Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Talking Points Memo)   Glen Greenwald: Dude, that Snowden guy gave me thousands of documents and like a dozen or two are really newsworthy. The rest is just Biden's shopping list for his Trans Am   (livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com ) divider line
    More: Followup, Glenn Greenwald, shopping lists, Biden, tranquility, documents  
•       •       •

1590 clicks; posted to Politics » on 11 Jun 2013 at 10:05 AM (2 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



57 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-06-11 08:40:46 AM  
Greenwald added: "It's not like it's delusional - he's completely rational. He completely understands that more likely than not, he's going to end up like Bradley Manning or worse. Yet he has tranquillity."

Manning is facing a potential life sentence after confessing to leaking thousands of classified documents to WikiLeaks.



Yeah, i'd rather be a cog working for a 1984-type world government making $200k a year and banging an acrobat wife than serve life in prison or worse.  As would most.  That is why our government gets away with it.
 
2013-06-11 08:58:14 AM  
Does anyone else find it superbly shiatty to know that they've got more shiat they think is "important" - but they're waiting to release it. Why? More media coverage? More fame?

I thought the ideal was to free the information to the people. Well, get to freeing.
 
2013-06-11 09:11:35 AM  

LasersHurt: Does anyone else find it superbly shiatty to know that they've got more shiat they think is "important" - but they're waiting to release it. Why? More media coverage? More fame?

I thought the ideal was to free the information to the people. Well, get to freeing.


Publishing it all at once isn't good for his blog's search engine optimization.
 
2013-06-11 09:14:32 AM  

kronicfeld: Publishing it all at once isn't good for his blog's search engine optimization.


I think it's more of an insurance policy: "You arrest me and I'll reveal what you guys are really doing with all that information"
 
2013-06-11 09:14:43 AM  
Normally I like Greenwald, but it makes me uneasy that he is trafficking in classified information.

It seems like this leak didn't just happen, this was planned and coordinated and has been going on for months.
 
2013-06-11 10:02:14 AM  
Am I the only one that thought this was going on for years?  When this story hit the press, it didn't seem like news to me. Maybe I'm complacent, but I really did assume what has been recently revealed had been happening for a decade.

Whether it is right/wrong or unconstitutional is a different story.  But it doesn't seem new.
 
2013-06-11 10:09:39 AM  

LasersHurt: Does anyone else find it superbly shiatty to know that they've got more shiat they think is "important" - but they're waiting to release it. Why? More media coverage? More fame?

I thought the ideal was to free the information to the people. Well, get to freeing.



Greenwald has got an ax to grind.
 
2013-06-11 10:11:45 AM  
I'm sure he wishes he had some kind of supercomputer to sort through all those documents.
 
2013-06-11 10:12:39 AM  
9, 10...a big fat hen. I don't see how anyone can view Snowden as anything other than a traitor, regardless of his reasons.
 
2013-06-11 10:12:48 AM  

Three Crooked Squirrels: Am I the only one that thought this was going on for years?  When this story hit the press, it didn't seem like news to me. Maybe I'm complacent, but I really did assume what has been recently revealed had been happening for a decade.

Whether it is right/wrong or unconstitutional is a different story.  But it doesn't seem new.


Yes, it's been going on for years. I've been trying to get people to share my concern about this stuff since 1993, but to date no one cares.
 
2013-06-11 10:16:06 AM  

LasersHurt: Does anyone else find it superbly shiatty to know that they've got more shiat they think is "important" - but they're waiting to release it. Why? More media coverage? More fame?

I thought the ideal was to free the information to the people. Well, get to freeing.


They're running a business, and a slow drip has more impact.
 
2013-06-11 10:21:13 AM  
First 0bummer's coming for our gunz, now he's coming for your pr0nz as well!
 
2013-06-11 10:21:29 AM  

HotWingConspiracy: LasersHurt: Does anyone else find it superbly shiatty to know that they've got more shiat they think is "important" - but they're waiting to release it. Why? More media coverage? More fame?

I thought the ideal was to free the information to the people. Well, get to freeing.

They're running a business, and a slow drip has more impact.


I guarantee they've already released the most damning stuff. Greenwald's "but wait there's more!" is as transparent a ploy as they come.
 
2013-06-11 10:22:22 AM  
Methodically releasing documents also guarantees this will stay in the news / part of the national discussion longer.
 
