BigBrother Stops Groklaw


“My personal decision is to get off of the Internet to the degree it’s possible. I’m just an ordinary person. But I really know, after all my research and some serious thinking things through, that I can’t stay online personally without losing my humanness, now that I know that ensuring privacy online is impossible. I find myself unable to write. I’ve always been a private person. That’s why I never wanted to be a celebrity and why I fought hard to maintain both my privacy and yours.

Oddly, if everyone did that, leap off the Internet, the world’s economy would collapse, I suppose. I can’t really hope for that. But for me, the Internet is over.

So this is the last Groklaw article. I won’t turn on comments. Thank you for all you’ve done. I will never forget you and our work together. I hope you’ll remember me too. I’m sorry I can’t overcome these feelings, but I yam what I yam, and I tried, but I can’t.”

see Groklaw – Forced Exposure ~pj.

What the trolls, and M$ and lots of other bad boys couldn’t do has been accomplished by the US government through its high-handed trampling of the basic human right to privacy. Governments should be serving people, not enslaving them. She responded to the shutdown of Lavabit and the whole Snowden affair the best way she could, by reducing exposure on the Internet. Is this what the USA wants? To shut down the Internet which has been a brilliant contribution to technology? Or was this the scheme from the beginning, to connect everyone so they could be manipulated more efficiently?


About Robert Pogson

I am a retired teacher in Canada. I taught in the subject areas where I have worked for almost forty years: maths, physics, chemistry and computers. I love hunting, fishing, picking berries and mushrooms, too.
This entry was posted in technology and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

25 Responses to BigBrother Stops Groklaw

  1. dougman says:

    Broken Windows thinks our government DOES NOT lie, he also thinks that abusive governments are ok.

    http://rt.com/politics/chemical-pushkov-false-weapons-686/

    Further examples of USA lies:

    – “I did not have sexual relations with that woman.”
    – Gulf of Tonkin incident.
    – Sinking of the U.S. battleship Maine.
    – The psychological warfare of the Buchenwald human skin lampshades and shrunken head lies.
    – The Lavon Affair.
    – The attack on the USS Liberty.
    – The Iran Contra Affair.
    – The Kuwaiti Incubator Baby Hoax.
    Etc….. I’m sure there many many more.

    Melissa Manning allowed the release of the Apache helicopter attack on the RT news reporters.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/21/bradley-manning-leaks_n_3788126.html

  2. bw says:

    but once he’s in USA, all bets are off

    You are far too jaded for your own good! The US is not going to lie to the Russians in public like that.

    I think they did much the same thing with Manning, but it didn’t stick. He got 35 years which is a fate worse than death, probably, given the suicide rate in those places.

  3. bw wrote, “Oh, that’s just hyperbole on your part! They don’t want to kill him, just prosecute him for violation of the laws that he took an oath to abide by.”

    They charged Snowden under the Espionage Act which carries the death penalty. They told the Russians they would not seek the death penalty, but once he’s in USA, all bets are off. If they didn’t want to kill him, they could have used other charges.

  4. bw says:

    That seems like the taxpayers are not getting a good deal, nor the citizens of the world

    Now those are two very different groups and it would be next to impossible, I think, to even begin to please both simultaneously with the same actions. To the extent that the taxpayers are voters and are likely to recognize that they are being shortchanged by the lack of diligence of the FBI, CIA, NSA, ATF and any others, Congress is going to lean on the administration to bolster these efforts, not slack off even more. It seems to me that is exactly the opposite result to what you are advocating, namely a sharp decrease in these spying activities.

    As to the rest of the citizens of the world, I do not believe that they are such a homogeneous group to all want the same thing. I think that the Euros who have seen their transportation systems bombed and the Asians who have seen markets bombed and subways gassed also applaud efforts that result in some terrorist honcho finding himself in a thousand pieces due to a missile hit on his car from a local neighborhood drone.

    Even the Russians are not likely to lose any sleep over a few Muslims a month based on their own experiences with various terror groups.

  5. bw says:

    they want to kill Snowden

    Oh, that’s just hyperbole on your part! They don’t want to kill him, just prosecute him for violation of the laws that he took an oath to abide by. I can hate him for what he has done to the degree that it threatens my son and his mates in the armed forces with heightened dangers due to adversary knowledge of US information gathering systems, but I don’t want him killed at all.

    The Russians have him now and he is not likely to be living very high on the hog. We have some of their guys locked up, too, and eventually within a year or two another swap meet will be held amongst the spook groups and Snowden will be traded for Boris Somethingkov and he will be repatriated and tried and sent to spend the next 25 to 30 years playing cribbage with Manning at Ft. Leavenworth.

