Groklaw legal site shuts over fears of NSA email snooping Pamela Jones shuts award-winning site, say

[LiberalArkie]

Groklaw has shut, with its founder saying she fears surveillance of emails sent to the site
The award-winning legal analysis site Groklaw is shutting because its founder says that "there is no way" to continue to run it without using secure email - and that the threat of NSA spying means that could be compromised.

"There is now no shield from forced exposure," writes the site's founder, Pamela Jones, an American paralegal who has run the site from its start in 2003, in a farewell message on the site.

Jones cites the revelations that the US National Security Agency (NSA) can capture any email, and can store encrypted email for up to five years, as having prompted her decision to shutter the site: "the simple truth is, no matter how good the motives might be for collecting and screening everything we say to one another, and no matter how "clean" we all are ourselves from the standpont of the screeners, I don't know how to function in such an atmosphere. I don't know how to do Groklaw like this," she writes.

http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/aug/20/groklaw-shuts-nsa-surveillance

I added another link

[link:http://www.pcworld.com/article/2047024/tech-legal-news-site-groklaw-shutting-down-citing-email-privacy-concerns.html|

[Recursion]

1. Why didn't she shut it in 2006 when it was revealed the NSA was doing this with no limits

or oversight whatsoever?

[Octafish]

5. Why didn't you bring it up then, Recursion?

Some on DU tried.

Know your BFEE: Like a NAZI

JFK Would NEVER Have Fallen for Phony INTEL!

Did the NSA help Bush hack the vote?

I notice that many DUers at the time were labled "Conspiracy Theorists" for pointing it out.

[Rex]

35. Not only that, but they deflect important questions

with non-questions.

[Aerows]

44. When they don't have an answer

they play like they have suddenly developed Alzheimer's. "I don't remember, I don't recall, What does this have to do with the conversation we were having 2 minutes ago, I don't know".

[Rex]

47. Yes, they use the Reagan defense.

"I don't recall." "I can't answer that question."

[sabrina 1]

8. Maybe because she thought it was a crime back then and that Congress would hold

the criminals accountable. Instead they LEGALIZED Bush's crimes, retroactively. We were all stunned back then, seriously not believing that those crimes would be allowed to continue and we wrote, called, emailed protested and then VOTED FOR DEMOCRATS which in the end, we were told, was the ONLY way to end these abuses.

So what do we do now, those of us who have never wavered on these issues? Vote for Democrats?

What is YOUR solution, assuming you were opposed to all of this all along, from the moment it reared its ugly head right up to today??

[Wilms]

11. Because she's a racist.

Obviously.

Oh, and she's not into pole-dancers.

Case (er, minds) closed.

[kelliekat44]

56. People are shutting down sites on their own and blaming it NSA "spying" when there is no

evidence of them having done so to their sites. It's a bad journalist game that some are playing and it is making some "journalists" lose credibility...they make shit up and than try mob fear to keep the lies rolling. A Breitbart ploy.

[Aerows]

59. People are shutting their own sites down

because they realize there is no privacy. That isn't making shit up. That is accepting the truth and dealing with it, by doing the only thing that does guarantee privacy - shutting your site down.

Are you okay with that? Because I can't think of a single thing that explains that away.

[grasswire]

60. you're complaining about people "making shit up"??

LOLOL.

[Aerows]

65. There are some

colossal shitheads in this thread, and I'm not exactly convinced that they recognize themselves and each other. I'd almost feel better if they knew and were just doing it because they were putting us on.

[Wilms]

106. That makes complete sense.

Assuming, that is, I want to avoid considering recent news reports about other sites being harrassed, the admins being gagged, and shutting as a result.

But that just isn't me. Sorry.

[JDPriestly]

15. What difference does what she didn't do in 2006 make?

Today, she is doing it.

Worrying about what happened in 2006 is irrelevant.

Maybe people just didn't stop and think in 2006. Maybe Snowden's statements have made people pause and consider what the collection of metadata can really mean.

