NSA

Obama's NSA is Collecting Phone Records of Millions of Americans Everyday

|

The Guardian has secured documents that demonstrate just how vast and unrestrained state surveillance is in Barack Obama's super-transparent, post-War on Terror America:

The National Security Agency is currently collecting the telephone records of millions of US customers of Verizon, one of America's largest telecoms providers, under a top secret court order issued in April.

The order, a copy of which has been obtained by the Guardian, requires Verizon on an "ongoing, daily basis" to give the NSA information on all telephone calls in its systems, both within the US and between the US and other countries.

The document shows for the first time that under the Obama administration the communication records of millions of US citizens are being collected indiscriminately and in bulk – regardless of whether they are suspected of any wrongdoing.

The secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (Fisa) granted the order to the FBI on April 25, giving the government unlimited authority to obtain the data for a specified three-month period ending on July 19.

The content of calls is not collected but everything else is, including both numbers involved, location data, and other unique identifiers.

The information is classed as "metadata", or transactional information, rather than communications, and so does not require individual warrants to access. The document also specifies that such "metadata" is not limited to the aforementioned items. A 2005 court ruling judged that cell site location data – the nearest cell tower a phone was connected to – was also transactional data, and so could potentially fall under the scope of the order.

Read more here.

And read the actual court document here.

Update (Thursday June 6, @8.30 a.m. ET): Glenn Greenwald, who broke this story at The Guardian, appeared on NPR this morning (no link yet) and fleshed out various other points worth thinking about. He noted that the request for the records was based on a section of The Patriot Act which was specifically designed to allow law enforcement an intelligence agencies to target individuals, not do such broad dragnet-style snooping. Additionally, Verizon is legally gagged by the order, meaning they cannot comment in any way on the action. Unanswered questions include whether this records request is a rare occurrence or simply an ongoing action that includes other phone carriers. Given that such requests were common under the Bush administration and the Obama administration's interest in surveillance, there's every reason to believe it is the latter.

Read Greenwald's archive at The Guardian.

Watch Reason TV's Surveillance After the Boston Bombing: Do More Cameras Fight Terrorism or Violate Our Privacy Rights?:

NEXT: NSA Collecting Phone Records of Millions Daily

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. I never really bought into the Obama hates america stuff but damn, his contempt for americans is something to behold.

    1. Just think about what you said there.

      1. Gabriella. you think Jimmy`s blurb is super, last saturday I got Fiat Multipla after having made $4545 this-last/5 weeks and also ten-grand last month. with-out any doubt it’s the best-job Ive had. I began this nine months/ago and pretty much immediately started making a cool at least $81 per hour. I went to this website….. Grand4.com
        (Go to site and open “Home” for details)

    2. The fact that you didn’t bother to capitalize America or Americans shows who truly hates America.

      1. He didn’r spell it “ameriKKKa”

        1. Speaking of spelling,

          Millions of Americans Everyday

          !=

          Millions of Everyday Americans

          !=

          Millions of Americans Every Day

          /nyah-nyah

          1. Could someone exhume Carl Sagan or find his Futurama head… Millions upon millions of phone records…

    3. They say it was another renewal of previous court orders going back to 2006. So just call it Bush 3EEE Cheney 2

      1. Not yet confirmed. Though I wouldn’t be surprised.

    4. It’s never too late for someone to learn.

    5. Four or five more scandals and Obama might have some problems.

  2. I think that Ice cream wants to throw itself on the ground

    1. Looks like he just snatched from some kid.

      1. “this ice cream cone, you didn’t lick it”

        1. He’s explaining how racist that ice cream cone is

      2. Looks like he just snatched from some kid.

        In his defense, that child had just been blown up by a drone. You don’t want ice cream to go to waste.

        1. Also in his defense, he put some really deep thought into the decision to drone that kid.

      3. Interception!

        1. You don’t sleep on Barry O.

    2. I threw it on the ground!

      The moral of the story is: you can’t trust the system.

  3. “The document shows for the first time that under the Obama administration the communication records of millions of US citizens are being collected indiscriminately and in bulk”

    The document is racist.

    1. There has to be some reason that it was printed on white paper.

      That’s a dog whistle if I ever heard one.

