Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Quotes from the Greatest Progressive to Ever Live. [View all]Savannahmann
(3,891 posts)30. Pfui
Was Verizon, AT&T, and all the other phone carriers providing all their information to the Government? Yes, they were. There is the subpoena. Every single phone call. In direct violation of the 4th Amendment.
Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
So what crime were I and millions of others suspected of? What evidence of what investigation did they hope to collect?
It was a database, one of those things that are supposed to be eschewed.
So what was the lie there? For years people had theorized that this was going on, and when they attempted to post information that had been gleaned from other sources, they were denounced as Conspiracy Theory nuts. A violation of this very group is the posting of CT. Yet it was happening, and it was wrong.
So what else were we told? We were told that the NSA was spying with the GCHQ on foreign leaders. Interestingly enough, any one was worthy to be spied upon, inexplicably including the President of Germany. Because if there is anywhere that the head of a Government is going to be helping Terrorists or working against us, it's Germany?
So what else was a lie? Was it a lie that Snowden could listen in to the individual phone calls? The NSA says yes, but this is the same NSA that swore for years that none of this was going on. Perhaps we could consult with the one demonstrated liar in the story. General James Clapper. The one person who has demonstrably lied, is the head of the Government agency you want to believe when they say they aren't doing something.
Interesting isn't it? The one group that has been lying consistently, is the one you turn to in order to find truth. That would be like returning to the Priest who just molested you to find comfort in the psychological horror of being molested.
I don't know if everything Snowden said was true. I really don't. I don't know if the NSA is listening to every phone call, reading every single email, etc. I do know that they are listening to quite a bit, and reading quite a bit. I suspected, or perhaps believed before Snowden. But my concerns were cast aside until Snowden.
Let me ask you this. If Bush was still in the White House when all this broke, would you take the NSA's word that they aren't doing things? Of course not. You would be leading the crowd shouting that this was wrong and they're lying. You would expect them to prove it. Well, they are spying on us, and they're not supposed to. Again, my fidelity to the principle of Civil Rights demands that I speak out no matter who is violating them. If it's a White Cop conducting an illegal search of a black man, I'll say it's wrong. If anyone violates those rights I hold sacred then you can count on me to speak out.
I've defended the President when he was right. I've taken issue when I thought he was wrong. I oppose all Civil Rights Violations, no matter who is doing it. There is no excuse, no reason valid enough to violate those rights. We see what happens when those rights are eroded, and I'm fighting hard to make sure they don't erode any further, and I'm even hopeful that we'll see some rollback on some of those erosions.
All the excuses for these programs have been laid bare, and disproven. All of the assertions have been discredited. All that is left, is the one thing we won't do. We won't admit it's wrong, and bring an end to it.
Again, you're looking at the political agenda of Snowden, and Greenwald. I'm looking at the evidence that they have presented, and the reactions of the intelligence game players. If Snowden was nothing but a liar, why do those sources insist that he did irreparable harm?
There are four reasons that people turn "traitor". Money, Ideology, Conscience, and Ego. But here's the secret, it's never just one of those, it's always a combination. Oleg Penkovsky for example, Ideology and Conscience. Aldrich Ames. Money and Ego. He wanted cash, and he thought he was smart enough to get away with it.
So what drives Snowden? Money? Hard to spend any money when you're in hiding from a CIA hit squad, which will inevitably get you. Ideology? Sure, to some extent. Conscience? Sure, somewhat. Ego? Absolutely, but that is normal. You can't do work vital to the nation if you don't think you're pretty special.
But the end result, is that Snowden, and Greenwald, and many others provided us with information that we needed to drag these programs out of the shadows of CT into the light of informed discussion. That many of the Conspiracy Theories were proven correct are relevant, especially if the technology and technique that has been demonstrated can be applied to other applications. Then those CT's appear true, and probably are.
So in summation, we know the Government is doing things they're not supposed to. And we know that a majority of the people want them to stop. Now, if you want to keep up the no such agency talking points, you can. Nobody will believe you, because that has fallen into the category of CT.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
58 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations

I don't think I've ever seen anyone call him "The greatest progressive ever to live."
Scootaloo
Oct 2014
#4
I'm a Greenwald fan but I have never seen anyone call him the Greatest Progressive to Ever Live
Autumn
Oct 2014
#5
I believe these to be Greenwald's quotes, but given your history, you need to provide a link.
DisgustipatedinCA
Oct 2014
#6
Yes, It has been obvious to all non-Greenwald Fanboys what he was about from the beginning, sir
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#15
Partially, yes. Orwell's full notes on nationalism where he describes negative nationalism
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#28
Thanks very much, I will search out all on that link to define this better for myself.
freshwest
Oct 2014
#29
Not just wrong, it would mean Dean was furthering “the great project of the modern right” and
Chathamization
Oct 2014
#37
That Would Be The Effect, Sir, Viewed Coldly, If Any Action Were Taken On The Proposition
The Magistrate
Oct 2014
#38
Right, so Dean’s exempt from the “right-wing libertarian” label because he isn’t anti-war.
Chathamization
Oct 2014
#42
Of course Greenwald's endorsement of multiple Democrats and praise of Obama doesn't matter to you
Chathamization
Oct 2014
#54
I've debunked all of that before. Here and now we have a chance to see what Greenwald and Snowden
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#31
You've debunked exactly nothing, and neither has been caught in a lie
DisgustipatedinCA
Oct 2014
#32
I have multiple times. And now we have an opportunity to see more of what they are about.
stevenleser
Oct 2014
#33
Telling that all the quotes are from ’05, since Greenwald has since said were uninformed and wrong
Chathamization
Oct 2014
#36
Like Some Others, Sir, He Seemed To Think That A Step Towards Making Single-Payer Viable Politically
The Magistrate
Oct 2014
#47
I'd say the onus is on the person digging up the 9 year old comment to: 1. Not truncate it in an
Chathamization
Oct 2014
#49
Do you have ANY evidence that "He mis-characterized Gov. Dean, in an attempt to make his own views
Chathamization
Oct 2014
#56
There Is No Evidence, Sir, For Describing Gov. Dean As A 'Fervent Proponent Of State's Rights'
The Magistrate
Oct 2014
#57