Comrade Glenn "Putin is A-OK" Greenwald is having a meltdown after he caused some technologically illiterate woman with a ridiculous name (who somehow got a job with the NSA) to be sent to prison.
47 2017-06-14 by HivemindBuster
Effort post warning:
You've probably heard about 'Reality Winner', who leaked NSA intel to the intercept, a Russian PR firm owned by the titular sanctimonious nu metal singer. According to various media sources, she did this after tiring of Glenn's constant Russia/Trump apologism, deciding to B him TFO with top secret documents detailing Russia's election interference. Unfortunately she was apparently so incompetent she took next to no measures to hide her tracks, sending a scan of a document that was clearly printed - and the NSA obviously keeps logs whenever anyone prints their documents - to a group that she had contacted previously using her personal email address.
More alarmingly, apparently The Intercept - a supposedly high quality and sophisticated outlet for geopolitics - had no actual idea how to protect sources, and simply posted the scanned printout with few details redacted online, being too lazy to copy the information into a new document of ambiguous origins. Further, failed to remove a near invisible digital watermark on the document, that is apparently common knowledge to anyone with a basic understanding of the intelligence industry, which allowed the feds to trace it to Winner more easily.
Because of this, everyone has decided to use this to shit all over Greenwald on twitter and elsewhere - especially the various even shittier journalists that he's managed inflict massive amounts of butthurt to in the past. After staying silent for a few days, Greenwald has finally reached breaking point, and has been melting down all over twitter.
He released this hilariously Trump-esque statement, deciding that it's a great idea to bring up petty twitter feuds in an official statement defending the integrity of the firm. He then proceeds to call anyone an idiot to think he might have any control over the company he founded or the content it produces:
Hey don't look at me, we didn't edit it!, says the "co-founding editor".
But what about the Iraq war????
"We're not the chief editors, you idiot. That's the point."
"What's "specious" is the revoltingly stupid and demonstrably false accusation you spouted"
Still continuing to throw the "editor-in-chief" under the bus to protect his own integrity.
64 comments
n/a SnapshillBot 2017-06-14
Buzzword is, itself, a buzzword now.
Snapshots:
This Post - archive.org, megalodon.jp*, snew.github.io, archive.is
nu metal singer - archive.org, megalodon.jp*, archive.is
statement - archive.org, megalodon.jp*, archive.is
Hey don't look at me, we didn't edi... - archive.org, megalodon.jp*, archive.is
"how dare you imply glenn has any c... - archive.org, megalodon.jp*, archive.is
But what about the Iraq war???? - archive.org, megalodon.jp*, archive.is
"No, imbecile. I'm the Founding Edi... - archive.org, megalodon.jp*, archive.is
"We're not the chief editors, you i... - archive.org, megalodon.jp*, archive.is
"What's "specious" is the revolting... - archive.org, megalodon.jp*, archive.is
Still continuing to throw the "edit... - archive.org, megalodon.jp*, archive.is
His twitter right now. - archive.org, megalodon.jp*, archive.is
I am a bot. (Info / Contact)
n/a newcomer_ts 2017-06-14
By the way, doesn't look for Glenn.
n/a HeroSix 2017-06-14
Found the problem.
n/a ur_mom_IoI 2017-06-14
gotta build em up to knock em down
n/a The_Reason_Trump_Won 2017-06-14
n/a Ultimatex 2017-06-14
E F F O R T P O S T F F O R T P O S T
n/a Ennui2778 2017-06-14
K Y S
Y
S
n/a Imgur_Lurker 2017-06-14
Putting people into cages because you are too dumb to know not to ask the IC if your leak is legit seems up there.
Also Weed dude lmao
n/a HAHApointsatyou 2017-06-14
dude weed lmao*
get ur gawdam memes right normie jfc kys
n/a Imgur_Lurker 2017-06-14
You don't even smoke the devil's lettuce the expression is Weed, Dude Lmao I don't care what you people who talk about how much pot they smoke online say.
n/a HAHApointsatyou 2017-06-14
i literally smoke so much dude weed lmao tho
too high to protest tho
lol ur an effort normie
n/a Imgur_Lurker 2017-06-14
Yes the person who hasn't memorized shit-quality memes like you is the "effort one"
Maybe "reply with I was only pretending to be retarded" I've got some nice Imgur ones for you to upgrade from that Ditch Weed meming
http://i.imgur.com/tLNvJha.jpg
n/a HAHApointsatyou 2017-06-14
DUDE WEED LMAO
n/a Imgur_Lurker 2017-06-14
I know what the meme is, i'm just not going to admit I typed it wrong and imply you are the retarded one instead of admitting I made a mistake.
Or i'll say I was only pretending to be retarded and baited you or something.