    2. The document shows for the first time that under the Obama administration the communication records of millions of US citizens are being collected indiscriminately and in bulk ? regardless of whether they are suspected of any wrongdoing.

      No, no, no.

      Right there in the document it says the court has determined that the application by the FBI has satisfied the requirements of 50 USC 1861, which statute requires the FBI to provide “a statement of facts showing that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the tangible things sought are relevant to an authorized investigation”.

      Which means either that the FBI is legitimately investigating Verizon itself or all Verizon customers or that FISA courts are rubber stamps for law enforcement. And we know that – since the FISA courts were set up specifically as oversight to keep the FBI and the CIA and the NSA from doing whatever the hell they wanted – it’s not the latter.

      The FBI is not simply indiscriminately collecting records on US citizens regardless of whether they are suspected of any wrongdoing, they are collecting the records because FYTW. The FISA court order says so.

      1. I will say that exercises like these strike me less as a coordinated policy the sort conspiracy buffs dream of uncovering, and more as envelope-pushing and employment-justifying makework.

        1. And that’s supposed to make us feel better? If we’re paying people to dig ditches and fill them back up then I want them out on the national lawn with shovels and a 24/7 broadcast feed of those parasitic scum digging.

        2. There is a couple of offices in NSA, and there performance is measured by terrabits of data vacumned up and dumped in a storage center.

          This bunch of GS 15s and GS 14s earn six-figure salaries to collect this.
          They don’t look at.
          They don’t care if it is of any use.
          It’s just what they do.

          They truely are the epitomy of ‘Banality of Evil.’

          1. This. The NSA’s getting a bunch of 6 column spreadsheets that list the originating account information, phone number, location, number called, and length of call. I’d be shocked if anyone ever combs through it for anything.

          2. It’s just what they do.

            So much in this simple statement.

      2. I don’t know enough about the specifics of this case yet–looks like you’re reading the tea leaves like the rest of us here, and while we’re reading the tea leaves…

        “or that FISA courts are rubber stamps for law enforcement. And we know that – since the FISA courts were set up specifically as oversight to keep the FBI and the CIA and the NSA from doing whatever the hell they wanted – it’s not the latter.”

        Question 1: How many FISA requests are actually rejected?

        According to this report linked below, of the 1788 FISA applications that were presented in 2012–a grand total of zero were rejected.

        http://dissenter.firedoglake.c…..s-in-2012/

        Maybe the reason the Bush and Obama Administrations didn’t want to bother with the FISA requests wasn’t becasue they were afraid some of those requests might be denied. It may have been, simply, that the process is such a pain in the ass–and since they hardly ever get rejected anyway–why bother?

        1. Wikipedia puts the number at 4 or 5 since FISA was passed in the 80s.

  4. I think The Gaurdian and now Gillespie can look forward to harassment from the DOJ, IRS, Department of the Interior, the EPA, The Agriculture department……

    It was glaringly obvious from his state senate days that this guy is nothing more than a two-bit, tin-pot dictator wannabe.

    1. You think maybe those of us who post here are beyond data-capture?
      Mike, is your encryption solid?

      1. Certainly we’re all on the watch list!

        1. hahahahahahahaha

    2. Given the track record of the present regime, you’d have to be courageous to be a Reason contributor these days.

  5. Yeah, Nick, but it’s not like a Republican is doing it. If that was the case then people would have a justifiable reason to be upset.

    1. I almost wish that Bush was still in there with all this happening. Can you imagine how different the reaction would be even given HALF of this behavior? It would probably be like Turkey right now. What a difference having the correct letter in parentheses after your name can make!

      1. If it were under Bush, 50% of Americans would still ignore it. They would simply be called Republicans instead of Democrats. Don’t underestimate the power of Team loyalty.

        And no, libertarians don’t count. They bitch about everything, always.

  6. HAHAHHAHA!

    Code Pink criticizes Michelle Obama for her heckling experience and criticizes Alicia Keys for giving a concert in Israel. Liberals lose their fucking minds.

    Remember when Code Pink was a group of noble heroes speaking truth to power? I wonder what happened between 2007 and today.

    Also, when’s the last time liberals got angry about an actually racist comment? I hear racist comments all the time, and liberals seem to let them pass. It isn’t until someone says something that isn’t actually racist that they lose their shit.