    All’s well that ends well.

  6. bw wrote, ” that is a sort of spontaneous occurrence that did not involve any detailed or long term communications with a terrorist center that would coordinate their actions. Certainly monitoring the metadata surrounding a communications network would not reveal anything about such a situation and could not predict any sort of danger.”, despite the Russians telling the FBI that these guys were terrorists and the NSA watching everyone do everything…

    What it means is that while the T-brothers were finding out how to make bombs on the Internet the USAians did not even bother to use the tools for the revelation of which they want to kill Snowden. The conclusion I reach is that the powers that be did not feel threatened by the T-brothers and let them do whatever they wanted until it made the news. That seems like the taxpayers are not getting a good deal, nor the citizens of the world.

  7. dougman says:

    “Education is what you learn after you leave school, as they are designed to create employees for the big corporations”

    Play it safe. Listen to the experts, we know what’s best for you. What boss wouldn’t want employees to believe that obedience and conformity are the keys to success?

    Instead of going into debt to get a degree, ending up to work at a low-income job, do yourself a favor and become a entrepreneur, stop being a “cog in the machine” and learn to be “disruptive”, find problems and solve them.

    If you’re serious about getting a degree, you can get the same kind of B.A. degree from an accredited university for about $15,000 in three years. Study at home, CLEP through as much as you can taking one test a month.

    Before you spend a dime on college, read this article from Forbes.

    http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2006/0327/039_print.html

    Remember Bill Gates??…see he was smart enough to get into Harvard, then he was even more smart by proving his financial intelligence, by dropping out to start a company. I rest my case…

    Salient to the topic of discussion, “Controlled terror plots and FBI Fake Terror Plot History”

  8. bw says:

    Clearly what they are collecting is neither necessary nor sufficient to stop terrorism

    Rather sloppy logic for a person as erudite as yourself. Could doughman be right in thinking that money invested in university degrees is just wasted and that the school of hard knocks is superior?

    There is nothing clear at all. Rather the most you can infer from the results to date is that whatever data collection is occurring is inadequate for the purpose of thwarting all terrorism. You give the example of the Chechnya brothers bombing in Boston, but that is a sort of spontaneous occurrence that did not involve any detailed or long term communications with a terrorist center that would coordinate their actions. Certainly monitoring the metadata surrounding a communications network would not reveal anything about such a situation and could not predict any sort of danger.

    On the other hand, detailed study of communications methods, albeit manually performed, is what led to the demise of Osama himself once they figured out where the center of the spider web was located. A lot of Al Quada leaders have bitten the dust since that time and it is plausible to suggest that many of them have been found out due to communications pattern analysis.

    It is entirely possible that the best answer is to increase the amount of spying going on. Adequate safeguards are in place, I think, to prevent any sort of Gestapo state being formed. The only people suffering at the hands of the NSA so far are the terrorists who are exposed to fire and brimstone once their lair is discovered.

  9. dougman says:

    All electronic data is captured, aggregated and stored for later POSSIBLE retrieval, none of this data is viewed until necessary later. This is how law s are circumvented. Congress could put a stop to this but they wont.

  10. lpbear wrote, “So…..where does the spying stop?”

    That is the big question. Clearly what they are collecting is neither necessary nor sufficient to stop terrorism. The Boston Marathon bombing showed that. At the same time, we have seen individuals privy to the information scatter it round the world, IRS and other departments attack whomever they think is out of favour, etc. I remember Obama even joked once that if anyone gave him trouble he would have the IRS audit them. That was months before the recent scandal. Also, USA is a psychopathic serial killer and should know as little as possible about everyone lest they be killed.

    This is completely out of control. The world needs to disconnect USA from the Internet until the USA returns to its senses. I should move this site out of their grasp ASAP.

  11. lpbbear says:

    bLOwHARD spews more idiotic drivel……

    ” Only people with something to hide or be ashamed of are at risk from this spying and, if that is what it takes to catch the terrorists, then so be it.”

    What an idiot!

    So…..where does the spying stop?

    If we invent a device that sees through walls and presents a crystal clear image of the people and private activities behind those walls are you going to say?

    “Only people with something to hide or be ashamed of are at risk from this spying”

    Where do idiots like you draw the line?

    Do we plant cameras on every corner?

    Allow Law Enforcement to strip search every citizen at every opportunity?

    Give police the ability to demand to see “zee papers” anytime and anywhere?

