and didn’t need to go looking for any more. Her priorities, I believe, were to provide for herself and her family, to help other whistleblowers, and to make the truth available to those who were looking for it. She appears to have succeeded on all counts.

      I wish Snowden and Assange nothing but the best. But my support goes to Sibel Edmonds.

      • carolcrumlish says:

        I’m with you 100%.

      • What “deal” is that? Should I “go away, bitch” as Greenwald said to Ms. Edmonds? Sorry to disappoint!

      • @mymarkx,

        Mine was an Apple IIC. It had a whopping 128k of internal memory. It also had a handle, so you could carry it around (without a monitor or that wonderful dot matrix printer). I guess it was a precursor to the laptop. Apple Basic:

        10 print “Text to fill up the screen”
        20 goto 10

        I actually got into it enough to write a score-keeping, 10 question, multiple choice quiz that my older brother used for his high school class project. And also a continuously running, screen-saver like graphics program that drew random lines on the screen in random colors. Talk about fun!

        That was about the time that Matthew Broderick was scaring the public into a pre-cyber-security state with hacking into the pentagon on the big screen, and computers and modems were still being sold in computer stores.

  11. This blog post came across as a bit of a rant to be perfectly honest. A major part of this blog post comes across as… “well – we told you so first” – almost over competitive in a way.

    Whichever way you want to slice it – Snowden has made NSA surveillance (which is the REAL scandal here) incredibly mainstream, which can only be a good thing. He did this because he has a massive amount of hard evidence. Something which previous leakers and whistle-blowers did not.

    • carolcrumlish says:

      Oh, my, gosh. Has it crossed your mind that Mr. Snowden got a lot of help to pull off his “coup,” whereas the other people basically were ignored. Can you contemplate a “limited-hangout” to avert further probing into NSA, et. al. skull-duggery?

  12. Package. Payload. The payload is tucked somewhere in the package. Somewhere in this gift basket, is a phony wax fruit. That’s the the explanation for the fancy wrapping, official teeth-gnashing and hand-wringing performances, and “sacrificing” information any professional in the field already knew or surmised.

    Granted, the package as a whole certainly does encourage the average Joe to feel helpless and exposed. That angle is sure to be exploited in the future, But we were headed down that road already.

    It is crucial to skeptically examine each revelation which dribbles out, as if it were the only so-called “secret” rather than part of a larger array . Is it logical, reasonable, doable and likely, as measured entirely on its own merits? Is it completely consistent with the other revelations? What action or reaction is it intended to initiate, which might be unique? If it were to be a lie, who stands to gain what from it being swallowed along with the rest of the Snowden / Greenwald smorgasbord?

    I expect the payload will come late in the game, after we have become almost shockproof and after a long string of other revelations have been confirmed, or at the least, failed to be dis-proven.

  13. Larry Lane says:

    I think the song “Private Dancer” by Tina Turner describes Glen Greenwald very well. He once appeared to be a champion of the people against the police state, but he sold out to them for money and now appears to be an agent of theirs. If you get a chance, listen to the song and see if you think it is a good description of Greenwald..

    I particularly like this remix: Tina Turner Private Dancer (Dudi Sharon Club Mix 2010)

  14. Mitchell Bupp says:

    I see Snowden’s snow job as a sign that a tipping point is near according to the analytical research done by the government and their spooks. Snowden is nothing more than the government trying to get out in front of the “spying” issue by creating a high profile pigeon who raises the same problems and issues already in the alternative public arena through the MSM as a pretense for the government to come use what I would call “legitimization through reformation”….. There is nothing to reform….. abolish the illegal spying…..

    • Wait, Mitchell. Wouldn’t simply abolishing the spying, rather than abolishing the bureaucracy that established the agency that does the spying, be nothing more than the “legitimization through reformation” you deplore?

  15. One thing is clear: Snowden deserves to be hanged, drawn, quartered, and burnt to ashes. Actually, given the gravity of his crimes his corpse should also be disembowelled.
    All in all, the career of Mr. Snowden on BF is a warning to all men how lethal it can be to pay no attention to a woman.

    • One thing is clear, if the most ignorant, violent, bigoted, and regressive can’t tolerate any criticism of Snowden, then, despite the media spin, Sibel is obviously 100% correct.

  16. What did Snowden do that was so bad? The way I see it, an oath taken to oath breakers is made nill and void by the fact that those forcing the oath have repeatedly broken the oaths they took. And since when is speaking out to expose corruption and wrong doing a bad thing?

    • “What did Snowden do that was so bad?”