    1. When Hugo Schwyzer disagrees with you, you know you’re on the right track. He really is a shithead of the first order.

    2. We would like to apologize for our recent actions that displayed an undeniable insensitivity to persons of color, especially women of color.

      As an organization, we strive to speak truth to power and stand for human rights for all. We respect intersectionality and strive to stay aware of the many forms of privilege among our group. We would like to make an unequivocal apology to Michelle Obama, Alicia Keys, and everyone who took offense to messages we posted on Twitter.

      By tweeting about how Michelle Obama “should have” responded to Ellen Sturtz’s interruption, we behaved in such a way that reflected a long history of white women dictating how Black women should behave. Our actions were not in keeping with our own values as an organization. While yesterday’s interruption was not a CODEPINK action, it is exemplary of CODEPINK tactics, and the way we responded to it was insensitive and thoughtless.

      WTF?

      1. If you read the tweets that were in response to their tweet, almost all of them are calling CODEPINK racist. It’s amazing. Now that Michelle is the new Obamessiah, since she doesn’t really have power or policies, the only possible reason for criticism of her must be race. That’s TEAM BLUE thought for you.

        1. The offending tweet basically just said they wished Michelle Obama had handled the protester better because they feel she had a legitimate issue with the administration.

          I can’t fathom how stupid you’d have to be to construe that as racist when we’re talking about the wife of the fucking President of the United States!

          1. Someone’s privilege is showing.

            1. By that line of thinking, those people who used to criticize Nancy Reagan for her belief in astrology were simply being ageist. (She did look rather elderly even back then.) But I guess that doesn’t apply because neither she nor Ron were liberals, so they were both 100% fair game.

      2. So they’re apologizing for not checking their privilege when speaking to… a Grammy-winning millionaire and the wife of the US president!? Is the whole world going completely insane? Er, moreso?

      3. If we roll the dice again we can make it acceptable.

        we behaved in such a way that reflected a long history of heterosexuals dictating how lesbians should behave.

        Ye gods! It’s grievance madlibs time!

        1. Let me try:

          we behaved in such a way that reflected a long history of plutocrats dictating how women should behave.

          This is fun.

        2. we behaved in such a way that reflected a long history of pimps dictating how ‘dey hoes should behave.

          Whee…

          we behaved in such a way that reflected a long history of General Butt Naked dictating how his army of lesbians should behave.

          Quoted for da troof, mate.

          1. we behaved in such a way that reflected a long history of Men of the Watch dictating how Wildlings should behave.

            Game of Grievances.

            1. we behaved in such a way that reflected a long history of Adeptus Astartes dictating how heretics should behave.

              Grievance 40K

      4. By tweeting about how Michelle Obama “should have” responded to Ellen Sturtz’s interruption, we behaved in such a way that reflected a long history of white women dictating how Black women should behave.

        I’m shocked that they call an African-American person of color B***k. Did I fall into some sort of African-American gravitational singularity of color and get time-warped back to the Jim Crow 1980s or something?

        1. That jumped out at me too, as did the fact that they capitalized white properly but made some kind of error with black.

          1. A Freudian slip, perhaps? At least in my experience, it’s the people with the most suppressed racism that are most concerned with racial sensitivity in every possible circumstance. The truly evolved non-racists long ago learned to agree with MLK when he said, “…judge a man not by the color of his skin but by the contact of his character.” That, to me, is as non-racist as you can get. It means that real equality and no free passes, even if someone’s black.

            1. the contact of his character?

              Do you mean Contact, the flu medicine with tiny time pills inside the capsule?

              1. You are getting old. You think of Contac as still being Contact.

              2. No, he meant the movie with Matthew McConaughey. Get it together man!

      5. By tweeting about how Michelle Obama “should have” responded to Ellen Sturtz’s interruption, we behaved in such a way that reflected a long history of white women dictating how Black women should behave. Our actions were not in keeping with our own values as an organization. While yesterday’s interruption was not a CODEPINK action, it is exemplary of CODEPINK tactics, and the way we responded to it was insensitive and thoughtless.

        They’re literally arguing that a white person can never CRITICIZE a black person because of something my great grandfather did to their great grandfather. I have no idea how they justify this Orwellian nonsense to themselves.

