An M-66 is a perfectly legal firecracker sold in all states where firecrackers are legal, and purchased by what is probably millions of people over the years.
The author of this inane hit piece Declan McCullagh, gives his title as "Chief Political Correspondent" at CNET, and an employee of CBS. He posts that Ms. Catalano posted "photos of explosives."
Are M-66 explosives? Yep. Firecrackers are in fact explosives. They are also legal to purchase, possess, and light.
How is posting a stock photo of these firecrackers to your Facebook feed on July 4th relevant to anything at all? CNET Chief Political Correspondent Declan McCullagh certainly is implying that posting such a stock photo gives the JTTF, whose members are generally coordinated under and paid by the FBI, the right to search your house and ask questions about pressure cookers which you happen to have recently done a google search for. Why does CNET Chief Political Correspondent Declan McCullagh believe this is justified or that anyone would consider posting a stock photo of firecrackers on the 4th of July to be something anyone would reasonably expect should lead to an armed house search and interrogation by JTTF members?
What does this stock firecracker photo posted on July 4th have to do with JTTF agents searching this couple's house and asking them specific questions about whether they owned a pressure cooker?
Jesus. He's not saying the visit was a good idea. In fact, he's said the opposite. Character assassination is bad enough, but to do it for absolutely no reason at all?
The fact is that you have absolutely no idea what happened, or even what some of the words in your comment (like "JTTF") actually mean. But you've got strong opinions and a lot of outrage. Because you're an outrage tourist. I wouldn't be surprised if you'd be angrier to find out that the FBI HADN'T been dragnetting Google.
Sheesh, this is one of the most inane comments I've ever read on HN (which says something). My post wasn't a defense of the cops. I never said the visit was justified.
If anything, as I wrote, it makes the cops look even more dumb. And if I'm a cop who's told by my supervisor to ask some guy about a bomb, and we have a 45-minute discussion, in the wake of the Boston bombing I definitely will ask about pressure cookers. This is how the real world works outside of HN, folks.
An M-66 is a perfectly legal firecracker sold in all states where firecrackers are legal
That is as irrelevant as saying, "An M-66 is an illegal firecracker, banned in all states where firecrackers are illegal." Are they legal in the state where Catalano resides? Even if they are, it only takes a nosy neighbor to make a phone call about explosives to generate an overboard police response.
I knew Michele a long time ago when she blogged regularly about politics on A Small Victory (asmallvictory.net). Back then she was very sensationalistic, and would go out of her way to artificially inflate or dramatize stories. I'm not surprised she drew the conclusion that the visit was due to Google searches; I also wouldn't be surprised if she intentionally inflated the story, she has always had a talent for getting attention.
Also worth noting. She was a pretty loud blogger post 9/11 and during the Iraq invasion. She ran a very popular Iraq invasion blog, lauded for updating about the invasion faster than the mainstream media. It would not surprise me in the least if the Feds have her on some list or another (not saying that's ok mind you). The Washington Post article about this talks about whether she'd be on a watch list, and Michele talks about searching for how to cook lentils and ending up on a watch list ("This is where we are at," Catalono wrote. "Where you have no expectation of privacy. Where trying to learn how to cook some lentils could possibly land you on a watch list."). That part is Michele knowing exactly how to craft a sound bite for media consumption. I suspect this story is demonstrating a real abuse by the terrorism obsessed police / feds, and the rest is Michele throwing fuel on the fire for the headlines.
It's unlikely that Google searches led to this. Most searches are done over HTTPS by default these days. Plus it was local law enforcement, and while the feds may share leads, it's unlikely info gleaned from an illegal top secret NSA program targeting citizens would be exposed to those citizens in this manner 100 times a week.
A county police "task force" monitoring local citizen Facebook posts is a MUCH more plausible explanation. Still disturbing, but the reporting on this so far has been terrible.
I find it unlikely that the JTTF don't have access to prism and other tools, so that seems a more likely avenue to me; searching for pressure cookers could lead to all sorts of non-https pages on amazon for example. After all that's exactly what these tools are designed to do - dig whatever the operators consider flags for terrorism this week out of the haystack of Internet traffic.
Ahh but it is exactly when we are celebrating our superior freedoms and democracy (which the whole world is naturally jealous of) that the terrorists will attempt to strike a cowardly blow at those very same things we are celebrating. Therefore any and all expressions of said celebration are veeery suspect indeed.
I have a feeling most people who are up in arms about this haven't been visited by the police because they live in a bad neighborhood and "there were reports of X" happening in their apartment. When their neighbor was wrong, or the dispatcher had the wrong number, or whatever.
Or because they got tired on a long drive and pulled over on the side of the road to sleep. Waking up to a spotlight, then a gun and flashlight in the hands of a bored cop on the night shift is a tense situation.
TL/DR: Lazy and irresponsible journalist makes wild and unsubstantiated claim in the process of pointing out wild and unsubstantiated claims by other lazy and irresponsible journalists.
It's an entirely stupid reason for a police visit. It could have been a film of someone setting an actual bomb, and it would still be an entirely stupid reason for a police visit.
This M. L. Hunt person in his comments writes a very reasonable response:
"+Declan McCullagh In her account she mentions the cops specifically asking her husband if they have a pressure cooker. Assuming that is true, where do you think they got that idea from? Besides, how many millions of people do you think posted pictures of fireworks, even relatively powerful ones like M-66s, around 04July? What do you think made Ms. Catalano's photo(s?) particularly worthy of follow-up?
It seems to me you are bending over backwards to make this story seem less worrisome than it is. But like others who have replied to your post, I don't find a whole lot of comfort in your alternate scenario even if it turns out to be more in line with what actually happened.
But anyway, you're a journalist, aren't you? Do you have any plans to try to get to the bottom of what actually happened here? Or do you just plan to stand on the sidelines and try to pooh-pooh the whole thing?"
To which good ol' Declan responds: "Alas, I'm working on an unrelated story today."
This is in reference to HN item - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6140545 right? So is the question why are police visiting her house about fireworks, or why she thought they connected her pressure cooker and backpack Google searches? Or is the question about why are news establishments doing little to no fact checking before they publish something?
That's quite disturbing. Ok, it was posted on a social media, which may not be perceived as needing as much quality work than a press paper, etc.
But how could a journalist be such on the affirmative without presenting any source ? We can't even see the facebook post he's talking about. The guy reacts to a shitstorm by providing unsourced opinion with a well established media name to link a cop operation with a stock firework picture supposed to be posted in USA on 4th.
Yes, it's lacking "rigorous" work. It's a G+ post, which is almost by definition not "rigorous." Sheesh. Would you like a refund on your subscription fees?
[+] [-] droithomme|12 years ago|reply
http://www.fireworksforever.com/products-page/firecracker/m-...
Only $11.59 for a box of 36.
The author of this inane hit piece Declan McCullagh, gives his title as "Chief Political Correspondent" at CNET, and an employee of CBS. He posts that Ms. Catalano posted "photos of explosives."
Are M-66 explosives? Yep. Firecrackers are in fact explosives. They are also legal to purchase, possess, and light.
How is posting a stock photo of these firecrackers to your Facebook feed on July 4th relevant to anything at all? CNET Chief Political Correspondent Declan McCullagh certainly is implying that posting such a stock photo gives the JTTF, whose members are generally coordinated under and paid by the FBI, the right to search your house and ask questions about pressure cookers which you happen to have recently done a google search for. Why does CNET Chief Political Correspondent Declan McCullagh believe this is justified or that anyone would consider posting a stock photo of firecrackers on the 4th of July to be something anyone would reasonably expect should lead to an armed house search and interrogation by JTTF members?
What does this stock firecracker photo posted on July 4th have to do with JTTF agents searching this couple's house and asking them specific questions about whether they owned a pressure cooker?
[+] [-] tptacek|12 years ago|reply
The fact is that you have absolutely no idea what happened, or even what some of the words in your comment (like "JTTF") actually mean. But you've got strong opinions and a lot of outrage. Because you're an outrage tourist. I wouldn't be surprised if you'd be angrier to find out that the FBI HADN'T been dragnetting Google.