2013-06-11 10:24:04 AM  
If Mr. Greenwald has more documents, and is not releasing them in order to increase his own influence and readership, I will lose a great deal of respect for him.
 
2013-06-11 10:26:20 AM  

qorkfiend: If Mr. Greenwald has more documents, and is not releasing them in order to increase his own influence and readership, I will lose a great deal of respect for him.


If they're going to be released, why does the timeline matter?

Also, he answers to an employer.
 
2013-06-11 10:27:40 AM  

BMulligan: Three Crooked Squirrels: Am I the only one that thought this was going on for years?  When this story hit the press, it didn't seem like news to me. Maybe I'm complacent, but I really did assume what has been recently revealed had been happening for a decade.

Whether it is right/wrong or unconstitutional is a different story.  But it doesn't seem new.

Yes, it's been going on for years. I've been trying to get people to share my concern about this stuff since 1993, but to date no one cares.


Hooray democracy!

/we're all farked.
 
2013-06-11 10:29:09 AM  

HotWingConspiracy: Also, he answers to an employer


You know who else used that argument?

encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com
 
2013-06-11 10:31:31 AM  

Wolf_Blitzer: HotWingConspiracy: LasersHurt: Does anyone else find it superbly shiatty to know that they've got more shiat they think is "important" - but they're waiting to release it. Why? More media coverage? More fame?

I thought the ideal was to free the information to the people. Well, get to freeing.

They're running a business, and a slow drip has more impact.

I guarantee they've already released the most damning stuff. Greenwald's "but wait there's more!" is as transparent a ploy as they come.


You're likely correct. It's a very Assangian bit of hype.
 
2013-06-11 10:35:30 AM  

HotWingConspiracy: qorkfiend: If Mr. Greenwald has more documents, and is not releasing them in order to increase his own influence and readership, I will lose a great deal of respect for him.

If they're going to be released, why does the timeline matter?

Also, he answers to an employer.


If he's withholding documents, then he's not actually interested in the civil liberties issue but - as you point out - in the profit motive.
 
2013-06-11 10:36:08 AM  

HotWingConspiracy: Also, he answers to an employer.


He keeps editorial freedom as part of his employment contracts and uses reader support to try to keep his journalism as independent of business concerns as he can. I don't think anyone at the Guardian is pressuring him to try to increase page views or anything.
 
2013-06-11 10:36:58 AM  

qorkfiend: If Mr. Greenwald has more documents, and is not releasing them in order to increase his own influence and readership, I will lose a great deal of respect for him.


He's got more but none as juicy.  As others have pointed out, he's just trying to prolong his moment in the sun.  It's like saying you have proof that the government murdered eight people but you're only going to release their names once a month.

I'm sure the next release will be something like "the Ambassador to Spain stole a set of towels from the Dutch royal family's summer home."
 
2013-06-11 10:37:25 AM  

qorkfiend: HotWingConspiracy: qorkfiend: If Mr. Greenwald has more documents, and is not releasing them in order to increase his own influence and readership, I will lose a great deal of respect for him.

If they're going to be released, why does the timeline matter?

Also, he answers to an employer.

If he's withholding documents, then he's not actually interested in the civil liberties issue but - as you point out - in the profit motive.


Or, since they're going to be released and reported on, he's interested in both and understands that he cannot do his work with no revenue stream.
 
2013-06-11 10:39:36 AM  

Sudo_Make_Me_A_Sandwich: HotWingConspiracy: Also, he answers to an employer.

He keeps editorial freedom as part of his employment contracts and uses reader support to try to keep his journalism as independent of business concerns as he can. I don't think anyone at the Guardian is pressuring him to try to increase page views or anything.


I doubt he's completely divorced from the financial realities of the business he is in.
 
2013-06-11 10:39:38 AM  

somedude210: kronicfeld: Publishing it all at once isn't good for his blog's search engine optimization.

I think it's more of an insurance policy: "You arrest me and I'll reveal what you guys are really doing with all that information"


Greenwald isn't going to hold the government hostage: I can't imagine him coming across a piece of information so offensive and inflamatory to actually make the government scared of him and saying "I'll just keep this in my back pocket." He's too much of an idealist (plus he gains more from releasing it and running than from sitting on it where another journalist could theoretically report it first.)