        1. I’m sure they’ll be just as deferential during the Cain administration.

    3. Don’t you see what’s happening here? The insane love for Barack is being transferred over to Michelle, because even while his betrayals and scandals rack up, she stays squeaky clean. She’s becoming their new idol, the new perfect politician/leader/figurehead that they viewed Barack as until he ruined it for them.

      This is just going to get worse.

      1. his betrayals and scandals

        ???

        The Immaculate President is pure and free of any of that. Those are just Rethuglican smears. When those ginned up controversies failed, they set out to attack him through Michelle, who should be immune from any criticism because she wasn’t the one elected.

        1. I made the mistake of reading a NYT comment thread today and have to agree, unfortunately.

          It was about the IRS schedule and how the president is too nice in dealing with these teabagging traitors.

          AND

          Get ready for the new argument…

          Giving charitable organizations tax-exempt status is stealing from taxpayers because these huge operations have some sort of agenda that is being supported by our tax dollars. They are supported by the fact that they use roads, or something, and what little they give back is driven by their secret agenda. They spoke of all charities like this, not just conservative ones. I consider my country dead.

          If you read comments’ sections of liberal publications, you can get an idea of what the next hive-mind arguments will be when you start seeing a coordinated effort in advancing the same premises.

          We have officially ridden into the sunset as an experiment in liberty. Arm up.

          1. Really, ALL charities? Even the one run by the first brother-in-law? The one that got IRS approval in just 2 weeks, and included a 2-year grandfather clause to give legal cover for all the activities before he got around to applying for tax-exempt status.

            And what about charities like the ones that work on AIDS? They too use the roads, no doubt, but don’t they automatically get a pass from NYT readers?

            1. Dude, I’m not shitting you. They didn’t say any specific charities, but did say that tax breaks to any charities was a ripoff of taxpayers because of, always and again, ROADZ!!one!

              I’m glad that Obama has had two terms because the authoritarian mask has completely slipped off of these collectivist assholes, and nobody is under any delusions that these people want liberty in any way, shape, or form.

          2. Get ready for the new argument…

            That is more or less what Jim McDermott said yesterday: Tax deductions = government subsidy. Because your property isn’t yours, the state just permits you to keep a portion of it out of its benevolence.

            1. I was shocked to read it, that’s why I remembered it. And every time I see a multiple posts on a news story with the same argument it becomes a mainstream talking point in the near future.

              I first heard the “90% of americans want background checks” myth in comments sections of gun articles. It was repeated so many times that eventually the president was using it to convince gullible americans that everybody wanted background checks.

    4. Many libertarians reasonably condemn liberal grievance mongering when it is directed at getting more money or privileges. Yet, they use the same arguments when complaining about things like the drug war or immigration. Few of the commenters here seem to see the irony when they accuse everyone who doesn’t want to legalize heroine of being a racist.

      1. Since when are female heroes illegal? Are you telling me that the War on Women is actually real?

      2. I suppose that because this is such a commonplace occurrence, you have a few specific examples to back up your point, or at least to allow people to clarify.

      3. Few of the commenters here seem to see the irony when they accuse everyone who doesn’t want to legalize heroine of being a racist.

        This seems a rather hasty generalization.

    5. “Remember when Code Pink was a group of noble heroes speaking truth to power?”

      No.

  7. Piers Morgan (with special guest Nuclear Titties) on this story: “2006…Boosh…Iraq.”

  8. Mother Jones is confused by this, of course

    After Democrats caved on the surveillance bill in 2007, I simply assumed that this kind of massive data mining of telephone metadata was going to continue forever and everyone knew it.

    1. Correct me if I’m mistaken, but didn’t the Clinton administration perform the same type of data gathering on all Americans through the Echelon Spy Network the facilities of which were based in the UK. Seems like there were some key-word oriented electronic eavesdropping going on at the same time that were domestically based. If I recall correctly they were code named Carnivore and Omnivore.

      1. This is different to the programs from the 1990s. Post 9/11, US government agencies got pretty much unlimited direct access to the server rooms of most US providers. A copy of the traffic is going right to the FBI and the NSA.

        Kudos to Greenwald for getting hard proof that this is still going on.

  9. Greenwald has the byline on this shit.

    Glen’s dead.

    They’re going to drone his ass. South America, London, wherever they have to.