People carry I-Phones and other handheld devices now. That has changed a lot. In 2006, not so many of us were aware of what information computers relayed about us.

I did not know in 2006 that my cell phone company could contact my phone when I turned it off. I did not know many things about computers that I know now.

In 2006, I did not know that the government was collecting massive amounts of metadata. Someone made the accusation about the government being hooked into the system, but I for one did not realize what was going on until Snowden came forward.

Stop trying to change the subject.

Right now, Obama needs to drop this program as it pertains to collecting massive amounts of metadata and as it pertains to ANY surveillance of the electronic communications of Americans without a warrant.

Right now, Obama needs to allow members of Congress access to all data collected by the NSA and all facilities in which the data is collected and stored so that Congress can determine what has really happened. Congress should have access to all NSA reports that Congress wants, not just the reports that NSA wants them to have. It isn't that Congress will read them all, but there should be no secrets on this from Congress. And Congress should hire civil rights attorneys, say from the ACLU, to advise them on how to set up a good system that can be used pursuant to the Constitution. And then, Congress should continue to have access to the system so that our checks and balances work on this.

[frylock]

18. who. fucking. CARES!

can we shitcan this lame fucking talking point already?

[Aerows]

48. If that's the only oe you have, you bang on it like a two year old

with a plastic hammer. The pro-NSA position is weakening by the hour, but hey, they are giving it the old GED try.

[corkhead]

21. That's right, since some people happened to know about it in 2006, that makes it A-O-K

[Yo_Mama]

26. The latest is that secure email sites are being shut down.

Those "wild" sites provided email that could be encrypted and wasn't fed through to NSA. From what I'm reading, after the Snowden event the, ah, Forces of National Insecurity are now attempting to shut down all such services?

I'm not really up to date on this. I've never used such a thing. But I have been seeing articles about it.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/fbi-suspected-of-cyber-attack-on-anonymous-web-hosting-and-email-services/5345652
http://rt.com/usa/lavabit-email-snowden-statement-247/

I'm sure someone on DU knows more about this.

[Aerows]

41. Why weren't you screaming from the rafters in 2006, and even better

why aren't you screaming about this now? Oh. It doesn't benefit your political perspective.

Some of us have been screaming about this for years, and it is coming to a head.

[Aerows]

45. I wish she would show up on DU, just so she could say

"I don't remember", "I don't recall" and "Let's talk about the weather instead". Just for you, Recursion, just for you.

[Aerows]

51. If somebody committed murder in 2006

Is it wrong to try them in 2013 if new evidence comes to light to tie them to that murder? Or does justice only matter when it is politically beneficial?

[City Lights]

54. Maybe she was still hoping for a pony. nt

[Aerows]

55. She never really loved him

and had too many boxes in her garage.

[hobbit709]

2. Let's see what all the defenders and apologists for the NSA have to say.

[frylock]

19. blah blah blah 2006 blah blah

[Egalitarian Thug]

24. Yargle Warrant Bargle Legal Blargh!!1! n/t

[Aerows]

50. Argle Bargle I don't recall argle bargle it isn't important

argle bargle but I show up in every fucking thread about this argle bargle.

[Egalitarian Thug]

52. LOL!

This whole thing is just getting to be hilarious (and I'm supposed to be doing stuff).

[Aerows]

53. It truly is

I've seen silly arguments before, but this whole issue has had everything but the kitchen sink in stupid arguments thrown at it.

I'm waiting for "I was just following orders" to fall out of someone's mouth at this point, because it can't get piled any higher and deeper.

[Baitball Blogger]

3. NOW we're seeing the end of freedom.

It's getting real.

[OldEurope]

17. It's the end of freedom in the internet.

Return to snailmail for the important issues and buy printed newspapers. The latter would save some journalists from unemployment.

Websites for legal (or other) advice could do just this: telling the readers that they should send not email but real letters with a prepaid envelope.
I know "they" are collecting data from snailmail, too, but "they" will simply drown in information when most people return to paper. Imagine: "they" would have to discretely open myriads of envelopes, unfold and scan the content, then restoring the letters to look like nothing happened.
At least that would be a hell of a lot of jobs!

