Uh-Oh! The rest of the world is pissed at us!

[Vinnie From Indy]

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023086724

It seems the rest of the world doesn't give a rat's ass that Edward Snowden had boxes in his garage and was a high school dropout! They are seriously pissed at us. Some will say that they are stupid because they should have known for years that our beacon of freedom here in the US was really the Eye of Sauron vacuuming up all their communication. Hell, I thought they would have gotten pissed at the whole "fight 'em over there so we don't have to fight 'em over here" war cry a few years ago, but it never happened.

I guess Linkasaurus Rex is gonna have to buy Rosetta Stone before unleashing the dreaded blue linkies overseas. She's gonna be busier than a one toothed man in a corn on the cob eating contest!

Cheers!

[L0oniX]

1. LOL "Linkasaurus Rex" ...forever drowning in a sea of links.

Link: www.I.have.no.idea.who.you.are.talking.about.gov

[CountAllVotes]

2. yeah, kinda surreal huh?

I am now reading that book you told us about recently.

Sheeeeeeshhhh ... no wonder we've come to this! eh?

[WillyT]

3. And There's This:

DULnk: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023087598

[boston bean]

4. Well we have the Brits.

They collect info for us, and we collect and share intel that they legally can't gather.

[sibelian]

43. Yes, I know.

I'm not very pleased.

[longship]

5. Jesus! A not so veiled call out of another DUer?

Instead of arguing against a position, you make personal attacks?

I can't go along with this post due to its lack of objectivity.


Despicible!

[LondonReign2]

73. The truth is a valid defense against accusations of slander

[ProSense]

6. I come here

"I guess Linkasaurus Rex is gonna have to buy Rosetta Stone before unleashing the dreaded blue linkies overseas. She's gonna be busier than a one toothed man in a corn on the cob eating contest!"

...for the unquestionable level of intelligent discussion. Thanks.

[RetroLounge]

44. The hell you do...

RL

[hootinholler]

71. SNORT

Tell me another one.

[darkangel218]

82. lmao!!!

[bigwillq]

7. Linkasaurus Rex

BWAH!

[Cha]

8. I guess Linkasaurus Rex is gonna have to buy Rosetta Stone before unleashing the dreaded blue linkie

overseas. She's gonna be busier than a one toothed man in a corn on the cob eating contest!"

Your obsession with another member on this board is only outing you as a vapid tool. fucking stupid.

Your OP can't stand alone with out personally insulting another DUer.

[Number23]

10. Somebody lost their posting privileges for a day because the jury wouldn't hide this blatant call

out of another poster.

[bunnies]

49. Now we know which side "the swarm" is really on.

Must be "fun" to fling shit like a 5th grader with impunity. Disgusting.

[SidDithers]

60. Hosts won't lock it either...

Apparently only threads that reference a group of DUers are Meta whining about DU. Threads that attack a particular specific DUer are on-topic in GD, and aren't Meta at all.

Go figure.

Sid

[ProSense]

18. You have to forgive them

Any port: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023080227

[Cha]

29. I should just ignore their ugly ignorance..

however, every once in awhile they need to know that not everyone thinks their bully-boy clique mentality is worthy of a Democratic site like DU.

But, I didn't even alert.. I knew the jury or the mods would probably let it stand. It's not the first one calling out Obama Supporters that's been left to stand. Whatever. So they yuk it up. they're the "fucking frauds".

[JaneyVee]

9. They're spying on us, so we're spying on them. Lets see how "pissed" they are at us when

they're begging us for partnership and allied support.

BTW, what depths of misery must one reach in order to call out a fellow DU'er?

[frylock]

12. yeah, fuck them, right?

they'll just be begging us for partnership and allied support in our next great imperialistic adventure.

[JaneyVee]

13. Why shouldn't we spy on them if they're spying on us?

[frylock]

14. why shouldn't they spy on us if we're spying on them?

[JaneyVee]

15. They are, and we are.

[frylock]

16. so what's beef?

