Greenwald's Latest - He is counter punching to great effect!
On PRISM, partisanship and propaganda
I did, though, want to note a few points, and particularly highlight what Democratic Rep. Loretta Sanchez said after Congress on Wednesday was given a classified briefing by NSA officials on the agency's previously secret surveillance activities:
"What we learned in there is significantly more than what is out in the media today. . . . I can't speak to what we learned in there, and I don't know if there are other leaks, if there's more information somewhere, if somebody else is going to step up, but I will tell you that I believe it's the tip of the iceberg . . . . I think it's just broader than most people even realize, and I think that's, in one way, what astounded most of us, too."
The Congresswoman is absolutely right: what we have reported thus far is merely "the tip of the iceberg" of what the NSA is doing in spying on Americans and the world. She's also right that when it comes to NSA spying, "there is significantly more than what is out in the media today", and that's exactly what we're working to rectify.
But just consider what she's saying: as a member of Congress, she had no idea how invasive and vast the NSA's surveillance activities are. Sen. Jon Tester, who is a member of the Homeland Security Committee, said the same thing, telling MSNBC about the disclosures that "I don't see how that compromises the security of this country whatsoever" and adding: "quite frankly, it helps people like me become aware of a situation that I wasn't aware of before because I don't sit on that Intelligence Committee."
How can anyone think that it's remotely healthy in a democracy to have the NSA building a massive spying apparatus about which even members of Congress, including Senators on the Homeland Security Committee, are totally ignorant and find "astounding" when they learn of them? How can anyone claim with a straight face that there is robust oversight when even members of the Senate Intelligence Committee are so constrained in their ability to act that they are reduced to issuing vague, impotent warnings to the public about what they call radical "secret law" enabling domestic spying that would "stun" Americans to learn about it, but are barred to disclose what it is they're so alarmed by? Put another way, how can anyone contest the value and justifiability of the stories that we were able to publish as a result of Edward Snowden's whistleblowing: stories that informed the American public - including even the US Congress - about these incredibly consequential programs? What kind of person would think that it would be preferable to remain in the dark - totally ignorant - about them?
***********************************************
Greenwald is not afraid to go after many alleged liberal voices in the media either. He calls them out for their duplicity on these issues.
More at:http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jun/14/nsa-partisanship-propaganda-prism
= new reply since forum marked as read
I made a congressional staffer pale with a similar comment.
We are in agreement.
I misread your post.
It must have sucked when he tossed you to the curb.
"Put another way, how can anyone contest the value and justifiability of the stories that we were able to publish as a result of Edward Snowden's whistleblowing: stories that informed the American public - including even the US Congress 
about these incredibly consequential programs? What kind of person would think that it would be preferable to remain in the dark - totally ignorant - about them?"
(Greenwald)
--------------------------------
Answer: People who are so stressed and beaten down and full of cognitive dissonance that they just don't have the mental energy to face it. Classic characteristics of the abused and exploited.
And then there are those other people whose beautiful minds are full of unicorns and rainbows, whose bank accounts are better than ever. They prefer oblivion as well.
but if you really are a retired RN, a gardener and a birder--I'd vote for you for any political office you want to run for. 
Excellent qualifications! That's all I need to know.
RN -- caring & generous & populist (but can also make the trains run on time)
Gardener -- patient & hard-working (stuff does not grow otherwise)
Birder -- sensitive & honest & dedicated (you can't lie on your life list)
--campaign managers must be excellent organizers 
What a nice reply. So glad to make anybody feel good in these times! (How I know you = my sis is a serious spotting scope-equipped birder, so I understand that rare species of human. My best friend from way back is a nurse. I know lots of gardeners and am always impressed by the patience required--I call myself a theoretical gardener, in other words, not so accomplished but I stab at it). And then when you mention your Dad...well...
My Dad was emotional too & never disguised it. Loved that about him. Everybody should be who they are. Dad was a journalist & PR guy, but in his latter years he became a minister of sorts--I used to kid him about his burgeoning "personal ministry." He lived alone but reached out to everyone he met and had so many friends and admirers. He had what someone once called an impish "leprechaun smile" (ear to ear) but I still couldn't figure out his magnetism. Once I asked what his secret was with people and he said, "Old journalist trick. You ask 'em about themselves, and then you actually listen." I think professional ministers must also have that capacity. My Dad genuinely cared about people, as I'm sure yours did, especially if he was "almost" a socialist.
At times Dad's friendly nature got him in trouble. Once a sketchy young character from the neighborhood came to his door and conned him out of $80 (my Dad was not wealthy), promising to pay him back. I gave Dad an ass-chewing (I think I called it a "polite stick-up" at the time) and we left it at "kiss it good-by." So about 5 years later Dad calls me and says, "remember that guy?...you won't believe this but he's in a substance abuse program and he just came by with 80 bucks for me!" (with a dash of "told ya so" . I know it sounds like something out of Readers Digest, but I promise it's true.