      RagnarT, did somebody tell you that Sibel or any of Sibel’s supporters on BFP said that Snowden did something bad?

      If so, why can’t you find where they said it, so you can quote it in your response?

      Sibel Edmonds and her supporters would be the last people in the world to say that there was anything wrong with speaking out to expose corruption and wrongdoing. After all, that’s what Sibel does and that’s why people support her.

      There has been some criticism about the way Snowden has gone about doing things, and of the people involved, but no criticism whatsoever of Snowden’s whistleblowing. His oath was to protect his countries from enemies, foreign and domestic, and that’s apparently what he has tried, however ineptly, to do. Perhaps he also got some bad advice.

      You can’t attribute the words of a sexist (“how lethal it can be to pay no attention to a woman”) commenter to Sibel or her supporters. Sibel seems to be opposed to censorship, so she’s wide open to teams of trolls with years of practice who are always on call to attack when political operatives feel someone isn’t toeing their party line.

      I’ve been dealing with that sort of thing for decades. A few years back I was commenting on another website when somebody disagreed with something I’d said and put out a call for people to go there and attack me. Several did, but most of them didn’t make any sense and everyone ignored them. Their most prominent ally, however, engaged me in discussion and ended up agreeing with me. So sometimes it can backfire.

      Sibel didn’t criticize what Snowden did, no matter what you or other commenters may have been told. Sibel has criticized the people involved in the release of Snowden’s documents and the way that they’re going about it. Being a whistleblower herself, and being associated with many other whistleblowers, Ms. Edmonds happens to know quite a lot about this sort of thing.

      Netter, the commenter I quoted, and who you appear to be responding to as if he were agreeing with Sibel rather than attacking her, does not.

  17. the water we are boiling in is getting hotter now.
    confusing because confusion is all about. The depths of depravity we witness globally, all example ‘the goals’ at stake.. there is a killing war going on, and information/missinformation play this field at every turn. witness the Ghouta false flag.
    Edward Snowden is a self confessed spook, bringing data to our attention confirming other whistleblowers ..or corroborating other whistleblowers up-till-now uncorroborated eyewitness. he is in Russia. How does his credibility stand? Whatever degree of balance or knowing I have, I see the possibles shifting all the time, am open to ‘being played’, keen to read all comers.
    So, we have all of the above,. and then we have Eric. Eric Holder is prepared to talk with Edward Snowdon and by any account at all, holder is deep state. he protects the narrative. and he is conciliatory toward some kind of repatriation or at least a ‘reasoned dialogue’. What are we to take from Holders ‘generosity’? that his cover-ups of 911 and OKC etc don’t scream caution? If ES is “traitor and thief” – why is any softer option being mooted by the authority figures we know are involved in the very deceptions in the first place?

  18. Sibel was very careful not to leak classified information waiting, instead, for it to become public in some other way before she would go on record. That’s not a criticism it shows how smart she is and it’s why she’s able to raise a family today in Oregon instead of Siberia. But Snowden leaked classified, specific information that put his life and freedom in jeopardy and took a different path for purposes of self preservation.

    While Sibel may ultimately be correct that Snowden is part of some larger conspiracy, (involving CIA, NSA, etc.) I highly doubt it and I believe what we are reading here, today, is based more upon ego than reason stemming from the Greenwald. Twitter debacle. Previous whistleblowers may have leaked important information but Snowden leaked classified documents to the public which detail the operations and the crimes. Have you ever heard that “the Devil is in the details”? This is a perfect example of that phrase. The details are important and I’m loving that some documents have been leaked in such a timely manner as to prove how our ‘leaders’ lie to us continuously.

    There have been many ground breaking stories disseminated from Sibel and this site but I personally am embarrassed by these unproven allegations about Edward Snowden. The conflict of interest stuff regarding Greenwald, however, I feel is fair game.

  19. “RagnarT, did somebody tell you that Sibel or any of Sibel’s supporters on BFP said that Snowden did something bad?”

    Honestly I was replying to the post Netter made above mine. Wile he may have been sarcastic, or not. I’ve heard many vehement quotes from people both within the government, and outside it . While I understand that some be
    I’ve that oaths sworn an oath breaking agency are valid, I personally don’t see them as applicable. I was mainly curious as to what other reasons people had for such extreme opinions on punishments they feel he deserves.

    • You may be referring to another attitude prevalent in the US, RagnarT.