    But he’s definitely earning my respect yet again. Maddox should hang her head in fucking shame whenever anyone says Greenwald’s name.

    1. Sorry, fucking autocorrect protected Maddow from my original slam up there.

      1. don’t talk shit about Maddox!

      2. Rachel Maddox? Charles Manson’s semi-aborted twin sister?

    2. But he’s definitely earning my respect yet again. Maddox should hang her head in fucking shame whenever anyone says Greenwald’s name.

      Whenever I think that I might have too much knee jerk hatred for leftists and that this clouds my judgement, I remember how much I love Glenn Greenwald, despite my various disagreements with him.

      Then I remember that I don’t really hate leftists. I hate fascists and hypocrites. Most leftists just happen to be fascists and hypocrites.

    3. Glenn really is awesome.

      It’s only a matter of time before the government comes after him.

  10. I was just talking to 3 different people on the phone, and I told every one of them that Obama is a statist shithead who deserves no better than tar and feathers and then prison.

    I wonder if the IRS will target my biz for an audit? Oh, wait, that just already happened.

    1. Now you’ve done it. You are going down!

      1. They already tried it once. They somehow found that our books were 53 cents off on our excise tax. I am not making this shit up. They told us, never mind, and we have not heard from them again.

        Just imagine, one company owner a card carrying member of the LP, and the other 2, long time conservative GOP voters. What the fuck would you be thinking if you were audited?

    2. Wait, you mean that happened BEFORE you made those comments? That must mean there is “Minority Report” technology available now, and you were spotted by the Bureau of Pre-Crime.

      I’m joking, but I sometimes wonder if Philip K. Dick will turn out to be a more prophetic writer than anyone would have thought.

  11. Man, we’ve got triple alphabet soup nut punches going on… TSA, CIA, NSA, all punching liberty in the nuts.

  12. Man, we’ve got triple alphabet soup nut punches going on… TSA, CIA, NSA, all punching liberty in the nuts.

  13. Everyone just needs to make sure that every time they are on the phone, they say ‘The Obama administration sucks big donkey ballz’, no matter who you are talking to.

    Citizen: Hello?

    Insurance company rep: Hi, I just wanted to call you and let you know that we can save you some money on your insurance by…

    Citizen: Obama’s a fucking jackass and his administration fucking sucks donkey ballz. There’s more where that came from, you statist assholes.

    1. “Furthermore, I consider that Carthage the Obama administration must be destroyed”

      1. Washington delenda est.

        1. Much better.

        2. your classical history teacher is crying tears of joy right now…

    2. I say those kinds of things on the phone all the time. Surely, it’s just a coincidence that there’s clicking and whirring noises every time during every call on my phone.

      1. I was wondering what those noises were also…

        1. Most likely we don’t want to know.

  14. I am sure that after the IRS non-scandal, that the Proglodyes are very relieved, knowing that it’s not them that the O admin is targeting with this illegal activity, but only those bad guys, like the baggers. And that makes it ok.

    1. I’m stealing this word. “Proglodytes”

      1. Can’t credit me for it, it’s not a new word. Can’t remember who first coined it.

    2. I’m not sure about that, given the AP scandal. The AP is about as solidly in their camp as can be. But those “Proglogytes” are probably going to conveniently forget that because it’s uncomfortable to think about.

  15. BRAVO!

    Peter Suderman
    ?@petersuderman
    Single guys at the NSA never ask girls for their phone numbers.

    1. Oh hell yes. Well played, Suderman.

  16. Why does reason hate America? If you nothing to hide you don’t have anything to worry about. I installed HD video cameras with sound in every room of my house including the bedroom and bathrooms and granted access to all federal, state, and local authorities to view them over the intertubes at any time. I did that as patriotic duty because unlike all you wacko birds I don’t want the terrorist to win.

    1. I hope you aren’t one of those wacko bird Libertarians, cause you know, that’s an automatic ‘need to hide’.

    2. Does it still count when you charge them a $9.95/month subscription fee.

      1. Well I’m not touching myself on video without a credit card number.

        1. I think your refusal to accept Bitcoin is holding you back.

          1. Well I’m a little gun shy after getting stuck holding all those Zimbabwe dollars. I could at least still use those for Origami though.

    3. You better be careful with that bathroom cam. After certain meals, you might end up raising the fed’s suspicions that you’re developing poison gas.