If he's claiming he has something juicier than he's released thus far, he's probably bluffing. I'm sure he has further documents he will release whenever interest in the story wanes in order to extend the news cycle, but you put your best case forward on these sorts of stories and then use "mini-scandals" to follow up with. He might have those same documents except for AT&T for example: makes a big dramatic splash to find out, but ultimately no more damning than the Verizon document.
 
2013-06-11 10:39:54 AM  

Satanic_Hamster: He's got more but none as juicy. As others have pointed out, he's just trying to prolong his moment in the sun. It's like saying you have proof that the government murdered eight people but you're only going to release their names once a month.


Or he's trying to do follow-up reporting to put stories in context as he releases them, or he's trying to verify information with his sources, or he wants to give each story the time it deserves as a lot of really important information went under-reported in the wikileaks case because the information was so much that news agencies couldn't properly cover it.

Maybe give him a little bit of benefit of the doubt before you assign motives to him?
 
2013-06-11 10:40:33 AM  

HotWingConspiracy: I doubt he's completely divorced from the financial realities of the business he is in.


I didn't say he was. I said he takes steps to minimize it and then outlined two of them.
 
2013-06-11 10:41:54 AM  
Or perhaps Snowden is just a little bit insane and did a full data dump. If Greenwald were to turn around and do the same, the important information would get lost in the noise
 
2013-06-11 10:41:54 AM  

qorkfiend: If Mr. Greenwald has more documents, and is not releasing them in order to increase his own influence and readership, I will lose a great deal of respect for him.


Sometimes there's information worth protecting in classified documents. Example: names and locations of informants. These docs have to be looked through and edited where necessary before release.
 
2013-06-11 10:42:05 AM  

HotWingConspiracy: qorkfiend: HotWingConspiracy: qorkfiend: If Mr. Greenwald has more documents, and is not releasing them in order to increase his own influence and readership, I will lose a great deal of respect for him.

If they're going to be released, why does the timeline matter?

Also, he answers to an employer.

If he's withholding documents, then he's not actually interested in the civil liberties issue but - as you point out - in the profit motive.

Or, since they're going to be released and reported on, he's interested in both and understands that he cannot do his work with no revenue stream.


So yes - profit motive.
 
2013-06-11 10:43:33 AM  

qorkfiend: So yes - profit motive.


Oh for fark's sake. The guy left a very lucrative law career to write a farking blog. I don't think he did that for the money.
 
2013-06-11 10:45:04 AM  

Three Crooked Squirrels: Am I the only one that thought this was going on for years?  When this story hit the press, it didn't seem like news to me. Maybe I'm complacent, but I really did assume what has been recently revealed had been happening for a decade.

Whether it is right/wrong or unconstitutional is a different story.  But it doesn't seem new.


I don't think it is right or constitutional. In particular it's wrong to hold historical records, and IMO those records shouldn't be admissible if they lead to a conviction because they were stored before the warrant was issued (if a warrant was even issued at all).

There are a lot of apologists for the actions of our government because they fear that someone will blow up something. Well, terror is going to happen regardless. Boston Marathon for example, the guy was on a terror watch list (but not high on it) and he and his brother were still able to carry out the attacks under the noses of their friends, neighbors, and family.

Anyone with a gun, a mental problem, and poor impulse control can go into a public place and start shooting. 9/11 was a huge and devastating event but a complete blip on the radar when you look at the number of people in this country dying every day from heart attacks, strokes, cancer, and a number of other illnesses caused by the obesity epidemic. Yet we have spent trillions of dollars fighting wars overseas when that money could have been used to improve education and food.

The things preventing another 9/11? Passenger awareness and locked cabin doors, not this bullsh*t patting down by the TSA.

Complacency and apathy are what lead us down the rabbit hole. In truth, nothing will really happen to change how government operates until a large majority of us are out of work, and most of us are too fat and happy at our jobs to protest or fight against government corruption.

That doesn't mean we should act as if this kind of thing is fine because we expected it to be. We all see movies like Bourne and Enemy of the State and think, oh the government probably has teams with this capability, and while I suppose it's a possibility, are we really satisfied that we allow this stuff to exist? Especially when you consider that it only takes the wrong type of person to use it against you. Watergate was just the beginning.
 
2013-06-11 10:46:35 AM  

qorkfiend: HotWingConspiracy: qorkfiend: HotWingConspiracy: qorkfiend: If Mr. Greenwald has more documents, and is not releasing them in order to increase his own influence and readership, I will lose a great deal of respect for him.