[+] [-] declan|12 years ago|reply
If anything, as I wrote, it makes the cops look even more dumb. And if I'm a cop who's told by my supervisor to ask some guy about a bomb, and we have a 45-minute discussion, in the wake of the Boston bombing I definitely will ask about pressure cookers. This is how the real world works outside of HN, folks.
[+] [-] NoPiece|12 years ago|reply
That is as irrelevant as saying, "An M-66 is an illegal firecracker, banned in all states where firecrackers are illegal." Are they legal in the state where Catalano resides? Even if they are, it only takes a nosy neighbor to make a phone call about explosives to generate an overboard police response.
[+] [-] adventured|12 years ago|reply
Also worth noting. She was a pretty loud blogger post 9/11 and during the Iraq invasion. She ran a very popular Iraq invasion blog, lauded for updating about the invasion faster than the mainstream media. It would not surprise me in the least if the Feds have her on some list or another (not saying that's ok mind you). The Washington Post article about this talks about whether she'd be on a watch list, and Michele talks about searching for how to cook lentils and ending up on a watch list ("This is where we are at," Catalono wrote. "Where you have no expectation of privacy. Where trying to learn how to cook some lentils could possibly land you on a watch list."). That part is Michele knowing exactly how to craft a sound bite for media consumption. I suspect this story is demonstrating a real abuse by the terrorism obsessed police / feds, and the rest is Michele throwing fuel on the fire for the headlines.
[+] [-] abalone|12 years ago|reply
A county police "task force" monitoring local citizen Facebook posts is a MUCH more plausible explanation. Still disturbing, but the reporting on this so far has been terrible.
[+] [-] grey-area|12 years ago|reply
There's now a guardian article up about this with contradictory responses from the FBI and local police.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/01/new-york-police...
I find it unlikely that the JTTF don't have access to prism and other tools, so that seems a more likely avenue to me; searching for pressure cookers could lead to all sorts of non-https pages on amazon for example. After all that's exactly what these tools are designed to do - dig whatever the operators consider flags for terrorism this week out of the haystack of Internet traffic.
[+] [-] declan|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] MrKurtz|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] princess3000|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mladenkovacevic|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] nutate|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] username223|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] famousactress|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] pravda|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tptacek|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|12 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] brown9-2|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] freehunter|12 years ago|reply
I'm not sure if the original story is true. But this guy's interpretation of the events does seem even further off-base.
[+] [-] makerops|12 years ago|reply
Ah...I get it...that would never happen in the US.
[+] [-] lawnchair_larry|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] falk|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] speeder|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Dirlewanger|12 years ago|reply
Any hard sources on this besides this guy blabbing off and making more drama?
[+] [-] mladenkovacevic|12 years ago|reply
"+Declan McCullagh In her account she mentions the cops specifically asking her husband if they have a pressure cooker. Assuming that is true, where do you think they got that idea from? Besides, how many millions of people do you think posted pictures of fireworks, even relatively powerful ones like M-66s, around 04July? What do you think made Ms. Catalano's photo(s?) particularly worthy of follow-up?
It seems to me you are bending over backwards to make this story seem less worrisome than it is. But like others who have replied to your post, I don't find a whole lot of comfort in your alternate scenario even if it turns out to be more in line with what actually happened.
But anyway, you're a journalist, aren't you? Do you have any plans to try to get to the bottom of what actually happened here? Or do you just plan to stand on the sidelines and try to pooh-pooh the whole thing?"
To which good ol' Declan responds: "Alas, I'm working on an unrelated story today."
Well that settles that.
[+] [-] joshdance|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] minimax|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mdesq|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] muyuu|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unreal37|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] oelmekki|12 years ago|reply
But how could a journalist be such on the affirmative without presenting any source ? We can't even see the facebook post he's talking about. The guy reacts to a shitstorm by providing unsourced opinion with a well established media name to link a cop operation with a stock firework picture supposed to be posted in USA on 4th.
That's at least lacking rigorous work.
[+] [-] declan|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] declan|12 years ago|reply
[+] [-] vectorpush|12 years ago|reply