[VanillaRhapsody]

27. The Internet is not inherently safe by its very nature....it is not private

because of how it works....

[Aerows]

63. Even over secure transactions like you do with your bank?

I think someone needs to read up on internet security, or at least stop spewing bullshit on topics they don't fully grasp.

[VanillaRhapsody]

66. Nope I don't need to read up....in the business...

secure transactions are only "secure" like Apple computers are "secure". If you think no banks will ever be breached you have another thought coming...and perhaps you should "practice what you preach" and read up.

[Aerows]

67. Sure you are

Firewall you administrate?

[VanillaRhapsody]

69. oh firewalls now?

they make you feel safe too?

[Aerows]

71. Desktop support. n/t

[VanillaRhapsody]

73. support....that figures.

programming...that's my thing...

[Aerows]

74. Oh

a programmer. That's a step down from desktop support in terms of knowing how the network functions. Excuse me while I take a breath. LOL.

[VanillaRhapsody]

79. a "step down" yeah right....

desktop support is what you do while waiting to get a programming or networking job. LOL indeed!

[Aerows]

81. Oh, so you are in desktop support

pretending to be a programmer. Just what I thought.

[VanillaRhapsody]

84. No never was in desktop support....

but I do know some....

[Aerows]

70. No answer

Just what I thought, desktop support personnel that thinks they know something. Next!

[DisgustipatedinCA]

76. I'm "in the business". Let me know when you're ready to come out and play.

[VanillaRhapsody]

80. All I said was that I didn't need to read up...as was suggested.

I know what metadata is and that the Internet is not private.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

75. You have no idea what you're talking about

It's laws, and not technology, that maintain privacy. Yes, technology can help with privacy, and it can also do very much the opposite.

The Internet, by its nature, is just as private as your blinds at home. Neither will stop someone who is determined to see inside, but you know good and well when you observe someone looking in that they're up to no good, and probably need to be arrested and charged with something.

The Internet, by its very nature, affords enough privacy to expose those who breech that privacy as bad actors. And by the way, the privacy can be pretty damned good. Why don't I set up an AES-256 LAN-to-LAN and you tell me what I'm transferring across it? Take your time. I'll give you a 2-year head start.

But back to the original point, it's vigorously-enforced and respected laws that can keep our privacy intact. I personally don't like it when people with no spine whatsoever tell me that because of technology, there's nothing that can be done to protect privacy. Argue for your own goddamned impotence. You're in my way.

[Aerows]

77. VR is a "programmer"

with delusions of grandeur that they know anything about how internet security works. VR is a "programmer" and automatically understands firewalls, switches and routers, didn't you know that? VR is probably trained in fiber optics too, because that's what they teach everyone in the programming community college classes.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

85. This is a special pet peeve of mine

I don't like it when people use their technical knowledge (often exaggerated) to lord over non-technical people. Doctors, accountants, actuaries, pipe fitters--all of these people could make me feel foolish by lording knowledge of their craft over me. But they don't. So when I see someone displaying the "it's a technical thing, you couldn't possibly understand" attitude, I look for holes and start ripping.

And of course, I don't begrudge people their technical knowledge. I just don't like seeing is used as a weapon against other people, and predicated on those other people not understanding the technology in question. It's a form of bullying.

[Aerows]

90. Amen

and it started with VR claiming almighty knowledge over the internet, and he knows.

Couldn't tell you about a firewall, but he's an expert on internet security, and that shit pisses me off, too, with good reason. I didn't wake up in the morning with that knowledge.

[VanillaRhapsody]

102. If you read back...I didn't do that...

it was in response to someone suggesting I "read up" and I just said "I am in the business". FYI

[DisgustipatedinCA]

103. Thank you for the reply. I read your other posts, and yes you did say you were in the business.

Not all of my pet peeve applies directly to you. Thank you.