      1. I would have thought they would have figured that out by now from my web searches.

  17. What is scary about this is that the Obama voters might legitimately worry about things like this, but, out of a sense of racial or cultural loyalty, they won’t be condemning him. We see the same thing with White Americans who refuse to criticize the GOP simply because they see it as the white party, even when it doesn’t represent white interests. This unthinking party loyalty needs to stop.

    1. TEAM BE RULED

    2. That’s sort of like preaching to the choir. Just sayin.

      1. It’s American though. His sermons always end with an explanation of how much he hates darkies.

        Even the choir gets a little weirded out when he puts on the white hood and starts goosestepping.

        1. Maybe it’s just satire hence the paleo handle

    3. I actually can’t think of any examples of that with the GOP. They seem perfectly happy to eat their own. It seems like the Dems have a lock on “circling the wagons” whenever one of their own is on the ropes politically.

    4. We see the same thing with White Americans who refuse to criticize the GOP simply because they see it as the white party, even when it doesn’t represent white interests. This unthinking party loyalty needs to stop.

      Preach it paleo! Where were there when Bradley Manning, who is the WHITEST AMERICAN.

  18. Queens of the Stone Age.

    That is all.

    1. Pretty sure that ‘No one knows’ is the official theme song of the Obama regime.

      1. I was sure it was “Every breath you take”

        1. Must be both, because they’re watching us, but no one knows, at least them, anything about anything.

      2. I thought it was ‘Cult of Personality’

  19. “We see the same thing with White Americans who refuse to criticize the GOP simply because they see it as the white party”

    Huh? No fan of the GOP but I don’t see that at all. I don’t even think openly racist people would not criticize the GOP ’cause they think it’s the “white” party.

  20. When I read all this “privilege” nonsense I like to think of Mary Phagan, Leo Frank and Jim Conley. Which one of them had the most “privilege”? And was the Jew getting lynched “preferable” to the black guy in Jim Crow South?

    1. Privilege means that the random nobody that runs the Code Pink twitter is more powerful than the first lady of the United States.

      As a general rule, if someone is using the word ‘privilege’ in a way that implies the President of the United States doesn’t have it but a West Virginian coal miner does, then I can assume that they don’t know what words mean.

      1. Well they raped the language so much I guess it’s time for “privilege” to be rendered meaningless.

        1. Kind of like the word Liberal or the facts that increases in spending equal austerity?

          1. Austerity is when spending increases by less than it has historically increased. If the last ten years you increased spending by 50% a year and this year you only increase it by 35%, well then you’re drowning in austerity, son!

            1. Sort of like when my wife would get home from the mall with bags or clothes and would tell me how I wouldn’t believe how much money she saved me? That was of course before the separate checking accounts:)

  21. Are ice cream trucks allowed in NYC? Anyone know?

    1. I guess for the moment they are.

      http://newyork.cbslocal.com/20…..from-tots/

    2. Of course! Mister Softee trucks now drive around into November.

      1. Thanks to Global Warming!

    3. You know, if it hadn’t been for the Carmel, CA city council banning ice cream cones in their downtown, Clint Eastwood would have never run for — and become — Mayor of that town.

      Never underestimate the power of ice cream.

  22. Hey guys, could somebody venture onto one of the progtard sites and pick out a stunningly retarded comment representing logical fallacy? I need it for my polisc….I mean English Composition class tomorrow.

    Also, fuck hipster English majors.

    1. Or it could be one of Tony’s or shreek’s.

      1. Yeah, just check down thread a bit.

        1. Yeah, Tony did pull out a solid tu quoque.

          That’s pretty much his only move at this point.

          1. I can only wish you’re playing with puns. Alas, probably just another libertarian who thinks Logic 101 and Ayn Rand week were the only times you really needed to pay attention in class.

            1. Tony, I delved pretty heavily into metamathematics and such during my masters. You know, logical foundations of mathematics. The kind that require you to really understand classical logic and all of its implications. Yet I find the logic employed by many people here pretty convincing. How is that possible? Was I not paying attention during Logic 501?

          2. Also ad hominem and hasty generalization. But the tu quoque was front and center.

          3. I read a truly masterful Tony post a few days ago. I remember tallying up a No True Scotsman, tu quoque, strawman, and ad hominem, all in the course of about four sentences.

