Over at (t)reason.com, the mental midgets who write for that pile o' turds continue to assure the pile's readers that things are peachy-keen.
Federal Agencies Fight for Warrantless Access to Emails
I don't know how/why a person named Veronique deRugy is assigned the task of writing reveal 85% of the truth but conceal the disturbing 15% that we shouldn't tell anyone, and I don't know why her pen name is some kind of The Archies reference,** but I do know Ms de-Reggie'd-long-before-Betty-did can't bring herself to speak honestly on the topic.
Actually, I do know why.
It's because (t)reason.com has made heroes of Glenn Greenwald and Edward Snowden, and (t)reason.com can't be bothered to recall exactly what it was that Mark Klein revealed in 2006.
Presumably that's because homo-/metro- sexuality is one of the bullet/focal points of the (t)reason.com perspective, and Mark Klein's 06 revelations didn't involve a gay lawyer or a metro B-movie actor. What they did involve was the disclosure that telecom companies were openly eavesdropping on all signals they handled -- without a warrant, and without notifying any warrant-issuing entity that they deserved a pass on warrant-before-eavesdropping due to some legitimate exigency or at least a cobbled-together salad of words pretending to argue in favor of such a "national security" emergency attending the eavesdropping activity.
This, good cretinous reader of this tumbleweed-infested Home of Homophobic Misogynistic Reactionary Mirth, is precisely why Greenwald was made into a hero and his Tom Cruise-wannabe disinfo vector Snowden was primped and pimped as a "whistleblower".
"What's that, Ochstradt? What's the reason?"
Glad you asked. It's because the lie offered by Greenwald/Snowden would be unmade and rendered impotent if the originator of the truth (Klein's 06 saga) had been upheld as the True Revelator and the disclosures therein given broader exposure. Because you know, stupid knuckledragging Progressive pals-o-mine, that there was near-to-nil coverage in 06 or any time thereafter of Mark Klein's revelations.
You know that YOU didn't read or hear about it, not back then and not since then either, and you definitely know that you don't believe me when I talk about this stuff, because Karl Franz Ochstradt is not a BRAND NAME EXPERT on any subject while Glenn Greenwald and Edward Snowden are, in your fantasy-masquerading-as-reality, the real EXPERTS on cyberspookery. They ARE your experts because you heard about them time and time again from sources you trust, and you trust those sources because they have spent lots of time writing and/or speaking in tongues familiar to your 4-Square Pentecostal belief in Progress.
All an infotainer has to do, in order to gull your incredibly cretinous self, is speak in Progressive tongues. Use Progressive buzzwords. Use Progressive button-pushing triggering phrases. And demonize the right monsters.
Do that, and watch the Progressives fall in line as zombie walkers in a somnambulent queue.
"But Ochstradt, you started out talking about the people at reason.com, and here you've been pot-shotting at Progressives. Did you get confused? Lose focus? Or simply have a synaptic misfire typical of someone who has the same mental illnesses you have?"
Ah. Yes. There it is. The allegation battery, the accusation barrage, done by passive-aggression, emulating Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz.
Let me tell you, good Progressive, that there isn't a wooden nickel's difference between Progressives and "libertarians" (followers of and participants at reason.com) where skull-crushing naivete and soul-stealing groupthink are concerned. Both tribes think themselves smart-as-fuck, both groups "prove" this by mocking the other with derisive words and scornful tones, and yet both gangs work from a fantasy playbook that doesn't really have much to say for itself in the way of reality-based foundations.
Both groups think Greenwald is a constitutional law expert and cybersecurity genius, and both groups think Snowden is a real whistleblower who left BA&H employ with a whole mess o' damaging data that eventually -- maybe some time in the latter part of the 21st Century, if we're lucky -- will be revealed.
Neither group, as a group, puts any value in the opposite position. Neither would believe that Greenwald actually knows little-to-nothing about Constitutional Law, and neither can imagine that Greenwald lies when he says he knows cybersecurity, and neither would ever entertain the concept of Snowden being an actor playing a role on the Bread&Circus circuit in service of distractive disinformation ends.
As far as both gangs are concerned, the Snowden/Greenwald Team is bringing cold hard truths home to liberty-concerned Americans, no matter whether Progressive or Libertarian, whether Republican or Democrat, whether technophilic futurist or luddite reactionary.
Perhaps Veronica will dump Reggie and Archie alike and end up married to Jughead.
Yes, and maybe Progressives and "libertarians" will dump the bullshit Greenwald/Snowden story in favor of what Mark Klein tried to inform people about in 2006.
If that happens, then Ms deRugy's linked essay will be nullified as missing the main point while trying to argue about a peripheral minor pseudo-point.
--Karl Franz Ochstradt, sworn enemy of tribalist reality-deniers and ignorant smugitarians.
** Is that Modern Hipster hilarity? An "ironic" reference to a late 1960s - early 1970s cartoon and/or novelty band?