"Now who's putting in effort"
n/a HAHApointsatyou 2017-06-14
u
n/a Imgur_Lurker 2017-06-14
link me to know your memes again, that's such a topical site, is it one of your favorites after I can haz cheezburger and ebaumsworld
n/a HAHApointsatyou 2017-06-14
KNOW
YOUR
 
MEME
n/a Imgur_Lurker 2017-06-14
k?
n/a HAHApointsatyou 2017-06-14
k
n/a leetdood_shadowban2 2017-06-14
K
n/a AHackFraud 2017-06-14
Asking IC for confirmation of leaks is unironically extremely commonplace. It makes sure that nothing fake and more importantly nothing which may jeopardise national security is inadvertently printed for the public
n/a Imgur_Lurker 2017-06-14
if you have a leaker you don't ask people whos job is to hunt down leakers if they are aware they have a leaker
I shouldn't have to explain why this is commonsense when it lead to her being arrested should I? Like the evidence proving my point is right here?
Like he didn't check with a source he had or a trusted guy or anything he asked the company he thought it came from.
n/a AHackFraud 2017-06-14
During the Snowden days the NSA was asked by multiple publications including the NYT, Washington Post, and yes the Intercept to confirm documents to ensure authenticity. This action is commonplace when it comes to national security leaks. This was even before Snowden revealed himself.
Like I said in general it is commonplace for publications to ensure authenticity with national security agencies such as the NSA. In terms of this case, there are other mitigating circumstances such as how the leaker sent the document from a computer at her place of work with disregard for normal leaking practices.
n/a Imgur_Lurker 2017-06-14
tldr
> Comparing Snowden to Reality Winner
> Yes the intercept sent copies of what she sent them to Firms who passed it onto NSA but it's not their fault
> Because Reality Winner is dumb it means the Intercept is less dumb
lol
n/a poopy_ass 2017-06-14
Only if you have a really bad imagination. Then again, this guy makes a living defending brutal dictators who drop chemical weapons on civilians, so maybe his sense of morality is just too advanced for us plebs.
n/a Prince_Kropotkin 2017-06-14
Are you saying Glenn Greenwald is an Assad defender?
n/a poopy_ass 2017-06-14
Yes
n/a autistitron 2017-06-14
Not as evil as shipping them to Hillary's slave mansion.
n/a none_to_remain 2017-06-14
yo it is probably Sam Biddle's fault
n/a MargarineIsEvil 2017-06-14
Who the fuck thought it would be a good idea to hire that retard?!?
n/a Eternal_Mr_Bones 2017-06-14
I think it's hilarious that GG ruined the reputation of a decent outlet by posting classified information that anyone with a brain realized was already happening.
n/a liqdom 2017-06-14
REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
This is #FakeNews. They didn't use the dots to find her and removing them would have made no difference (though of course they should have). Read the affidavit you commie:
n/a glmox 2017-06-14
what the fuck kind of nerd actually looks at sources lol
n/a nomad1c 2017-06-14
seriously. check out this poindexter over here
n/a grafton29 2017-06-14
Is Greenwald really a Russia apologists? Because if so L O fucking L and Hypocrisy with a capital H. Please someone tell me if its true.
n/a Prince_Kropotkin 2017-06-14
He is if you're Louise Mensch and calling people russia apologists is literally how you make your income
n/a HivemindBuster 2017-06-14
Maybe, but he's also the kind of guy where, as soon as even the mildest criticism of Russia/Putin is brought up, will immediately change the subject and jump straight into whatabouitsm about USA/UK.
He also habitually defends RT, even as its own journalists are quitting over it being 'pro Putin propaganda', and it's just really really hard to get him to condemn or criticize any action of Putin's. Oh, and let's not forget his association with Oliver Stone, a literal Putin sycophant.
Honestly I don't know at this point how you distinguish between Greenwald an actual out and out Russia apologist, literally all the most obnoxious and stereotypical actions a literal Russian apologist might make can so easily be attributed to Greenwald. Of course unlike that insane lunatic witch Mensch, I don't think he's some kind of actual shill/agent of Russia - he's just a edgy contrarian who almost certainly has mild autism as no functioning adult can be as consistently obtuse as him for so many years.
n/a Prince_Kropotkin 2017-06-14
No he doesn't. In general his stance is that ranting about the evils of countries he can't do anything about is pointless when he can improve his own country. That's very reasonable. I'm pretty bored with all these moral crusaders who write column after column about how evil Kim Jong Un or whoever is but then sign on to war crimes from their own country because patriotism. fuck that
Less defending of RT, more point out the gross hypocrisy. See above. RT isn't literally satanic though, which you'd think if you listen to Congress etc.