            1. I remember tallying up a No True Scotsman, tu quoque, strawman, and ad hominem, all in the course of about four sentences.

              I posted on a local newspaper’s comment section for the first time recently, noting that one commenter had basically done the same logical fallacies you just stated, in his previous four comments. He was starred as a “top commenter” though, and apparently he must pull some weight with the editor, because my brief, no-profanity post was deleted a few minutes later. Then I found I could not post again so I must have been banned for pointing out logical fallacies.

              And yes, the person I pointed this out about was an over-the-top lefty whose posts were mostly ad hominems about every other poster. Perhaps he was the editor himself, I don’t know.

    2. How about the Salon article the other day claiming that libertarianism is a bad idea because no country has tried it before?

      That’s a pretty hysterical appeal to tradition.

      1. Only problem is that my internet will only load 5 sites at the moment. I’ll have to search for that tomorrow.

      2. It’s a bad idea because it’s obviously a bad idea. That it’s never successfully been tried just means it probably can’t possibly work, and is in all likelihood a bad idea.

        1. ^^ You should use this one, Sea Captain.

          In order of logical fallacy: Argument by assertion, argumentum ad nauseam, appeal to tradition, argumentum ad nauseam.

          1. Took a screenshot so one can enjoy both in all their glory at once.

          2. I’m slayed, slayed I tell you, by your deployment of logic 101 vocab!

            1. So no cognitive response to the logical deconstruction of your argument?

              1. A list of vocab words is not a “logical deconstruction.”

                1. Umm…it pretty much is. Logical fallacies have been understood since the time of Aristotle. It’s also been understood that fallacies can’t support an argument. Arguing from a premise to a conclusion through fallacious reasoning destroys an argument. The conclusion can’t stand. This is the way it’s been since Aristotle.

                  But we all know you aren’t bound by the rules of logic, Tony. Oops! My bad – ad hominem. Fucker.

        2. Exactly. I was saying the same thing about letting women vote back in 1892, but no one fucking listened. Now just look at the world.

          1. People have had a lot of ideas over the centuries. Shall we have tried them all perhaps?

            1. No, just ours.

            2. You can’t pick and choose when “if it hasn’t been tried it obviously can’t work/is bad” is true. It either is true or it isn’t.

              1. Unworkable until proved otherwise I think is a pretty rational way of thinking about it.

                1. Except that pretty much every component of libertarianism has been proven workable, just not in the same country at the same time. What reason is their to think that everything put together leads to failure?

    3. fark.com/politics

      you are welcome

    4. Looking to fail, huh?

      1. Not really, but I can’t conceal my inner monocle wearing libertarian for too long.

        And when did English class become a non-stop two hour argumentative “debate” class? I always wondered why I could write better in High School than most recent college grads, and now I know why.

  23. This is the kind of thing you people could be useful in pushing against if you weren’t so wrapped up in ODS. ODS solves nothing. A Republican president would only be worse. Stroking your Obama-hate boner is fun for you, but like all masturbation, the rest of us are left out.

    1. That was pretty damn weak, even for you.

      1. ROMNEY WOULD HAVE DONE IT TOO, ONLY WORSE BECAUSE HE’S A REPUBLICAN!

        /Partisan dipshit

        1. Romney would have run the government like your weird marketing director, with buzzwords and “solutions.” The foreign policy intelligentsia in his party, I’m fairly sure, would insist upon what Obama’s doing and bringing back some of what Bush did too. Republicans are always worse. What planet have you been living on?

          1. Regardless of how you feel about their views on economics or other issues, do you actually think Rand or Ron Paul would be as bad on this issue as Obama?

            1. No, but it would hardly matter considering they’d destroy the global economy if they ever got their way.

              1. Because Obama and Bush (who is far closer on economic issues to Obama than he is to the Pauls) have done such a great job of that?

          2. Obama uses buzzwords and “solutions”. The foreign policy intelligentsia in both parties support the warfare state. Both have openly embraced putting pressure on Iran. Most of Obama’s foreign policies are simply the continuation of Bush policies.

          3. If Romney were POTUS, then Tony would oppose such policy. As O’Bummer is POTUS, Tony is fine with all the crap that is going on.

            Tony, you are a puppet on a string.