If they're going to be released, why does the timeline matter?

Also, he answers to an employer.

If he's withholding documents, then he's not actually interested in the civil liberties issue but - as you point out - in the profit motive.

Or, since they're going to be released and reported on, he's interested in both and understands that he cannot do his work with no revenue stream.

So yes - profit motive.


Everyone that goes to work has a profit motive. This doesn't exclude them from being interested in other issues.
 
2013-06-11 10:56:19 AM  

HotWingConspiracy: qorkfiend: HotWingConspiracy: qorkfiend: HotWingConspiracy: qorkfiend: If Mr. Greenwald has more documents, and is not releasing them in order to increase his own influence and readership, I will lose a great deal of respect for him.

If they're going to be released, why does the timeline matter?

Also, he answers to an employer.

If he's withholding documents, then he's not actually interested in the civil liberties issue but - as you point out - in the profit motive.

Or, since they're going to be released and reported on, he's interested in both and understands that he cannot do his work with no revenue stream.

So yes - profit motive.

Everyone that goes to work has a profit motive. This doesn't exclude them from being interested in other issues.


My impression of Greenwald was that he was far more interested in the civil liberties issue than the business side of things. It's not a bad thing that he's not, just unexpected.
 
2013-06-11 11:00:28 AM  

ObamaTheOmnipotent: 9, 10...a big fat hen. I don't see how anyone can view Snowden as anything other than a traitor, regardless of his reasons.


I'm viewing him as a hero, and a defender of our constitutional rights, but whatever floats your boat, Fascist McSympathizer.
 
2013-06-11 11:02:00 AM  

qorkfiend: HotWingConspiracy: qorkfiend: HotWingConspiracy: qorkfiend: HotWingConspiracy: qorkfiend: If Mr. Greenwald has more documents, and is not releasing them in order to increase his own influence and readership, I will lose a great deal of respect for him.

If they're going to be released, why does the timeline matter?

Also, he answers to an employer.

If he's withholding documents, then he's not actually interested in the civil liberties issue but - as you point out - in the profit motive.

Or, since they're going to be released and reported on, he's interested in both and understands that he cannot do his work with no revenue stream.

So yes - profit motive.

Everyone that goes to work has a profit motive. This doesn't exclude them from being interested in other issues.

My impression of Greenwald was that he was far more interested in the civil liberties issue than the business side of things. It's not a bad thing that he's not, just unexpected.


I don't see how him not releasing things on your preferred timeline means that, but ok.
 
2013-06-11 11:02:13 AM  

nekulor: ObamaTheOmnipotent: 9, 10...a big fat hen. I don't see how anyone can view Snowden as anything other than a traitor, regardless of his reasons.

I'm viewing him as a hero, and a defender of our constitutional rights, but whatever floats your boat, Fascist McSympathizer.


It's always wise to rapidly canonize someone as a hero within days of learning they exist. Nothing can go wrong there.
 
2013-06-11 11:02:14 AM  

ObamaTheOmnipotent: 9, 10...a big fat hen. I don't see how anyone can view Snowden as anything other than a traitor, regardless of his reasons.


Depend on how you define traitor, and if being a traitor is excusable when blowing the whistle on activities you find unconscionable. He certainly betrayed Booz Allen & Hamilton (his employer) when he released the documents. I can almost guarantee you he violated a sworn statement made to maintain the privacy off all records he had access to. If Greenwald's statements that he first started working with him in February despite being hired by BAH in March are accurate it's highly likely that this wasn't any sort of crisis of faith upon discovering the documents but rather premeditated espionage.

I think the value of the documents released so far aren't damning compared to what we were aware was going on prior to their release, but that also means that the sensitive information suspected terrorists now know about government operations hasn't really changed enough to compromise investigations either.

It's like the WikiLeaks stuff: yes, the stuff was damaging, but beyond confirming that American forces were responsible for the accidental deaths of reporters it was all minor slights being reported (trash-talking ambassadors, mentioning the oppulance the ruling class enjoyed) that resulted in some PR nightmares and critics of a few nations getting ammunition to criticize their governments. The idea it compromised national security is fairly laughable unless you're going to somehow try to spin the fact it slightly contributed to the Arab Spring as proof any anti-American violence in the region since is Manning's fault.
 
2013-06-11 11:03:08 AM  

ObamaTheOmnipotent: 9, 10...a big fat hen. I don't see how anyone can view Snowden as anything other than a traitor, regardless of his reasons.