[VanillaRhapsody]

104. Yes I did...but only after someone said I needed to "read up" on basic Internet security

and I replied meaning that THAT was not necessary and why...

[VanillaRhapsody]

101. Yeah I admit...I went to community college....but then...

I went on and got a "real" degree...I guess in your eyes...

but way to go to insult people who go to community college you dork!

[VanillaRhapsody]

82. Yes I DO know what i am talking about...

Laws about technology correct! But until then people need to know that the Internet itself without laws is NOT secure.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

87. No. And car locks aren't secured against anyone with a hammer.

But if you break into my car with a hammer, I'm going to do my best to make sure you have an arrest record to go along with it.

[VanillaRhapsody]

89. Ding ding ding we have a winner!

but you cannot be sure that you will never have your car broken into by a hammer....

[Aerows]

93. You *CAN* have the secured knowledge

that it will take a fuckton of resources to break your account.

[VanillaRhapsody]

95. oh really...thats why HB Gary and so many other networks are hacked...

cause they are soooooo secure and it took a fuckton of resources to to break their networks!

Yeah right!

[Aerows]

96. See, that's what is funny

HB Gary was a social engineering hack.

[VanillaRhapsody]

98. yeah....exactly!

and THEY got hacked!

[Aerows]

100. Do you know what social engineering is

or are you just going through the motions to pretend you do?

[VanillaRhapsody]

97. wow...Aeorows has solved the problem of hacking single handedly!

no big time stores or banks or credit cards ever get hacked at all!

You can all cancel your accounts with LifeLock now...Aerows has solved that problem...sheewwww!

[Aerows]

99. Oh, I guess you have nothing to say then

Figures. All hat and no cattle.

[TM99]

4. I have followed PJ's work for a decade.

She is a seriously smart woman. If she is to the point of shutting shop, then yes, folks, this is a big fucking deal.

[Trillo]

6. http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20130818120421175

I'm really sorry that it's so. I loved doing Groklaw, and I believe we really made a significant contribution. But even that turns out to be less than we thought, or less than I hoped for, anyway. My hope was always to show you that there is beauty and safety in the rule of law, that civilization actually depends on it. How quaint.

[phantom power]

7. It bothers me to see these people surrendering

That just makes the surveillance state's job easier, not harder.

[sabrina 1]

9. Yes, but that is what generally happens when people realize finally that there are living in

a surveillance state. I guess for a long time most of us thought that something would be done about it, it is clear now that even some Democrats, which were our only hope when it all began, are defending the Surveillance state.

In the end, when people realize how dangerous it is to speak out, many put their lives and families first and do what she and several other great sites, are now doing.

We are not all heroes, like Manning and Snowden and Greenwald.

Maybe it's too late to turn this around and the great experiment in democracy has finally come crashing down. It lasted longer than most I suppose.

I'm beginning to wonder too if it isn't safer to just live your life and keep your mouth shut, as people in other oppressive states have done historically and hope that one day things will get better. I don't have Greenwald's courage. There is talk now of prosecuting journalists. I actually never thought I would see that.

[JDPriestly]

16. Good points!

Frankly, if I still depended on the approval of a boss to keep my job and earn my living, feed my family, etc., I would not be saying what I am. It would be too risky.

I think that is why only a few of us are daring to speak out as frequently as we are. I think that is why some are defending Obama. They don't dare speak out. They don't even dare think about the dangers of the surveillance program. They just can't let themselves go there. It's too awful for them to contemplate. They probably don't even admit that to themselves.

[VanillaRhapsody]

29. Unless you want laws changed about the nature of how the Internet works...

then this is what is happening. I have seen this coming for 20+ years. There is no way to make the Internet private...its against it's very existance..

[sabrina 1]

31. That is not the issue at all. The issue is the GOVERNMENT spying on the American people.

Each time people sign up with online business or forum they are shown a Privacy Agreement. I have read dozens of them over the years and not once did I see anything about that forum handing over my information to the GOVERNMENT.