Greenwald doesn't jump on political bandwagons because there is a new Russia Scare, he stays consistent, and that infuriates people to no end. I like that because I operate in a similar way and it also pisses off huge numbers of people. Tough shit, it's funny to see mindless rage when simple assertions of political tribalism are insufficient to change minds.
n/a HivemindBuster 2017-06-14
Criticizing Russia is not a "political bandwagon" - and Greenwald is literally the exact opposite of nuanced, he makes the most asinine false equivalences between Russian and Western institutions, when any nuanced analysis would recognize their significant differences. Nobody is saying you have to spend all your time raging against Russia - it's that he spends such an absurd amount of time raging against anyone critical of Russia.
n/a Prince_Kropotkin 2017-06-14
lol have you turned on the news now? Putin is literally behind everything bad that happens in the west according to huge numbers of people.
It's just easy points scoring. No matter what you say about Putin you won't change a damn thing. Journalism isn't about easy points scoring in the service of national rivalries, it's about bringing transparency to your own society and making it better.
But he doesn't. I hear way, way more crying about it from people who don't like him than from his own writing.
n/a HivemindBuster 2017-06-14
Why not? By many reports, internal media critical of Putin is between somewhat to significantly suppressed in Russia - so more than likely a lot of the biggest criticisms of Putin that regular Russians will be exposed to will come from western sources (and yes a fair amount of Russians do understand English). Why can't you bring transparency to other countries?
But do you follow his twitter?
Also it's still not clear to me how you're distinguishing Greenwald from an actual Russian apologist, it seems what you're saying is that Russia is criticized too much and Greenwald is right to defend them... even if that's true I don't see how that makes him not an apologist.
n/a Prince_Kropotkin 2017-06-14
Is this a joke? How many regular Russians do you think are reading the New York Times? There's a very small, relatively liberal opposition that has no effectiveness whatsoever, I guess, but this is like a second order effect at best we're talking about.
I don't think Greenwald spends much time at all "defending Russia". You still haven't linked anything. If he's "autistic" and obsessed then you should be able to list more than something Cathy Young said a few years ago.
n/a HivemindBuster 2017-06-14
It's not just the New York Times though is it. Most (all?) of the western media is critical of Putin, even Putin doesn't censor incoming broadcasts to his country completely. I've been to Russia, they have the BBC on television. Do you really think it has no effect? How many regular Americans do you think read the Intercept by the way?
And the two examples I provided were deliberately chosen, and what made them so egregious, and made me pick them is that they were regarding Russia's invasion of Ukraine, something universally condemned and uncontroversial to be critical of, unless you're Greenwald apparently. If you want more examples, just follow his twitter.
n/a Prince_Kropotkin 2017-06-14
Give me some examples instead of hand waving. Like I said a few times, if he's that obsessed it should be dead simple.
n/a HivemindBuster 2017-06-14
You're the one that handwaved away the two examples I gave originally.
n/a Prince_Kropotkin 2017-06-14
Nobody is "obsessed" if you can find two examples of something in years of almost daily writing.
n/a HivemindBuster 2017-06-14
The only person who has used the word "obsessed" so far is you.
n/a Prince_Kropotkin 2017-06-14
OK, given all the other words you use, it seems to me like you're pulling it out of your ass. This is like the 5th time I've asked for evidence and you can't come up with it. I think we're done here.
n/a HivemindBuster 2017-06-14
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/12/glenn-greenwald-tucker-carlson-unite-to-dismiss-russian-hacking-allegations.html
n/a Prince_Kropotkin 2017-06-14
Entirely unobjectionable. "Please provide public evidence of very serious claims". Remember, Crowdstrike recently had a big fuck up on some related reporting that named Russia as a culprit, they aren't the most credible and the 19 intelligence agencies are just taking CrowdStrike's word for it. So it's good to have evidence before starting major diplomatic incidents.
What do you have a problem with, or that counts as going out of one's way to defend Russia?
n/a HivemindBuster 2017-06-14
It's not unobjectionable. He's circlejerking on fox news with the utterly vile Tucker Carlson, saying we should be "extremely sceptical", without justification - it's not clear why we should lean on such an unbelievably gigantic totality of evidence all being falsified, and disregarding Occam's razor entirely (by far the simplest explanation, given everything uncovered so far, given everything we already know about Russian's history, is that Russia did have at least some interference). It's the old /r/conspiracy double standard, suddenly when it comes to Russia we need an extreme threshold of scepticism when evaluating any claims - but meanwhile it's perfectly fine to make the outrageous hyperbolic unsubstantiated claims against the USA, such as the claim that the entire NSA/European internet spying apparatus uncovered by Snowden was really for "corporate espionage" rather than for anything involving national security, a claim he has made.
Even if Russia really is totally innocent and didn't do anything wrong, and that's possible - he's still dismissing claims against Russia - that is actively defending Russia and bashing its critics, that's an example.