[JaneyVee]

20. You're the one who said "fuck them", not me.

[frylock]

21. i was merely echoing your sentiment

[JaneyVee]

22. It's OK to admit when you're wrong.

[frylock]

25. i'll circle back later to see if you do just that..

i'm not holding my breath, mind you.

[JaneyVee]

30. You were the one who assumed my intentions. You know what they say about assuming.

[frylock]

32. "Lets see how "pissed" they are at us when they're begging us for partnership and allied support."

you see, where I come from, that translates to "fuck you." if your intentions were otherwise, then i'd love to read them.

[JaneyVee]

34. I have no problem saying fuck you when I mean fuck you, but I didn't say that now did I?

[frylock]

40. so what precisely did you mean by your post?

[magellan]

17. Who's "they"?

Is New Zealand spying on us? Switzerland? Norway? Finland? OWS? Anti-war protesters? Please provide evidence, or at least a valid reason for us to spend billions spying on any of these entities.

[patrice]

64. Why spy? Isn't this administration in trouble for NOT prosecuting anyone for the frauds that caused

the Derivative Crash of '08?

Hypothesis: At least one of the reasons that economic justice has not been done for those crimes is the fact that what is needed in order to identify whom to prosecute and whom NOT TO PROSECUTE is stuff all tied up in the PRIVATE BUSINESS CONTRACTS that made the derivatives possible. The government will probably never see those contracts, but they might be able to discern their ripples in financial activities around money launderers and foreign banking.

[magellan]

81. Are you seriously suggesting we're only spying on the world

...in order to prosecute financial crimes? Seriously?? That's an incredible stretch. Don't you think we'd have seen some kind of movement in that direction by now if so? Rumors of investigations, records seized, anything. Considering public sentiment, they'd want us to see they're working to make arrests, right? Maybe even a glimmer of intent? After FIVE years?

[railsback]

11. My GOD!

And here I was thinking that all these other nations were spying on us, too! It took The Snowden to show us all that ONLY the U.S. accumulates data… and that big giant data bank Australia is building is actually a massive chicken coop. Thank you Snowden for showing us the way!

[jazzimov]

19. We need MORE links, not fewer.

Links show that you can back up your statements, rather than just pull them out of your ass like many seem to.

Let me add my voice to the din - this OP is despicable.

[frylock]

23. what we need is more links that lead to more links that lead to more posts full of links..

that in turn circle back to those original links linking more links.

[nadinbrzezinski]

24. Careful, you might set up a singularity of links there

Odd strange mood.

[ProSense]

27. LOL!

[ProSense]

26. Here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3088733

You're welcome.

[Demit]

35. When links only go to your previously expressed opinions

they don't show anything, except that you want people to click on your previous opinions.

[ProSense]

37. Oh

"When links only go to your previously expressed opinions they don't show anything, except that you want people to click on your previous opinions."

...the horror of "previously expressed opinions"!!!

Run for the hills!

[zeemike]

39. Isn't previously expressed opinions old news?

And old news worthy of dismissal?
I am trying to keep these rules strait...They seem to change all the time

[Demit]

41. No, linking to oneself isn't horror. It's just lacking in substance.

[ProSense]

47. And

"No, linking to oneself isn't horror. It's just lacking in substance"

..I suppose talking about links is substantive?

Here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023083768

[Demit]

50. Nope. Not going to click on your link. You can continue referencing yourself

without my participation. But yes, talking about whether links are useful to the reader or a waste of the reader's time is definitely substantive.

[ProSense]

53. Gee, thanks for your permission.

"But yes, talking about whether links are useful to the reader or a waste of the reader's time is definitely substantive."

[patrice]

65. Personally, I don't mind people trying to provide context for their posts. This is an asynchronous

environment. People come to it at all hours of the day and night, so if I have a question about something someone said, the poster may not be available and coming back to a later Reply might not be that efficient for some people.