      You see, in the USA, we have a legal system rather than a justice system. What that means is that as long as the technicalities of law, however amoral the law may be (the fugitive slave law, or laws authorizing torture and drone strikes, are good examples) are adhered to, nothing else matters. The Supreme Court has even gone so far as to say that if a proper trial was held and a judge or jury found someone guilty and sentenced them to death, the fact that the person was factually innocent of the crime is immaterial. Obviously, justice is not done by executing an innocent person, but if the juridical technicalities are adhered to, the execution is legal. The old joke is that the students in a law class once asked their professor a question about justice. He took them outside the building and pointed to the sign, saying that they were in a school of law, not a school of justice.

      Those who care only about law, might tend to wish violence upon Snowden for breaking what they perceive as a legal contract. Those who care about justice, like most of us here on BFP, do not.

      • I agree with all your points. In fact, unless Snowden is kidnapped and subjected to the same treatment as Bradley Manning, then more people might be encouraged to step forward and blow the whistle on equally illegal, unconstitutional and immoral actions by the government and its assorted agencies.

        Whenever I hear people mention that the US is a Democrasy, I always point out that “no, the US is a Republic, not a democrasy”. There’s a difference.

        • Thanks, RagnarT, but the US is neither a democracy nor a republic. It’s a Constitutional plutocracy, rule by the wealthy–a tyranny.

          In a democracy, supreme power over government is vested in the hands of the people. In a republic, which is a form of democracy, supreme power over government is still vested in the hands of the people only they exercise it through their representatives rather than directly. Of course in order to exercise your power through your representatives, you have to be able to hold them accountable during their terms of office, which is the only time they have the power to do irreparable damage in your name, and the only time they are supposed to represent you.

          In other words, in order for us to be able to exercise our power through our elected representatives, we’d have to be able to recall and remove them from office BEFORE they could do irreparable damage in our name. As Jim Fetzer was surprised to learn when he had me on his podcast years ago, we have no right of recall at the federal level, so we cannot hold our elected officials accountable before they do irreparable damage in our name, which means that we cannot exercise our power through them. We cannot force them to represent us, so they are free, once elected, to represent the wealthy, corporations, banks, foreign powers, or anything else they wish. All we can do is wait until their terms of office are up, the irreparable damage is done, and then try to elect someone else. We have no power over our representatives while they are in office. We can petititon them, lobby them, and protest their actions, but we cannot exercise our power through them because we have no power over them while they’re in office–the only time such power could be exercised, if this was a republic and we had that power.

          Benjamin Franklin knew that when he left the Constitutional Convention, but he also knew that the people would never accept a plutocracy, so he lied and said that it was “a republic if you can keep it.” He knew it wasn’t a republic and that therefore there was no way we could keep the republic we didn’t have. He wasn’t the honorable man we were taught–he also withheld the anti-slavery petition he’d been sent to the Convention to present, because it would have angered the slave states and they might not have ratified the Constitition.

          The essay I linked above The Counterrevolutionary Constitution and the comments below it explain this pretty well. The article (without the comments, but with a link to them) is one of five essays in my little book, Consent to Tyranny: Voting in the USA which explains why we can’t elect people to represent us. In a democracy, we wouldn’t need to, as we’d be able to vote on issues and decide them ourselves. In a republic we would have to be able to elect people who would represent our interests, as that would be the only way we could exercise our power. We can’t exercise power that we don’t have.

  20. BennyB-DoubleD says:

    Nice photo caption Sibel. Is that the chair of the United States Select Committee for Intelligence Oversight?

  21. Forgive me if somebody has already brought this up… (I have limited time to scan through this lengthy thread). Snowden’s most comprehensive interview to date was broadcast on German television a couple weeks ago. Here it is in English at Archive…

    For the first time we seem to be getting some cautious expressions of dissatisfaction from Snowden with the editorial decisions he has entrusted to Greenwald, et al.

    Three times during the interview he declines to answer questions that would reveal classified information that hasn’t been revealed yet and that he is privy to, deferring instead to the editorial decisions of journalists.

    From his responses I would infer that he is pursuing a strategy that would give him a legal out if ever he should be brought to trial, though he himself acknowledges that the likelihood of due process under current conditions is not good. Nevertheless, he can argue that ‘I personally did not reveal classified information; rather I made available to journalists documents that they through their editorial decision-making process may determine to be in the public interest to reveal’ – the latter being the operative phrase throughout this interview.

    You do get the sense of some frustration on his part with the ‘editorial decisions of journalists’ (none of whom he mentions by name) in satisfying the public interest, particularly when the question was brought up as to whether other German politicians besides Merkel have been spied on. He seems to be aware that the answer is in the affirmative and it is his opinion that it is in the public’s interest to know this but it hasn’t yet been brought to light in order to protect the reputations of others…? Very intriguing indeed.

