While most eyes are focused on the presidential race between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, three major events prove how widespread, and dangerous, mass surveillance has become in the West. Standing alone, each event highlights exactly the severe threats that motivated Edward Snowden to blow his whistle; taken together, they constitute full-scale vindication of everything he’s done.
Earlier this month, a special British court that rules on secret spying activities issued an emphatic denunciation of the nation’s domestic mass surveillance programs. The court found that “British security agencies have secretly and unlawfully collected massive volumes of confidential personal data, including financial information, on citizens for more than a decade.” Those agencies, the court found, “operated an illegal regime to collect vast amounts of communications data, tracking individual phone and web use and other confidential personal information, without adequate safeguards or supervision for 17 years.”
On Thursday, an even more scathing condemnation of mass surveillance was issued by the Federal Court of Canada. The ruling “faulted Canada’s domestic spy agency for unlawfully retaining data and for not being truthful with judges who authorize its intelligence programs.” Most remarkable was that these domestic, mass surveillance activities were not only illegal, but completely unknown to virtually the entire population in Canadian democracy, even though their scope has indescribable implications for core liberties: “The center in question appears to be the Canadian Security Intelligence Service’s equivalent of a crystal ball — a place where intelligence analysts attempt to deduce future threats by examining, and re-examining, volumes of data.”
The third scandal also comes from Canada — a critical partner in the Five Eyes spying alliance along with the U.S. and U.K. — where law enforcement officials in Montreal are now defending “a highly controversial decision to spy on a La Presse columnist [Patrick Lagacé] by tracking his cellphone calls and texts and monitoring his whereabouts as part of a necessary internal police investigation.” The targeted journalist, Lagacé, had enraged police officials by investigating their abusive conduct, and they then used surveillance technology to track his calls and movements to unearth the identity of his sources. Just as that scandal was exploding, it went, in the words of the Montreal Gazette, “from bad to worse” as the ensuing scrutiny revealed that police had actually “tracked the calls and movements of six journalists that year after news reports based on leaks revealed Michel Arsenault, then president of Quebec’s largest labour federation, had his phone tapped.”
Speaking this week at Montreal’s McGill University, Snowden called for the resignation of Montreal’s police chief and denounced the spying as a “radical attack on the operations of the free press.” Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said, “Obviously I think that the troubling stories — troubling for all Canadians — coming out of Québec … will lead to reflection on how we must and can continue to ensure protection of the press and their rights.” The Canadian Journalists for Free Expression’s Tom Henheffer made the key point — about this specific abuse but also mass surveillance systems generally:
You can’t even make the argument that this is just a few bad apples because it was authorized by a justice of the peace. This is the system as it’s supposed to work. Which just goes to show that the whole system is broken.
So just this month alone, two key members of the Five Eyes alliance have been found by courts and formal investigations to be engaged in mass surveillance that was both illegal and pervasive, as well as, in the case of Canada, abusing surveillance powers to track journalists to uncover their sources. When Snowden first spoke publicly, these were exactly the abuses and crimes he insisted were being committed by the mass surveillance regime these nations had secretly erected and installed, claims that were vehemently denied by the officials in charge of those systems.
Yet with each new investigation and judicial inquiry, and as more evidence is unearthed, Snowden’s core claims are increasingly vindicated. Western officials are indeed addicted to unaccountable, secretive, abusive systems of mass surveillance used against their own citizens and foreigners alike, and the more those systems take root, the more core liberties are eroded.
The New Republic: “Edward Snowden was right. Glenn Greenwald was right. The American Civil Liberties Union was right.”
Donald Trump Will Have His Eye on You
In my opinion, Snowden is an example of heroic integrity. I just want to add that another great grassroots fait was made yesterday, awesome people voted to bring some black markets to the light, cheers! lets keep the momentum!
Snowden’s revelation of PRISM may be an example of heroic integrity. Unfortunately, the vast majority of the other documents he leaked had everything to with legitimate foreign-intelligence operations.
I don’t disagree that choosing to leak PRISM at such tremendous risk to himself was heroic, but Snowden did not limit his disclosures to legitimate civil liberties issues.
Snowden is a problematic figure at best.
“legitimate foreign-intelligence operations.”
In other words, spying on “foreign” neighbors. They look different, think differently, govern themselves differently. And after all, there is this invisible, man-made geographical line that separates us.
Our government snoops and gleans data from others without their consent because some consider that–by their own false standards–to be legitimate. Peeping Tom rules were created to govern the behavior of those who might feel tempted toward sexual deviancy, but at its core it is all about protection of privacy. In this case, stealing data to gain political and/or economic advantage: it is doubtful which is worse.
“intelligence Surveillance” involves implanting everyone with a biochip that enables law enforcement to see what they see, hear what they hear, and supposedly take control of their mind”.. Safeguards in a World of Ambient Intelligence page 9. They implanted me and have tortured me for nearly a decade. Virginia state police take credit for the Virginia Tech massacre. They were so happy to have murdered all those innocent people. See Terrorism and Mental Health by Amin Gadit. He states that American Scientists told him they could direct someone to commit suicide or mass murder without them having any memory of it. They are torturing infants and children for a “chance” at world peace. William and Mary’s Obstacles and Promise of The Active Denial System. We only know that they have perpetrated the unpardonable sin of blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. To believe that you can control the mind of one held by the Holy Spirit is the unpardonable sin of blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. They basically believe they are stronger, smarter and better than God. They are the largest domestic cell of terrorist in this nation. Lawyers, doctors, surgeons, social workers, hospitals, labs, radiologists, etc. are making big bucks murdering and torturing victims of this technology. Don’t be an organ donor in Virginia. According the medical examiners office on CBS in Richmond, law enforcement have murders thousands and sold their brians according to whistleblower Dr. Whaley. Medicaid Expansion = Medicaid Fraud. It is the largest boost to Virginia’s economy since 2014. They are so criminal in Virginia. Don’t bother to report it to the FBI – they do it too!
Makes the Stasi look like amateurs!
Talk about Orange is the new Black …
this is our Brexit. People are sick of the status quo and people decided to pour sand on the gears of the machine.
It was sweet seeing Podesta claim it is too close to call.
and NBC just announced Hillary has conceded with a phone call to President-elect Trump.
@Gator
You’ve become utterly dishonest. First, I’ve seen no evidence that “most people on the left” think Hillary Clinton is more bellicose than Trump. What people on the left are, in fact, very sure of is that she is a goddam warmonger who is saber-rattling at Russia.
There’s a reason that well, well, before the Trump candidacy many prominent neoconservatives were lining up to say they supported her for her foreign policy awesomeness. (Yes, some of the worst crazies among them are ardently for Trump — they hold insane views about Hilary Clinton that do not reflect reality; that is, they think she’s some sort of Marxist, secret Muslim-lover who has Muslim Brotherhood members on her staff. Those types are pro-Trump, quite i and do not count.)
I don’t give a shit what you think or say any longer, Gator. And I certainly do not care about any future “apologies” for your grotesque Hillary apologia that will almost certainly be shown to be worse than wrong. You have no excuses and cannot be operating from ignorance, so I do not have much use left for you, at all.
Damn. The tiny subset of humanity that gives a shit what I think or say has been reduced by one. A painful loss to be sure. But whether you give a shit or not, that faint snickering sound you hear as President-Elect Clinton is sworn in will be me.
“that faint snickering sound you hear ”
is little different than HRC snickering as Libya was slaughtered.
She’s got that same ‘wink’ soft spot you do.
Gator, it is 10:28 p.m. Eastern. Trump has taken Ohio and the NYT has it at 86% likely Donald Trump is our next President. Trump has 167 electoral votes, Hillary 107.
Gator, you — who voted for Hillary in the primaries — what do you think of the Democrats sabotaging a hugely popular, anti-establishment candidate who, in every poll, showed him beating Trump far more so than Hillary could?
If I didn’t know better, I’d think that you asking me what I think indicates some degree of interest in what I think. But I do know better, of course — you just want to enjoy your I-told-you-so dance. Which is fine, knock yourself out.
But just in case you really do want to know what I’m thinking right now, it is only this:
FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK
How’s the Bern looking now? Hillary has always been a loser. The people wanted change but the DNC torpedoed that.
Perhaps you can visit her in prison …
Actually, I’m sick and frightened. For the fate of African-Americans and Muslims, criminal justice reform, and the prospect of Attorney General Giuliani. Then there’s the Supreme Court.
This is heinous.
The sole satisfaction I take is the comeuppance of the arrogant, venal assholes of the DNC, including Hillary Clinton. They deserve their humiliating loss and misery — if only it didn’t come at the expense, the severe expense — of so many innocents.
All of you have a great deal to answer for.
Maybe Bernie Sanders would have somehow turned back the tsunami of white racial fury that just swept across the country. Maybe there were thousands of Trump voters in battleground states who would have voted for Sanders instead, if only Sanders had been on the ballot. I doubt it, but we’ll never know.
You are free to nurse your grievances from the primary campaign (including the dastardly vote of a certain dipshit Jew lawyer in Florida) for as long as they give you comfort. Meantime, I will get back to the insipid motion I’m drafting — since I can’t sleep and there’s no way in hell I’m watching TV right now — and try to figure out how to explain all this to my daughters. (And no, “Daddy voted for the wrong person back in March because he’s not as smart as Mona” won’t suffice.)
More than sabre Rattling she literally organised the funding to over throw the elected Government of Ukraine, but it gets worse because she also dealt with Al Qaeda to attempt regime change in Syria and did so also in Libya!! But dont get all excited because there is significant talk that the US was covertly funding the Chechen Rebels through Georgia and that was a Republican action noting the same major Player in all of this Victoria Nuland! We may even see old Bonkers Bolton back causing his mayhem except God forbid as the Secretary of State!
@lion, don’t forget her love affair with the head-choppers in Saudi Arabia, her unconditional support for that rogue nuclear state in the Middle East that’s fully embracing the philosophy of Der Fuehrer, her criminal activities here at home…
Great article by Mr. Greenwald.
What is most disturbing with these latest revelations re: Canada and the UK is that they follow a sinister pattern. These spy outfits realize that sooner or later their spying will be uncovered. But it takes years, often.
So then the spin is: well, we’ve been doing this for years and nothing horrible has happened. So what? We can spy to protect you and we aren’t creating a new Stasi or KGB. See, no harm, no foul.
This is the (illegal) wearing down of legally protected privacy and civil liberties. With the excuse that despite the illegality, it’s “not so bad” since only “bad people” are affected. So no worries citizen!
Average citizens may buy into this argument since the abuses go on for so long undetected and they are persuaded that the authorities “can be trusted.” Yes, until they can’t.
Either we live in a Police State or we don’t. And we can’t really know what the consequences are for this spying since there is still no transparency.
So meanwhile, despite written Constitutions, legal protections, etc. it is a slow torture of drip-drip-drip erosion of actual privacy. The dumbing and numbing down of public consciousness.
Thanks to the Intercept we at least are being made aware of this.
RRHeard, disagreeing with me about the significance of DJT’s endorsement by the KKK, asks: “And exactly how much economic, political muscle or relevance does the KKK have in America?”
The KKK, though a spent and marginalized organization in the formal sense, is an enduring and universally recognizable symbol of white supremacy, which, I submit, retains a great deal of muscle and relevance in America. If the embrace of a major-party presidential nominee by open and avowed white supremacists (who speak for millions of quieter white supremacists) doesn’t tell you something important about said nominee and the party that selected him, you should check your privilege.
It’s hard to see these days who’s in cahoots
‘Cause now the KKK wears three-piece suits
It’s like that, y’all
It’s like that, y’all
In fact you know it’s like that, y’all
–Public Enemy
@ Gator 90
Only one privileged in this conversation is you. The practicing attorney with a very limited speciality that feels he doesn’t have to do his own research on anything unless you are being paid. Maybe you should check yours, because I’m pretty sure if we compare “privilege” in life you’ve got my life story beat hands down.
As far as this goes:
And that’s a prime example of why I think you’re intellectually lazy (or not very smart, I’m not sure which)–something can’t be both a “spent and marginalized” ideology or organization and also “retain a great deal of muscle and relevance”. Those statements are self-refuting.
So the only thing it tells me, other than America still believes in the First Amendment enough to allow fringe bigots to openly state their opinions in this nation, is that an ever shrinking minority of Americans still cling to irrational and idiotic beliefs out of fear, which has absolutely zero to do with the what we are talking about.
And here’s a newsflash for the lazy intellectual guy, the KKK just about always endorses some candidate, or runs one for Senate in the case of David Duke.
Do you believe the KKK will ever go away? My guess is no. There will always be “fringe” beliefs in America which stand for nothing other than as symbols that America tolerates fringe beliefs and/or that at one time those beliefs were or may have been more prevalent I America’s past. But that demographic is dying and that’s simply a fact.
So the fact the KKK openly embraces Donald Trump means absolutely zero as a practical matter. But it works really well as a propaganda tool for people who are at base cowards. Stand up to bullies and bigots or don’t. But don’t give them the power over you or anyone else of fearing them. I wasn’t raised that way, maybe you were, but that’s your problem not mine, and again has nothing to do with what we were talking about.
@RR
The KKK is a small, de-centralized organization that does not enjoy a glowing reputation, at least not in public. That fact in no way demonstrates that white supremacy is a “fringe belief” among white Americans. (Surely a super-intellectual like yourself has no trouble grasping the distinction.)
You know as little of my life story as I know of yours. But let’s assume, for the sake of argument only, that I was born to wealthy parents and my legal career has been highly remunerative, and that neither of those fortunate circumstances applies to you. That would give me certain economic or class-based privileges that you lack. But there are of course other types of privilege, such as those of maleness and whiteness, that you would retain irrespective of your financial status.
I believe that you are white, but if that is not accurate, feel free to so advise. If you are black, then you are among the small minority of African-Americans who believe white supremacy is a mere “fringe” ideology clung to only by a “dying” demographic. (One might say you hold a “fringe” opinion among African-Americans.) But if you are indeed white, your privilege is showing, big-time.
rr is, I believe, hispanic. You absolutely do have a privilege– you are a white, professional American.
Your candidate isn’t going to be bombing the fuck out of your brown families and co-religionists all over the Middle East.
That all said, Trump’s candidacy clearly has unleashed the bowels of racist hell in the U.S., such that those who used to have to take more care in their statements are now boldly and proudly “out” as the undiluted white supremacists they’ve longed to be. Still, a significant cohort of blacks will not vote for HRC because she’s the racist who wears gloves. Super-predators, anyone?
As I’ve posted before, Michelle Alexander, author of the great book The New Jim Crow puts it well: Why Hillary Clinton Doesn’t Deserve the Black Vote
Hi Mona. I will let the percentages of the African-American vote received by HRC in the 2016 Democratic primaries and general election, respectively, speak for themselves.
I think your fears of HRC raining death all over the Mid-East (let alone starting a war with Russia) are hyperbolic, but we’ll see what happens. If I’m wrong, I’ll admit it. While some folks on the left seem to assume that HRC would be a more bellicose president than Donald “bomb the shit out of ’em” Trump, the basis of such assumptions is unclear to me.
“I will let the percentages of the African-American vote received by HRC in the 2016 Democratic primaries and general election, respectively, speak for themselves. ”
Of course the African-American vote is in response to HRC actions to better the lives of African-Americans, especially women and children …
The positive view of HRC held by the majority of African-Americans is, therefore, appropriate.
Thanks for pointing that out.
Yes,African Americans in the south exposed their antisemitism by voting en mass for HRC,who has never done one thing to help blacks,latinos or muslims,instead of the socialist BS,who would have helped them.
Talk about suicide.
Is the truth racist?You know who says so.
Funny how Gator manages to assert his higher station while dissing rr. (are you not white and male?) I’m pretty sure rr has Native American heritage.
Gator rarely argues; he asserts his position and then asks how can you not see it.
I know RR is male unless his parents gave him a highly unusual name for a girl. As to his ethnicity, I thought him to be white; Mona says Hispanic; you say he “has Native American heritage.” Perhaps he will return and clear up the mystery if he is so inclined.
“Mona says Hispanic; you say he “has Native American heritage.” ”
We are both correct.
(god, did I just say ‘Mona and I are both correct?’!
Today is Armageddon after-all …)
RR, I meant to add, just as an aside, that my aversion to research has nothing to do with any privilege as far as I can tell. It’s just that I don’t enjoy doing research and I have to do a lot of it as part of my job, so it’s not how I like to spend my free time. (For some perverse reason I’d rather spend it arguing with some dude in Oregon who thinks I’m lazy, stupid or both. Go figure.)
Gator drips condescension. He pleads he is only trying to discuss his position rationally; from the high ground, naturally.
He is a smug asshole and he’s not really ashamed of it. (he’s proud to stand taller than the other races) His cheap shot at Pedinska speaks volumes.
If I come across as condescending and/or smug, I truly don’t mean to. I tend to dislike those qualities in others, and that is not the impression I want to make on anyone, even you. I’ll work on that.
Pedinska and I have been interacting in GG’s forum for many years, and I believe our “relationship” (for lack of a better a better term) has been and remains one of mutual respect, the occasional dust-up notwithstanding.
Hillaryous;The KKK are less venal and murderous,and not stealing others lands like the zionists,and funny,the KKK likes zion.Babes in arms.
Hypocrisy writ huge.
Screw them both,but I will agree they have the right to be what they are in a free society.
A bit OT perhaps, Glenn, but wanted you to see this clip of Stephen Colbert if you missed it, discussing how he too wants a post-election “apocalypse bunker.”
http://www.colbertnewshub.com/2016/11/05/stephen-colberts-appearance-on-cbs-this-morning-3/
Does anyone here know how to contact the commenter going by the moniker Mister? He may have been caught over the weekend in the site’s spam filter, but should again be good to go.
Spam Filter
Oh, is that what happened to Mani…..lol…..
Yes! But that was on purpose, and he should still be there. But in deleting his libelous threads it swept up a bunch of folk, apparently all to spam. Then when trying to let us out over the weekend, one who was supposed to remain was, I think the only one released.
IT then got on it this morning and it’s mostly all worked out. This all got confusing and the one other miscreant may still be released, but if he doesn’t repeat I prolly won’t say anything because the writer and the IT staff have wasted enough time on this nonsense.
But I do want Mister to know he hadn’t been banned! He just happened to be one of the participants in one of the deleted threads and should now be FREEEE!
Glenn interviewed by Benajmin Dixon on journalism, Wikileaks, Democrats/HRC
Dixon’s show is great, pretty much all the time.
Excellent conversation!
Thank you.
@ Glenn
Those poor humorless unknown outside their own echo chamber satire challenged sad sacks at LGM, are at it again:
http://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2016/11/predictions-2
It really is embarrassing when second rate academics try to gain relevancy off the coattails of someone’s work that is more influential in every arena than anything any of them will ever write in their entire academic careers. Sad really.
Was GG’s prediction of “unprecedented bipartisan unity” behind HRC in fact an attempt at humor or satire? I’m not saying it wasn’t, but it’s not obvious to me.
(You should start commenting at LGM on a regular basis, RR. Even though all the popcorn I would consume probably wouldn’t be good for me.)
@ Gator 90
Humor or satire, it struck me as one or the other, but fair enough that it wasn’t obvious to all. But the point I think Glenn was trying to articulate with that tweet (in context) is one I agree with, and one Glenn has made consistently over many years i.e. there is “bipartisan unity” on the vast majority of policies that are the most consequential to the American public (war, foreign policy, banking, economic ideology generally, campaign finance, “entitlement reform” etc. etc. . . . .) notwithstanding the pantomime that politicians engage in attempting to draw purported meaningful distinctions without much of a difference in those arenas. And which the mainstream media generally refuses to recognize.
Instead the media loves to focus on the narrow band of “culture issue” differences, that while undoubtedly consequential to those individuals whose lives are impacted by those policies, really do nothing to address the big bipartisan consensus among elites on the big issues (and which is contrary to what the vast majority of the American people want in those arenas).
As far as me commenting there, my feeling is this, if they are going to sit around and defame Glenn and accuse him of position he’s never taken, or misrepresent and decontextualize the ones he does for clicks (or even worse if they believe their own drivel), then fuck em. They aren’t interested in intellectually honest dialogue. So I don’t see much point in engaging them on the merits and taken together with the fact they are non-influential nobodies in anything that could be described as a “national dialogue” in the blogosphere, why give them the click fodder of the comments section dust ups I’d instigate over there?
Moreover, they (the authors and commenters) are with some narrow exceptions, ideologically rigid bean counters. And by that I mean they study and write about “politics” from a “polling” and very insider baseball technical understanding of politics that doesn’t believe in the possibility of “transformational politics” and fails to understand that most human politics isn’t “rational” in the sense of proceeding from verifiable “facts” and “logical” argument. That’s simply not how most human beings understand politics, nor is it what motivates humans to engage in politics or influences how they vote. I think for his faults, Prof. George Lakoff understands this better than all of them combined. But for reasons that are very clear to me at this point, the Democratic Party at a national level does not want to empower a unified class based politics of the working class–because that’s not who they see as funding them, nor do they even care about them or the issues that are important to them, because quite frankly the modern Democratic Party believes they are intellectually, morally and technocratically superior to all those voters and feel they are fit to “rule” the world consistent with the policies that benefit the perpetuation of their class(es)’ interests and “world savior” worldview of America.
So they would much rather characterize every Trump supporter as illogical misogynist/racist (overt and/or subconscious) drooling imbeciles in bed with Putin and Assad. And anybody on the left who doesn’t line up behind Hillary Clinton are functionally the same.
Now I’m not suggesting there isn’t a big block of humans who are motivated by those sorts of irrational impulses (racism/misogyny), and many are aligned with Trump’s campaign, because there are. But I detest anyone who makes such a facile argument about those who are generally ideologically “on their side” to the degree real leftists are in agreement with “liberals” like the LGM crew (excepting Loomis).
But, again, not all of Trump’s supporters are and there is a significant minority motivated by other factors, at least primarily, and not overt racism/misogyny (even if subconsciously influenced by certain antiquated cultural/gender worldviews). Now I’m not saying I agree with what motivates that significant minority, but to misrepresent it is to not understand it in the first instance.
And as far as those second rate academics at LGM are concerned, they are quite content to “hippie/leftist” bash with glee because they identify (for quite obvious reasons) with the class of people that are aligned with Hillary Clinton’s worldview, even though a few were vocal Bernie Sanders advocates during the primary.
Presumably, and predictably, they have a very difficult time engaging in dialogue that is intellectually honest with anyone who doesn’t share the basic premises of their worldview (“pragmatism”/”LOTE” voting). Now I’ve always carved out Prof. Loomis out of that herd mentality given his “class” related teaching and writing. But even he succumbs to these childish critiques of Glenn’s work, petty backbiting and misrepresentations of same. They all treat Fredrick DeBoer the same way by and large. And Prof. Corey Robin, who based on his body of work, none of them are fit to carry Prof. Robin’s satchel to class. That’s how petty and lacking in intellectual rigor I find those goofs at LGM to be. Most first year philosophy students could blow up most of their moral “arguments”, and I find other than Loomis their areas of study to be largely navel gazing and data crunching that adds nothing to the greater American dialogue. I mean none of them are even in the same analytical ballpark of the now deceased Prof. Sheldon Wolin or Chomsky in his prime, they are wannabes that will never be.
So bottom line is to spend my time commenting there, as opposed to just keeping abreast of their arguments du jour is a waste of my time. That, and I find with the exception of Prof. Loomis, their writing is very glib and superficial except when it comes to some “technocratic” analysis of politics or polling or whatever. Not saying that doesn’t have some marginal value in America, I just think it misses the forest for the trees.
@RR — Without endorsing your characterizations of the LGM authors/commenters, I understand why you wouldn’t find commenting there a worthwhile use of your time. I was just selfishly thinking of the potential entertainment value, for me, of your participation in that forum.
It appears to me that the folks at LGM understand GG’s non-humorous point, as described by you, perfectly well. You and GG believe that the purported differences between the major parties are insignificant compared to the similarities. The LGM people just disagree, as do I. (I think it significant, for example, that one party recently nominated a candidate who has the enthusiastic endorsement of the Ku Klux Klan, and the other party, well, didn’t. But your mileage may vary.)
I don’t know about yourview, Gator, but that is NOT the position of most at LGM. LGM doesn’t recognize especially important similarities or consensus between the two parties. Their vitriolic hostility toward Glenn is entirely based on the fact that not only does he see the huge areas of important consensus, he highlights and inveighs against this destructive reality.
For the neoliberals at LGM this simply will not do.
Moreover, Glenn has not said such differences as exist between the parties are “insignificant.” Not ever. He’s said the opposite.
No, LGM despises Glenn for tenaciously using his platform and high profile to show up neoliberals for what they are.
LGM is a collection of the enemies of justice and equality, as well as being functional supporters of imperialism and militarism. They are the Bad Guys. Period. Not in the least bit entertaining.
And let’s recall that you posted a nauseating, giddy comment rhapsodizing about being in The Presence of [genuflecting] Hillary Clinton — after voting for her in the primary — and (gasp) shaking her hand. You, Gator are far more on Neolib Team LGM than you are in ideological agreement with Glenn or most of us here.
Hi Mona. My exaggeratedly rhapsodic account of meeting HRC was posted here for the specific purpose of annoying you (and other HRC-haters here), because I thought it would be fun to do so. And it was.
Which is not to say I didn’t enjoy meeting her. I did. I don’t agree with you that she is vile, foul, etc. I think she has a number of admirable qualities and may well be an effective president. I believe to the point of moral certainty that she would be far better than any prominent Republican, especially the demented bigot the GOP recently puked up as its nominee.
I have not seen or heard GG discuss what he regards as the significant differences between the Democratic and Republican parties, and how those differences compare in importance to the similarities he perceives. If you can point me to any source material, I’d be sincerely interested.
Finally, just what is a “neoliberal” anyway? (Sincere question. I really don’t know and therefore can’t decide how insulted I should be.)
@ Gator 90
I don’t mean to be overly rude, but if you don’t know what “neoliberal” is I think it’s because you’ve been too lazy to do your own research on the word and its usage.
Prof. Corey Robin at his blog has done quite a few pieces on the history and usage of the word that are pretty good. Spend a little time using his search function and I’m sure you’ll find some nice primary sources that set out its history.
I never really thought about the meaning of “neoliberal” until Mona called me one. So I asked her what it means. She can tell me, or not, as she wishes. (In general I think Mona enjoys being informative and she is quite good at providing clear, concise explanations.)
I try to avoid research unless someone is paying for my time.
Playing dumb is getting old, Gator.
ps Neo-liberals are assholes who think they are enlightened relative to classic asshole conservatives; yes, you should be offended.
Nah, I’m not offended. I don’t consider myself an asshole (most of the time anyway), but that’s a very subjective assessment. I don’t mind if others disagree. I do think I’m relatively enlightened compared to conservatives, so that part is certainly accurate.
I don’t believe you. And no it wasn’t.
Well, it was fun for me, which is what matters. Indeed it still is, as the sustained fury of your reaction continues to amaze and amuse. It’s a gift that keeps on giving.
@ Gator 90
That’s not at all what I believe, and I don’t think what Glenn believes. First and foremost I never said any differences that do exist, and there are many, are “insignificant”, particularly to those people those policy differences impact directly. For example, LGBT civil rights and/or voting rights etc. etc.
My, and I think Glenn’s point, is that on the “big issues” from domestic economic policy, to foreign policy to purported “entitlement” reform, to military spending, mass surveillance, taxes etc. etc., policies that I believe have direct impacts on the vast majority of Americans rather than just a subset (although it impacts them as well), that there is broad “bipartisan” consensus (at least in the sense of “consensus” among those who can whip a bipartisan majority (no matter how bar) to continue or pass those sorts of policies.)
So this is what I am getting at, and why I don’t like LGM its writers and commenters, because they seem incapable of drawing that logical and/or rhetorical distinction without sliming people like me and Glenn for pointing it out. Instead they misrepresent using words like “insignificant” when that is not at all what we said or what we intended.
typo . . . (no matter how bare)
Agreed. LGM, like so many neoliberal, partisan Democrats erect so much straw that the bile-fueled fire they then breath upon it should burn up the Internet. Or at least their sites.
I see. You don’t think the differences between the parties are “insignificant.” The differences just don’t concern “big issues” as designated by you. OK…
@ Gator 90
Fair enough. How about contending with this woman’s take on why she, a non-affluent AA woman, cannot vote for Hillary Clinton.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/07/supposed-vote-hillary-clinton-woman-why-i-wont
Is she, as LGM seems to constantly argue–stupid, selfish, racist, misogynist, too self-absorbed, (obviously not afflicted with “white privilege” as her failure to vote for Hillary Clinton could have direct dire consequences for her) . . . .
And to be frank, I’ve always found you to be intellectually lazy. That’s why I don’t engage you very often.
If you were prepared, assuming someone was paying you to do your own research, to have a meaningful discussion on what separates “big issues” from “lesser issues” (although none “insignificant” in isolation to those who are affected by policies that address them–good or bad) it might be fun for me to have that discussion with you. But you likely aren’t, given the general glib quality of your response, so I won’t waste my time.
Here’s the bottom line, vote on whatever calculus you like. It’s a relatively free country, and I believe if the right to vote is a “right”, then it is perfectly fine for people to vote their conscience whether that be anything from “anti-abortion” to nominally “liberal” LOTE voters.
Just be (wo)man enough to own the policies and actions that your chosen candidate pursues (good and bad), and don’t try to blaming their actions while in office on those who didn’t. I don’t owe you my vote or my conscience on any calculus, any more than some Republican does who has a worldview that you would find fundamentally anathema to yours. Convince enough people to vote in solidarity with you or don’t, but don’t whine like a child if you and your nominal Clinton fellow travelers can’t close a sale on an undecided voter or one who doesn’t see Clinton’s sterling “credentials” as the end all be all.
On the issues that matter to me most, she falls woefully short, and has a long track record of demonstrating precisely where she stands. She’s a known quantity, and while she may be significantly better than Trump in many ways, she is far far far from someone I feel represents the values and policies I want to see become the norm in this nation. Of course you are free to disagree and vote as you chose, and you won’t hear another word from me on it, so long as you own the consequences of that affirmative vote to empower her.
I would have literally sold a kidney to help fund Sen. Warren if she had decided to run (even with her imperfections like her views on Israel and a few others), because policy-wise I think she is head and shoulders above Hillary Windsock For/Against Focus Group Clinton on what I consider the “big issues”.
Ha! I may not have your rigorous intellect (indeed I’m sure I don’t), but my memory does work pretty good, and you have deigned to engage me many more times than you appear to want to believe.
I am, as I’ve said here before, willing to own my share of responsibility for HRC’s actions as president should she assume that office as I hope she will.
Of course you too are free to vote as you wish, secure in the knowledge that enough of your fellow Oregonians are willing to sully themselves by voting for the one person standing between the world and the ghastly train wreck that is Trump, thus affording you the luxury of patting yourself on the back for your purity with no fear of actual consequences.
What do you make of Senator Warren’s tirelessly enthusiastic exertions on behalf of HRC’s campaign?
@RR — also too, as to the anti-HRC black lady, it appears her dispute is with the imaginary voices in her head insisting that her gender, in itself, obligates her to vote for HRC irrespective of any other considerations. (I doubt that any flesh and blood person has actually told her that.)
” (I think it significant, for example, that one party recently nominated a candidate who has the enthusiastic endorsement of the Ku Klux Klan, and the other party, well, didn’t. But your mileage may vary.)”
Interesting that one candidate thought blowing the fuck out of Libya would be good for something. Especially the women and children; because Hillary is a woman, too (at least that is what is on her birth certificate – there’s no box for hell’s spawn).
@ Gator 90
And exactly how much economic, political muscle or relevance does the KKK have in America?
Not what either of us have ever argued as far as I recall, but hey learning to read for comprehension might be a valuable asset as a practicing attorney dontchyathink? Oh right, you specialty is very, what was the word you used in describing it one time, oh yeah . . . very narrow. So maybe a broad understanding of the political world really isn’t in your wheelhouse.
For such a self-proclaimed deep thinker, you sure rely heavily on personal insults unleavened by even a dash of wit. But that’s OK, thick skin is also a valuable asset for an attorney.
“why give them the click fodder of the comments section dust ups I’d instigate over there?”
I agree. The ‘attacks’ on Glenn seem designed to draw fire and not for serious discussion. Your take on Glenn’s view of the “2” parties seems accurate, too.
And now they are doing it again, and it’s really inane.
http://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2016/11/voting-is-about-strategy-and-power-voting-is-not-a-consumer-choice#comments
Here’s the basic premise of the argument: even though you have only an infinitesimally small amount of political power via your right to vote, you are obligated to vote for the person that in our opinion may yield the marginal “good” as we see it. Anybody who doesn’t is a drooling selfish misogynist racist Putin loving asshole. You think that is good or effective politics? Or even rational?
Seriously, this is just another reformulation of “voting” is an exercise in “collective power” but if you don’t agree with us what that “collective power” exercised should/could yield X, Y or Z policy (via theoretically Hillary Clinton) then you are no better than a Trump voter. That’s both absurd, illogical, and misinterprets what the “right to vote” means to most people. Here’s a hint, no matter how much the Loomis’ and Lemieuxs of the world try and reformulate the “right to vote” as being a “collective exercise in power” looking only to “marginal gains” (if any), it still misses that that is not how most people perceive and exercise their “right to vote”. It simply isn’t and never has been, at least not in America. And I’d argue it never will be.
Because, and again, if people are not free to exercise their “right to vote” as they see fit then it really isn’t a “right”. You are free to disagree with that calculus, or try and argue that in the absence of employing our “collective” LGM calculus du jour, you stand a lesser likelihood of getting the policy preferences you claim to desire (that’s a fair argument). But what that really becomes, and absent evidence to demonstrate that Dems have delivered anything to “leftists” over the last 50 years other than a badly fucked up health insurance scheme, that theory still devolves into an exercise in validating whatever voting calculus some goofs like Lemieux or Loomis normatively prefer.
And quite frankly, if that is the position they want to take, they should spend their time castigating Republicans for how they cast their vote, and their voting calculus, not trying to shame their nominal allies who don’t show 100% fealty or conformity to their “LOTE calculus”.
Like I’ve said, second rate academics shouldn’t be getting on their collective high horses running down their nominal allies because their party has been selling their historical constituency (the working class) down the river going on decades, but then expecting them to uniformly continue to support a party that gives them “slightly more crumbs” than their GOP opponents.
It’s bad politics, it’s bad logic, and it is morally reprehensible fucktardery as far as I’m concerned. And to paraphrase FDR “I welcome their attempts at shaming me into their insular worldview”. Since I know precisely how much my “power” my individual right to vote amounts to, I would rather vote my conscience and try and “change” the system in ways other than voting for fucked up human beings like Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump. And if the second raters at LGM don’t like that, then they can get fucked and see how well their voting calculus works when they’ve alienated huge blocks of their nominal allies (kinda like now where this election shouldn’t even be close if we didn’t live in such a fucked up nation where Hillary Clinton is the best “liberals” could come up with–that’s a system feature or failure depending on how you want to look at it, but I’m done with a party at the national level that is that fucked up).
Excellent excuses / alibis….ALL LIES. The truth is called deniability. They are not fools – they are fully aware of their illegal activities – they just do not want you to aware of their knowledge / but without that knowledge – they would not be spying on you …. ARE you stupid enough gullible enough to believe them??
Sounds a bit like America’s rubber stamp “FISA” courts, doesn’t it?
And then there are the Canadian federal spies “CSIS”
You’ll be happy to know that although they were found by the court to have broken the law over a ten year period, they say: “we accept their decision”
It’s almost Trumplike in audacity. Imagine any other crime…perhaps a robbery:
Robber – “We accept the court’s decision that we were found stealing over a ten year period, but we didn’t break the law knowingly…and anyway, we interpret the robbery laws differently. And now we will work towards having the law changed.”
Again, there seems to be a confusion about language. The court said spying on journalists should be a “last resort”…which ordinary humans would understand to mean that, if there was the suspicion that the journalist themselves are breaking the law, their communications can be monitored as a last resort.
Whereas, the Canadian government, evidently, takes the view that after asking nicely for the reporter’s sources, and the reporter saying no, spying on the reporter was thus then the last resort in an attempt to get those sources. And this reasoning applies even in the most trivial of cases (a reporter was spied on after investigating the possibility that the Mayor of Montreal had not paid a fine for driving without a licence)
This of course makes a farce of any protections the supreme court appeared to have granted the free press. In other words, the police have said…”the last resort” before spying on a journalist’s smartphone = “we asked the reporter for their sources…and they said no”
And if a local Canadian police force is doing this….what of the federal spies? If a local reporter’s investigation of a mayor is grounds for electronic surveillance of that reporter. It shouldn’t take great imagination to see what a plethora of excuses the federal spies have to justify spying on reporters.
Patrick Lagace – “I really was living in this fairy tale — where journalists are not special citizens but you cannot spy on journalists as easily as what we’ve seen in this case. “
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/investigators-lagace-surveillance-1.3837270
We’ve seen this before in the US, the abuse of language. Innocent citizens are spied on…but they are not the ones being “targeted”, say the police. Multiple reporters have their phones tapped for years…but such spying is “exceptional”, say the police. The police aren’t spying…they are “only collecting meta-data” of reporters…say the police.
THANK YOU!
I appreciate the bravery and dedication that the people on the front lines have put into reporting on these abuses.
I’d like to also add as an “insider” please, “If you see something, SAY SOMETHING”. (I’ve heard that someplace before :-) )
Square Peg since 1962
Given the “ALL CLEAR NOW” issued by the F…B…I… all political candydates and cronies as well as the public now are “CRYSTAL CLEAR” that department and agency head appointments in 3rd World USA is where it’s at when it comes to helping wallstreet rob the public and finance wars for profits while sons and daughters (Hellary’s “Let’s draft women too” policy) and fathers and mothers (Hellary’s “Let’s draft women too” policy) are killed (aka murdered) in their wars for more.
So, when is it OK for the governments to protect themselves (in this day and age) against the potential terrorists etc…?
1. I think that “protect themselves” phrasing is inadvertently revealing. Any government that sees its function as “protecting itself” should probably be sent packing, promptly.
2. “(in this day and age)” = “The bogeymen are out there! They want to kill us all!”
3. “. . .against the potential terrorists etc. . .” Why, golly, gee, Pa, we could all be “potential terrorists” or “etc.” — or even both! It’s probably a good thing that our Wise Leaders are keeping a close eye on us all the time.
when did journalist and ALL citizens become terrorists?
P.S. My comments have not shown up yet – someone unknown to me is no doubt deciding if the post is appropriate to go online. And this is in response to a journalist.
Okay, let’s talk pervasive. I had to give up my email address in order to post this comment. Why?! Where is that information going and why do you want it? Who knows who I am for posting this?! I don’t know where that information is going or why!
True privacy was taken away from us all a long time ago. Every text, phone call, email, etc. can be (and I believe is) being collected somewhere and we don’t know how it could be used!
I don’t wish to be paranoid, but I am! I understand that I am willingly giving up information about myself to post this – do you understand that you are giving up personal information to read it?
It will never end. Even if you stay away from all this stuff, your bank has you on their computer, the medical establishment has personal information out in “cyber land” about you, your credit cards and what you buy – there is no such thing as “privacy” anymore. How we are tracked, monitored, etc., will only become more secretive and pervasive. That’s the world we live in folks.
Er, you have only one? You do realize registration isn’t necessary here, right? You can literally use any email address you made up at yahoo 5 minutes ago.
There are and have been trolls here using multiple email accounts. Indeed, it makes it hard to keep rid of them. That could be done if the site required registration, but it doesn’t in large part precisely for the privacy concerns you reference.
Glen; I hate to tell ya; 99% of Canadians are more interested in American boreball than what the cops are doing. These monkeys used to be in the RCMP but they got caught burning down too many barns so they changed the name but not the mentality of the players to CSIS. Our government just built the biggest, most expensive building in the history of the country to house them and no complaints, they do what they want or more likely what the USA wants them to do. Just a few years ago at the G20 in Toronto, well over a thousand peaceful demonstrators and bystanders were imprisoned in cages set up for it. They, the cops were using “agent provocateurs”; burning their own cars and it was just accepted as normal. It cost 1.3 Billion; no one cared; we have come a long way in our docilization. If you believe this is about terrorism, you are beyond hope; this is about the coming social collapse as Mother Earth gets her revenge. Good luck to us all; the HFCs that replaced the CFCs to save the Ozone have turned out to be 10,000 times as potent as CO2 and 1.6 Billion leaky AC units are coming on stream in the next decade. Survival will require the best and the brightest and Trillions to come up with some Geo Engineering system and remember, it’s global dimming saving us now ; it will get worse as we cool the planet and there is less cloud cover. Good luck to us!
What the hell is boreball?
I got a letter from President Obama! (Well, it’s addressed to me “or current resident,” but still.)
President Obama wants me to know how critical it is that I vote on Tuesday — he doesn’t say for whom to vote, only that it’s super important that I do so. Now, given that I’m not registered with a party, and further given that I haven’t contributed to any presidential candidates until last February, I can only assume that Bernie let them have his donors list.
From a DNC/HRC perspective mailing on that basis is safe I suppose, as the number of Bernie voters who’d turn out for Trump is just shy of non-existent.
Shining a light on one of the most powerful people in Washington.
The Empire Files: Abby Martin Exposes John Podesta :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9fat63bqvG8
… “a Social Credit System … for each of its 1,3 billion citizens scoring them based on their behavior” …
The important question here is: scoring system based on what?, determined by whom? or, who/what watches the watchers?
The Chinese government you said? Well, I am not so sure that they got there first, but at the very least:
* they are doing it in the open
* initially to their own people (are we sure about that? or do they considered USG to be “their people”, too (OPM hack))
* it is not Chinese people doing the government the favor of doing it for them
So, things don’t seem to be that bad after all.
Sarcasm aside: If you knew about technology and you had some morally principled spine that piece of news must have scare the sh!t out of you.
I could imagine business people, politicians and police once again envying, getting ready to emulate the Chinese.
We are living in times in which very important, paradigm shifting things are hapenning before we can make sense of them.
Technology, in some sense, just makes things faster. If you are an idiotic, morally deafferented @ssh0l3 you will be able to “be yourself” faster. Your idiocy won’t get any “better” or “smarter”.
RCL
communism is a billet system, things need to be done and you get a job assignment, it’s about what you do.
insectism is a hierarchal system, things need to be orderly and you get rated, it’s about what you are perceived as.
millions of people lacking sufficient intelligence, big egos, easily insulted, control freak personalities, who want guarantees in a competitive environment that prohibits such guarantees who rely on acceptable cowardice rather than change the operating environment.
promoting individualism is the antidote.
Those doing the spying are proving they are not trustworthy….You can not trust someone spying on you because first they actions are illegal – and secondly how can you trust them to believe what they say / no matter how they back it up……Oh, Look what he said ten years ago…
Their stupidity is showing.. If you do not trust people they will prove it for you…
People who are trusted live up to that trust…. CHEAP SPYING on everyone, and no-one will trust you…..and with good reason – they will play the game on you
Us humans are nothing if not good at finding ways to subvert purpose. And now that these techs are out there we will increasingly find ways to subvert them. We know we are on certain lists and that essentially nullifies the purpose and value of these programmes. We still have power. We just have to know how and when to exercise it.
I have to ask. As a Lutheran.
You stand up for homosexuals rights. Yet (no offense) you consider yourself and the “media” and “journalists” as the Gatekeepers. To knowledge and truth.
Did the Catholic Church, still in power today as it was then, not have the same power over people? Priests were gatekeepers.
The populace world wide, those that find themselves for some reason not being able to follow current events, day by day, as they should do. Now treat the media and “scientists” of various and obscure consensus as the Messangers, the Gatekeepers, the Priests….
I am only posting because I had never heard before that you and Wikileaks and Snowden had any sort of beef.
I’m here to say. What makes you judge and jury? What makes you believe you and the media should be Gatekeepers?
What if everyone who has access to the files you’ve all had access to dies in mysterious circumstances? Dead mans switches? Etc. etc.? How are we the people you claim to try and help realize the truth supposed to continue to trust?
Release it all. What gives you the right to decide what happens? Your job is to report the truth, not decide morality.
The world should know the names of those who have tortured, those who have made millions suffer. You are not the Gatekeeper. You are not the Priest.
And there shouldn’t be one. You claim people should know the truth? Show us EVERYTHING you know.
Ed Snowden is a HERO!
#ESIAH
So is Julian Assange
https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/49435
So is Putin
Julian Assange, Donald Trump, and Vladimir Putin: A Troika for Our Insane Era.
Says Assange (because Trump surrogate Vladmir Putin was unavailable for comment):
Right.
Because if it’s good enough for Russia, it’s good enough for the United States.
Trump on reprisal killings:
Trump on torture:
Trump on mass incarcertaion:
Typical zionazi garbage from a bobblehead for the bubblehead,HRC.
The truth has no chance to free corrupt minds.
Sad that.
It’s almost over milt … the crap Bush shat all over the world, lo, long ago has been so carefully cultivated in Obama’s secret garden of America’s hope as to yield the inevitable fruit of yet another Clinton shit sandwich redux2.0
*Trump Inc will be left to determine its superPac assets and future tax liabilities. .. which is all perfectly legal, if not appropriate.
Therefore, let us not speak of the Big Crazy, no more. The way I see it, milt, the only way The Great Orange Lizard of Gotham could even ruminate in public on the horrible things you mention above – reprisal killings, torture, mass incarceration –is because, you know … he can! With utter impunity!! It’s not like any-body is going to prosecute him for those things, or anything like that!!!
Perhaps … the world’s new Nobel poet laureate had a few things to say that might best describe my thoughts on this matter right now:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L9EKqQWPjyo
Politics aside, goddamn, that is a great song. While reading the lyrics you posted, I listened to my TV playing a bastardized version of “When the Ship Comes In” in order to sell Volkswagens. As another of our greatest literary lights might put it: Sad.
So you’re saying there’s a Nobel Prize for despair?
Cool.
I’ll start work on my acceptance speech immediately.
I have it on good authority that Trump’s stated intentions and positions are absolutely meaningless and have no predictive value whatsoever with respect to what he might do or attempt to do should he assume the world’s most powerful office.
I suppose it could be argued that if true, this means he is the most brazen liar of all time and/or clinically insane, but why worry about that?
Yes,you zionists always play the higher authority card,but you don’t believe in God,only the authority it implies.
I’d say,you,uncle Miltie and Mona are all bigger liars than Trump could ever be.
Hey,zionists for Trump are holding a rally on a manhole cover in Times Square,but only his son in law is there.
Pedophiles for the hell bitch sell out SNL.
ewwww.
“this means he is the most brazen liar of all time and/or clinically insane, but why worry about that?”
The “most brazen liar of all time” goes to Hillary ‘What, wipe it with a cloth” clinton.
She’s covered for Bill’s sexual predation of under-age girls.
She’s accepted personal bribes as SOS and guided invasions resulting in the utter destruction of Libya.
Your comfortable with all because, well, as you’ve noted, you have special considerations.
… because we all know what happens when the Trump/Putin/Pence/Bannon/Limbaugh/Giuliani/GhostScalia/Coulter/ ticket takes over the United States.
Attorney General — Rudy Guiliani
Secretary of State — John Bolton
Secretary of Defense — Erik Prince
Homeland Security — Chris Christie
Chief of Staff — Roger Ailes
Treasury — David Koch
EPA — closed
Education — closed
HHS — closed
FBI — Paul Manafort
Department of Corrections and Deportation — Joe Arpaio
ATF — Ted Nugent
Fema — Eric Trump
Ambassador to Russia — Paul Manafort
Department of Religious Enforcement — Jerry Falwell Jr.
Enjoy!
And what do you see happening under POTUS Hillary?
I assume her people would be serious and competent.
Don’t let the corruption rot rot your brain. HRC is an apolitical technocrat, a manager. She isn’t a politician.
In contrast Trump is very much the politician. He can hold various contradictory propositions — e.g., Bill Clinton is a sexual predator; Donald Trump respects women more than anyone else: or, HRC is corrupt AND HRC wants to take away your guns because its politically correct.
Like most Republicans, he can change his meaning in an instant. Comey is part of Obama’s corrupt Justice department, to Comey is right and proper, to switching back to Comey is corrupt — it’s all rigged.
His reality is malleable, even fungible. You must determine how it effects him (how he THINKS it will effect him) to determine the reality du jour.
Why anyone would vote for an electronic sandwich board advertising specials du jour is a mystery to me. If you can’t believe him from one minute to the next, do you seriously think that sort of crackpottery will change over time?
Whatever you think of Clinton, she is exactly the same person day after day after day after boring day. Call her corrupt, call her a money-grubbing manipulator, call her a liberal manipulator gaming the system, call her a murderer, call her simultaneously incompetent and yet able to manipulate government for her own sinister purposes …. call her whatever.
She is pretty much the same person now that she was in 1992.
Trump, in contrast, explains his multitude of disguises and reversals as “I like to be unpredictable.”
He’s an idiot and if he wins, he will be forced to find other idiots to fill government positions. If you thought “heck-of-a-job Brownie” a disaster as FEMA head, you’ll cry over the carful of clowns Trump produces to run the government.
Competent people will refuse him, decent people will retire or find work in the private sector, thoughtful people will scream with frustration (“Do we like Putin today? Do we hate Putin today? “) and many career people might sabotage him. That leaves him (like George Bush) with only ideological or power seeking clowns like himself to choose from. Cases in point — Chris Christie, Mike Pence, Ben Carson, and Ted Cruz.
You should be able to figure out exactly what you’re getting.
If you can’t figure it out, don’t say I didn’t warn you.
Let me put it more simply, more briefly.
What would you say if Glenn one day said, “I’m not going to tell you that because I like to be unpredictable.”
How would you respond?
Neither are heroes. In this day and age of hacking and stealing info and identity I’d like to know how much transparency is not enough or is too much. Even Glenn Greenwald (not a big fan of his) felt that recent Wikileaks dumps left a lot to be desired because they released private individuals’ information. What do you all suggest the governments do to protect themselves from cyber hackers like Assange? Some transparency is OK, but too much can be harmful.
One sees these judgements. Great! But what is the legal remedy? Is there any enforcement to enforce the law?
Glenn is in the movies, again. Variety has a review of the new documentary, All Governments Lie: Truth, Deception, and the Spirit of I.F. Stone
Could things be turning the corner with courts now having had time to review the situation?
NEW YORK (Reuters) – The Clinton Foundation has confirmed it accepted a $1 million gift from Qatar while Hillary Clinton was U.S. secretary of state without informing the State Department, even though she had promised to let the agency review new or significantly increased support from foreign governments.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/clintons-charity-confirms-qatars-1-million-gift-while-001205827.html?soc_src=social-sh&soc_trk=tw
Mass surveillance isn’t such a bad thing at all. At least we can say this that under Barak Obama we need this surveillance to make sure ISIS type people are not spreading themselves around in our friendly neighborhood in the guise of refugees created by people like him and his secretary.
the only problem with mass surveillance is that it does not work when there are no terrorists unless it is always there in ever increasing surveillance in the terrorist prevention scheme which doesnt work without a real potential for terrorists which doesnt work without a mechanism for branding people as terrorists whic cannot happen without a terroris creating environment.
for instance. If a handful of people own-control all the world’s resources, and someone was starving and needed to eat, and decided to rob one of the wealthy people of something and did so, then the wealthy people would, using their media, brand such an attempt of theft as a terrorist attack on all people insofar as that which affects the wealth group also affects all people dependent on the wealth group.
Jesus had that problem to deal with.
What’s going on here Glenn?
There’s another piece of powerful evidence of the risks Snowden has been emphasizing, and its playing out right in front of our eyes in the US election: the FBI is leaking against Clinton.
If you wanted a more conclusive piece of proof that the ‘authorities’ can’t be trusted not to misuse their offices you could hardly think one up. If the people within the USA’s most powerful law enforcement agency are willing to leak information to influence a presidential election then hell – what wouldn’t they do?
I don’t understand why you’re running dead on that stuff. I get that Bernie was a better choice than Clinton, but just look at your comments section. Look at how and for what purpose your work is being used now.
Do you not see a Trump Presidency – with the resulting access it will gain to all of these surveillance programs – as an outcome worth fighting against? Do you think that any of the commentators currently flooding your threads with calls for HRC to be jailed would object even one iota if the government started using its surveillance powers against those opposed to the Trump agenda?
Snap out of it man!
The FBI were right to reveal the criminal investigation,as the public have the right to know, so they can make an informed decision on which candidate to vote for. It is also important that the leaked Podesta emails, published by Wikileaks are considered.fully so that the public can determine which candidate is most honest,and less corrupt. The Democrats mass surveillance ensured that they have all information possible on ordinary civillians so its only fair that the public have all the information on them.
There are so many reasons that the FBI should not have say a word about this investigation that I won’t even go into them.
But I will tell you the real reason the HSBC board member and head of FBI did break protocol and talk about investigation.
By opening this up and then clearing Shillery of any wrong doing of the Weiner emails he has effectively put to bed all of the emails including wikileaks. This investigation and the info about it HELPED shillery not hurt her and it was all planned with her full knowledge.
Congratulations on not mentioning Russia. ;^)
Not more worth fighting against than a Killary presidency with the resulting access to all those programs, and the power to promulgate more and wider wars, while endlessly whoring for Wall Street and only opening her mouth to lie.
Not even a little bit.
I’m pretty sure Glenn does think that we would object — vehemently. And he would be correct.
Now, run along and try to sell your misguided and dishonest fearmongering somewhere where there are more buyers.
Yeah, he’s not reading the same comments the rest of us are. the few “out” Trump voters her are almost all treated with the contempt they deserve. We just are not fools who think their idiocy translates into Hillary being anything but vile and foul.
Well, you need to teach Hillary Clinton how to maintain some secrecy around some of her crooked deeds.
Donald Trump is opposed by all the people who have made our security perilous.Open borders in a time of terror,sheesh.
It was not he who recklessly invaded and destroyed the ME for zion,it was HRC and her friends the shrub,Cheney and all the zionist neolibcon scum.
He is for guarding our borders and ending this nonsense of ALCIAda alliance for zionist expansion over our dead citizens.
Just saw Rove and Ignatius on fox(football taping);Even they have it in for Donald,as Rupert Murdoch is a zionist.
When the Boston Marathon bombings happened I remembered an article by Naomi Wolf in The Guardian about how the FBI used its surveillance powers to spy on and track Occupy Wall Street. From what I understand, the FBI was tracking the Occupy organizers before the first occupy action in NYC. So here we have the FBI ferreting out OWS, but cannot pick up on the Tsarnaev brothers even after being warned by the Russians about them.
And now yet more revelations about spying on people who are neither criminals nor terrorists–all in the face of system that is failing to find terrorists. I may be late to the game, but it is apparent that the primary purpose of the surveillance state is not about finding criminals nor terrorist, but rather about tracking, monitoring, and controlling the entire population of a nation. Look at what Snowden revealed about the NSA setting up monitoring to categorize the sexual proclivities of people. Do criminals and terrorists have porn habits that will uniquely single them out? Now would it matter if some anti-war protester was questioned by the police in front of their spouses and friends?
Imagine what all this massive personal data is plugged into a system which the Chinese seem to be building. An article by Jay Stanley, Senior Policy Analyst, ACLU Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project:
https://www.aclu.org/blog/free-future/chinas-nightmarish-citizen-scores-are-warning-americans
Also as noted by the author, there may be some questions about this system.
OWS did not encrypt , they used normal cellphones not stuff like Signal private messenger.
Its time to realize you need to encrypt , not only to protect from your own gov , but also from other country’s govs…
You no loger can risk unencryped or weak encrypted communication , if a counrty weakens its internet structures to be able to tap them , it also weakens it self , thats exactly what happened with the DNC hack , this contradiction can not be fixed , only 2 binary choices
1 encrypt everything but loose control
2 loose control over internet structures and systems, by using backdoors that ANYBODY can use!
Because backdoors are like hookers they do what you pay them for but never have it all for your self!
Disgusting,latest Wikileaks on Podesta :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wMHIAOJXNDM&feature=youtu.be
Cue Revelations time stamp circa Nov 8th 2016. It doesn’t matter what you think.
Glenn, the recent attempt to frustrate the will of the British public with the High Court ruling on Brexit is wholly unacceptable, and totally disrespects democracy.
The wealthy war criminal Tony Blair has even had the audacity to call for a 2nd referendum.You wrote an incredible report on Brexit previously, so please can you write again on the recent developments which threaten democracy?
https://theintercept.com/2016/06/25/brexit-is-only-the-latest-proof-of-the-insularity-and-failure-of-western-establishment-institutions/
I think you may be misreading what the British high court ruled. In U.S. terms, this was a “separation of powers” holding, and is likely correct. The Court ruled that “the most fundamental rule of the UK constitution is that parliament is sovereign.” Therefore, Parliament alone has the authority to trigger Brexit by notifying Brussels of the UK’s intention to leave the EU.
That is, Teresa May doesn’t get to decide when and how this is done. Parliament does.
It may well be that Parliament could block or delay the necessary invocation of the Article that triggers the leaving process , but as a matter of the British constitution it would appear the court ruled correctly. If Parliament does that, then the people would have to turn their anger on that body.
The people that brought the case made an attempt to block the will of the people. They refuse to accept the result of the referendum in which a clear majority voted for Brexit. If Parliament does block or delay the invocation of the article to trigger the leaving process, then you are right the people will vent their anger for sure.There is no need for a 2nd referendum, and Blair should not be calling for one, Here is the BBCs report on the development :
Brexit case ‘attempt to block will of people’ says Sajid Javid
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37866411
The essential point of the ruling is captured in this from your link:
This is similar to the separation between the Executive and Legislative branches in the U.S. The Prime Minister can’t exercise these legal invocations without the Parliament’s backing. That is, the PM can’t just do this by edict.
As I said, it may well be that forces in Parliament can delay and/or block. I don’t know what the remedy is when Parliament refuses to enforce a referendum result, but, as near as I can tell, (and my law degree isn’t British!) the British Court got the separation of power question correct. The result of the ruling appears to be legally correct even if the practical result is unpalatable for the reason that Parliament may not do what it should.
Thanks Mona, and I appreciate your look at this from a US law perspective. I’m not sure either if Parliament can delay or block. The latest this evening according to the FT is that the UK Prime Minister Theresa May “tells Europhiles accept what the people decided,” PM says UK will get worse deal if court forces her to get Parliament’s mandate. The UK Government is appealing the High Court verdict.
@Mister addressing Jamie:
Rather frequently I find Jamie’s commentary to be, at best, overwrought. But I think it is fair to characterize multiple of Maz Hussain’s pieces on Syria as rank propaganda.
The single best way to learn why that is would be to read and understand Max Blumenthal’s two-part series on the PR campaign that has captured even many left-wing writers.
Max Part I: Inside the Shadowy PR Firm That’s Lobbying for Regime Change in Syria
Max Part II: How the White Helmets Became International Heroes While Pushing U.S. Military Intervention and Regime Change in Syria
Maz’s piece here at the Intercept leaves an impression of these local Syrians — the White Helmets — who are about nothing more than valiantly risking their lives to save others. What one learns reading Max’s work is that they were literally founded and organized by a British mercenary only a few years ago, and trained to tote video cameras to film especially touching rescues to be used as propaganda.
It’s certainly true these men on the ground truly are bravely rescuing people, but at the top of their politicalorganization are leaders attending Washington parties and meetings to lobby for a No Fly Zone and other U.S. military intervention. Maz’s piece would leave one wholly ignorant of the political purpose and foundation of this group.
Completely agreed, on both points!
Blackwater founder and former Navy SEAL Erik Prince told Breitbart News Daily on SiriusXM that according to one of his “well-placed sources” in the New York Police Department, “The NYPD wanted to do a press conference announcing the warrants and the additional arrests they were making” in the Anthony Weiner investigation, but received “huge pushback” from the Justice Department.
http://www.breitbart.com/radio/2016/11/04/erik-prince-nypd-ready-make-arrests-weiner-case/
Hahaha
Two sources as credible as those two old soviet era newspapers Pravda and Ivestzia.
Nobody believes this crap except a bunch of demented Trumpetistas who want nothing less that the overthrow of liberal democracy. They push hate and call it patriotism, they repeat rumors and call it truth, and they worship at the authoritarian altar of Donald Trump and call it “freedom.”
God I can’t wait for this election to be over so that Trump and go back to feeling up pretty women and kissing his daughter.
What a creep!
“Liberal democracy” what a joke, more like corporatised fascism, and well at least Trump is honest and not being criminally investigated. He also doesn’t associate with under age sex texters, and those using “pizza” coded words and who attend weird occult dinners. Nothing more creepy than the Democrats. Cant wait for it to be over so they can go to jail where they belong.
Woww you can celebrate If she wins although that is looking increasingly unlikely. You may even get an invite to a White House spirit warming party for being such a loyal demented supporter.
You argue against yourself.
If Trump wins despite the rigged election as he calls it, do you think the very same mysterious forces rigging the election will allow this buffoon to gain power?
A vote isn’t a magical wand. Ask Kennedy about that — and he knew what he was talking about.
A Putin lackey like Trump will not give orders to the US military. The officer corps will act to prevent that. A megalomaniac will not get the power to launch nuclear weapons. The Pentagon will see to that. The stock market will revolt and that will piss off people who will squash this little man like a bug.
Trump is a fascist authoritarian who appeals to a small set of impotent white men who don’t truly believe in democracy. They talk big, but truly they’re cowards. Like Trump, they’re as empty as their braggadocio and as juvenile as their sneers and jeers suggest.
And you, my friend, like your fellow termites, will not form an armed opposition sufficient to oppose the US military — especially when it is supported by most civilized nations — Britain, France, and the rest of Western Europe. Probably China too. Furthermore, at least a hundred million American civilians — Republicans and Democrats alike who will be traumatized by the possible ascension of a classical fascist in league with Putin — will support the arrest and prosecution of Trump and his henchmen.
We know from history what fascists bring.
Sexting, emails, guilt by association and innuendo will not suffice as a defense.
That’s what you Trump pickleheads don’t understand. It will get ugly if Trump tries to claim the presidency.
It will get ugly because Trump isn’t running against Hillary Clinton. He’s running against the United States of America. You say so yourself as often as Trump says it.
This isn’t a reality show.
Dumbshit.
@Willem
Probably. Virtually no one sensible finds that Freddie deBoer drafts “propaganda” for any purpose or faction.
Syria is convulsed by a civil war, and there are also geopolitical actors with pipeline interests often dictating their policies, preferences and involvement.
I read, and follow on Twitter, a man named Maher Arar. Arar is a Canadian of Syrian heritage whose country (Canada), at the prompting and with the assistance of the United States, was renditioned to Assad’s Syria for torture. It would be fair to state that Arar, and many other ethnic Syrians, would find the word “monster” entirely accurate as applied to Bashar Al-Assad. (Canada apologized and paid damages; the U.S. will not allow Arar in the country to file suit, because being empire means never having to say you’re sorry.)
Very simple explanation and you probably are aware of it.
Assad knew then,as now,he was a target of USzion,and only did that to help himself from terrorists,and or for US and Canada.And as we sent him there(or Canada),knowing he would be subject to torture,puts those nations much more monstrous.
And torture has been around since man began,and will be as long as we exist,unless everyone is citizenchipped,as you would prefer,I believe.
Everybody has done and does do it,its a human condition.
No I don’t approve of it,and realize it can be counterproductive,but I’m just me,not the CIA,the FBI,SFs or cops and thugs who use it regularly.
Assad is under the USzion gun,because he is in the way of zion.F*ck them,all their murder and those who can’t see that incontrovertible truth, go to Israhell.
The monster ophthalmologist.sheesh.
It is logically impossible Assad is the bad guy.He might be amenable to try to improve relations with his enemies,like Col K,by assisting our bogus war of error,but he knows it doesn’t matter what he does,in the end he is kaput,like Chavez,Col K,Saddam,OBL and the list of dead American puppets and enemies.
This is exactly why you are a 3 dollar bill.
dahoit spews incoherence, concluding with:
You are a vicious racist and antisemite who is wildly and mindlessly pro-Trump. You don’t even care that he’s come out strongly *BRAGGING* about his support of the “great” Israel, because he nevertheless fits your racist needs.
I do not care that you don’t have a high opinion of me. It would be worrying were it otherwise.
Here we go again.You know there are many antisemitism accusations thrown at Trump,and as he isn’t any more “antisemitic”than anyone else in this world,he is just being politically correct so the demons(who you defend) who have lied about him repeatedly,to derail his candidacy,in rank propaganda criminality, don’t use that as a last second calumny.And why don’t you mention the collusion of the shitestained HRCs- MSM derailing of democracy,by stealing the nom from BS,your hero and their attempt at destroying Trump?
And you know why,goddamn Israel,but you are silent
You are a counterfeit 3 dollar bill.
And if he wins,oh boy!
I noticed the fraud Al Franken,the corrupt SNL alumnus,just called Trump antisemitic.
Par for the serial liars course.
I started to look into the extensive code words being used in the Podesta emails like ” Pizza”
This is fascinating given the current FBI investigation :
http://www.realtruenews.org/single-post/2016/11/04/Podesta-Emails-SECRET-CODE
It is way beyond pervasive and dangerous, it is Britain’s national disgrace. The Donut was built and funded by a bog-standard construction company; a telecomms company that, like much in Britain, still dreams it is a world leader; and a security company famous for letting its prisoners escape. It ended up costing £450m to get operational – over ten times its initial proposed cost of £41m; this from people who claim to be in the intelligence business.
It seems no one gets to question these people, to doubt their worth and challenge their wisdoms.
What do they do in there? Well it seems they are the servants of the USA, spying on the entire digital communications of the world and working hard at hacking security and breaking codes. Why is that? Well, now that the Cold War is over and realistically Russia and China pose no serious threat to the UK mainland, it is unclear why they do that. We are told “terrorists”, but “terrorists” aren’t building anything particularly sophisticated, there aren’t really a great number of them, and most of them it seems now work for the USA as well, so they are in fact spying on their own people.
“Aha!” You say, “But IRAN are making nuclear weapons!!!” Well, Iran has a right to defend themselves as their attempts at Democracy in the 1970s were rudely interrupted by the US and UK who installed their own insane dictator instead, triggering a counter Islamic Revolution that was universally despised which in turn led to everyone from US-A to Russia-Z funding Iraq to blow them to kingdom come in a war that resembled WWI with sand. So you may forgive them for being a little tetchy about foreign influence-come-invasion.
Also, the thing with nuclear weapons is that they take some fairly easy-to-see-with-a-satellite production sites, and we can always just ASK THEM. If they officially refuse to answer, then I am pretty sure one of the many people involved in such a technically difficult process will spill the radioactive beans.
But that would assume that we WANT all this to come nice, but we don’t, we are making this fight because Iran has a say in the pricing of OIL. So the only way Iran can “win” our game is to do what we say. Hence the need for strategic and intermediate-range nuclear weapons – some for any invaders and some for Riyadh, I guess.
So where does the mass collection and storage of data on all people of the world fit in to this? Well, it seems you can never be too careful with just who you might need to spy on. Especially, if you are about to piss EVERYONE off and make them all potential adversaries. This might happen if you:
1) Hijack the oil pricing mechanism and bump the oil price up 4-fold.
2) Does anything else matter after that? Putting the price of oil up 4-fold means EVERYTHING goes up in price as well and will cause mass problems for most people, let alone those struggling already.
That’s the plan – hike up the price of oil and beat down anyone who resists. So the spying is not targeted at “Ruskies” or “the Yellow Peril” or “Terrorists” or “Drug Dealers” or “the Dark Web” – it is for ME AND YOU when we finally become furious at paying insane amounts for fuel and having US corporations suing our governments through the likes of CETA and TTIP for our taxes when we try to boycott them.
So enjoy! You idiots voted for these monsters and bought their guff for long enough, so I guess they feel mandated to own your souls too.
In a nutshell, the Spying creates the need for Spying and it is an oxymoron to call it a Security function as it does quite the opposite in fact. It intrinsically undermines and attacks our security, it is a false economy and it severely weakens the much better alternatives, such as MAKING PEACE and working together to bring down barriers and borders.
But then US companies might not be very competitive any more and people might want to challenge their monopolies and endless copyrighting strategies.
Russia are no longer a threat, and probably haven’t been since Stalin keeled over over 60 years ago. Uncle Joe was most definitely in the homicidal-genocidal category along with Mao and Adolf, but since then I don’t believe any of the Russian leaders were of the same ilk and I think they were more interested in protecting their own borders from our imperial ambitions than they were ever interested in expanding their own towards London.
China never have been a threat. They were at their most dangerous and imperialistic under the Mongols, but since then they really haven’t done anything remotely comparable to us in the West. And anyone who bleats “What about Tibet?” Well, firstly Tibet was granted to China when the Mongols were boss, so there are legitimate claims to the territory anyway; secondly Tibet is a big lot of nothing and no one; and thirdly, if the Chinese weren’t there exploiting it, someone else would be and the Dalai Lama would probably resemble some Arab sheik and be far less the champion of the sort of Cretins-for-a-Cause people who still think Hillary Clinton is the Caring-Sharing option compared to the clearly goose-stepping Herr Trump.
So who is the threat that we must guard against, that we must set guardians against that are funded with our taxes and then compromise our freedoms to thwart?
Seems that a group of Very Rich People headed by Americans and Arabs do not want things to change in a way that puts them in any way out of the picture. And so they have turned to the Intelligence agencies to help them Win.
It is the Gamekeeper-turned-Poacher, the Disgrace of our sorry little Nation: GCHQ. There they are, busying away, helping the US to bully its rivals so that they can frack their lands into a putrid mess and a few billionaires can get some more billions whilst the rest of us pay for it with our money, our freedoms, our health, and the very environment which is the air we breathe, the water we drink, and the land we grow food on and live upon.
So, to conclude:
FUCK YOU, YOU SPOOKY CREEPS AND YOUR INSANE PAYMASTERS; YOU ARE THE ENEMY.
Ed was vindicated in my mind with your first report from the archive, Glenn, and learning how much we’d actually been lied to about empire’s Big Brother surveillance – of everyone. Three and a half years later and coming up on celebrating my fourth SnowMann (Whistleblowers) Day on Nov 25th, as my alternative Thanksgiving, nothing has changed for me or my gratitude.
The Coup :
http://www.stevepieczenik.com/us-takeover-may-be-near/
Good article on the fake “White Hats” – Compare and contrast this reporting with the Intercept’s propaganda on Syria:
http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/11/04/just-how-gray-are-the-white-helmets-of-syria/
Exactly what reporting on Syria do you regard as propaganda ?
The Intercept reports truthfully and accurately, unlike the majority of the corporate mass media.
Maz Hussain’s.
Yeah okay Doug agreed. I thought it may have been a report I had missed from Mackey.
Oh, Mister, are you joking?
Try Mackey or even Greenwald (his interview with Naomi Klein where they trashed Assange and suggested without any evidence that the Podesta mails were leaked by ‘the Russians’ that was clear propaganda).
Haven’t you noticed that the intercept has changed course again, lately? No more white helmets, since that was a disaster, clear propaganda as explained btl of those pieces by commenters (you can check for yourself). Now it is ‘The surveillance state’ that has The Intercept’s attention. But within very narrow margins. Talk about privacy, that is a fine discussion. But do not talk about content too much. Like the content of the Podesta mails. Or if you talk about Clinton here, at least add a statement that you despise Trump.
That is all according to the manufacturing of Consent as explained by Herman and Chomsky: have a lively debate about things that are not particularly interesting, or that could be more interesting if you would broaden the margin of that what journalists are allowed to discuss.
Is that accurate enough?
I don’t see or accept that The Intercept has changed course,as it remains editorial free,and continues to be a relatively fearless media organisation. The Intercept also continues to provide an uncensored comments section which is very important. I didn’t like the trashing of Julian Assange who I have the greatest of respect for. I do dislike both Presidential candidates, and still firmly believe that the US needs a new political system, so that a government that serves the people can be formed, and not one that is corporatised, and just serves the agenda of a few elite billionaires, their corporations and Wall Street.
Maybe The Intercept is just trying to widen its audience, and to balance with articles that appeal to people of all political beliefs? Personally I do not agree with the political views of Robert Mackey, but despite that he is clearly a talented journalist. The Intercept clearly promotes free speech, and continues to expose corruption and corporate, and government wrong doing. It continues to defend human Rights, and exposes war crimes and breaches of Humanitarian Law. I remain confident that The Intercept will maintain that course.
I had little use for Glenn’s interview with Klein, but he did not “trash” Julian Assange. Nor did he agree with Klein’s most objectionable statements.
Julian and Glenn have both publicly criticized each other’s standards on redaction. But Glenn continues to defend Wikileaks in many ways.
i am surprised that snowden dared go to canada. i’m equally sure the obama administration demanded that he be arrested and delivered into american hands.
was he speaking in a teleconference to mcgill university?
apparently not.
i guess we’ll have to go to war with canada over this.
buckle up.
For those of us who instantly fell in love with the idea of Snowden leaving Russia safely/Quebequians being angry enough to somehow receive him to the point of not being able to get the joke. No, of course ;-), he teleconferenced
// __ Edward Snowden McGill Nov 2 2016
youtube.com/watch?v=w1aD2ygiuK0&t=525
~
RCL
Charles Pierce, Esquire,
“Of all the astonishing things in an astonishing (and increasingly grim) presidential campaign, the sudden involvement of elements of the Federal Bureau of Investigation in the act of ratfcking a candidacy is even more amazing than the fact that there is a vulgar talking yam one step away from running almost the entire federal government
(enthusiastically supported by morons Mona, Doug, and dahoit).
There hasn’t been a hotter hot mess in Washington since John Mitchell was running both the Department of Justice and a criminal conspiracy to obstruct same.”
http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/news/a50282/fbi-clinton-cash-new-york-times/
Legal principle? FBI involvement in an election?
Hey! it’s just great! Hell! we don’t give a shit about that noise… amirite, Moonie?
The horror!dahoit and those two?
Me no lickspittle.(nor a moonie loonie)
good to see a sense of humor.
Unfortunately, whether true or not, the esquire article has a big red flag. It is acting on information from ThinkProgress, which is associated with John Podesta. Therefore, whether the information comes from God on high, inscribed on tablets next to a burning bush, it’s tainted.
And, even worse – first, the Clinton campaign blamed Russia. After weeks of people not buying it, they pivot, and begin to blame the FBI (the FBI is pretty popular thanks to constant positive portrayals on TV and in film.).
Did the FBI ratfck the Clinton campaign. Probably. Did the leaks come from some disgruntled 3 letter agency grunt? Most likely. But now, again, thanks to the perpetual dishonesty of Camp Clinton, no one is going to buy it.
“we must and can continue to ensure protection of the press and their rights.”
Although let’s not pretend that journalist are omnipotent or do not have their own twisted agenda’s. Judy “I was fucking right” Miller sold the invasion of Iraq for the Bush administration in the complicit New York Times. All should be on trial at the Hague for assorted levels of war crimes.
Again journalist and media outlets are not omnipotent.
Glenn just tweeted and highly recommended this Freddie deBoer essay, which I and many here have also endorsed: 1953—2002—2016: SYRIA AND THE REEMERGENCE OF MCCARTHYISM”, my emphasis:
(Freddie also thinks the movement represented by the Bernie Sanders campaign isn’t the future — he throws cold water on the notion the Democrats will ever let even a growing demographic of ever-more younger voters change the neoliberal basis of that party which will remain very powerful. I choose to not believe him, for I must.)
John Pilger on Clinton, Trump, the media, WikiLeaks and war :
http://johnpilger.com/articles/inside-the-invisible-government-war-propaganda-clinton-trump
WSWS interview with David North: A Quarter Century of War: The US Drive for Global Hegemony, 1990-2016
http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2016/09/28/inte-s28.html
Thank you Mona.
Mona linked to deBoer’s piece previously, and I am grateful that she did. It’s a brilliant essay, imho.
So I just read the article that is apparantly recommended by Glenn Greenwald and so many others here.
I did not like it at all. One of Freddy’s conclusions was this:
‘Assad is a special kind of monster; Syria is a special kind of hell. I hope the regime of Assad falls. I hope the people of Syria are finally allowed to emerge from this horrific, bloody, unthinkable civil war. But hope is not the basis for action. ‘
A) it is not a civil war, it is a war about pipelines and gas, as many people here know
B) ‘Assad the monster’. Sure. But what about your government? And why is demonizing Assad and his supporters (80% of the Syrian public) not McCarthyism?
C) ‘I hope that Assad’s regime falls’. As many here know, Assad was democratically chosen by the people of Syria to lead their country. This of Freddy reminds me of Maidan. It also reminds me of Brazil, Greenwald’s country, with the impeachment of Dilma. Democracy is such a pain in the neck when people vote for someone who is not beneficial for US interest. DEMONIZE him or her and anyone who even suggests to support the poor politician who dares to oppose US interest. Clearly, McCarthyism
D) ‘hope is not the basis for action’. Agreed. But what is the basis? War maybe? Sanctions? Foreign ‘intervention’?
Am I the only one here who believes that this article is just another piece of propaganda trying to make us believe that, despite that the MSM cannot be trusted, there are exceptions? Like pieces of Greenwald, Naomi Klein, Michael Moore, and this guy Freddy Deboer who actually say what their masters want them to say? Only with a bit more sophisticated tone than other obvious propagandists?
– Assad must go
– We must ‘help’ countries that have ‘despicable’ (read: democratically chosen) leaders.
– Humanitarian interventions are good as long as our intentions are ‘good’
That is the line that must toed, by MSM journalists like Freddy Deboer, and others. And that is what I did not like about the article of Freddy Deboer.
Because words have meanings.
Criticism of a person – even demonizing or calling him a “monster” – for what he has done is not McCarthyism. Neither is expressing the hope that a leader – even a democratically-elected one – will fall. Depending on one’s point of view, there are many ways to characterize such opinions, but flinging-about McCarthyism isn’t one of them.
I think you are misreading.
those were somewhat “good” but still illusive suggestions
there are certain aspects relating to infrastructure that must be fixed in order to be able to safely communicate. Some people seem to expect for our deep-state rulers and managers to have a sense of humanity and morality, which to me amounts to asking politicians to stop lying and expecting for them to do so. People, who attempt those well-intended venues are granting them some credibility, just inviting them to stage once again some theatrical performance a la Church committee.
There are plenty of aspects which can and should be technically addressed. You do not ask for respect to politicians and police, you gain it.
1) We are tacitly screwed from the start if the companies offering you the actual device are the same ones offering you the operating system and the same ones offering you connection to the Internet. They are all NSA affiliated companies anyway capitalizing on our innate, needed socially established stupidity and their “don’t be evil” google tm thing. They are just fronts to the deep state.
Capitalism as a healthy competitive business force ceased to exist already. Abusive business practices are nothing new. It is just that lately, it has all become all too evident and they are making corruption and abuses “legal”:
// __ Planned Obsolescence Documentary
https://archive.org/details/PlannedObsolescenceDocumentary
~
Most people seem to be abysmally careless about police keeping detailed, all-encompassing records about their lives because most psychologically healthy people don’t mind other people’s business (which is very much part of their own illusions about that thing they used to call “privacy”) as Snowden’s girlfriend was telling him “why would they care about ‘my boobs'” and “semantic web”‘s (whatever he means) Berners-Lee and networking/security guru Bruce Schneier were “shocked” when the learned about the degree and scope of Snowden revelations. Now, could you reasonably accept those two who take contracts from both police and business didn’t know about what was going on? Come on Schneier and Berners-Lee didn’t you know all IT departments “legally” log all communication (including seemingly private data such as passwords) while at work? We all teachers know very well that authorities in schools and those above them mandate to do so.
2) Devices should be based on a physical baseline that don’t leave behind traces which can be easily achieve using and reusing RAM exclusively and read-only physically unwritable storage.
~
Once those hardware related issues are addressed:
1) we should all use totally encrypted and regularly re-encrypted OS read from read-only media (cables and hardware relating to writing should be severed)
2) people somehow related, culturally sharing their communications (say, families) should all:
2.1) use hubs-sorters pairs which work in tandem but can’t be permanently connected to one another, just through some external device .
2.1.1) hubs serving also as chargers would set up each phone with OTPs for the period of time that the phone will be physically charged:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-time_pad
2.1.2) sorters would, given data temporarily created by the hub, know which individual carries a certain phone and serve as liason of all comm originating in the phones setup by its pairing hub and being transferred by the telco to a given number (no who-is-who necessary at all) all telecom companies basically need is a # to route EM waves to.
Bob (phone b) calls Alice (a) since they regularly use the hub you have no way of knowing for sure who carries a or b. Telco transmits encrypted data to the Internet/comm facing sorter which bounces it back and forth to the appropriate user
3) people should keep their phones in Faraday cages at all times when they are not using it and don’t expect calls. BTW there is something called your senses and brain. There used to be a time when people looked at a map in order to get an address and figure out how to get from A to B, instead of keeping someone on hold telling them what to do as they went their way.
4) we should all face it. It is not even that the friend of your enemy is your enemy, since all participants in the deep-state are in bed which each other they are all “the enemy” forget about those silly “Apple is hip and cool”, “Apple stands up against the government”, google: “don’t be evil” insipidly silly b#llsh!t. google capitalizes on our clicks on links in order to keep a trace of your whereabouts and likes. The refe(r)rers should be sanitized both by browsers and on the routers and the incoming google based b#llsh!ting adds as well as all kinds of unrelated attention seeking and abusive javascript b#llsh!t should be sanitized, scraped off.
5) all devices should have a decoy and noise level deamon sending messages that based on the OTP other carriers of people belonging to the same hub would simply drop, but the NSA will have what they love and what they are good at: data. At the user’s discretion, that data emitting routines should be salted with a certain degree of “impersonation” and “protagonism” based on ones own usage. Those deamons would be just sending messaging with words such as “fly path” to nonexistent email addresses in Muslim countries or mentioning the chemical elements and parts used to make bombs . . . Do you want to take away my privacy? Please, do!
6) all devices and infrastructures should be less web facing. Say you are accessing a youtube video which will be most probably paused, restarted and watched again by you or other people in your network. Just download the video data locally and which web url to that video should be rerouted to the local copy. Less adds, less delays, less b#llsh!t! Storage is so cheap anyway!
7) when you speak on the phone, use random back ground noises, music and pseudo language-like phoneme generators. Our brains are very good at sorting out sounds, computers aren’t.
8) all types of communicating parties to some degree shared some intersubjective background. Avoid mentioning times, places and names on the phone; use higher order references they will have to figure out. They say they are really smart about this. That will help them hone their skills and get better at it.
Notice that police-deep-state will still have plenty to monitor us and keep the “terroristic index” of every one of us updated. All cameras out there, all our credit card transactions, all our records (including medical ones) … and last but not least plenty of snitches out there.
RCL
and google redirecting links, all such cr@p I meant to say
RCL
Hillary Clinton, The Podesta Group And The Saudi Regime: A Fatal Menage A Trois
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/medea-benjamin/hillary-clinton-the-podes_b_11779826.html
The most damaging Wikileaks :
http://www.mostdamagingwikileaks.com/
And what is the solution to mass surveillance? What can be done to turn the ship around? I don’t see Congress or Hillary or Trump doing a goddam thing about it.
Several years ago wasn’t the Obama administration caught spying on AP reporters? Why yes, indeed.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/15/opinion/spying-on-the-associated-press.html
Unfortunately,it looks like they are here to stay.
Fear sells,and today’s terror error sells mucho.
This is the world zionism has created for the ME,Europe and US.
Until we cut the terrible influence of these criminals from our government,we will continue down the road of war,mis and disinfo,divide and conquer,and the suppression of our democracy,so evident this year.
Hopefully,Nov.8,there will be a new birth of freedom here in the USA,God willing.
Trump 2016.
The Clinton Foundation receives money from the same sources that fund ISIS, namely the Governments of Saudi Arabia and Qatar, and the leaked emails prove that Hillary Clinton Knew this.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JQ7lYRnF1F8
What a clever slander!
By this logic, if you knowingly buy gas that comes from Saudi Arabia, you knowingly fund ISIS.
If you buy a product from China, you’re supporting the occupation of Tibet.
If you watch The Simpson’s on Fox, you support Rupert Murdoch.
If you ever bought a Volkswagon, you support the Holocaust.
Brilliant!
Literally, anybody on earth can be made to look responsible for the acts of anybody else on earth if they participate in the economy. Only Jerimiah Johnson would be blameless except for his, you know, PETA infractions.)
Sometimes I wonder which is worse — Trump’s advocacy of reprisal killings, his recommendation of torture and worse, his rejection of democracy and the US legal system, or the incredible gullibility of his supporters who so desperately need to believe that Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton conspired to create ISIS.
Their pretzel logic astonishes me.
(Oops. Sorry. I used the German word “pretzel” so I must be a Nazi sympathizer. I’d like to say I’m not a Nazi sympathizer, but I suppose that just proves the case because only a Nazi sympathizer would use the word “pretzel” and then pretend it had nothing to do with Nazis. SMH)
No slander the proof is in the email.
Hahahaha
It must be TRUE! because I read it on the internet.
You are a deplorable propagandist.
Insulting the internet is rather strange if one wants people to believe your BS on it.
HRC is the most corrupt criminal bubblehead with a following of corrupt bobbleheads in American history.
An alcoholic warmongering murderer who promises more of the same shite she has involved US in for 30 years,as she and her lying media try to impede the democratic process with the biggest attempted fix in POTUS electoral history.
Only feminazis,the brainwashed and zionists will vote for her.
Trump 2016.
1. see “dahoit”
2. scroll past
3. saves one from having to ‘read the screed’
But the screed is absolutely correct.
Yes,scroll on,you aren’t worthy of the truth obviously.
Cut the crap Milton – its true because the emails were published on the internet, and its true because not a single shred of evidence has been produced by the Democrats to support their false claims that the emails are not authentic.
If Clinton Campaign Believes WikiLeaks Emails Are Forged, Why Don’t They Prove It?
https://theintercept.com/2016/10/28/if-clinton-campaign-believes-wikileaks-emails-are-forged-why-dont-they-prove-it/
Well said
https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/3774
https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/5469
https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/1828
“…the governments of Qatar and Saudi Arabia, which are providing clandestine financial and logistic support to ISIL and other radical Sunni groups in the region.”
“Clintons should know better than to raise money from folks whose primary concern has been supporting the NIAC, a notorious supporter of the Radical Islamic Mullahs. “The Clinton’s have thrown principle out the window in exchange for cold hard cash…putting money ahead of principle.”
?
Hillary’s Chief of Staff admits in the 2nd link that foreign interests sway Hillary to do what they want her to do (money for mandatory appearances). She also admits that the “Friend of Hillary” list is available and rentable to people who want to influence, but that it’s too sensitive to talk in email.
This leak shows Hillary knows Saudis and Qatar are funding ISIS, which is an enemy of the state. After knowing this, Hillary accepted tens of millions in donations from these terrorist-funding governments (of course they are getting something back in return). She also supported arms deals to them.
Saudi Arabia and Qatar commit horrible acts under Sharia law, including throwing gay people off of buildings, persecuting Christians, Jews, and atheists, and making it legal to rape and beat women. They are the leading funders of Hillary and her campaign through the Clinton Foundation.
And the US sells arms to Saudi to the tune of billions of dollars. So we can fight terrorists with weapons stamped with Made in USA. Greatest scam ever. Sell arms to Saudi cha-ching, military contracts with Boeing and others cha-ching, military members die fighting those wars which in turn creates an angered public that froths at the mouth for more war thereby electing professional idjits cha-ching. Never ends.
The fraudulent War on Terror is all about war profiteering and their will be no end to it if Clinton is elected. Clinton represents the alliance of Wall Street and the military intelligence apparatus.
No,its about zionism,the MIC payoff is a side effect,which the criminals involved reap.
A nexus of criminals never before seen in American and world history.
Michael Moore on Democracy Now, ref’d below.
Tragic self-delusion, but when Amy Goodman plays him some GG talking about Hillary’s war-mongering, he says thank god for Glenn Greenwald (not a paraphrase) and oh yeah that’s true. (Which was not the tune he sang when the Snowden story first broke; see Huff Post for the embarrassing details).
And then Michael says “we” made a mistake by not pressing on Obama more (hi Michael THAT WAS YOU who helped publicly enforce that “mistake,” that now is just a minor “we”). Sometimes saying “we” is not brave.
And then the most hit-myself-on-the-head part at the end is when he says that Hillary is unlike Obama in that, this is too much, she is not going to sing “Kumbaya” with the Republicans. Nah, that Hillary, she’s a tough cookie. Will have NOTHING to do with those dastardly Republicans you see. She’s shown that so strongly this election season by…..naming all the Republicans who support her. Yeah, nothing “Kumbaya” about that!
Michael Moore did some good things in his life, but he is one of the best examples of why liberals with optional principles get absolutely nowhere.
Moore is a self-aggrandizing asshole and a rich capitalist pig of a hypocrite. But you’re right, other than that he “did not some good things in life…”
Yeah, well, haven’t we all?
if you are going to quote me do it correctly. the rest of your post is boring.
He also preposterously tweeted a “no woman has ever…” inanity about waging war, nuking ppl & all kinds of shit that plenty of chicks have, in fact, done. We grrls are not the pacific, nice tea and doily crowd he’d have us be. And for fuck’s sake Hillary “WE came, We saw, He died [cackling madly]” Clinton is not. She’s still the Goldwater Girl, supporter of that fella who wanted to “put a hole” where Hanoi was.
Ask any T.I.
GangStalking
is 24/7
The Province of Quebec, in Canada, which is where Montreal is located, has always had a Gallic view of life including law, human rights, etc. The War Measures Act was a Canadian statute that allowed the government to assume sweeping emergency powers, stopping short of martial law, i.e. the military does not administer justice, which remains in the hands of the courts. It was, of course, used in October Crisis of 1970.
In 1988, the War Measures Act was replaced by the Emergencies Act.
Quebec has various federal government functions assigned to it – other provinces don’t enjoy this privilege.
Canada’s Canadian Security Intelligence Service has the same ‘f**k you’ attitude to law and government as does the NSA, GCHQ and that really horny bunch bunch known as Government Communication Security Bureau (GCSB) in New Zealand which only only allows ONE PERSON in from Parliament, and then under great restraints, the current prime minister, to oversee their activities. See: > http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0105/S00104.htm <
As far as circumventing cell handset evesdropping is concerned these are some of the techniques I and my work colleagues use when we work in the DPRK (North Korea).
(1) Use multi-SIM cell handsets. You can buy a Foreigner SIM in the DPRK which permits international calls and in-country calls to similar cell SIMS, i.e. Foreigners. When we work there we are usually given DPRK citizen SIMS so we can call our minders or our work place (which is in the north of the country and out in a small city);
(2) We also carry a cheap Android smartphone which has NO SIM but has Apps similar to SERVAL (Google Play) which converts an Android handset in to a 'hotspot' MESH network node. These can communicate in an 'ad hoc' mode with similar 'Apped' Android handsets. As we usually get accommodated in what passes for the city's best hotel (as government guest workers) we also leave a handset there to act as a repeater/node. The hotel is on high ground.
(3) We use Iridium satellite paging. Iridium has a constellation of satellites that circle the earth, lower than the usual intercontinental satellites, so coverage is pretty good – all over. We have a single, one-way, subscription and we use time slots of 5 minutes past the hour to send messages individually to our people. One way pager recipients cannot be tracked by of the Alphabet-soup named outfits-only where the message is coming from. We only have one legit pager, all the rest of us have SDR (Software Defined Radios) that pick up messages.
We also use 'loose visas' which are regular visas that are only stapled into your passport and removed when you leave. This means that governments have reduced insight into your travels. Often visitors to the DPRK are subjected to 'debriefing' if they pass through any of the Echelon countries and by using (requesting) 'loose' visas even the US ICE men won't figure out where you have been. (You can remove glued-in visas using acetone)
Perhaps the Quebec Press, and others, need to update their communication protocols.
Speaking of remarkable reporters and sources, I had no idea that John Pilger recently interviewed Julian Assange – but he did, which is damn interesting!
Here’s one short section of the interview (approx. 5 minutes):
‘Trump won’t be permitted to win’ – Assange interview with John Pilger
From the same interview (approx. 5 minutes):
‘Russia not behind Clinton leaks’ – Assange interview with John Pilger
The John Pilger with Julian Assange interview is available in full now.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_sbT3_9dJY4&feature=youtu.be
Assange is awesome,but no,Trump will win.Must be the isolation from reality in the embassy.I notice that from a lot of Europeans also,this belief in serial liars.
It’s a Western worldwide phenomena,a serial lying media.
Sounds like a plot huh?
RT mentioned that the entire interview will be made available Saturday.
a must see if you ask me
His “Trump wont be permitted to win” fits my prediction about Hellary’s fony baloney polls to disuade suspicion of her usual election count rigging. But wallstreet thieves and their warmonster machine will defraud the US anyway because that’s how they feed on the country. Kleptomania is a mental disorder, so is power monstering.
” Three major events prove how widespread, and dangerous, mass surveillance has become in the west.”
SMH…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aLKuPPe1IhY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jvgZWDwWqEo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O0U-Y9wKmHs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kg1-vao5Ta8
Speaking this week at Montreal’s McGill University, Snowden called for the resignation of Montreal’s policeWhen Snowden first spoke publicly, these were exactly the abuses and crimes he insisted were being committed by the mass surveillance regime these nations had secretly erected and installed, claims which were vehemently denied by the officials in charge of those systems.
Yet with each new investigation and judicial inquiry, and as more evidence is unearthed, Snowden’s core claims are increasingly vindicated. Western officials are indeed addicted to unaccountable, secretive, abusive systems of mass surveillance used against their own citizens and foreigners alike, and the more those systems take root, the more core liberties are eroded. chief and denounced the spying as a “radical attack on the operations of the free press.”
Applause and congratulations, which isn’t my fault of course.
Most remarkable was that these domestic, mass surveillance activities were not only illegal, but completely unknown to virtually the entire population in Canadian democracy. Completely false, unfortunately. People lie about anything to protect themselves or loved ones, which of course is understandable. Survival instinct is the strongest human instinct, probably, and we clearly aren’t gaining answers about astronomy and the “supernatural” from the military like every civilian should have the right to. I get sexually assaulted and tortured and dehumanized every day by the war criminal organization that is the nsa. I hope Chelsea makes it but considering everybody is afraid to stop me from being tortured or sexually assaulted, I find it hard to maintain interest in the Snowden (nsa) leaks, although I will continue to find a way to. I’ll use the fact that the nsa doesn’t want me to do this in order to make it easy to continue. I hereby give The Intercept permission to report on the torture I’m subjected to on a daily basis, even though I know they won’t. Good for Snowden, don’t want him to get murdered like coward fascist war criminal rogers stated he did.
The problem with unmasking governments is they no longer have any incentive to put on a show of being virtuous. The public knows this and is trying very hard to ignore the Snowden revelations. Strategically, they are right. People have always made a show of being gullible in order to lull their leaders into a sense of complacency. Leaders are only human and can be tricked relatively easily into believing themselves to be admired and respected. They may even do something admirable to try and maintain this illusion. But once the fine rhetoric is exposed as empty and their flouting of the law is revealed, governments have no alternative but to rule through fear.
However, we should refrain from blaming Mr. Snowden for the upcoming reign of terror. The truth has a habit of exposing itself, and while Mr. Snowden contributed to that unfortunate situation, the final destination was always inevitable.
You may be giving people in general too much credit. I highly doubt that the seeming indifference of the population towards illegal acts being executed by (members of) their government is meant as a clever ruse towards those in power. More than anything, I suspect that people have become desensitized to and accepting of these exposés of corruption in their government. Yes, some are in denial that their own government is as corrupt as has been exposed – but generally speaking, there is to some extent, a somewhat pervasive hopelessness that anything can be done about these things, and it would require that a considerable fraction of the people unite together around a common cause, of protecting their liberties. The mainstream media, in particular, has done a very good job of propagating ignorance in people, and in exacerbating the polarization that exists in our already very divided society. I believe that it will take a “strength in numbers” approach, before we begin to see the real, needed changes that have long been required. (As a cynic might say: After all, these are, to politicians, potential votes.)
If people were as dumb and easily distracted as you claim, then we wouldn’t need mass surveillance. There is widespread hopelessness, which is good, but unless hope is completely extinguished it is susceptible to being rekindled. So I fear that you are demonstrating some of the complacency of which I warned.
No leader can ever be so secure that they have nothing to fear from the truth. And an insecure leader is bad news for the people. Hence it follows that truth is the enemy of the people. The people understand this, since no exceptional intelligence is required to grasp it, just simple cunning derived from basic survival instincts. But they also know that truth cannot be defeated directly and therefore the best strategy is simply to ignore it. So they squirm every time a Greenwald or a Snowden speaks the truth, as it only promises to make their lives more difficult.
“If people were as dumb and easily distracted as you claim, then we wouldn’t need mass surveillance.”
Good thought and could save the government billions, but despite this fact, the government still choose to do both, distraction (dump & unaware citizenry) as well as mass surveillance, because they are in war mode.
more “scandals” … Now it is Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau lending his politician face for “the cause”.
I haven’t forgotten yet that Australian “Justin Trudeau” who promissed to quit if Snowden revelations about Australia being one of the so-called “five eyes” were true … He didn’t!
Obviously, you either are an accountant (so you see reality through monies) or/and you don’t know what you are talking about. I would bet the NSA would be one of the most “on the black” companies out there. They have been doing more with less money and less infrastructure than any other company.
Computer hardware is so cheap and software is pretty much costless on top of that all IT companies must “by the rule of law” collaborate with the NSA and all other similar agencies.
I think if theIntercept isn’t, they should be looking for writers like you. I don’t care that much about “articulating” stuff right. Just stating the truths is and feels great
RCL
Sorry! It actually was New Zealand’s Prime Minister John Key doing “Justin Trudeau”‘s role some time ago:
https://www.theguardian.com/global/2015/mar/10/john-key-restates-promise-to-resign-if-mass-surveillance-data-was-collected
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Key
Now, did he resign? That clearly shows some important issues about politicians, among them: how deep into their @ss they have their heads stuck and how above the law, above morality and above “We the people” they see themselves …
In the global surveillance state of affairs Trudeauism by Justin Trudeau, John Key, or Angela Merkel or any other impersonators don’t really matter.
Also, Glenn could have included New Zealand and Australia as other five-eyes countries in which the Snowden revelations have caused some uncomfortable stirring with their neighbors/commercial partners and internal domestic strains.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australia-Indonesia_spying_scandal
Again, this piece will be another case of “verbal issuings” and silly posturings. I am totally hopeless about any change whatsoever coming from our politicians, police, lawyers or the media (including theIntercept)!
RCL
When Government Officials start going to prison for their criminal behavior there will be a dramatic change in their behavior !
the Blatant disregard for the preservation of goodness and the operating environment of a good society is indicative that such willful disrepsect has a more nefarious and predatory group which seeks to operate against the will of the populations
Could be the operators of wealth (hording), growth (fraud) and wars (murder & genocide) fear the consequences of an awakening population.
The elite fear nothing. Even the climate change and nuclear war they’re keen on inviting for some reason won’t cramp their style, for they have their underground bunker-mansions stocked with every luxury and necessity imaginable.
When Obama was elected, people worried that the right-wing proletariat would openly rebel. They didn’t, except to stupidly and inaccurately call him a ‘Muslim socialist’ on comment pages, and neither will the Trump ‘anti-establishmentarians’ cause much of a real fuss when Clinton is Selected. The masses of people everywhere have been indoctrinated into submission, and unless left and right can unite against the system, it will ever be thus.
the new Oath to the American Way shall cometh.
They’ve moved into OBLs old digs in Tora Bora?:)
Could be the operators of wealth (hording), growth (fraud) and wars (murder & genocide) fear the consequences of an awakening population.
Unfortunately history would prove the answer to that is “no”. They simply redirect anger, fear or enlightenment elsewhere, to a different enemy. I can provide millions of examples, such as “the black and brown man taking over, migrants stealing jobs, Muslims are all terrorists, U.S. is Jew.S.A,., and on and on and on…
This has PUTIN written all over it … and his ‘useful idiot’ Trump too, Glenn.
*h/t Gen. Micheal Hayden
Bill Owen has been informing us that the correct spelling is POUTINE and that it is, in fact, the Montreal moose population that is responsible.
Wait a minute, this is disturbing. What, exactly, do moose contribute to poutine?
Let’s hope it’s not the gravy.
That’s a National Secret. No Canadian would ever speak the truth. The Official Story is that it’s ‘cheese curds’.
*Rhymes with curds anyway!
Hi, Bill! Long time no seeya here. Nice to seeya now!
Bill Owen!
Much as I hate to chime in with Salzmann, it is indeed nice to see you here.
(Hey everybody, please don’t tell Bill I voted for Vold– er, never mind.)
Oops, I meant that to be a reply to Bill, not Salzmann. Oh well. Bill and Salzmann both remind me, albeit in very different ways, of how stupid I can be.
Well I’ll be a monkey’s uncle, if it ain’t Bill Owen back in the world! My, how longs it been? *time for a fete’
*nevertheless, I’m afraid Bill, like Glenn, has been a little out of the loop lately … PUTIN hacked the Montreal democratic moose population and gave it to WikiLeaks a few weeks ago./
PUTIN hacked the Montreal democratic moose population and gave it to WikiLeaks a few weeks ago./
Pretty sure they already have the Ontario moose population wrapped up. There were “curds” everywhere when we were up there!
Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said “obviously I think that the troubling stories – troubling for all Canadians – coming out of Québec,” adding: “we must and can continue to ensure protection of the press and their rights.”
Now that’s some weak tea.
Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said “obviously I think that the troubling stories – troubling for all Canadians – coming out of Québec,” adding: “we must and can continue to ensure protection of the press and their rights.”
Damn, that’s some weak tea.
We are living in dark times. Thank you for your bravery in shredding some light on our situation. OMG, scary!!!!!
And how many arrests were made? LOL.
Looking forward, If the past is any judge …
“OBAMA: We’re still evaluating how we’re going to approach the whole issue of interrogations, detentions, and so forth. And obviously we’re going to look at past practices. And I don’t believe that anybody is above the law. On the other hand, I also have a belief that we need to look forward as opposed to looking backwards. And part of my job is to make sure that for example at the CIA, you’ve got extraordinarily talented people who are working very hard to keep Americans safe. I don’t want them to suddenly feel like they’ve got to spend all their time looking over their shoulders and lawyering up.”
Meh, the natsec elite — like their bankster counterparts — are almost never arrested for criminal behavior. It’s so vulgar; unseemly even.
The Snowden revelations have backfired, if their purpose was to open up debate and change laws. The abuses are now more entrenched than ever, and the establishment knows people are too divided, cowardly and self-absorbed to do anything about it. In all of the 5 Eyes nations absolutely no massive demonstrations have occurred because of the revelations, and in the United States the infamous USA Freedom Act – often claimed to be ushered in because of Snowden’s alarm – actually gives the NSA access to even more data than previously (NSA Can Access More Phone Data Than Ever).
The establishment are ultimately quite pleased with Snowden’s revelations and their fallout, for it has all demonstrated that outside a few activists (who end up marginalized or neutered or worse) the people will not insist on meaningful change at all.
This is a shame, because Snowden and Greenwald etc. acted with mid-blowing courage to get this information to the public (as did Sarah Harrison from WikiLeaks, who helped Snowden escape), only to see that the public would prefer by and large not to be roused from their sleeping state. As with the Clinton emails, defenders of the status quo would rather pretend submissively that everything is okay than stand up for liberty and principle.
Don’t confuse the media blackout (for example, the refusal of the corporate media outlets to ask any questions about the Snowden revelations and domestic mass surveillance in any of the debates) with public views on STASI-like surveillance by an unaccountable government. People with a higher level of knowledge about it are almost uniformly opposed (look at Ars Technica discussion threads on mass surveillance if you doubt this). However, the big telecom corporations have been in bed with the government STASI centers (for example AT&T, who wants to merge with more media corporations), and are trying to shut down all discussion of it on television, radio and in the print media, almost all of which is controlled by media conglomerates like Comcast, Disney, Time-Warner, Newscorp, Tribune, Gannett, etc.
However, given the two candidates views on Snowden (both Trump and Clinton refuse to discuss pardons as well as the surveillance programs), I think there’s getting to be a good argument for dumping all the Snowden files to Wikileaks, suitably redacted to remove all personal identifiers. Contingency plans for this after the election should be seriously considered.
Partisan fear tactic: Do you really want Trump in charge of the mass surveillance programs? Dump it all to Wikileaks! Perhaps Robert Mackey could take up this theme?
No doubt, but there aren’t enough of them to facilitate even a mild revolution in the paradigm/culture.
I like your sarcastic partisan plea, but Clinton will obviously be more fascist than Obama with these powers. And Trump is a stooge who was never meant to be president. I must say I prefer WikiLeaks’ overall approach to Snowden’s, but I respect the choices of both.
Trump the stooge?Holy shite,that is hilaryous.
For whom,the people?
No the HB,0,GWB,Cheney,Kerry,McCain,Cruz,Ryan,Bent Dick etc etc are all stooges for Israel.
Propaganda really sucks,don’t indulge in it,it will kill your idealism quick.
I have to disagree. Surely we read about passivity, but it’s not everywhere.
There are pockets of people, and there are small and large organizations in the States and worldwide, meeting, discussing, brainstorming, and with a great deal of legal heft, trying to inform us all, while actively doing something to stop it.
I do agree that it’s going to take a long time to organize and change the system/structures, but backfire, it certainly did not. Our corrupt and captured agencies, the long history of our too well-financed and funded Deep State, will take time to change, as do the power of contractors, lobbyists, finance, Wall St, and multinationals, etc. Sometimes, generational death will help, but let’s at least give our children and the next generations a got damn fighting chance.
Well, good luck with that.
We told ourselves much the same thing, when we were young, forty and fifty years ago. And the generation before ours, and the one before that. . . It’s “pie in the sky when they die. Didn’t happen, doesn’t happen.
There’s no rational basis for optimism.
There’s no rational basis for optimism.
Oh, I don’t know. There isn’t, until there is. History is replete with revolutions. It’s just a shame they have an overwhelming tendency to get so violent. There’s also an issue with the governments that come along after getting all ripe and crusty with corruption of their own in time.
Even my husband, who is younger than I, remembers the one that happened in his own country. It was called the Velvet Revolution and it sent the Russians home. Well, a bunch of them anyway.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Velvet_Revolution
So, the problem is “We the people”?
OK, there you got an easily falsifiable statement. The day that those “mind-blowingly courageous” individuals explain to “We the people” the actual meaning and scope of Snowden’s revelations in a way that they can understand, we will be able to check if this is true or not, or the extent that it may be.
How come everybody get the point of “The Yes men” at once, both perpetrators and victims?
RCL
“We the people” have been sophisticatedly and brilliantly propagandized into self-flattering cliques of confirmation bias, divided against each other by superficial or impotent ideologies that prevent large-scale defiance of the elite. This is somewhat our fault for falling for it, but mostly the blame goes to the corrupt establishment that has manipulated society into serving and defending the status quo of inverted-totalitarian oppression.
Some people prefer to live as individual humans while many prefer the lifestyle of a militaristic insect colony which seeks only to protect its own.
Very important insight. Yes, individualism and originality has been crushed, apparently with great success. From what I can tell, this has been going son systematically for decades.
…going ON systematically for decades.
yep
it is a process of habituation, painlessness, specialisation, and laziness.
discovery and exploration and risk are tossed to the winds.
it’s automatic.
i dont know that it is unstoppable but i believe it is counterable thru an appreciation of differences and regular celebration of such perhaps with food, music, dress and arts.
“The Snowden revelations have backfired, if their purpose was to open up debate and change laws. The abuses are now more entrenched than ever, and the establishment knows people are too divided, cowardly and self-absorbed to do anything about it.”
The Snowden leaks definitely opened up the debates over mass surveillance, but as some have pointed out, the media blackout has suppressed discussions on this topic that are so urgently needed. If we’re hearing more about the corruption in government now than before, it’s not necessarily because it’s more rampant, but it is certainly because more corruption is being exposed now than before. (i.e. Just because there are more acknowledged cases of a problem/condition, it doesn’t necessarily mean that it is more common, as was seen in autism statistics)
“REQUIEM FOR THE AMERICAN DREAM [2015] is the definitive discourse with Noam Chomsky, on the defining characteristic of our time – the deliberate concentration of wealth and power in the hands of a select few. Through interviews filmed over four years, Chomsky unpacks the principles that have brought us to the crossroads of historically unprecedented inequality – tracing a half century of policies designed to favor the most wealthy at the expense of the majority – while also looking back on his own life of activism and political participation. Profoundly personal and thought provoking, Chomsky provides penetrating insight into what may well be the lasting legacy of our time – the death of the middle class, and swan song of functioning democracy. A potent reminder that power ultimately rests in the hands of the governed, REQUIEM is required viewing for all who maintain hope in a shared stake in the future. Written by Jared P. Scott” [from amazon.com, 11/4/16]
1. Absent a revolution, power in the US does not rest in the hands of the governed. That’s a silly thing to say and a pathetic thing to believe.
2. Noam’s analyses are excellent, but he’s been re-writing them for decades and it’s been a long time since there was enough fresh material to justify a new volume — but new volumes keep on coming, nonetheless.
3. For all the excellence of his analysis, at the end of the day Noam is a promoter of LOTE voting and is thus a part of the problem and not part of the solution. Sad, but true.
The themes Chomsky analyzes have been recurring ones; he’d be writing fantasies if he was writing about them as new or different. There’s value in putting current events within the framework of their recurrent themes.
Like you, I don’t agree with his approach to Lesser Evil Voting (LEV). I also know I could be wrong. I am certain, after his decades of tireless advocacy and devotion to moral and intellectual clarity, that Chomsky’s conclusion here doesn’t make him “part of the problem.”
I was surprised yesterday to hear that Pres Obama had sided w/the Water Protectors against DAPL, but my source who claimed NPR was wrong – and a day late. (Tuesday’s news is old.)
My response was that to our schizo president, what he must do to shift the balance within his own frenetic style of governing (sometimes, not always), is to pardon all whistleblowers and to bring Edward Snowden home.
The abuse is astonishing. Somehow, because these leaders and their agencies (or just rogue agents in the US) don’t want to stop, come hell or high water, they ain’t gonna. Evidence keeps pointing to the fact that we are basically chasing something down a rabbit hole without a flashlight – aren’t we? Is there any proof anywhere that this massive and unprecedented spying, hacking, data-mining, and everything else you write about has netted any positive results? Not that I recall.
As Michael Moore said on Democracy Now this morning, we are going to have to kick ass without taking numbers when Ms Clinton doesn’t hew to the 75% of the Bernie agenda she apparently agreed to. I am, of course, paraphrasing. Of course, neither candidate addressed these programs or cutting DoD spending.
The larger point is, without reporters like Mr Greenwald and his colleagues at TI and other places, without Mr Assange, without organizations like EFF fighting for all of our privacy rights, without people like Ralph Nader to fight for consumers’ rights, and without millions of young leaders and us holding these damn people accountable, it’s not going to change. There are some brilliant authors and books that have informed me for decades.
Obama said “both sides” should avoid doing anything to exacerbate conflict, making a false equivalency between peaceful demonstrators and the corporate-hired thugs pepper-spraying and beating them.
And if Obama pardons Snowden, which is extremely doubtful, it will be solely because he’s convinced Snowden turned out to be no threat to the establishment at all.
What are you referring to. I have not seen Obama siding with the water protectors, I’ve only seen him spout pablum as he continues to do absolutely nothing. Please specify when and in what way did Obama supposedly side with water protectors against DAPL.
I think he’s referring to this statement published a few days ago. Obama gives an interview about DAPL.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yx4LX6J_8co
He says there “might be a way to accommodate everyone”. I personally wouldn’t call this ‘supportive’ but rather a politicians way of side-stepping any commitment on the issue. But judge for yourself.
Which is what I figured, which is why I called Obama’s statement pablum, and in no way at all takes sides with The Water Protectors. Obama’s statement is classic Obama horse shit. Very similar to the low quality, meaningless crap that Clinton put out on the subject:
Hillary Clinton finally releases statement on Dakota Access Pipeline
By “accommodate everybody”, he no doubt means divert the pipeline a few miles one way or the other to avoid running directly through native lands and burial grounds, (merely surrounding them with leaking lakes of oil, as opposed to having it bubble up from their midst,) and then ram it down our throats from whatever direction that happens to be. How does one accommodate everyone when one side wants no pipeline and the other side wants one? These seem particularly mutually exclusive. Perhaps Obama seeks to inaugurate a new type of logic, or give us a Schrodinger pipeline, one that simultaneously exists and doesn’t exist
More likely, the “everyone” here refers to DAPL execs, and the banks that fund them.
Exactly.
Sorry – I over-edited and left out a comma, I think.
Because my friend cited a reputable source and I knew I didn’t have time to check it until this morning, I thought it was new at the time.
I also said that it was Tuesday’s news, and hence, not news at all.
Barack Obama is a uniquely styled coward after all.
Anyone who read Tariq Ali’s The Obama Syndrome six years ago already knew what a corporate lackey and war hawk he is.
“Change, change, change”, blah, blah, blah… How long is it going to take this community organizer to sign the pardon for Snowden? His last day in office?
Snowden’s been on the lam for what, 2 and a half years now? Come on you champion of the Nobel Peace prize (who bombs & kills innocents in hospitals, bombs innocent Syrians -during a cease fire), grow some balls!
Oh please, this standard bearer of protecting the police state status quo is not going out of his way to help any whistle blower of the Nebraska Sewing Association.
I know it’s not the same, but at least he’s been pardoned by Vladimir Putin. For now, that’s good enough for me.
An all important fact that is fundamental to understanding the depth of this issue is this:
In Canada, contrary to popular belief, judicially granted authorizations to wiretap are obtained by the police for investigations, and not each individual phone, or even each individual person. The number of phones wiretapped under an Authorization will range from one to infinity, and solely at the discretion of the police.
I note that the police statements to date appear to imply that at least the initial journalist in this scandal was wiretapped after a warrant was obtained by the police from a Justice of the Peace on evidence that the journalist, while not a target of a corruption investigation of a police team, had relevant information. In reality, unless it was an investigation specifically into the journalist, the Justice of the Peace would not have been presented with even so much as the identity of the journalist prior to issuance of the warrant. The police would simply have added him and his phone number or numbers to the list to be wiretapped and relevant account activity/metadata accessed.
A journalist that had written many revealing articles on police shenanigans would have been easy to include into any investigation of police misconduct under this blanket authorization that relies at least to some degree on metadata. It would appear to be an open invitation to manipulation.
Obama said “both sides” should avoid doing anything to exacerbate conflict, making a false equivalency between peaceful demonstrators and the corporate-hired thugs pepper-spraying and beating them.
If Obama pardons Snowden, which is extremely doubtful, it will be solely because he’s convinced Snowden turned out to be no threat to the establishment at all.
Sorry, meant as a reply to someone else.
“Which just goes to show that the whole system is broken.”
It is not “broken”. It’s working exactly as intended. The problem is that it is corrupt.
What is merely broken can be repaired. But what is corrupt can only be dismantled, root and branch, and entirely replaced.
“It’s working exactly as intended.”
Very perceptive.
The whole system has domestic populations under surveillance for the security of the states and for the centers of power they serve. To maintain their control, states must be kept secure from their own populations.
once it becomes an economy with high paying jobs from money printed by wallstreet thieves, you cannot simply fire thousands of people.
BUT YOU CAN REPLACE THE CURRENCY.
It’s dishonest of the author to include a quote about the UK case and imply it is a quote by the Court (in his second paragraph). If anything I suspect he’s quoting press coverage of the case. So much for integrity in journalism.
Attack the messenger not the message, that will fix the problem for sure ! Sarcasm ! !
He is quoting press coverage, but it’s hardly dishonest. Rather, it appears to be a simple failure to clarify attribution.
It would, of course, be dishonest if the quote(s) didn’t accurately reflect the tribunal’s findings, but that isn’t the case. The tribunal found just what the quotes indicated it found.
Of course, since there is no writing on Earth more dreadfully boring than that found in British legal opinions, one is quite likely to fall asleep attempting to verify the above, but here you go:
Neutral Citation Number:
[2016] UKIPTrib 15_110
–
CH No. IPT/15/110/CH
IN THE INVESTIGATORY POWERS TRIBUNAL
Rolls Building
26, 27,28,29 July 2016
Before:
THE HON. MR. JUSTICE BURTON (PRESIDENT)
THE HON. MR. JUSTICE MITTING (VICE-PRESIDENT)
SIR RICHARD MCLAUGHLIN
MR. CHARLES FLINT QC
MS. SUSAN O’BRIEN QC
B E T W E E N:
PRIVACY INTERNATIONAL
Claimant
–
and
–
(1) SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AND COMMONWEALTH AFFAIRS
(2) SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT
(3) GOVERNMENT COMMUNICATIONS HEADQUARTERS
(4) SECURITY SERVICE
(5) SECRET INTELLIGENCE SERVICE
Respondents
It’s only about 70 pages, with appendices.
Note: What were they thinking when they adopted the abbreviation, UKIPTrib? ;^)
This is not to critique this piece; like many people I am grateful for this sort of reporting. However, I wonder if part of the problem with quietistic acceptance of mass surveillance is precisely the language and imagery around it — “surveillance”, imagery of the UFO like GCH donut, all the ones and zero streaming matrix-like, lots people in skinny suits with the mission impossible theme music humming in the background.
This case is so classic — a grubby little city vendetta against a local reporter. The one that, for me, should be written in crayon and glued with glitter stickies to the NSA’s smooth impassive exterior is “loveint” — dudes (mostly dudes) sitting around all day spying on their exes or whoever they have a crush on. Or the story of the massive amounts of government funding that enabled somebody’s crack team to look for terrorists via playing World of Warcraft all day.
Getting people to think some kind of super capable caste of genius spies should be reined in is a hard sell (not to me, but for many people who really believe they work like that). Hitting a little harder on the “hidden jerks being jerks in a sneaky way for nothing just because they can, while also being paid by your taxes” needs to be hammered on a bit more so that citizens who don’t care about the Deep State realize it is also the Shallow State in operation on their dime, too.
Journalism is sadly missing from MSM, consequently, the people/sheeple wouldn’t know of real objective journalism is it was in front of them. The people/sheeple get their ‘news’ via MSM, hence, for the majority this is non news. Bring on the latest about Taylor Swift and the Kardashians, now that IS news.
You would hope that the targeting of journalists again would be triggering an awakening of sorts in the profession, but since most are actually “journalists” who do not challenge the power structure through investigative reporting, the majority in that class of clowns knows they are immune. They act accordingly in maintaining the status quo.
We are going to need a whole lot more whistleblowers, because the failures in oversight by the executive, legislative and judicial… or rather their collaboration in perpetuating these abuses will continue.
If we assume the unlikely will NOT occur… an organized purge by voters that leads to agency defunding mentioned by a few below, a massive solar storm or series of EM blasts that wipes out the technology infrastructure, or a giant meteor that puts us all out of our misery… we will need to find a new approach.
I’m not going to join those asking GG what we should do, because I’m fairly confident that if he had a viable idea, he’d be sharing it with us.
We also know he is not on board with the cacophemistic “burn it down” approach favored by some in the anti-establishment minority like Assange, so maybe we should begin a discussion on a viable approach that can achieve support from a majority.
A shiny new nickel for the one who comes up with the best idea today!!!
Enforce the laws that are already on the books see Title 18 sec 241 & 242 would be a good start !
Prosecution by the Department of Justice relying on sitting judges?
I like the idea, but if I recall correctly, it hasn’t worked out so well yet.
Nevertheless, you are on track to being five cents richer as the sole entrant in the contest.
A long journey always begins with a first step, & sunlight is the best disinfectant for a corrupt government, let them expose themselves some more & if you give them enough rope they will hang themselves !
“Privacy International, Liberty and the American Civil Liberties Union are among 10 human rights groups backing a landmark challenge to mass surveillance in the European Court of Human Rights……Privacy International and nine other human rights organisations have filed submissions to the court, in Strasbourg, in the first case to challenge the legality of surveillance programmes revealed by Edward Snowden.”
Something else to keep an eye on.
http://www.computerweekly.com/news/450400044/NGOs-challenge-UK-and-US-mass-surveillance-in-human-rights-court
Here is the actual legal suit filed.
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3115985-APPLICANTS-REPLY-to-GOVT-OBSERVATIONS-PDF.html
Today, the Canadian press are shocked at the revelations that Canadian spies and the police are spying on them, but I think it’s fair to say that up till now, most Canadian reporters have been sleeping through the “Snowden era”. They heard about how their government, along with the American NSA was spying on everyone, but they had faith in government promises that Canadian reporters and their sources, were not part of “everyone”.
From 2014:
I personally Tweeted CBC many times, I emailed journalists, I Tweeted to journalists and the organizations that represent. I told them, it can happen to you. It IS happening to you.
Nothing. Nothing. Nothing.
I guess they have nothing to hide.
And for the last two days, Tweeting to CBC, journalists.
Nothing. Nothing. Nothing.
No, it’s not that they have nothing to hide. It’s that” responsible people censor themselves”. That old adage, and subtle guideline, plays especially well to us Canadians, ….to our detriment. We seem to operate with some unstated understanding that issues will be ‘properly’ dealt with in the backrooms by the responsible elements of our society. —Something of a holdover from our colonial past.
This CSE issue is a prime example. When Snowden gave us the undisputed goods on what the Five Eyes were up to, it was relatively unreported in Canada. Reading the headlines, one would have thought that it was pretty much an American problem pertaining to intelligence re their overseas wars. ….Meanwhile the CSE was in the latter stages of constructing the largest Canadian federal building ever built. Oh, and incidentally, the NSA just so happened to be constructing a facility so huge in the desert of Utah that it had its own postal code. Now who’d have ever thunk that there might be a connection. ….Not an F-ing word out of our mainstream media beyond a feel-good piece about this huge building that was now going to allow the efficient operation of the CSE under one roof of what had been a disorganized collection of buildings in the area.
I am amazed at how easily and seamlessly those kinds of Stalin era memes have become part of the backbone of the consciousness of “‘free’ societies”.
I wrongly thought that for people to “understand” such things, there had to happen tumultuous social conflicts, such as the rise of Nazism, WWII, the Bolshevik, Chinese, Cuban revolutions, the cold war …
RCL
Your press has the same disease our press does;Zionism.
Milewski
https://twitter.com/Bill_Owen/status/560538590758064129
Glen, you can’t write for this paper with any moral authority. It is nothing less than cognitive dissonance that you rail against the police state while the Intercept shills for Hillary Clinton and assists the deep state in propaganda such as the Intercept pieces on the White Helmets. Hillary Clinton is the champion of the deep state in this election, and she and Obama both want Snowden dead or captured.
You have lost all moral authority when you try to expose the deep state while simultaneously the Intercept perpetuates many of the deep state lies, as we see regarding Syria — articles glorifying people who don’t like Assad. When the Intercept did a flurry of articles on Aleppo, they simply were doing what the corporate media was doing, fretting that ‘their’ side, the Jihadists, were losing.
The idea that Aleppo could ‘fall’ to Syria and Russia, shows the imperialist mindset of the Intercept. Aleppo is part of Syria, it could only fall if a foreign army took it over — unless of course you support the illegal proxy war in Syria. Los Angeles could only ‘fall’ to US Troops if you, for some reason, supported a foreign army of Jihadists occupying it.
You also have sold-out your moral authority to the Intercept due to the owner, Pierre Omidyar. Pierre helped finance the illegal coup in the Ukraine a few months before an election. This coup was facilitated in part by Nazi battalions. You should be ashamed you work for a billionaire who actively funds the deep state and actively supports war crimes. Russia essentially saved Edward Snowden’s life by following international law and granting him political asylum. Yet now you work for a billionaire that supported Nazi groups to overthrow the Ukraine for the purpose of destroying Putin and turning Russia into a satellite of Western capital.
I know the reason for your mistake Glen. You are a brilliant thinker and great writer, but you lack common sense. This can be illustrated by your support of Bush’s lies to invade Iraq. Anyone using common sense could have seen through the propaganda used to invade Iraq.
Yet, this happens to brilliant people. Many great minds have trouble seeing what is right in front of them. Just as you made an error in judgement before the Iraq war, you have made another one thinking that you could write about the deep state and Snowden’s revelations while working for a billionaire that is one of their hand-maidens.
Please forgive me if you were threatened by the PTB and are acquiescing to Pierre for your own safety. I wouldn’t blame you if that is the case; otherwise I suggest you take that 2 gig file Snowden gave you and leave this deep-state corporate rag.
For an argument arguing that another has lost the moral authority to argue, this argument is arguably self-defeating. Well done.
@ Shorter Jamie
Arglebargle, blah, blah, blah, I don’t even known Glenn’s name is spelled with two n’s not one. Or that by and large, with the exception of Robert Mackey, The Intercept’s writers haven’t been anything that could remotely be called “pro-Hillary” except to the extent they are “anti-Trump”.
I mean it’s not like Glenn Greenwald’s name isn’t directly below every piece he writes or that a quick scroll through of the articles in the last 6 months haven’t been really very kind or supportive of Hillary Clinton’s campaign.
But hey everybody has an opinion, amirite?
RR Heard, still kickin ass and taking names.
:)
We resort to spell-checking when have lost the argument … .
@ Jamie
Were you making an argument? I didn’t see it. I saw standard arglebargle, concern trolling, blah blah blah, whataboutery.
But if there was one (or more) it seemed to arise from three unsupported premises:
1) That The Intercept is “shilling for Hillary”;
2) Glenn Greenwald cannot possibly have “moral authority” on “surveillance issues” because he published his work at a legal non-profit whose seed money came from a billionaire who you believe, without linked substantiation, funded a coup in Ukraine; and/or,
3) that Glenn Greenwald supported “Bush’s lies” based on a forward from one of Glenn‘s books that does not indicate “support” by Glenn, but rather indifference or the benefit of the doubt.
Now 1) and 2) are easily debunked, and/or as in the case of 2) unsubstantiated.
And 3) is a longstanding claim that Glenn has addressed repeatedly since that particular book appeared in print.
Now if you want to argue that “support” in your book is precisely logically and morally synonymous with “indifference” or “benefit of the doubt”, then feel free. Many have before you and many will after you, but most of us can read for comprehension and know that’s not what Glenn was attempting to convey in the forward of that book, and any blame you want to place at his feet on that basis, he has spent basically his entire journalistic career since attacking his and everyone else’s misplaced benefit of the doubt or indifference.
So, again, believe what you want because everybody is entitled to an opinion. But I’m not seeing anything from you other than a bunch of unsupported assertions rather than compelling argument.
His point re: misspelling Grenwald’s name goes to your obvious lack of depth on this file.
Next!
Hereafter known as “the argle-bargle refutation.”
“Please forgive me if you were threatened by the PTB and are acquiescing to Pierre for your own safety. ”
Now that is funny.
It’s the editor. It’s always the editor. Betsy is the funnel for most of the pro-Shillary crap. Imagine the crust on her.
You can’t believe that the thugs who have stolen the govt of Brazil wouldn’t limit GGs speech?
That Omidyar isn’t a propagandist or part of the MSM leviathan that lies repeatedly to people?
That GG has been silent the last 2? weeks regarding the election?
Canada?At this moment,wtf cares about Canada?
Please. Just having the pathetic Mackey here is a sign of BS.
The left wing govt of Ecuador tried to shut up wikileaks.GG and NK dissed Assange.Snowden is silent.
Oh Canada.sheesh.
“Please. Just having the pathetic Mackey here is a sign of BS.”
Mackey is pathetic. He must be a raging drunk to post analysis of tweets as work.
It is always the editor. From the moment she was here the crap appeared.
Glenn has made his view of the stench here known. As a benevolent dictator once said, ‘Let’s do it my way.’
Wasn’t GG a co founder and editor?Does Mackey have more clout here than GG?
Lying and reportage are two different things.
Terrible business and ethics model.
Glenn is one of the founders but he is just that; a founder who contributes.
Betsy picks the crap as editor.
And it gets sillier and worse from there.
“Semiliterate Partisan Conspiranoid Morons on Parade.”
Is that too many adjectives for a title? ;^)
“Semiliterate Partisan Conspiranoid Morons on Parade.”
LOL. Is that the title of Mackey’s latest or an indictment of his writing as a whole of late? ;-}
p.s. I refuse to give him the clicks of reading him now that he’s hidden his tender ass behind a no-comment shield. Such a fragile flower….. :-)
I’m with you. From the beginning of his ridiculous campaign, the only reason to read Bob’s pieces was to savage them and to admire the creativity of others doing likewise.
If he’s too sensitive to expose himself to us (oh, dear!), there’s no reason to allow ourselves to be exposed to his nonsense. I mean, what if it’s communicable?!?!?
“I mean, what if it’s communicable?!?!?”
Gonna have to leave this one alone. ;) There’s too many choices and jokes to be had for this statement. Cheers
Yes, the Secretary of State who wanted to kill or capture Edward Snowden is now enjoying a 24/7 commercial on the Intercept. What irony!
Yes, the Secretary of State who wanted to kill or capture Edward Snowden is now enjoying a 24/7 commercial on the Intercept.
As you are well aware from watching elections commercials are not always flattering. Which one of the following articles do you think she might enjoy reading the most?
Those are just between the beginning of October and now. One month. The journalists who wrote them (off the top of my head because I didn’t write them all down as I was perusing – you should really take up perusing, it’s educational): Glenn Greenwald, Zaid Jilani, Jon Schwarz, Lee Fang, Alex Emmons and Naomi LaChance.
I don’t understand why you “guys” are so intolerant of Mr Mackey. When I don’t like an article of his, I explain why. When I like an article, I thank him.
There are teams of writers on TI that blow me away, (let me plug Lee & Zaid, whose youth encourages me) and I try to read as much as I can, as often as I can.
What is wrong with having a different viewpoint? Who are the fragile flowers, really?
Maybe attacks on Mr Mackey went beyond the pale and that’s why they blocked comments. I seriously doubt that he’s hiding.
I don’t understand why you “guys” are so intolerant of Mr Mackey. When I don’t like an article of his, I explain why. When I like an article, I thank him.
While there are always cranks posting under every article, in large part, most of us have done exactly what you noted. Mona, myself and many others participated in Mackey’s comment sections and interacted with him on twitter, both praising and critiquing as we usually do. But something changed with him at some point during this election and his writing became a bit too much cheerleader-without-pause.
I have no problem with Mackey – or anyone else – going after Trump. Trump is a fascist idiot and his followers are, to an uncomfortable degree, potentially violent. But there has been virtually nothing from Mackey critiquing Clinton and, when myself and others posed legitimate questions to him about some of his articles in support of her, he was quite dismissive to us.
There is nothing wrong with having alternative viewpoints. But when the critique becomes such that you simply turn it off rather than address it – or even simply ignore it – you are trying to set yourself up to simply impose your views on a reading public.
I didn’t read all of the comments under his articles and have no doubt that some were pretty scathing, but I have seen no other writer here place him/herself above even permitting reader commentary. Greenwald has been a huge proponenet of his commenting sections over the years, so I suspect that doesn’t happen here at TI unless a writer specifically requests it. If it were a thing that were editor-imposed then it would have happened long ago on some article about, say, Israel.
I have nothing personal against Mr. Mackey, but if he has chosen to snub the readership here in such a manner then he will find that he gets critiqued and/or ridiculed in other places. I address my critics here. I don’t have as many as Mackey, perhaps, but I would say that’s at least some evidence that I am not as fragile a flower as he. If you found my comment a bit indigestible in nature, well, I’m just getting over a bout of norovirus and that’s just my way of sharing. ;-}
FYI, Greenwald spells his name with 2 “n”s…..Glenn. I see you’re a stickler for detail.
Perhaps you could also blame Greenwald for global warming.
I really love this comment of yours: “This can be illustrated by your support of Bush’s lies to invade Iraq”
You do realize that Greenwald has literally spent almost a decade writing about this very issue. Perhaps you care to provide some evidence of your assertion? It’s rather humorous that you accuse Greenwald of not having ‘common sense’ yet you seem to know virtually nothing about his history on the Iraq question.
Here is Greenwald’s response to you obvious uniformed mind.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/1/30/1182442/-Glenn-Greenwald-Responds-to-Widespread-Lies-About-Him-on-Cato-Iraq-War-and-more
I really love this comment of yours: “This can be illustrated by your support of Bush’s lies to invade Iraq”
That was the line that got my antennae a-stirrin’ as it’s a classic concern troll line over the years that almost always comes from someone who has a Greenwald bone they’ve been worrying for a very long time.
It references an admission from the preface of one of Greenwald’s first books where he talks about how he came to his political awakening. How, after the 9/11 attacks he was willing to cut Bush some slack but how that changed as he realized the damage being done.
People who bring that nugget back up from deep within the shityard are amazingly immune to the fact that none of us awakens, like Venus on the halfshell, with fully operative political philosophies. It also conveniently ignores, as you noted, the vast amount of work he’s done since to rectify that mistaken opinion. And it makes me want to ask them to provide proof of their own Forevah Political Purity as a pre-condition for them laying out such bullshit critiques.
“People who bring that nugget back up from deep within the shityard are amazingly immune to the fact that none of us awakens, like Venus on the halfshell, with fully operative political philosophies”
Agreed. It ‘s mind-boggling to me why idiots like Jamie like to live in a delusional world whereby once you’ve formed an initial opinion, you’re precluded form changing that opinion in the face of new evidence. I wonder how that outlook would work in our judicial system? Sounds very authoritarian to me.
exactly.
Looking back at positions I held 13 years ago I can objectively say that if I had a the chance to speak with my younger self of that time, there isn’t much that we’d agree on.
People evolve and change their position with new knowledge, new perspective on life, maturity, etc. That people can recognize their mistakes and change their opinion with time, and be open about it and the reasons why they changed their minds is actually a good thing.
““Had I known then what I know now, I would not have supported it”
From Greenwald’s response in the link I posted.
“Ask anyone who claims that I “supported” the Iraq War to point to a single instance where I ever supported or defended it in any way. There is no such instance. It’s a pure fabrication.”
Here, you can read the entire item for yourself. I’m betting you don’t have the courage to face the truth and admit you’re wrong. Anyone with such a bone to pick as you seem to have doesn’t have the personal conviction of fairness to ever admit he/she might be wrong or mistaken.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/1/30/1182442/-Glenn-Greenwald-Responds-to-Widespread-Lies-About-Him-on-Cato-Iraq-War-and-more
“The war in Iraq, while it may be exacerbating the conflict between Islam and the West, is a red herring. However mixed or misguided American intentions were in launching this war, civilized human beings are now attempting, at considerable cost to themselves, to improve life for the Iraqi people.”
“I accepted his [Bush] judgment that American security really would be enhanced by the invasion of this sovereign country.”
The first paragraph is in now way a supportive statement of going to war with Iraq.
The second paragraph is from his preface of his book. The link’s I posted are a direct repudiation of person’s using the preface as a means of ascribing support for the Iraq war, which of course you refuse to read and choose to ignore.
Since I know you won’t read Greenwald’s response, I’ll just repost it here for you and anyone else to see.
“But anyone using this Preface to claim I was a “supporter” of the Iraq War is simply fabricating. At worst, I was guilty of apathy and passivity. I did nothing for or against it because I assumed that those in positions to exercise adversarial scrutiny – in journalism and politics – were doing that. It’s precisely my realization of how profoundly deceitful and failed are American political and media institutions that motivated me to begin working on politics, and it’s those realizations which continue to motivate me now.”
Produce links to pieces where these supposed quotes come from or be considered a liar.
It’s really quite simple. Even you should be able to accomplish a link to a quotation.
You have lost all moral authority when you try to expose the deep state while simultaneously the Intercept perpetuates many of the deep state lies,
No. His moral authority, such as it may be, comes pretty much from the pieces he writes and the philosophy underpinning. Aside from his blog, Unclaimed Territory, Greenwald has done nothing BUT write at media institutions that also had other writers of questionable morals. This was true at Salon and certainly the Guardian, so it’s particularly rich to see this plaint raised.
I suggest you take that 2 gig file Snowden gave you and leave this deep-state corporate rag.
It takes resources to do journalism. As my parents were so find of reminding me, money doesn’t grow on trees. If Omidyar – whatever his faults, and I’m sure they are many – had not ponied up, how much of Snowden’s work would have been produced? People can bitch, moan and legitimately quibble over what’s been written, what they think’s been omitted etc ad nauseum, but the fact is without the resources of TI those stories would have been stifled, effectively suppressed to an even greater degree than whoever thinks they already have been. And that applies to a lot of other really good reporting that has happened at this site outside of the Snowden revelations.
Seriously, what kind of blinders do you have to be reading through to think that Mackeys Trumpdown hidey-hole shite and/or Clinton puff pieces should be given more weight than some of the reporting done by the heavy lifters like Jordan Smith, Cora Currier, Liliana Segura and Sharon Lerner among others. It’s unfortunate, but the only way to get to the wheat is through the chaff. :-s
This is what I find interesting from the Intercept: that many of the commenters are more informed and more able to look through propaganda than the journalists from the intercept are able to.