Source on this.
n/a Prince_Kropotkin 2017-06-14
Asking for evidence is not dismissing claims. It's just basic skepticism. It doesn't make you an "apologist" or traitor or whatever else, not getting caught up in hysteria doesn't mean you're in bed with the enemy.
https://medium.com/theyoungturks/crowdstrike-the-dncs-security-firm-was-under-contract-with-the-fbi-c6f884c34189
n/a HivemindBuster 2017-06-14
I told you, it's not about the "asking for evidence" - it's the claim that we should be "extremely skeptical", given the massive totality of findings so far - as if it's much more likely Russia is innocent than guilty, even though that goes against Occam's razor, and even when he doesn't apply this standard to many of his other claims in the past. And I didn't say he was "in bed with the enemy" or a traitor, I said he was a contrarian, who reflexively takes the contrary position against the western establishment, that doesn't mean you're a traitor.
First of all, the allegations against Russian interference goes far beyond the DNC hack - in fact the NSA leak that is the subject of this thread has little to do with that at all.
Secondly, CrowdStrike aren't the only firm to have analysed the data and come to the same conclusion, per wiki:
"In June and July 2016, cybersecurity experts and firms, including CrowdStrike,[94] Fidelis, Mandiant, SecureWorks[95] and ThreatConnect, stated the DNC email leaks were part of a series of cyberattacks on the DNC committed by two Russian intelligence groups, called Fancy Bear and Cozy Bear,[6][96] also known respectively as APT28 and APT29.[94][97] ...In December 2016, Ars Technica IT editor Sean Gallagher reviewed the publicly available evidence, and wrote that attribution of the DNC hacks to Russian intelligence was based on clues from attack methods and similarity to other cases, as the hacking was tracked in real time since May 2016 by CrowdStrike's monitoring tools.[101]"
I also don't see a reason, on the whole, to dismiss Crowdstrike, even if they had that one unspecified 'fuckup', they make a lot of the data public for many other experts to assess, who all seem to come to the same conclusion.
n/a Prince_Kropotkin 2017-06-14
https://www.voanews.com/a/cyber-firm-rewrites-part-disputed-russian-hacking-report/3781411.html
speaking of CrowdStrike and FancyBear... someone fucked up with some major details
Who else had direct access to the DNC server? If other groups are just taking their data, it's not really helpful.
No solid evidence about the NSA leak either. Just hypotheses. Digital attacks are very, very hard to attribute to as a general rule. Hence being skeptical.
Wouldn't Occam's Razor say that John podesta having "passw0rd" as his password means that you dont need to be a crack Russian hacker team to get in their email?
n/a HivemindBuster 2017-06-14
I've no idea if the other groups had direct access or were given the data by Crowdstrike. Even if they did, I see no reason to assume or find likely that the data was falsified by Crowdstrike. The thing from voanews just seems to be a benign numerical mistake about Ukrainian artillery losses (i.e. about military events that resulted rather than specific details regarding the hacking), that they corrected, I'm unconvinced they're a malicious organization.
n/a EvanHarper 2017-06-14
im sorry to tamp down on the drama especially because i hate glenn but The Intercept's actions had basically no effect on Reality Winner's getting caught unless maybe they had buried the leak entirely and not acted on it. their failures were awful but at most just sped up the exposure by a few hours. the indictment seems to have been worded to deliberately play up The Intercept's security failures but the truth is ms. Winner was just as inept
n/a MegaSeedsInYourBum 2017-06-14
Someone with the name Reality Winner is inept? No, I refuse to believe that's possible.
n/a glmox 2017-06-14
reality winner? more like reality won-her xD
n/a Cloacalla_Festival 2017-06-14
Liberals are people who never got over being told "Life isn't fair" when they were children.
n/a grungebot5000 2017-06-14
i don't know who here is supposed to be the liberals
n/a Cloacalla_Festival 2017-06-14
Hillary voters et al.
n/a EddingtonDidNothingW 2017-06-14
how the fuck does someone like that even gets hired at NASA
i would toss out the application as soon as i saw that name
unless she was maybe some kind of a certified IQ 200+ genius, which she clearly isn't lmao
n/a poopy_ass 2017-06-14
She doesn't work for NSA
n/a EddingtonDidNothingW 2017-06-14
so what was she some kind of a private contractor or did she sneak in or what
sorry i dont read articles im too busy commenting on them
n/a Teresa_May 2017-06-14
Yep, contractor, just like Snowden. Think she did translation work.
n/a razzmataz 2017-06-14
Multiple levels of contract labor agencies.
n/a MargarineIsEvil 2017-06-14
I'm more surprised that anyone would think hiring Sam Biddle is a good idea.