Some DU -ers have been part of this asynchronous environment for 10+ years, some 10 minutes. Fragmentation is one of the most oppressive traits of our culture. It part of why so few people understand anyone who doesn't communicate in their pre-determined cliches. It's part of the reason why so many people can't express themselves except in sound bites and memes and text message shorthand.

Providing context for what you say on the internet is also one of the traits of the best journalists. They put hyperlinks INSIDE their articles "for the drill down". As a professional educator, I think this is an excellent practice, VERY liberating.

[Demit]

68. I do appreciate when writers link to sources outside themselves to provide facts.

Independent sources of verifiable facts, not other commentary. Otherwise the writer is merely saying See? These others agree with me! Which you, as an educator, would recognize as a fallacious arguing from authority.

I've been here a long time too, and I've seen many posters, when they start a thread, take the care to set out a well-reasoned argument. That is not only a recognition of an asynchronous environment, but also a show of respect for the potential reader (not making them do the work of looking elsewhere to make sense of what you said). Even when they title their thread with an outrageous title, to entice readers into the thread, they do the work of giving it context right then and there. You wouldn't accept a paper from one of your students that consisted of a title and a long list of footnotes, would you? Or accept that, because they're not there in front of you to answer your questions, it's up to you to do the work of sussing out what their premise and argument actually is? You'd want to see them show how they arrived at the conclusion they did, whether or not you agree with it. Anything less is lazy.

[ProSense]

69. Face it,

I do appreciate when writers link to sources outside themselves to provide facts.

Independent sources of verifiable facts, not other commentary. Otherwise the writer is merely saying See? These others agree with me! Which you, as an educator, would recognize as a fallacious arguing from authority.

I've been here a long time too, and I've seen many posters, when they start a thread, take the care to set out a well-reasoned argument. That is not only a recognition of an asynchronous environment, but also a show of respect for the potential reader (not making them do the work of looking elsewhere to make sense of what you said). Even when they title their thread with an outrageous title, to entice readers into the thread, they do the work of giving it context right then and there. You wouldn't accept a paper from one of your students that consisted of a title and a long list of footnotes, would you? Or accept that, because they're not there in front of you to answer your questions, it's up to you to do the work of sussing out what their premise and argument actually is? You'd want to see them show how they arrived at the conclusion they did, whether or not you agree with it. Anything less is lazy.

...you're just upset because you don't agree with the POV in my posts. Everyone of the links here (http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023083768) go to DU post which contains an "independent sources of verifiable facts."

I mean, who are you and the others obsessed over link trying to kid. This post:

NYT editor's blog: Snowden’s Questionable New Turn
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023034825

..was alerted on.

Those who hate the fact that other people have opinions are the ones screaming that others are "authoritarians" when they are the ones who can't stand diverse opinions.

Still, even if the link is to a point I made, what the hell is the problem? Maybe I want to keep a discussion in a thread going.

Trying to portray this as some huge issue is beyond silly.

[Demit]

75. No, I'm not upset because I don't agree w/a pov. What I am is contemptuous of lazy writing.

The problem is lazy writing. Another problem is lazy thinking. In this case, repeatedly falling back on a strawman response, accusing people of hating the fact that others have opinions.

[ProSense]

77. No

"No, I'm not upset because I don't agree w/a pov. What I am is contemptuous of lazy writing."

...you're upset about my POV. Who cares what you label "lazy writing"?

I mean, you seem to believe your opinion, including your focus on links, is more valid than mine.

"The problem is lazy writing. Another problem is lazy thinking. In this case, repeatedly falling back on a strawman response, accusing people of hating the fact that others have opinions."

Yeah, because discussing "links" obsessively and defining other people's opinions as "lazy writing" are not straw men?

Too funny.

[Demit]

78. Oh, good lord. No they are not.

Do you ever do anything but employ the I'm Rubber and You're Glue retort in your responses?

Wait, of course you do. You use animated emoticons and consider them zinger put downs.

[ProSense]

79. You

"Do you ever do anything but employ the I'm Rubber and You're Glue retort in your responses? "

...can't be serious? I suppose irony is lost on you.