Article III Section 3 is incredibly narrow; it's not an act of war (as in no part of the US or its territories was duly constituted lawful authority suppressed by force for even ten seconds), and the legal connotations of "adherence" makes showing that tricky.
 
2013-06-11 11:10:28 AM  
It's not treason.  If anything its espionage.  Use the right damned noun and stop calling it treason.
 
2013-06-11 11:16:43 AM  

HotWingConspiracy: qorkfiend: If Mr. Greenwald has more documents, and is not releasing them in order to increase his own influence and readership, I will lose a great deal of respect for him.

If they're going to be released, why does the timeline matter?

Also, he answers to an employer.


So what you're saying is that Snowden is a hero for violating his contract and releasing classified documents to the public, but Greenwald is totally fine not releasing them right away?

So "See Something, Say Something....unless you can string it out to make more money"

Also, declaring that you are illegally inpossession of more classified documents and have plans to release them is probably not a good idea.
 
2013-06-11 11:16:57 AM  
I'm sure he saved the good stuff to sell to the Chinese
 
2013-06-11 11:17:27 AM  

ObamaTheOmnipotent: 9, 10...a big fat hen. I don't see how anyone can view Snowden as anything other than a traitor, regardless of his reasons.


I hope you're trolling me hardcore.

Snowden has shown illegal spying on american citizens. This isn't just some guy leaking a ton of diplomatic cables. This is someone exposing the nsa and their illegal over reach.
 
2013-06-11 11:22:49 AM  
Julian Assange: OMG he just dumped all that information out there without researching the background or even care of what might happen!!

Glenn Greenwald: OMG he's not dumping all the information!!
 
2013-06-11 11:24:44 AM  

Karma Curmudgeon: Julian Assange: OMG he just dumped all that information out there without researching the background or even care of what might happen!!

Glenn Greenwald: OMG he's not dumping all the information!!


Assange also carefully timed his releases and was sure to speak to the press. Don't be obtuse.
 
2013-06-11 11:26:52 AM  

Nezorf: HotWingConspiracy: qorkfiend: If Mr. Greenwald has more documents, and is not releasing them in order to increase his own influence and readership, I will lose a great deal of respect for him.

If they're going to be released, why does the timeline matter?

Also, he answers to an employer.

So what you're saying is that Snowden is a hero for violating his contract and releasing classified documents to the public, but Greenwald is totally fine not releasing them right away?


I never said Snowden was a hero, and yes, it's perfectly fine.

Snowden also demanded the papers be released in their entirety, but the journalists conferred with the US government and decided to withhold most of it.
 
2013-06-11 11:35:01 AM  

vernonFL: Normally I like Greenwald, but it makes me uneasy that he is trafficking in classified information.

It seems like this leak didn't just happen, this was planned and coordinated and has been going on for months.


You think people like Bob Woodward aren't trafficking in classified information?  The difference is, when Pentagon and Administration people want to influence public opinion, they leak classified stuff through chosen mouthpieces like Woodward.

When real whistleblowers want to leak, they go to people like Greenwald.
 
2013-06-11 11:50:10 AM  
My problem with the leaker is that he wanted the Washington Post to publish a cryptography key in order to prove to a foreign embassy he was/had the real deal.
 
2013-06-11 11:51:18 AM  

LasersHurt: Does anyone else find it superbly shiatty to know that they've got more shiat they think is "important" - but they're waiting to release it. Why? More media coverage? More fame?


It certainly must complicate the life of the shill. Imagine spending time posting in every thread trying to convince people there's really nothing bad going on, all the while knowing there's further revelations out there which could sink all those carefully prepared talking points.
 
2013-06-11 11:59:11 AM  

Nezorf: HotWingConspiracy: qorkfiend: If Mr. Greenwald has more documents, and is not releasing them in order to increase his own influence and readership, I will lose a great deal of respect for him.

If they're going to be released, why does the timeline matter?

Also, he answers to an employer.

So what you're saying is that Snowden is a hero for violating his contract and releasing classified documents to the public, but Greenwald is totally fine not releasing them right away?

So "See Something, Say Something....unless you can string it out to make more money"

Also, declaring that you are illegally inpossession of more classified documents and have plans to release them is probably not a good idea.


We don't have an "Official Secrets Act." Being in possession of classified data is not a crime.
 
Displayed 50 of 57 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report