They are pretty specific and we can either agree or not whether to sign up.

This has been the case forever. Even before the tech age people trusted Doctors, Lawyers, Schools, Hospitals with their records. Did that mean they should expect the Government to secretly pry those records from their Doctors, Lawyers etc??

No, it did not. And I have cancelled our Verizon account telling them why. I read their privacy agreement to them and they DENIED handing over my 'data' to the Government. Sorry, but I saw the evidence and heard the POTUS confirm it.

This excuse, that 'well you went out in the street so you expect your rights to be violated' is reprehensible and intended to diminish the huge criminality of a government spying on its own people.

[VanillaRhapsody]

32. Metadata is not the same thing as what is in your medical records...

thats what the govt collected.....you have no evidence of it collecting anything else without a warrant. If you have evidence of a crime then you should take that to a Prosecutor...

So are you going to go Galt now?

[sabrina 1]

33. Really? Where is the warrant, showing probable cause of wrong doing on MY part that

allowed Verizon to hand over my 'meta data' to the Government?? I went straight to Verizon when I heard about this and asked them to show me that warrant. Because you surely know that no 'warrant shall be issued without probable cause' as written in the Constitution's 4th Amendment.

Verizon told me there was no warrant and they did not hand over any of my 'data' to the Government. But the President and Congress and the NSA have all verified that information.

So where is my warrant?? Now there are lots of court cases against Verizon being filed to find out where all those millions of warrants are, and what it is we all are supposed to have done wrong??

I want to be told when a warrant is issued against me charging me with wrong doing. But no one told me until Snowden retrieved OUR PROPERTY which the Government was hiding from us and I learned about this mysterious warrant.

[VanillaRhapsody]

34. Do you have evidence that content of your emails or phone calls was compromised?

Metadata does not equal data...sorry it just doesnt. Meta is information ABOUT information...

[sabrina 1]

39. I have been told by he POTUS that my 'meta data' along with that of millions of Verizon

Customers has been handed over to the Govt for 'collection and storage'. I have also been told, along with millions of other Verizon customers, that this was all perfectly legal because there was a warrant issued.

I want to know what probable cause of wrong doing was presented to the court that justified millions of warrants being issued for the meta data of Verizon.

This is my focus right now. Where are all those warrants and what was the probable cause that justified them?

I have no idea what they did or are doing with the 'data'. I didn't even know they had collected the data until Snowden's leaks exposed it.

So are they reading my emails? I don't know.

If you had asked me a year ago ... But ARE they collecting and storing your meta-data', I would have said 'I do not see how they could be doing that without some very good reason'. But then I found out that I was wrong. They did do it without any good reason.

So, are they reading people's emails? I am afraid to say 'no' because each day we are finding out more and more disturbing information about what our Government is up to and at this point, nothing would surprise me.

[VanillaRhapsody]

40. Metadata...is NOT data.

I don't know why you cannot understand this...

[Xithras]

68. Metadata can be data.

I work with XML metadata records all day long, so don't even try to tell me otherwise. Metadata can contain anything from simple connection records to lists of keywords excerpted from the content (yes, keyword excerpts are metadata). They can also contain external references to files or other data attached to the communication and stored elsewhere. The argument that it's "just metadata" is a bullshit game designed to calm those who are not technically literate. Unless they've published the structure for the metadata they're storing, there's no way for us to know what that metadata actually contains.


That structure is a government secret. We simply have to take their word for it that none of their metadata impinges on our privacy. That would require some credibility on their part, which is sorely lacking.

[VanillaRhapsody]

72. Yes I work with databases myself...

keywords are added to the metadata...I know because I add keywords to the meta tag. Keywords are still not content...there is a big difference between keywords and descriptions vs content.

[Xithras]

83. LOL!

So, the body of an email is content? But a list of keywords selected from that body is not content?

Body: "I really don't like terrorists. I think 9/11 was a disaster, and that Bin Laden was no Islamic hero. New attacks must be stopped!"