    Allow police to arrest citizens for using a camera to film arrests?

    Do you completely destroy civil rights and privacy by rationalizing that….

    “Only people with something to hide or be ashamed of are at risk from this spying and, if that is what it takes to catch the terrorists, then so be it.”

    You and moronic people like you are the reason civil rights were originally meant to be protected in this country.

    You and moronic people like you are why those civil rights are being steadily eroded by government spying organizations like the NSA.

    You are a complete tool and with your shitty attitude its no wonder you are a shill for Microsoft.

  12. oiaohm says:

    bw “Venezuela or Mexico” Lol you wonder why I call you a idiot. Can the USA stop people from Mexico or Venezuela crossing the boarder now. The answer is no. So how could USA stop saboteurs from those countries.

    Gorilla war from Venezuela or Mexico to the USA would be a real nightmare.

    Technically its a lot easy to beat iraq than it is to beat Mexico. Its harder for fighters in iraq to hit the USA factories making arms. Mexico is well trained at sneaking across the boarder is only some extra training to sneak across boarder and blow factories up.

    In one way Mexico vs the USA might be a fair fight that is too fair and runs until both countries are complete ruined.

    The trick to winning a war is ruining the other sides supply lines. No supply no option bar give.

    Europe does not need middle east Oil. All Europe Oil need can be serviced by Russia. This is why they were reluctant to get involved.

    Middle east oil majority services the Americas, Africa and a little to Australia. Due to Africa being such a war torn mess there are no major armies to call on to assist with the Middle east problem.

    Yes all those wars USA arms makers support just happen to be the countries USA needs a allies to protect there non USA oil supplies.

    Really the USA need to get a lot more strict on who they will allow arms to be supplied to. You want our arms you will assist us to defend the resources we need.

    Australia is not assisting USA in iraq or Afghanistan for free. Lots of supply discounts of weapons. Please note Australia is the largest producer of legal opium poppy for medical usage. Afghanistan was our competitor. Afghanistan was the largest producer of legal and illegal opium poppy before the war.

    Yes there is profit in Australia involvement. This is the problem bw you want assistance in war there must be something in it for the parties you want to risk there armies.

  13. bw says:

    Bush wanted the oil.

    There is absolutely no evidence of that anywhere. In the sordid history of the Iraq war there was never any effort made to confiscate or otherwise obtain Iraqi oil for the US or any other ally. Bush’s motives can be brought under suspicion, but not as an oil grabber. We would be more likely to invade Venezuela or Mexico if we wanted to do that. They are likely to be a lot easier to beat, too.

    there is no need for much from the Gulf

    I do not think the self-sufficiency is all that close, but I do agree that we do not need Mid-east oil. Europe does and they should be the ones policing around the region. They mostly sit at home watching us spend a lot of money and disturb military families with long deployments to risky environments.

  14. oiaohm says:

    bw iraq only had chemical and biological weapons because the USA gave them to them with the tech to make more. Yes iran iraq war is why WMD was in iraq at all. Of course a lot of what was thought to be chemical weapons turned out to be drums and drums of die filled water. Because the iraq scientists did not trust there leaders not to use them on their own population. Basically iraq was disarmed of chemical weapons and did the leaders not know it.

    Afghanistan only became a base to terrorism because the USA had not plan to rebuild Afghanistan after the Russians pulled out.

    9/11 if you want to be truthful is the USA own fault. Offered to assist a group against the Russia then let a worst group crush that group. In fact the head of the of the group that did 9/11 was trained by the CIA.

    Has the USA tighten up there arms shipments or training of hostiles after 9/11 not as far as I know. So another place could be turning into another Afghanistan todo another 9/11 attack.

  15. ram says:

    The US is almost out of “energy positive” hydrocarbon resources, both domestically and in countries it occupies.
    Next up, dire food shortages.

    They are trying to isolate their hereditary elite from the consequences of their shortsighted actions, but I don’t think it will work, no matter how much blood they shed.

  16. bw wrote, “If 9/11 had not happened, Iraq would not have happened since there would have been no opportunity to tie Saddam to world terror. He wasn’t a terrorist to begin with, just a dictator.”

    Nope. Bush wanted the oil. WMD was an excuse to invade. Now that USA is nearly self-sufficient in hydrocarbons, there is no need for much from the Gulf.

  17. bw says:

    Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11

    I agree with you, but it is still a direct result of 9/11. It is kind of foggy, but it is plausible that the Bush administration feared that chemical, biological, and even nuclear weapons could be distributed to terrorist organizations. They are all Muslims, eh? Quite a few people went along with the idea. Fools certainly, but one thing (9/11) led to another (Iraq).