    My assessment is that he is a highly strategic player in this game. He was indeed the game-changer in doing what he did – disclosing the information that is ‘in the public interest’ in such a way as to give himself some semblance of legal immunity from the act. Moreover, giving the press the hard copies of documents to chew on was crucial in order to give the stories traction, whereas individual whistle blowers without hard-copy can be dismissed as disgruntled or whatnot by the media… There is the downside of this strategy, in being at the mercy of the ‘editorial decisions’ of the privileged few news organizations and journalists who have disappointingly been merely nibbling on these documents. Again, Snowden seems to be expressing this disappointment, though not explicitly as he is hesitant to burn any bridges just yet.

  22. “It is possible that NSA has contracts with commode manufacturers to have them install mini tracking microchips to track your pooping pattern. NSA is very interested in our bowel movements. Bowel movements can tell a lot about a person. Once they have our pooping pattern you never know how they may use it. I kid you not. Don’t write it off. Your poop matters-to the NSA…”

    Sibel you crack me up… Keep the “harshness” coming please. Big boys can take it…

  23. The problem with keeping the story alive is that we end up with conversations with basically untrue facts being laid out by the keepers of the documents. Lies by omission. So, you trade the truth for the extension of an untrue story. I saw and heard Snowden deferring to the editorial decisions of journalists in that recent German interview and I thought it was shameful. He even said it with a snicker. Ha, ha, the joke’s on us.

    Why do so many people parrot the line about the story being quickly over if there was a dump? Would no other analysis come from so many people having access? Is the story really the fact that someone stole the documents and released them? Or is it about what is contained in the documents? What story do you really want to be extended?

    These questions become moot, when we focus on the issue of the public’s right to know. We have the right to see the evidence of these serious and ONGOING crimes against us. Don’t you want to know what’s STILL BEING DONE? How on earth can your media strategy stop you from thinking about what you NEED TO KNOW?

    That is why Sibel wrote a tongue-in-cheek story about the endless drops of repetitive details we are being fed (which should keep the story about those feeding us, like little babies, alive longer than we are). No, it’s not really about ego. Check your recent memory for all the egotistical articles Sibel writes. Get back to me when you find that pattern. Or, maybe, start realizing what she is trying to tell you and quit grasping at straw men to extend your belief in the heroes who stand in for truth and accountability.

    • Xicha: I heard the same kind of people saying the same kind of things in 2004-2006 when I issued strong statement debunking a group of CIA actors who came out fashioning ‘whistleblower’ title on the issue of 9/11. We had posers like Mike Scheuer & Robert Bear who were showcased by the MSM 24 X 7 on 9/11=blowback. The amazing common theme that tied several NSA so-called whistleblowers was: Blowback. Just Google Michael Scheuer, Robert Bear, Valerie Plame … (basicall all the CIA operatives who came out & were extensively covered), and the tern ‘blowback’ and you’ll see what I am talking about. Some of them even publish book using the term as title!!

      Anyhow. The same propaganda outlets that brought us Iraq WMD & 9/11 lies now present us with their hero= Snowden. That alone says more than 1000s of pages.

      Another interesting theme: Wikileaks & Greenwald feel repulsed by anyone in any 9/11 camp. Again, check out Assange’s statements on 9/11 conspiracy crazies & Greenwald’s attacks on all 9/11 truther crazies…See what you get, and then share it with the very few here who are badly deficient in Omega fats as brain food to take in the macro picture & facts. Thanks.

      • Speaking of 9/11, did you see my tweet to Tom Drake about Gladio B, after listening to him basically describe 9/11 as blowback in a recent interview? And his reply that he knows nothing about any program called Gladio B?

        • Your Gladio Plan B interviews with Corbett were the biggest story of 2013, but so many who should now know about it, know nothing? Where’s the hip new alt-media on that story?

          • carolcrumlish says:

            Xicha, thanks for the reminder about Gladio A&B. The content of these presentations covers some of the most important history of both the last and current centuries. A grasp of this information is most urgently needed. How to push this information to the forefront? I am understanding that the Snowden-Greenwald sand machine has been designed to distract attention from, in my view, the much more urgent information found in other realities of our experience, the Gladio series being one of the most important. I would place the Federal Reserve scam in the same, must, must know class. I hope that James Corbett’s upcoming documentary will stimulate more people to become informed about these most egregiously criminal activities and then to raise bloody hell and do something about it.

    • Xicha: “I saw and heard Snowden deferring to the editorial decisions of journalists in that recent German interview and I thought it was shameful. He even said it with a snicker. Ha, ha, the joke’s on us.”

      The snicker is open for interpretation… It is just as well cynically directed at the journalists that he originally trusted in his naivete. The guy just turned thirty alright? Sibel you readily admit that early on you were naive in your expectations of “journalists”, so can’t we give the guy a little benefit of doubt here?

      Again give another listen to the third time he defers to ‘the editorial decisions of journalists’ – he suggests that something in the public interest is being held back in order to protect certain reputations. We don’t know whose reputation in particular, but that did remind me of what Sibel has said about the foundations who were willing to help her so long as she didn’t reveal things that implicated the Clinton administration. Is Snowden implying that perhaps a deal has been struck to not embarrass certain politicians…? I wonder who Omidyar is banking on for 2016…? Snowden may have given us a lead here…

      • The same journos he is in supposed dailycontact with? If he’s upset with them, why not just give them a little nudge publicly? Why help them by omitting facts from the conversation/interview? I saw him agreeing with their motivations and putting the public interest on the back burner.

        What are the journos holding over his head, if his mission has already been accomplished?

        With all due respect, I see your straining of imagination protecting your own hope and faith in the narrative, more than giving him the benefit of the doubt. His clearly stated omissions were lies about important facts and that’s what we are keeping alive.

        • A little public nudge is precisely what he was giving them in that interview. -the point he raises there might be something worth tweeting Greenwald about (I don’t do twitter so if anybody else wants to give it a try…?)

          As I noted above, the strategy he is following is to not personally reveal classified info publicly, but to rely on journalists as go-betweens. This way he gives himself some legal protection from disclosing the classified info, so yes there is self-interest on his part by not dumping it all unedited on the internet or letting it come out of his own mouth. But what? we want all our whistle-blowers to be unmitigated self-immolating martyrs. Edward Snowden is not Jesus Christ, OK?

          • Didn’t he break the law by giving the docs to the journos? He disclosed it to them already.

          • The journalists themselves did not take any sort of secrecy oaths and they have First Amendment protection. He lets them be the arbiters of ‘public interest’ and hence removes himself personally from the decision making process as to what is released and what is not. I imagine that Greenwald, being a lawyer, advised him to take this approach. Whether it would actually hold up in a court of law is another matter, given all the exemptions to the First Amendment that exist in lieu of “national security”…

          • I think ES went on camera at the beginning of this story and said my name is ES and I broke the law by taking these docs. Then I broke the law by giving them to these uncleared folks. I want them to do the work of giving it to the public in a strung out manner.

            I don’t think there’s any legal protection motivation for his deference. This must be a rumor, but obviously without merit. He already admitted to giving a boatload of classified information to uncleared people, journos or not. This may be confused with protecting journos, who can now say they didn’t steal it.

      • Only thirty, but already special forces, CIA, NSA, believed in the mission in Iraq, but then “learned”.  Great acting.  I’d like to hear more about the training accident when his legs were broken.

  24. “Another interesting theme: Wikileaks & Greenwald feel repulsed by anyone in any 9/11 camp. Again, check out Assange’s statements on 9/11 conspiracy crazies & Greenwald’s attacks on all 9/11 truther crazies…See what you get, and then share it with the very few here who are badly deficient in Omega fats as brain food to take in the macro picture & facts. Thanks”

    This is something that I use, valid or not, as a benchmark when it comes to judging who ‘s opinion to pay attention to in matters relating to the government, their agencies and their activities. People like Noam Chomski, Greenwald and others, while outspoken on many matters, tend to urge belief in the “Official Story” on 9/11. This throws up a red flag to me. But I realize that due to the massive amount of dis/miss-information on the topic, some people prefer to avoid the subject entirely. I can certainly understand and respect that. But, to urge people to accept the official story just puts a black mark by their name in my opinion. While I will listen to their analysis on other topics, in the back of my mind I always keep a vault of salt ready for use. 😉

    • Also, Chomsky on the subject of the JFK assassination; basically he says well JFK was an asshole so who cares? Well JFK may have been an asshole circa ’61, but after the Cuban Missile Crisis there was a distinct change – you had the nuclear test ban treaty, you had the initial withdrawal of “advisers” from Vietnam before that war had chance to go full-blown, you even had JFK opening up lines of communication with Castro, and to top it all off LBJ was literally within days of seeing his political career ended with a scandal story that was about to break in the next issue of Life magazine. But as things turned out that issue of Life was instead devoted to fingering Oswald as JFK’s assassin. But Chomsky says ‘move along nothing to see here’ -sometimes I wonder for whom people like Chomsky are really ‘exposing all the evils’ on behalf of – is it just another form of bragging rights?