    2. Dammit, too much incendiary language even for a college course. :sadface:

    3. What do you mean “you people?”

    4. Ok, this spews ad hominem, straw man, and appeal to consequences fallacies.

      No?

      Or just plain bullshit.

    5. Not the real Tony.

      1. I started hanging out when there was T O N Y, and this Tony doesn’t seem the same.

    6. I’m genuinely curious as to how Tony thinks it could be worse under a Republican.

      1. I just remember the years 2001-2009.

        It is the US intelligence community’s stated desire to collect all digital information everywhere. Yes, it’s totally a real scary issue, and one that I can only hope enough citizens care enough about to create political consequences about it.

        So you explain how it will be better under President Cruz.

        1. I actually think there is a non-negligible chance it could be better under President Cruz. Surely President Graham or McCain would be a better example of GOP worthlessness?

          1. President Cruz… I was trying to be fanciful. Who would possibly give a shit about government surveillance when the planet is a burning husk, the victim of sheer American stupidity?

            1. Yeah, the guy who clerked for Rehnquist, worked as Texas Solicitor General, and authored 80 Supreme Court briefs. He was also named one of the 50 best lawyers in the country under 45 by American Lawyer magazine.

              What a dumbass.

            2. You’ve blown past dishonest straight to entirely incomprehensible.

            3. Oooh, an appeal to worse problems.

              Tony’s on a roll.

              1. Yep, Tony has given me plenty of material.

                “So you explain how it will be better under President Cruz.”

                And a Straw Man.

  24. Either its fake s o c k p u p p e t or his gay Oklahoma escort logged onto his laptop.

    1. Well, allegedly the old Tony is T o n y, but I don’t know what you would call an imposter of a sockpuppet.

      1. Are we sure T o n y hasn’t changed his named to Tony?

        1. Philosophically, if no one can tell the difference between Tony and T o n y, they might as well be considered the same.

        2. They’re the same exact Krugnut.

      2. 70% of Reason commentators?

  25. I have to say it’s fun to watch the Tony’s come out and assume the position. I’m over debating with them because they are too dishonest to have a debate, but the level of delusion keeps getting ratcheted up and it’s hilarious.

    Code Pink getting called racists…..swwoooooooonn

    You can’t say this isn’t entertaining, even if it spells disaster for the great American Experiment.

    1. “Are you not entertained?”

  26. Wow, you kind of have to wonder if Glenn Greenwald ever will be able to travel to the United States again. To say nothing of the poor sap(s) who leaked the court order — they will be getting the full Bradley Manning solitary leaker intimidation treatment if they get caught, I’m sure.

  27. Articles only a hipster could love
    10 Best Arcade Fire songs

    1. So…

      I am, like, really sad and stuff.

      Did you watch the game?

  28. Speaking of logical fallacies:

    According to the Pope, wasting food is like stealing from the poor.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new…..-poor.html

    (Sorry if this has been posted, I haven’t read every threa yet)

    1. “You better eat everything on your plate because there are starving children in the Vatican!”

      1. They’ve worked up a serious hunger what with all the molestation.

  29. Oh jeez, Tony is in rare form tonight. Could somebody call Troll Central and find out if we can get some new trolls? Our current crop is defective.

    There is a lovely term in Japanese to describe Tonys line of thinking. “Herikutsu” – which translates literally as “fart logic”.

  30. I encrypt most of my phone calls anyway so boo yah!

    http://www.AnonStuff.tk

    1. AnonBot just keeps getting smarter all the time!

  31. We hear all this crazy stuff is going on, but we never hear WHY this crazy stuff is going on. Why did the government buy up all that ammo? Why is it necessary to go through millions of phone records? The fact that doing it isn’t a secret but the reason for doing it is makes me consider this to be psychological warfare. All this and more seems to be ramping up each day while the President goes around giving “your Government is your friend” commencement speeches. Kind of creepy.

  32. Piper. if you, thought Brandon`s storry is impressive, on tuesday I bought a gorgeous opel when I got my cheque for $7487 this-past/month and also ten k this past-month. it’s definitly the most-comfortable work I’ve had. I actually started three months/ago and almost straight away started earning more than $87, p/h. I follow the details on this straightforward website,, Go to site and open Home for details
    http://WWW.JOBS34.COM

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.