    Enough people believed the theory, now proven false, and so the war was on. It was irrational for the terrorists to attack the World Trade Center, too, along with the Pentagon and that corn field in Pennsylvania. “Sow the wind and you will reap the whirlwind!” as the saying goes.

    If 9/11 had not happened, Iraq would not have happened since there would have been no opportunity to tie Saddam to world terror. He wasn’t a terrorist to begin with, just a dictator.

  18. bw wrote, “In my calculus, absent the terrorist attack on the World Trade Center on 9/11, there would have been no invasion of Afghanistan nor any invasion of Iraq”

    Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. That was about oil and WMD… Invasion of Afghanistan made some sense until it lasted years. That made no sense at all and cost ~100K lives for nothing. That’s real terrorism.

  19. bw says:

    The USA costs more lives and money than all the terrorists on the planet

    That is an interesting thesis, although I don’t see what it has to do with my assertion as you quoted it. I think you have to consider causative factors and assign resultant actions to those factors rather than just counting bodies.

    In my calculus, absent the terrorist attack on the World Trade Center on 9/11, there would have been no invasion of Afghanistan nor any invasion of Iraq. So and an all economic damage and loss of life resulting from that initiating and enabling event can be laid at the door of the terrorists. It is the modern day equivalent to the Pearl Harbor attack that started the war in the Pacific.

  20. bw wrote, “What the USA, and I think everyone one else on earth, wants is guaranteed safety and serenity as in “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness”. Even under the constitution, privacy does not extend to things that are criminal in nature or violate the other protections afforded.”

    The USA costs more lives and money than all the terrorists on the planet.

  21. bw says:

    What would 24 hours of silence on the WWW tell Obama?

    It might give the security mavens some ideas, I think. They do not view the internet as something that aids security, rather they view it as a means for the bad guys to collude with one another without revealing their specific locations, at least to within the CEP of a big bang weapon. So shutting down the internet would be a boon to their mission.

    As to the will of the people perhaps wanting the government to cease and desist NSA programs that are collecting and analyzing this data, good luck. Not that many people are really concerned. Many people feel that they have nothing to hide and that their internet activities are not worth scrutiny. Only people with something to hide or be ashamed of are at risk from this spying and, if that is what it takes to catch the terrorists, then so be it.

  22. bw says:

    Is this what the USA wants?

    What the USA, and I think everyone one else on earth, wants is guaranteed safety and serenity as in “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness”. Even under the constitution, privacy does not extend to things that are criminal in nature or violate the other protections afforded.

    The internet is not private. It is a very public arena wherein information can be extracted either directly or via inferential study of the flow of data. If you are up to no good, better not use the internet. You shouldn’t shout things over the back fence without knowing if someone may be standing within hearing distance either. The only difference is the actual distances covered by the internet are much less limited.

    If PJ thinks that government ability to read the information stored on the Groklaw blog is somehow a violation of privacy, she is not thinking very clearly anyway. My bet is that she will resurface soon just as she did when the SCO affair wrapped up.

  23. lpbbear says:

    “Sometimes silence speaks wonders. What would 24 hours of silence on the WWW tell Obama?”

    If you mean the entire Internet going silent for 24 hours that in of itself WOULD be speaking out. If you are talking a few sites no one will even notice and certainly not President Obama.

  24. lpbear wrote, “There is nothing to be accomplished by not speaking out.”

    Sometimes silence speaks wonders. What would 24 hours of silence on the WWW tell Obama?

  25. lpbbear says:

    Even though I completely understand and agree with PJ’s assessment of the current climate on the Internet with regards to the US government and its illegal intrusion into private citizens private lives I don’t agree with her decision to shutter Groklaw.

    There is nothing to be accomplished by not speaking out. Shuttering Groklaw only serves the purposes of those who would want to create a more closed society. Without sites like Groklaw many of the illegal abuses of companies like Microsoft and SCO may have never been stopped. Even at the minimum Groklaw has greatly succeeded in exposing these criminals to the scrutiny of the public eye.

    In the face of increased “spying” by governments on private citizens worldwide the better approach is to NEVER shutup. Always speak truth to power and never be intimidated to go into hiding and shutup. Sites like Groklaw, and this one, are vital to a free society. I know its sometimes a hard road to follow but speaking out and keeping sites like Groklaw alive is far too important. While shutting Groklaw down does make a statement it is one that will be forgotten sooner by shutting down then by remaining open long term in the face of state oppression.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *