General Discussion

jazzimov

(1,456 posts) Tue Jul 9, 2013, 11:41 PM Jul 2013

"it's not about Snowden or Greenwald!"

Which is true.

BUT, there is a lot of misinformation both on the web and and in the "mainstream media" (watch Fox News for 10 minutes and then deny that they have an "agenda&quot .

So, before I believe, trust, or even re-post someone's post, I tend to check it for reliability.

I have suspected Glenn Greenwald for some time - I think he has an agenda and I haven't trusted his posts for quite some time.

Then he posts "leaks" from an anonymous source - that turns out to be a huge Ron Paul fan. This, in itself, makes me suspicious of the "source".

Then, I read Greenwald's claims, and the leaked documents directly contradict his claims.

When a so-called journalist makes claims that are directly contradicted by the very information he claims to bolster his claims, then he is hardly a journalist. In my humble opinion, his motivations for lying to the general public are "fair game".

When someone posts something this controversial, the first thing that all of us MUST consider is the motivation. that is why Snowden posted his sentiments that he was doing it "for the people".

But was he? His motivations were questionable to begin with - but since HE made an issue of them, it;s even more of an issue.

Please look at the facts.

And we need to have a serious discussion, despite the distractions that Greenwald and Snowden have bcome.

I don't trust Greenwald, I don't trust Snowden.

I trust facts.

10 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

"it's not about Snowden or Greenwald!" (Original Post) jazzimov Jul 2013 OP

Lieing your face off doesn't have much consequences these last few years. Whisp Jul 2013 #1

"It's not about Snowden or Greenwald... but Greenwald blah blah..." whatchamacallit Jul 2013 #2

Well, not everyone supports Snowden "completely" ProSense Jul 2013 #3

It wouldn't have been about Snowden Cha Jul 2013 #4

What are the direct contradiction from the leaked documents? Bonobo Jul 2013 #5

"I trust facts..." Hissyspit Jul 2013 #6

The issues around Greenwald and Snowden's characters and histories are nothing but distraction NuclearDem Jul 2013 #7

what, praytell, is greenwald's "agenda?" frylock Jul 2013 #8

I've posted this elsewhere but it bears repeating: Maedhros Jul 2013 #9

What kind of proof would satisfy you on this subject? reusrename Jul 2013 #10

Whisp

(24,096 posts)

1. Lieing your face off doesn't have much consequences these last few years.

Reply to jazzimov (Original post)

Tue Jul 9, 2013, 11:44 PM

Jul 2013

The 'Baggers and the 'Tarians have paved the road well for shit like this.

whatchamacallit

(15,558 posts)

2. "It's not about Snowden or Greenwald... but Greenwald blah blah..."

Reply to jazzimov (Original post)

Tue Jul 9, 2013, 11:50 PM

Jul 2013

"It's true we need to have a serious discussion... but Greenwald blah blah blah..."

ProSense

(116,464 posts)

3. Well, not everyone supports Snowden "completely"

Reply to whatchamacallit (Reply #2)

Wed Jul 10, 2013, 12:05 AM

Jul 2013

Funny, I just checked, and didn't see a snarky remark by you in that thread.

Upset that Snowden and Greenwald are being criticized?

Cha

(297,661 posts)

4. It wouldn't have been about Snowden

Reply to jazzimov (Original post)

Wed Jul 10, 2013, 12:22 AM

Jul 2013

or Greenwald if Snowden had leaked and stayed to face his leakage, imv. but, he fled to Hong Kong and leaked to Greenwald.

He made it about himself and so did Greenwald.. I don't think they'd have it any other way.

And, he further made it about himself when he slipped info to China and Russia.. ingratiating himself, evidently. Again, about him.

Edward Snowden’s a Hero, All Right - to China and Russia

But that doesn’t mean it’s insignificant when a US citizen reveals this kind of information to Russia, either. I had already lost any shred of sympathy for Mr. Snowden when he dumped secret documents to a pro-Beijing newspaper, but this demonstrates beyond a doubt that his sole purpose in leaking these secrets is to embarrass the US government.

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/42144_Edward_Snowdens_a_Hero_All_Right_-_to_China_and_Russia

I've seen Greenwald as nothing but a petty hater with extremely ugly ODS. not everyone thinks Greenwald has any validity.

Glenn Greenwald’s stunningly superficial hate for Obama and admiration for Ron Paul

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/01/08/1052672/-Glenn-Greenwald-s-stunningly-superficial-hate-for-Obama-and-admiration-for-Ron-Paul#

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/02/20/1188423/-Glenn-Greenwald-Once-Again-Proves-He-is-a-Hate-Oozing-Douche

Bonobo

(29,257 posts)

5. What are the direct contradiction from the leaked documents?

Reply to jazzimov (Original post)

Wed Jul 10, 2013, 12:25 AM

Jul 2013

That's a reasonable question, so please explain.

Hissyspit

(45,788 posts)

6. "I trust facts..."

Reply to jazzimov (Original post)

Wed Jul 10, 2013, 01:08 AM

Jul 2013

And there have been plenty of false or misleading interpretation of facts posted about Snowden and Greenwald, but no need to post about those.

"It's not about Snowden or Greenwald. Which is true. "

But now I'm only going to discuss them.

NuclearDem

(16,184 posts)

7. The issues around Greenwald and Snowden's characters and histories are nothing but distraction

Reply to jazzimov (Original post)

Wed Jul 10, 2013, 01:12 AM

Jul 2013

Something the authoritarian apologists have jumped right on board with. Washington and their corporate media lapdogs played their usual "distract, divide, discredit" game, and a lot of us bought right into it.

frylock

(34,825 posts)

8. what, praytell, is greenwald's "agenda?"

Reply to jazzimov (Original post)

Wed Jul 10, 2013, 02:21 AM

Jul 2013

Maedhros

(10,007 posts)

9. I've posted this elsewhere but it bears repeating:

Reply to jazzimov (Original post)

Wed Jul 10, 2013, 02:26 AM

Jul 2013

There is ample reason to believe Snowden and Greenwald are not lying. Their assertions have been corroborated by:

Two Democratic Senators (Ron Wyden D-OR and Mark Udall D-CO) who sit on the Senate Intelligence Committee and have been trying to warn us since at least 2011 of the abuses Snowden revealed.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/weigel/2013/06/06/nsa_collecting_verizon_phone_records_two_senators_have_protested_patriot.html

Three former NSA officials (Thomas Drake, William Binney and J. Kirk Wiebe) have for years told anyone who would listen that the NSA collects huge swaths of communications data from U.S. citizens.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/06/16/snowden-whistleblower-nsa-officials-roundtable/2428809/

The Director of National Intelligence himself (James Clapper) admitted that he himself lied when asked about the scope of the NSA program which was confirmed by Snowden's leaks.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/02/james-clapper-nsa_n_3536483.html

All of that, and the "non-denial denials" (to steal a phrase from Woodward and Bernstein) issued by the Administration are more than enough evidence to conclude that Snowden and Greenwald are most likely telling the truth.

reusrename

(1,716 posts)

10. What kind of proof would satisfy you on this subject?

Reply to jazzimov (Original post)

Wed Jul 10, 2013, 04:20 AM

Jul 2013

What if Obama were to make the same claims as Snowden and Greenwald.

Would you still think everyone is lying to you about this?

I'm just curious about how this particular type of denial works. As long as you are told something else by Obama you will believe the alternate story? Is that it?

Reply to this discussion