So now I know I'm DEFINITELY voting for you & I'll help you write speeches for pizza & green tea (& tomatoes, or flowers if you don't do veggies). And thanks for the opportunity to go awol from my effort to stay on top of the newz, and veer off into a beautiful side street). 
to you and yours, mg
--If we could just get some of the big money out of politics...ah the changes we could make...
committee.
Actually gardening is a passion, almost an obsession. It is the truly one way for me to be an artist. I treat my yard as a palette. I learned my beginning skills from my Dad. He was a hobbyist to the max. But one of the things he always did was garden. And he taught me the organic way to do it. He was original Mother Earth News subscriber.
The "old journalist trick" you spoke of is something I have learned. People love to talk about themselves. Just ask a couple questions and most people are nonstop. That was probably another thing I learned from Dad. It certainly helped in my nursing career. You are right, Dad really care about people. It was like Sunday was his day off. He ministered to people in their homes and in the hospitals. He and I had the opportunity to get close before he died and I am grateful for that. Your Dad sounds like he was a neat guy too.
So , you can write my speeches. We make our pizza from scratch using everything we can from the garden. And our drink du jour is green tea. WE buy loose leaf from Upton Tea.
Marions ghost. I think we could change the world. Keep the faith. We will win. I know the news is a downer and I enjoy this hiatus myself. To you and yours also. We shall see other around.
Oh I forgot to tell you. While in high school I worked for my local weekly newspaper. I could set type by hand, run a linotype machine, run presses. I sold advertising and did a little journalism too. It was a job my Dad got me to keep me out of trouble. But I had a reputation of a preacher's kid to overcome. 
I overcame that and then overcame that.
[font size=3]What "massive spying apparatus" ??!!!![/font]
A new LOW BAR has been set at DU for willful obfuscation.
How can you expect to be taken seriously after something like THAT? 
You really should just delete that embarrassing and revealing post.
Really.
[font size=3]They aren't just for Republicans anymore.[/font]
Last edited Fri Jun 14, 2013, 10:49 PM - Edit history (1)
Of course, the government is wrong. Everyone knows this. But, what is he telling us that we don't already know?
Greenwald here is much like a doctor who focuses 90% of his time on the symptoms of a disease and ignores both its causes and it vectors.
Now while everyone, those who belong to his quite considerable fan club, are sitting around and congratulating themselves on his latest rhetorical takedown of the political establishment, I'm still waiting him to explain how this thing got out of hand.
You know? How something like THIS happened:
Because IF the Corporate/Congressional/Surveillance/Industrial Complex isn't replaced with some system where the government can have complete internal oversight of it (you know, like with DEMOCRACY?), rather than allowing private enterprise to promote its own growth as was done with the Pentagon, how the hell are we to reverse the expansion of this process?
How will it be controlled? How to take the profit and influence OUT of the expansion of this process? How to take out the corporate infrastructure that protects it's own interests and profits that it gains from its relationship with the government?
Because THAT'S the REAL story.
Booz Allen is a major corporate sponsor of Public TV, much as are the Koch Brothers. We all saw what happened when Public TV tried to do an exposè on the Kochs, right? It was squashed. How much influence do these corporations have over the content of the media? Why aren't the brave souls, like your boy Greenwald, focusing on how these corporations influence and control the process. He's only making these people out to be un-indicted co-conspirators in this process, instead of the ones who are responsible for pulling the strings.
How the HELL does anyone explain the WAY that Congress lost its oversight over the surveillance infrastructure?
There's a lot missing about this story. But instead of focusing on what the extent of the problem actually is, Greenwald wrote a nice personality driven piece on how Congress is fucking up, both sides are to blame, don't mind those corporations behind the curtain blah-blah-blah.
I'm sure that someone is telling this story correctly. I'm also pretty sure that those same people aren't as self-congratulary as Greenwald while they're doing it.
You know, when Greenwald was interviewing Snowden, he had this wonderful opportunity to explain how a company like Booz became a power-player in the government contracting game. How that game had facilitated the growth of the surveillance infrastructure, how it protects itself from efforts by diligent public officials to restrict its growth and maintain oversight, how that such a process also facilitates the policies and laws which makes surveillance intrusion and collection "legal," how that no political party is completely immune to the influence of the relationship that government has with these corporations.
This is NOT politics, we are WAY beyond politics here.
"That is the atomic, and sub-atomic and galactic structure of things today," once said by a famous movie character.
I'm just me, but still waiting for Glenn Greenwald to start meddling with the primal forces of nature.