Keywords: "I, terrorists, 9/11, disaster, Bin Laden, Islamic, hero, Islamic hero, New, attacks, New attacks, stopped".

I built that keyword list by feeding that first sentence through a content indexer I use (used to autopopulate the keywords field for an enterprise search engine SEO tool). Explain to me how automated keyword excerpting pulling focus words isn't "content". In fact, as you can see from my example, they could even be more dangerous than the original content, as they remove the context of the word usage.

[VanillaRhapsody]

88. and how does this pertain to what we are talking about?

yeah I know a little about SEO too...I even know what long-tail keywords are...but I highly doubt that verizon is making ALL message contents a keyword....don't you?

[Xithras]

105. You said metadata isn't data.

Keywords are excerpts of data. And I'd be shocked if they weren't at least keywording email contents as it's relatively trivial to do. Phone conversations are a bit more complicated, but are entirely within the realm of current technology. The NSA has the computing power and the space to store both.

When the NSA's defenders claim that they're only storing "metadata", they're wilfully ignoring the fact that useful metadata could easily contain contents from the communication itself. Absent any opportunity for the public to verify otherwise, we're simply supposed to take their word for it that they're not doing so. We're supposed to trust the untrustworthy.

[VanillaRhapsody]

107. logistics....

You do XML right? Do you also do XHTML? Yes with XML I can make up my own tags....but communications need certain ones to identify them etc....thats the meta data. Data about data.. these meta tags are located in the head section of the code. Internet communications have specific DTD's that they use...

[Go Vols]

38. k

The Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act was passed in 2009 – also known as the HITECH Act. The goal is to promote the meaningful use of electronic health records. Provisions in Obamacare expand the HITECH Act by requiring use of electronic health records or face lower reimbursements from Medicare. In a nutshell, this will move the entire health care system to electronic medical records.

.............


So there is all this good potential use of electronic medical records. What is the downside?
Scary Potential #1: Monitoring by insurance companies or the government

We already know this is currently happening, although more through billing submissions than from actual medical records. Insurance companies and the government will comb metadata from physicians to understand trends in health care delivery on an individual and organizational basis. Physician’s delivery of preventive care will be monitored and reported on healthcare.gov. The payment scale for procedures that are being inappropriately over-utilized will be adjusted by the Medicare Independent Payment Advisory Board. Who knows what else will be done with the data?

http://www.forbes.com/sites/carolynmcclanahan/2013/06/11/privacy-versus-possibility-the-nsa-scandal-and-the-challenge-of-electronic-health-records/

[VanillaRhapsody]

42. all technology is yin and yang

with the development of all technology comes the down side.....it has its potential for good and for bad...

[VanillaRhapsody]

46. I see you that and raise you with:

http://www.hhs.gov/ocr/privacy/index.html

[Go Vols]

58. k

On July 14, 2010, HHS issued a rule that listed categories that included 701,325 entities and 1.5 million business associates who would have access to patient information without patient consent after the patient had given general consent to their medical practitioner's HIPAA release.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_Information_Technology_for_Economic_and_Clinical_Health_Act

[VanillaRhapsody]

64. means that they "could" doesn't mean that they did...

which is the ultimate point here....Unless you want to end the Internet revolution and go Galt. The only thing to do is to prosecute for the actual crime...not the ability to commit it.

[Yo_Mama]

28. If you are exposing participants to risk,

what other choice do you have?

[Aerows]

61. Integrity often means sacrifice n/t

[PowerToThePeople]

10. Please relocate to a safe offshore location.

I do not have any personal history with Groklaw, but have read plenty of articles that came from them. So, instead of email interception, we just lose the site completely. I do not see how this helps.

[sabrina 1]

37. They've seen what happened to Glenn Greenwald who was just a blogger who focused on

Civil Rights issues during the Bush years. As a lawyer this was his field. Then a few years later when he began writing about the Big Banks, he was targeted by a Private Security Corp, HB Gary, for a 'smear campaign' to 'intimidate him' and the methods of beginning the campaign were revealed eg, 'check out his family, see if he has kids, a wife etc'.