I mean, you're obsessing over links and trying to argue that somehow my opinion is not valid because of them.

Now you offer this childish straw man as justification?

Here's a suggestion: Get used to me expressing my opinion and using links. It will be liberating.

[NorthCarolina]

84. It is a little tough to post links backing your misinformation,

without directing the reader to the right wing blog sites where these ideas spring from, blowing your cover in the process. Many are already dipping into their reserve of back-up alias's.

[ZombieHorde]

28. I don't often agree with Prosense, but there is no reason mock her in an OP.

She's polite, and backs up her opinions with links. Even though I don't agree with many of her arguments or opinions, she does make some good arguments. Better than most of us.

[ProSense]

31. Thank, you don't have to agree with me, but

I really think some people are afraid of me. They resent anyone who can effectively counter their arguments. This is their way of trying to intimidate. They fear my opinions. Oh well!!!

[malaise]

46. Keep 'em coming

[ProSense]

48. Thanks

I want to keep this thread kick to show what people consider progressive debate: Obsession with "blue links" and name calling.

[one_voice]

33. seek help for your...

[URL=.html][IMG][/IMG][/URL]

[Arctic Dave]

36. LOL

Linkasaurus Rex.

Classic.

[DeSwiss]

38. The Great Unraveling

...has begun in earnest.

- Hang onto your hats!

K&R

[HappyMe]

42. More Weaksaucesarus Rex for the trash can.

[RetroLounge]

45. "Linkasaurus Rex"

Careful, you'll awaken the pom pom squad and they'll swarm with links that lead back to link that lead back to links...



RL

[darkangel218]

51. LMAO!!!

[ProSense]

52. .

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=286706&sub=trans

Transparency!!!

[darkangel218]

54. Ok Ms LR

[ProSense]

55. .

pwned

[darkangel218]

56. Glad you admit that you were :p

Lmao!!!!

[treestar]

62. Haha!

[idwiyo]

61. Too late, they are already here... With more links, of course!

[bunnies]

57. This is digusting.

If you want to call out another DUer why are you hiding behind some insult straight from the mind of a 5 year old? At least have the fucking nerve to do it directly. Must take a big set of nads to hide behind bullshit like this. Grow the fuck up, kiddo.

ps. nice link.

[idwiyo]

58. K&R for using "Linkasaurus Rex" in this great post!

[carolinayellowdog]

59. troll food

even making gestures in their direction makes a thread part of the problem and not the solution

[darkangel218]

63. Lmao!! Im still laughing!!

Thanks for the post Vinnie

[patrice]

66. Linking is liberating, because it builds autonomous cognition, but I wouldn't expect a one-toothed

man in a corn on the cob eating contest to approve of that.

[HappyMe]

67. I'll make a note that call-outs are great in GD.

[Myrina]

70. LMAO @ Linkasaurus Rex ....

..... the rest of your post, though, is spot on - especially the comparison to the Eye of Sauron.

What have we become?

[hootinholler]

72. DUzy for Linkasarus Rex

[ProSense]

74. DUzy for

"I guess Linkasaurus Rex is gonna have to buy Rosetta Stone before unleashing the dreaded blue linkies overseas. She's gonna be busier than a one toothed man in a corn on the cob eating contest!"

...the mean-spirited kewl self-declared progressive kids!

You guys are compassionate and really really kewl! You're doing the DU proud!

[hootinholler]

80. Hey, it's not about issues

It's about PWNING people, eh?

[LanternWaste]

76. It can be frustrating when someone presents opinions and conclusion

It can often be frustrating when someone presents opinions and conclusions citing relevant and contemporary material.

It often results in a nothing more than awkward pejoratives and melodramatic language lacking both premise and conclusion. I for one am rather relieved you didn't go in that direction.

[Scurrilous]

83. Nice personal attack/callout.

[wildbilln864]

85. k & r & thanks to....

Prosense for referring me here so I can kick & rec this.