  25. Ragnar: Agreed. You see they emphasize the point that the majority of these severe violations started with 9/11. 9/11 is the starting point for almost all of them: PATRIOT ACT, NDAA, Black Sites, Torture, Iraq-Afghanistan-Pakistan-Yemen … Yet, they just hop over the most important macro cause & starting point, and focus on all the symptoms & side effects. This is like your tooth being infected with potent bacteria, and you taking aspirin rather than tackling the infecting agent(s)/bacteria. This is one of the most important points I try to emphasize: tackle the causes(s), rather than chasing one symptom after another, and seeking band aid & aspirin.

    • Also: Being so wary of being labeled/etc is a sign of being a coward. I have no respect for cowards. Regardless of how eloquent, articulate, high-IQ, intellectual, educated the subject(s). I have been attacked nonstop for being a 9/11 truther. I am still standing, and I will not consider ‘adjusting’ my tone or stand because ‘they’ are cowards and self-obsessed.

  26. This article is awesome, possibly the best so far in your Snowden-Greenwald-Omidyar coverage. I was genuinely laughing out loud at ‘NSA is spying on Pink Panther applications’…

    • BennyB-DoubleD says:

      Yeah, this was a pretty awesome article (caption included). It’s not clear to me that Snowden’s trying to take credit for anything, but I can’t say the same thing for the ‘Pandejo Club’. It’s getting tiring hearing about Snowden’s “Revelations”, but I lay the blame squarely at their feet for now. No doubt, they’re going to continue milking an emaciated cow for “leaks” when it’s perfectly clear that nothing which runs on electricity is sacred and assurances otherwise are complete bullsh!t.

      PS – The toilet pictured above must be the Clapper & Alexander model: It requires 1.7 million gallons of water per day to operate, but it boasts it’s powerful enough to flush out any terrorist plots or cells even when it’s full of sh!t.

      Sorry, that’s two references to sh!t, now three in one comment. Blame it on Sibel 😉

  27. I’m not sure of the exact timeline, but wasn’t the Patriot Act already written, just sitting in a drawer waiting for the opportunity to ram it down our throats? When 9/11 happened I was not awake to false flag events like Germany’s Reichstag Fire that allowed Hitler to pass “The Enabling Act”. But I did think it very odd that within a day of the “attacks” media people were on the street using questions like “Wouldn’t you rather give up some freedoms to prevent another attack like this one?” Leading questions I felt, and it was almost every “channel” that did this. Sure enough it wasn’t long before the “Patriot Act” was announced.

  28. And the point I intended to make above, but hit the “Submit” button too soon, was that the oppressive legislation that’s been passed since 2001 had been planned out meticulously likely a decade or more prior to the “event”. Even Werner Von Braun, the Ex-NAZI recruited by Project Paperclip who helped found NASA and developed many of the early rockets like the Saturn V. Apparently had a change of heart shortly before he died. He warned of a series of “threats” that would be used by the government to justify massive military spending. Beginning with
    Communism and including middle eastern “terrorists”. He saw these threats as charades used to scare the people into going along with their plans. And it’s worked well so far.

  29. I place great value on Sibel’s courage, experience, insights and disclosures. They have provided a primary source for my own education and understanding of the world, including about our government, its history, and its policies, and it is something I don’t hesitate to communicate to others, especially those who have not thought critically about these issues.. At the same time, I also value what Snowden has done and hope the disclosures keep coming.

    I think the next step- and for this I would value Sibel’s advice- is to examine how our surveillance and other policies should be changed to ensure our security, while also protecting our privacy and personal rights, and accommodating the rights, culture and dignity of other peoples- e.g., in a cooperative and harmonious relationship that would benefit us all, rather than in a relationship that dominates our neighbors and plunders their resources.

  30. BennyB-DoubleD says:

    edg: I appreciate where you’re coming from regarding the value of Sibel’s insights in making some sense of this whole episode. Regarding continued disclosures from the Snowden documents; I’m not even sure how to refer them at this point since they’ve long been transformed to a into a filtered commodity. I’d even argue that these disclosures have become a diversion, bordering even on propaganda at this point. This article cleverly presents the idea that the sensationalized “revelations” shouldn’t come as a shock and it’s pretty safe to say that the NSA’s tactics have exceeded any semblance of discretion or restraint.