Anonymous exposed those emails. It was pretty chilling I'm sure for him to find out that as a relatively unknown blogger at the time, he was the target of a Private Security Corp bidding on a contract which included doing a 'smear job' on him.

But instead of allowing them to intimidate him, he continued to write about what he thought was important and he only gained a larger audience as a result.

However not all of us have that kind of courage and don't always feel it is worth bringing the power of the Government down on you if you have family to think about etc.

So I understand why this site is shutting down. Things are pretty scary here right now and what we did to try to fix things, 'vote democratic' didn't work. So what now?

[VanillaRhapsody]

43. Has something "happened" to Glenn Greenwald?

[sabrina 1]

49. Yes, there has been concerted smear campaign against him since HB Gary lost the contract

on him and it obviously went to someone else.

He has had powerful elected officials call for his prosecution, some even calling him a 'traitor'. That's pretty scary for a blogger, to see top Government officials calling for your prosecution on charges of espionage, including Media 'news' people. I would find that to be extremely frightening just for writing a blog.

Now things have escalated as his partner has been persecuted, his rights violated, threatened with jail and has had his possessions stolen from him by another powerful ally of the US. Done we are told to try to silence Greenwald.

If you think this is 'nothing' then you are very much in the minority as anger continues to grow at what this country has been revealed to have become.

Even if I despised someone, I would be horrified if they were treated the way Greenwald has been as it isn't about just this one journalist, it is about all of us.

[VanillaRhapsody]

57. OOOOh scary...

If you got involved with things that Greenwald has gotten himself into....shouldn't he be expecting all that?

And "persecuted" are you kidding me....being detained for questioning because your spouse is possibly involved in espionage is hardly unique....and it would be deplorable if not for the fact that his spouse claimed publicly that he would be using him as an actual mule for this data...

[grasswire]

62. oh, the memes, the memes!

espionage
mule

the memes!

[WillyT]

12. K & R !!!

[AnotherMcIntosh]

13. Groklaw is not the only law-related site that should shut down.

[JEB]

14. Repression, plain and simple.

With a whole lot of private security firms harvesting vast sums from the US Treasury. Cheney's wet dream. Can't believe we have defenders here.

[SpankMe]

20. Looks like they've finally won.

The government, that is.

They can't shut down controversial, informative whistle-blowing web sites directly as that would violate the first amendment.

But, spy on the web sites and serve National Security Letters (which are "legal" under the current climate) and scare them out of business.

I'd call it an "elegant" solution if it weren't so tragic and un-American.

[GliderGuider]

22. This is part of the indirect purpose of Miranda's detainment.

"You think you can screw with us? Think again, little fish!" And those with something to lose fold their hands.

[blackspade]

23. A sad day for law and order.

[Poll_Blind]

25. This was a VERY cool website and it will be missed. RIP. nt

PB

[nadinbrzezinski]

30. And...so it begins.

Didn't some of us predict this?

[warrprayer]

36. this is exactly the purpose

of the surveillance apparatus

[jazzimov]

78. This just doesn't "smell right".

It's hard for me to swallow that a blog that has been successful all this time with the program going on secretly suddenly goes shut because the program is revealed. If her company was truly successful, she'd find a way around this.

Sounds to me like her business was going under, anyway, and she's just using this as an excuse.

[liberal_at_heart]

86. the slow death of freedom continues. This was certainly bound to happen.

There will be more that give in than fight and no one can blame them, but there will always be a few like Snowden and Manning and Greenwald who will fight. And they will be our life line to the truth until the day we are all willing to stand up and fight.

[treestar]

91. Just like all those companies shutting down because of Obamacare

Yeah, right.

[Blue_Tires]

92. Sad...how many more will follow?

[liberal_at_heart]

94. What authoritarians never understand is that the resisters never really go away. They just go

underground.