The reason for this is, I think, that commenters do not get paid for what they write, while the journalists here do.
Journalist who write for money are not truly independent in their thinking and this becomes painfully clear in their writing. They write to be able to pay their rent, house, living, and for this they have to please their masters.
Readers don’t need moralizing journalists who are trying to sell the message of their owners to the readers, although it is good education for them to learn in practice what propaganda looks like and why it is used on them.
Still it is kind of sad to know that there are journalists who cannot be blamed for the world that they live in, but still are perfectly aware that their ‘success’ of dragging people into the world of their owners (which is their job), is actually a failure.
” It is nothing less than cognitive dissonance that you rail against the police state while the Intercept shills for Hillary Clinton and assists the deep state in propaganda such as the Intercept pieces on the White Helmets. Hillary Clinton is the champion of the deep state in this election, and she and Obama both want Snowden dead or captured.”
I really couldn’t read a word further than that because this paragraph demonstrates pretty clearly that you have not been reading The Intercept at all with regards to Clinton and the upcoming election. Greenwald and The Intercept have consistently pushed for further investigation and reporting on Hillary Clinton and denounced the one sided support for the Clinton campaign by most major media outlets. They have been repeatedly accused of supporting Trump for their consistent advocacy of the position that Trump being a d!ck did not justify giving Clinton a pass.
So for you to claim that they’ve been “shills for Hilary Clinton” is nothing short of laughable.
As for US policy on the middle east and Syria, as far as I know Greenwald has always been extremely adversarial to state propaganda about the motives of US intervention and mainstream media/government officials depiction of the stakes and parties.
Not only that, it’s just a non-sequitur. Even if you don’t like the coverage the make about Syria that doesn’t mean they shouldn’t denounce government overreach in terms of surveillance. There’s absolutely no link between the two.
S/He is obviously reading Robert (Glen) (sic) Mackey (Greenwald) and perhaps has a limited vision or optical illusion issue.
I leave the defense to those who know GG’s work better and longer than I do, but I found it to be a ridiculous claim, as well.
TL:TB
DNR
Wait, I think I smell a boiling frog? Is that you Sibel?
Sibel wouldn’t have written,
You are a brilliant thinker and great writer,
Never in a million years would that drip off her fingers.
Beware of the slings and arrows of the lickspittle.
Silent Snowden?Why?Does he like the criminal HRC?
I think addicted is an accurate word to use, and I think it will prove very difficult for these agencies to relinquish these dangerous capabilities.
Thank you Edward Snowden!!
I think it should probably be noted that the GCHQ, et al., practices found to be illegal by the investigatory powers tribunal will soon mostly be legal unless the “snooper’s charter” undergoes major revision before its pending approval by the House of Lords.
That is, the UK government response to public and judicial condemnation of illegal suspicionless mass surveillance has been to legalize it.
Also, of course, little, if anything, has been done to rein in the similar activities of the US and other 5 Eyes spooks, over the past three years.
Perhaps we should all be wondering whether citizens of our Western “democracies” care enough, or have sufficient influence, to curtail the intrusive activities of our Rulers and their lackeys. Personally, I doubt that either is the case.
I agree with you. There is ample evidence that most people in this country don’t care about anything that does not directly and materially affect them. It is why the notion that IT can’t happen here is a lie. They will sit by passively as one group after another is deported, imprisoned, or worse. And unlike the Germans, they will have put him into office with a majority of their votes.
It is comforting to think about the antiwar uprisings of the late ’60s and early ’70s as though they indicated that we were somehow more involved and active then, but one must remember that for every hippy com’nist war protestor there were a half dozen redneck hard hats.
I remember. I was one of those hippy commies and I certainly felt we were outnumbered an under fairly constant threat.
That said, there were many more of us then, relatively speaking, than there are now. The masses are much more complacent, much more thoroughly propagandized, much more effectively sedated by toys and entertainment and cultural fairy tales.
And the PTB are much quicker, more effective and more brutal in stamping out any resistance or hint of rebellion.
the currency needs to be changed
The Germans?Oy.
HRC and her zionist traitors are the epitome of nazidom,and all they spew is divide and conquer nonsense to keep our nation divided enough for that criminal relationship to continue.
If someone can denote one positive legislation,policy or act by HRC which has benefited America in 30 years,please elucidate?
A serial liar,clusterf*ck of a human being,an alcoholic stumblebum who berates her staff and others over their failure to prevent the public from seeing the real HRC,a pos screwup from hell.
Obomba can issue blanket pardons as he walks out.
He can even give Shillary an official pass on her crimes; looking forward .
Which crimes are those?
The crimes of which she has been sentence to prison? (“Lock her up.”:)
The crimes of which she has been convicted by a jury of her peers? (rogue FBI agents and various bigmouthed Republicans like Giuliani?)
The crimes for which he has been indicted by a legitimately constituted legal entity? (The RNC is not a grand jury.)
The crimes of which she has been charged by political allies of Vladmir Putin?
The crimes charged by a known and acknowledged fraudster?
The crimes for which she has been accused by political opponents — including the murder of Vince Foster, the solicitation of bribes from Chinese businessmen, the importation of drugs via the Mena, Ark. airstrip, the crime of supporting a philandering husband, the crime of illicit sex parties and procuring women, the crime of being Secretary of State when terrorists attack a US consulate, or the crime of trying to keep her personal emails separate from her official emails?
I’m very curious.
Which of “her crimes” — her many, many, heinous crimes — should Obama pardon?
Well lets start with these :
http://www.mostdamagingwikileaks.com/
Do you understand the concept of “crime” … of “law” … of “trial”?
Posting a bunch of accusations on a website co-opted by Vladmir Putin or Trump ally Steve Bannon isn’t the same thing as a “crime.”
Accusations aren’t charges.
Why is it so difficult for you pickleheads worshiping Trump to understand he isn’t telling the truth — and that when you repeat his lies, you’re not telling the truth either.
Your accusations have as much weight and merit in the criminal justice system as a report of Hillary having an affair with an alien.
What’s the matter with you?
An accusation — even a hundred accusations (especially promoted by Trump allies) — does not equal one crime.
How difficult is that to understand?
Even Republicans understand it. That’s why they were pissed with Comey in July.
Geesh.
Can we prosecute the war crimes and pay to play corporatism at least, or do you only want to argue the Republican approved politically opportunistic ones that the establishment will tolerate?
But this-
“or the crime of trying to keep her personal emails separate from her official emails?”
is crossing the line into Correct the Record nonsense.
Hillary’s attempted evasion of federally mandated transparency is an unprosecuted real crime.
Hillary apologists pretending otherwise are just delusional.
Nice oxymoron.
Clinton’s explanation for the server was to keep her person separate from her official emails (and for convenience.).
She said in 2010, “”I don’t want any risk of the personal being accessible.”
If you accept (I assume you do) that Trump will make America great again” or that he knows more about ISIS “than the generals” — both preposterous claim, why is it so difficult to accept that someone would not want their personal life invaded by political enemies???
What is the matter with you people? You rail against NSA spying and then insist that actual human beings should be glad when Breitbart and the National Enquirer can dig through their personal lives with absolute impunity.
I don’t get your double standard.
Privacy matters, even for public officials.
Sure.
You need three things first.
Specific charges, jurisdiction, and indictment.
Then you can prosecute.
“Mommy. I forget. Do I put on my shoes first or do I put on my socks first?”
“Mommy. I forgot. Do I put on my trousers first or my underpants first?”
“Judge. I forget. Do we put her in jail first or do we have a trial?”
What is it with you numbskulls?
I’m absolutely sure you would scream bloody murder if you were put in jail without a trial — or if a crowd gathered outside your house screaming for your imprisonment.
I could be wrong about that. Correct me if so.
“He can even give Shillary an official pass on her crimes; looking forward .”
pre-emptive absolution
Actually they are legal now. As the article Glenn points to helpfully explains, the activities became legal in November 2015 when avowal took place. It was the secrecy around the way in which powers were being used that the IPT objected to.
That’s mostly true. If you read the tribunal’s full opinion, you’ll see that they reserved or dodged judgment (judgement to them) on some points. All of those will be magically washed away if the snooper’s charter comes into effect without significant changes, as appears likely.
Creepy damned people in our Five Eyes Planetary Omnisurveillance Cult.
Filler.Ho hum.To the lumberyard!
What, seriously?
If I were more sarcastic, I might be inclined to say your comment needs a “This comment brought to you by the NSA” disclaimer.
Your inclination is way off.
My take is that who the f*ck cares about Canada at this moment before the most critical election since FDR for the American people,in rejecting the serial liars and screw ups who have brought US 9-11,The War of Terror and the most divided nation since the Civil War,all for the love of zion.
The hero worshippers can’t see the forest for the trees,as HRC is nothing but the chosen whore of zion to continue our abject misery,in their divide and conquer,which so many alleged exceptionalists seem to revel in.
F*ck the NSA,F*CK the HSecurity,f*ck HRC and F*ck Obomba,the world leadership in our history bar none.
Yankee come home,Trump 2016.
In Trump we trust.
Does it mean I’ll give him a pass if he f*cks up like all demoncrats for the HB?
Nope.
President Obama should pardon Snowden. Without his sacrifice, we would most likely have no knowledge of these abuses. But regrettably, Obama has embraced government secrecy and the ongoing surveillance of innocent citizens. So I very much doubt that he will.
‘Secrecy Governance” is totalitarianism with a little lipstick.
Agreed.
Is there any solution?
Relatively uncomplicated issues like the right to vote or the right to dominion over one’s own body incite tens of millions of people to vote against their own interests. The legislative branch of government has decided it’s better to have no judiciary rather than to accept inconvenient decisions interfering with their ideological and theological crusade. The executive branch cannot seemingly act without cries of outrage and rebellion.
Western security agencies ignore standard constitutional strictures because their political overseers demand it. Further, as we see with recent revelations about the New York FBI field branch, the agencies themselves are filled with political operatives who ignore common decency for political advantage. Worse, other autocratic governments use identical methods to undermine open democracies as the Russians have done in this election. And if that isn’t sufficiently “unaccountable, secretive, [and], abusive’ consider the role of supposedly independent institutions like Wikileaks or Murdoch news organizations in spying and crafting information in a blatantly political way.
Additionally, major commercial operators like Apple, Google, and Microsoft are prying to obtain commercially viable information in seemingly benign and disguised ways (and cleverly constructing unwitting buy-ins.) Minor commercial entities also gather information — without restriction — in order to accomplish ordinary things like ordering a pizza or getting your kid enrolled in school.
The problem isn’t sinister spymasters peeking into our lives. The problem is our lives. Everyone has a telescope these days and none of us have curtains.
The ruling parties want to control us folks? Why? I don’t think they trust their own shadow?
http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/political/310979/a-new-mandate-to-spy-on-new-zealanders
“Legislation giving the country’s spy agencies an explicit mandate to spy on New Zealanders has been introduced to Parliament.”
From another member of the Five Eyes, New Zealand. Attempting to codify spying. Although they would try to use something similar to FISA to protect citizen’s rights, I’ll bet it’s merely for show…and no real accountability.
“The government would implement what it called a “triple-lock” system to protect New Zealanders, which would require warrants to be signed off by the Attorney-General and a Commissioner of Intelligence Warrants.”
Only Bilbo could hold The Ring without actually wearing it. Similarly, AT&T couldn’t resist taking millions in taxpayer money by selling metadata to the cops with the Hemisphere program, which bypasses warrants, and judges.
Don’t forget mind control. Our taxes pay for that too.
Do you believe in mind control? Part 1, KOVR 13TV News, Sacramento, CA, November 2000:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zvJL0f424cc
Do you believe in mind control? Part 2:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K2k4KESfCNY
Do you believe in mind control? Part 3:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WCEIQ2qakZo
Little know info about phone metadata. When I was in Telecomm in the late 90’s there was a company in Israel that compiled the billing for the top 25 US phone companies. To do billing you needed the origination and destination of the call, date, time and duration. In other words all the metadata. Now it was illegal for the US government to collect this data without a warrant but it was not illegal to them to ask this private Israel company for “help”
Great article Mr. Greenwald. Thank you. Its very hard to see the developed world getting out of this path to eventual widespread tyranny they’ve started down – as those in power like this idea they know everyone’s details so much. Seems the different countries spy agencies are okay with back doored software/hardware as long as they have a backdoor to monitor everyone with – despite what that means for the national security or their own countries.
There doesn’t appear to be self correcting forces at work here either – to restore the people’s right to privacy etc. – other than a few wins on the edges the forces seem to continue to push the other way like the financial crisis. Apple is only for privacy till their CEO is replaced (and one for “profits first” is installed) and that will be it for smartphones, computers and most software in the world for the foreseeable future. Its not a nice place we’ve gotten to, nor where we’re still headed.
BTW, I would guess every commenter’s e-mail is harvested by these agencies and monitored out of hand, might be a good idea not to receive & collect them.
Thank you Glenn.
Am struck by recent disclosures / actions by the F.B.I.
A government institution sworn to neutrality using vast, secret resources to obtain information to influence a Presidential election.
Abetted by one political party that has sworn to use all available means to subvert both the will of the people in said election and sworn to subvert effective functioning of government by means of a favored tool: abuse of data to fuel investigations, inquiries, filing of criminal complaints and waging of smear campaigns against political and corporate enemies.
the capability and practice of drawing upon vast data resources compiled on every citizen to nullify and criminalize.
Intelligence resources for wielding political power and the obstruction of political institutions.
who benefits?
“Rudy Giuliani Confirms The FBI Leaked Information To The Trump Campaign”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/rudy-giuliani-fbi-clinton-emails_us_581c9e3fe4b0e80b02c93d6b
+++++
James Comey’s Actions Place Him in the Worst Traditions of J. Edgar Hoover
[thenation.com/article/james-comeys-actions-place-him-in-the-worst-traditions-of-j-edgar-hoover/ ]
+++++++
“James Comey’s Self-Righteous Meddling”
[ nytimes.com/2016/11/02/opinion/campaign-stops/james-comeys-self-righteous-meddling.html?action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=opinion-c-col-right-region®ion=opinion-c-col-right-region&WT.nav=opinion-c-col-right-region&_r=0 ]
++++++
‘The FBI is Trumpland': anti-Clinton atmosphere spurred leaking, sources say”
[ theguardian.com/us-news/2016/nov/03/fbi-leaks-hillary-clinton-james-comey-donald-trump ]
Certainly not the arch criminal HRC.
You are pathetic with your defense of your evil clown.
Don’t do the crime,and one doesn’t have to do the time.
Every thing happening to her is her own fault,and is emblematic of her deep and malignant corruption.
your insight into the proper role of the FBI and other governmental agencies in the skewing of elections is straight out of Barnum & Bailey. But at least those clowns had more self respect than you.
one more time for the hard of thinking:
I am not defending Clinton. I am protesting the active role of the FBI in an election.
No indictment, no criminal charges, just leaks intended to malign a candidate they seek to undermine.
The FBI has violated longstanding principles of non involvement…
I am deeply troubled by the FBI’s conduct… and what it means for all elective contests.
Morons like daahoit… have their compass stuck on HRC and can’t see beyond their snot encrusted noses.
Stop Mona’n.
Please fill us in on the accomplishments of HRC outside of being the wife of Bent Dick?
Carpetbagged into the NY Senate,she was a willing participant in starting and continuing the terror explosion we are subject too today, by promoting the Iraq War,the totally obvious stick in the hornets nest that it turned out to be,and the harbinger of all destabilizing garbage to come,with thousands and thousands uncounted dead,maimed and injured,all for absolutely nothing.
And now,the conflicts in Ukraine,Syria and Libya(and others)can all be laid at her feet,as she might be the most incompetent human in American history,a match in the bomb factory,a drunk,and a malevolent kiss up kick down pos.
A globalist nightmare,promising more nation eroding trade crap for the donors to the Clinton Crime Family,national grifters of proportions never before seen,vile money grubbing corrupt scum,paid off to warmonger for GS criminals,and of course zion,her benefactor and propaganda outlet.
I cannot fathom a rational human voting for her.
Trump 2016!
And the FBI statement has died,btw,as the MSM control the narrative,and as with all the wikileaks,very limited exposure,in the MSM as well as all alleged progressive outlets,which are all part of the borg..And how do we know that this wasn’t a sympathy ploy by the corrupt Obomba administration?
By deception they rule.
I heard a report this morning in which Trudeau assures us that the Feds don’t get involved in the kind of hanky panky that Montreal police and Quebec provincial police are accused of.
You can’t make this stuff up…but Justin sure can.
#sunnyways
Trudeau’s innocent boy act is wearing thin. That pretty face and head of flowing hair won’t hide his duplicity much longer. He is either lying about this or he is too stupid to do his job, either one of which should be disqualifying. I am increasingly convinced that my concerns about him being Canada’s Obama were spot on.
Amazing how much being handsome and charming lets him get away with. If I want a pretty face, I’ll head for Netflix. Kinda like Comey being tall got him almost a complete pass for shenanigans up to this point.
I’ve met him and he ain’t stupid.
The list is shortening!
In the Canadian case, our federal government appears to be open to reform and there are a number of us getting involved to try and assure that public consultation doesn’t turn into laws that don’t reflect the public’s participation. For more on the Quebec situation: http://www.glendon.yorku.ca/communications/2016/11/03/words-snowden-spying-journalists-quebec-radical-attack-journalism-free-press/
Glenn , Can you elaborate on how these revelations will, in fact, lead to cessation of these violations of law.
They won’t. Just has they haven’t thus far. Not unless and until the entire US Congress is thrown out of office en masse (with the exception of those who are on record and have voted to stop these programs wholesale).
And even if Americans were to seat an entirely new Congress that wanted to stop all of these programs in a bipartisan way and were willing to enact new legislation designed specifically toward that end, they’d have to engage in an incredible legal fight (and hope to hell the Judicial branch aligned with them) against the Executive branch agencies that don’t want to even admit these programs exist much less abandon them because of some pesky laws passed by a co-equal branch of the US government.
Moreover, even if a new Congress was to pass legislation prohibiting these sorts of activities or programs, and won a legal fight to enforce those new laws, how is Congress going to actually enforce them? The spy agencies who oversee and run these programs aren’t legally obligated to allow US Marshalls or any other enforcement body, much less individual members of Congress who don’t have proper “security clearances”, to even inspect their alphabet agency facilities much less provide access to those agencies computer systems to ensure they aren’t continuing these types of activities and programs.
Really, the only way I see that Congress could actually meaningfully assert its authority is to defund certain agencies in their entirety, and you know they will never do that because of “terrorism” or “keeping us safe” or whatever pathetic nonsense they can peddle to the cowed American public.
But maintaining even partial funding to certain agencies means they’ll find ways to channel those funds into the programs they choose.
Prime example: watch Congress try and obtain an accurate “audit” of what specifically the Pentagon uses taxpayer dollars for program by program.
Look, we live in a country where there are huge interrelated groups, factions and industries that are legally permitted to operate in secrecy and unaccountable to the American people or their representatives. That’s just a fact. And unless the American people are prepared to engage in a coordinated, nationwide, anti-incumbent, non-partisan “cleaning house” and then immediately defund these agencies, then good luck–this is the new and future “normal”.
The most effective way of regulating is by tightening the purse strings. The republicans have effectively neutralized agencies like the EPA and SEC by simply throttling their funding; the same could be applied to the CIA, FBI and NSA. Freeze hiring and promotions, for a start. Along with that, cap their budgets for contracting out so they can’t have Booz-Allen-Hamilton, Dyncorp, CACI and hundreds of others like them continue helping with their dirty work.
All the mechanisms for control are there. Can we use them to absolutely eliminate the excesses? No. But we can certainly force them to concentrate most of their efforts on legitimate threats.
The only way to stop this, is to reduce the Spy agency s budgets & start prosecuting these criminals & putting those in charge in prison !
Much respect to Glenn Greenwald and Edw. Snowden.