    I don’t think “reform” is possible as long as it’s suggestions coming from within the structures of power. This includes “First Look” media, since the government’s the one who gets the ‘first look’ at whatever’s released to the public or held otherwise on the grounds of “national security”. So long as National Security(™) remains a euphemism for documents which embarrass the state or the intelligence agencies, I have no confidence that the agencies responsible for protecting the public have a sufficient commitment to doing so effectively. It took me a long time to truly accept this, but I’m at the point where I genuinely believe this is the case. I think discussing real reform is going to require some serious thought based on at least a partial acceptance of this. I look forward to Sibel’s input here, no doubt.

  31. Bradley Fuller says:

    As soon as I viewed the 2nd round table video over at Corbett’s site I popped over to BFP (took out a yearly subscription) and began reading the associated articles. One of my first thoughts after was what exactly had been revealed that the imagination couldn’t think of and what exactly was revealed that was not already thought to be already happening? This article sums this feeling up precisely. This is why I don’t do facebook, seldom tweet, or own a smart phone and try to pay with cash as much as possible. However, Ms. Edmonds has here revealed a NSA spying secret that Snowden and his NSA friendly buddies forgot to warn us about…the monitoring of our poop,… but not the content NSA has counter claimed, so as to remain within constitutionality !

    Question for Ms Edmonds if you read this. What happened to Greenwald’s dismissive and rude email replies that were originally posted within an article? I was questioned as to authenticity on GG’s rudeness in a comment section, but couldn’t provide a link when I found the emails had been removed. Another person’s link to 39:05 of the round table where Edmonds states the “go away bitch” line was taken as paraphrasing by the questioner; who purports to be a staff member of TSA (?) which often (?) links to BFP.. Anyway besides having some egg on my face (again) I was not totally able to defend my assertion, Ms Edmonds or BFP.

  32. Well thankfully the NSA is only measuring the size and frequency of our poop. Clapper testified before congress that they are not inspecting the contents of our poop. So the NSA will have no way of knowing if you ate a second ear of corn, or hit the buffet more then once. 😉

    • Bradley Fuller says:

      Ragnar, Yes, so the NSA and Crapper state…but why has the H.S. ordered 500 billion fecal lab tests? The recent whistle blower Snowjob has said the NSA is storing samples which they can test at any time and are already doing so on poop they suspect of being produced in a subversive manner. Of course the NSA is now blaming Snowjob to alerting subversive poopers who are expected to begin using pit toilets to avoid detection. It all seems a crock of shit to me….

  33. Ribbit-Mark says:

    It won’t be the entire Snowden cache, but all the newly revealed documents in Greenwald’s upcoming book (release date May 13) will be available free online at the book publishing website.

    • Ribbit-Mark says:

      Well this is a bit of a disappointment. I just visited the publisher’s website. I assumed the documents would be available as soon as the book was released. I guess Greenwald can always say “It’s in my publisher’s hands not mine”.

      • Ribbit-Mark says:

        The docs are out now. They can be downloaded here:

        • I only saw a pdf with the inexpensive of docs in the book. Did I miss it?

        • Ribbit-Mark says:

          There was much prognosticating, pontificating, etc. about just how many documents are in the cache that Snowden gave to Greenwald and why they should all be released immediately.

          Well finally, courtesy of two NBC News interviews with Greenwald, we know roughly how many documents there are.

          “Since you know how much he has, you’ve seen it basically or you’re aware of it; if this is the gas tank on your car Glenn, is it still full is it half empty is it near empty?”
          “I would say it’s about half…”


          “Greenwald says he still has thousands of documents”

          We can now put that into context of what to expect in terms of future releases.

          As of May 12, 2014 Greenwald says he has released about half the documents he is going to release.

          We know the documents he’s released to date, so it’s just a matter of counting them up and figuring out what’s in store, numbers-wise.

          It looks like the tally will be much closer to the 58,000 first reported than to the 1.7 million claimed at a later date.

          As far as whether these are all the documents he was given or simply those he was instructed to release, we’ll just have to wait and see.

          But we can all breathe a collective sigh that we won’t have to wait 40+ years before they are published. 🙂

          • Ribbit-Mark says:

            RagnarT wanted access to the actual documents..
            Xicha said we have a right to the docs: ” We have the right to see the evidence of these serious and ONGOING crimes against us.”

            I know his name is somewhat of a dirty word around here, but I thought that many would be interested in hearing about the following.
            Glenn Greenwald just gave a talk in Ottawa that was broadcast on, minutes ago.

            During his talk he mentioned that soon (in the coming weeks/months) he will be releasing his entire cache of Snowden documents to a venue in New York.
            At this special venue, journalists from around the world (who were pre-vetted) would have access to any of the documents to read at the location.
            The documents could not be copied or stored electronically etc.
            They could only be read on site.

            He gave a figure once again of “tens of thousands” when describing the number of documents in the cache.

            So that long-awaited time when they would be released will be coming sooner than many here expected (it won’t be 40 years), albeit in a fashion not directly accessible to most individuals.

          • @Ribbit-Mark,

            Sounds like the time Bush and Cheney testified to the 9/11 Commission.

            Also, was there any more clarity about whether or not this entire record set consisted of those planned for eventual release, or, in fact, the entire record set?

            How long are the document visiting hours? Will they have a searchable database or ten thousand printed docs in boxes?

            Forgive me if’ I say this looks like a scripted maneuver to drum up intrigue and will not bear any fruit beyond call logs and metadata for the vast majority of Americans.

            That said, many thanks for the heads up!

  34. Yabba-dabba-doo!

  35. Ribbit-Mark says:

    Love him or hate him, one can’t deny that Greenwald has kept and continues to keep the NSA’s illegal surveillance practices in headline news stories.

    This time he’s gotten Cisco Systems Inc.’s CEO to sit up, take notice and complain directly to President Obama about NSA’s practice of intercepting its equipment and tampering with it.

    • Robbie Martin says:

      I’ve just been assuming the whole time that there is ‘nothing new’ in the documents, so by that logic clearly this Cisco router thing was not new either, everybody already knew about it

      • It’s a point. But honestly, in comparison to not having any confidence that they will show the evidence for collecting the audio of all American phone calls(or having some confidence that they will Omit that evidence), does it really satisfy? Does it take away that feeling of being stabbed in the back?

      • Why isn’t it okay for us to demand that they stop trickling on us and show us the evidence of the serious ongoing crimes against us?

      • It’s not necessary to watch a porno movie in its entirety to recognize the content isn’t appropriate for children. It’s probably not necessary to view the content of the Snowden cache in its entirety to come to the conclusion that in any scenario imaginable where the NSA could be violating our privacy we’re probably getting screwed.

        • To stay with that analogy and discuss just what kind of porno we’ve been cast in: seeing proof of collection of all phone call audio in the USA might help a few in the audience, who actually were getting a kick out of watching GG fluffing ES, realize that they too are getting screwed, filmed, and exploited. While “the Cisco router thing” is merely another sex toy they don’t understand, to the majority of Americans.

          • hehe… an impressive embellishment on my analogy Xicha that was.. humph… If into the security recordings you go, only pain will you find. Indeed… understand these toys the majority of Americans do not.

  36. Ribbit-Mark says:

    Every time I see a headline in the news about internet/phone call security (or lack thereof) and there have been plenty in the past few weeks alone (China, Russia, EU etc.), I think to myself:
    “Gee, all of this commotion about security issues have been brought about by a fake whistleblower, just think what changes would be taking place now if he was actually a real one!” 🙂

  37. Ribbit-Mark says:

    Strange things continue to happen on this site. Yours was the only post in this thread I could not reply to directly Xicha!

    Sounds like the time Bush and Cheney testified to the 9/11 Commission.
    Hey don’t shoot the messenger! 🙂

    Also, was there any more clarity about whether or not this entire record set consisted of those planned for eventual release, or, in fact, the entire record set?

    This will be the entire cache, everything that was given to Greenwald.

    How long are the document visiting hours? Will they have a searchable database or ten thousand printed docs in boxes?

    No specifics were given unfortunately as per your questions above.

    Forgive me if’ I say this looks like a scripted maneuver to drum up intrigue and will not bear any fruit beyond call logs and metadata for the vast majority of Americans.

    If the rest of the docs had just “call logs and metadata” that’s what will be released. I take his word that he will be releasing ALL the docs.

    That said, many thanks for the heads up!

    You’re welcome! 🙂

    • I couldn’t reply to your comments, when I commented last time either. This is normal, as there is a limit on how much indentation the comments can have and the water this was implemented makes us reply to the first comment above the one we want to reply to that has a reply link.

      I wasn’t trying to shoot you as the messenger. I’m sorry if it came across that way. I was comparing the viewing rules to the bush Cheney testimony rules.

      Thanks again for the info.

Speak Your Mind