Carl Bernstein: Greenwald 'out of line' (updated)

[ProSense]

Carl Bernstein: Greenwald 'out of line'

By DYLAN BYERS

Veteran investigative reporter Carl Bernstein publicly criticized The Guardian's Glenn Greenwald on Monday over a statement he made about the National Security Agency secrets that could leak "if anything should happen" to former security contractor Edward Snowden.

<...>

"With all my regard for The Guardian, which is considerable... that's an awful statement, and the tone in which he made it," the former Washington Post reporter said. "It's one thing to say that Mr. Snowden possesses some information that could be harmful, and that could be part of the calculation that everybody makes here. It's another to make that kind of an aggressive, non-reportorial statement (that) a reporter has no business making."

"There are, at the same time, precautions... that Snowden has taken in terms of secreting some information in various places that definitely would disclose more things -- some of which might or might not be inimical to the interests of the United States," he continued. "But that statement by that reporter is out of line."

In an email to POLITICO, Greenwald returned fire on Bernstein.

"I realize Carl Bernstein hasn't done any actual reporting for a couple decades now, but he should nonetheless take the time to read what he's opining on," he wrote. "The Reuters article he's referencing is a complete distortion of what I actually said in that interview. The point I made is the opposite one: that Snowden has been as responsible as a whistleblower can be in ensuring that only information the public should know is revealed, but not gratuitously harmful information."

http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2013/07/carl-bernstein-greenwald-out-of-line-168286.html

"Out of line" and still trying to cover his ass.

Greenwald tries to do damage control
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023244823

Why is he giving interviews talking about documents he can't or has no intention of publishing?

He is not helping Snowden by declaring that he is in possession of stolen documents that have the potential to harm U.S. national security.

Despite their sensitivity, the journalist said he didn't think that disclosure of the documents would prove harmful to Americans or their national security.

"I think it would be harmful to the U.S. government, as they perceive their own interests, if the details of those programs were revealed," said the 46-year-old former constitutional and civil rights lawyer who has written three books contending the government has violated personal rights in the name of protecting national security.

http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/greenwald-snowden-docs-nsa-blueprint-19665239

Consider this disclaimer from a July 1 piece by Der Spiegel:

SPIEGEL has decided not to publish details it has seen about secret operations that could endanger the lives of NSA workers. Nor is it publishing the related internal code words. However, this does not apply to information about the general surveillance of communications. They don't endanger any human lives -- they simply describe a system whose dimensions go beyond the imaginable. This kind of global debate is actually precisely what Snowden intended and what motivated his breach of secrecy. "The public needs to decide whether these policies are right or wrong," he says.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/secret-documents-nsa-targeted-germany-and-eu-buildings-a-908609.html

Snowden turned over information that could "endanger" lives, and Greenwald spends the weekend making implicit threats.

Greenwald: Snowden Docs Contain NSA 'Blueprint'
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023259203

Updated to add this clip:

[BeyondGeography]

1. In other words, Greenwald's not a reporter

Reconfirmed.

[Fawke Em]

2. Actually, he's more of a reporter than all the

milquetoast mouthpieces we usually hear from.

[Renew Deal]

5. His little threat made him sound like an activist

And so has his behavior this far. Greenwald is more opinion than fact. He's more Hannity than Maddow. This may open him up to prosecution.

[Cha]

54. "more opinion than fact".. ain't that the awful truth.

Much "more hannity than Maddow"!

thanks Renew Deal

[BeyondGeography]

12. He's very far from being a reporter

Doesn't mean what he writes should be ignored, just that readers should proceeed with caution, because he does not.

[ProSense]

13. He jumped in and

created the headline for the week. Actually, two headlines: the "worst nightmare" and the one from the quote he's using to try to cover his ass:

"Snowden has enough information to cause more damage to the U.S. government in a minute alone than anyone else has ever had in the history of the United States."

[BeyondGeography]

15. Breathtaking breathlessness

Waaaay back. Going, going, gone.

[Cha]

53. No, he's not.. he's fueled by vicious hate and that gets his big

ol mouth twisted like a hyperbolic freaking pretzel.

[Marr]

43. I don't see why people think reporters or journalists have to be without opinions.

When has that ever been the case-- especially with any form of investigative journalist? No one is without biases.

So long as their facts are correct, I fail to see the problem.

[stevenleser]

57. One of the problems is that Greenwald is trying to be part of the story instead of covering it. nt

[SidDithers]

3. DU rec...nt

Sid

[shawn703]

4. I think Greenwald is just trying to delay this happening to him

[Octafish]

6. Hey, Carl! Read my translation...Note the part about the three doctors no US report mentions.

The journalist who received the leaks from a CIA mole says there are more documents

by Alberto Armendariz, The Nation, Saturday, July 13, 2013

RIO DE JANEIRO -- Appearances deceive. With his striped swimsuit, white flip-flops, jean shirt and a big backpack, Glenn Greenwald looks like a tourist walking along the Sao Conrado in Rio de Janeiro. But his trade is that of journalist, blogger and columnist for the British daily, The Guardian, who surprised the world with the revelations about the extensive computer spy network of the United States, leaked by Edward Snowden, the ex-intelligence analyst of the National Security Agency (NSA).

"Snowden has enough information with which to cause more damage to the government of the United States in one single minute by himself than any other person has had in the entire history of the United States," Greenwald, 46, affirmed to The Nation, and who, from these latitudes, writes regularly on the issues of international security that have made him into a celebrity, the winner of various distinguished awards.

Today, this New Yorker, ex-lawyer, is in the eye of the storm. Legislators in Washington want to bring him to trial; spies of various nations look to obtain the secret information that Snowden shared with him, the heaviest, in Hong Kong and that he continues sending from Moscow via a system of encrypted electonic mail. He knows that he's being surveilled and that his conversations are monitored. This includes the theft of his laptop from his boyfriend, from their own home.

Three men wait in the lobby of the hotel Royal Tulip with credentials from a symposium on osteoporosis, a meeting of which the (hotel) concierge has no idea. Are they really doctors or are they following Greenwald? Appearances deceive.

Q: Share with us about Snowden's decision to stay in Russian while awaiting to come to Latin America?

Yes, the most important thing is not to end up in the custody of the United States, whose government has demonstrated to be extremely vengeful in punishing those who reveal inconvenient truth, and whose judicial system can't be trusted when it treats people accused of putting the nation's security at risk; the judges do all tehy can to secure convictions in those cases. He would be imprisoned immediately to pt a stop on debate he helped start, and he'd finish the rest of his days behind bars.

Q: Has Russia guaranteed his security?

There aren't many countries on planet earth that have the capacity and the desire to challenge the demands of the United States. However, Russia is one of those states and has treated him well up to now.

Q: Beyond the revelations about the functioning of the spy system in general, what additional information does Snowden have?

Snowden has enough information with which to cause more damage to the government of the United States in one single minute by himself than any other person has had in the entire history of the United States. But that is not his objective. His objective is to reveal computer programs that persons around the whole world use without knowing that they are being watched and without having consciously agreed to giving up their right to privacy. He has an enormous quantity of documents that would be most damaging to the government of the United States should they be made public.

Q: Is he afraid someone will try to kill him?

That is a possibility, although I do not think that would be of much benefit to anyone at this point. He's distributed thousands of documents and has ensured that various people around the world has his complete archive. Should something happent to him, those documents would be made public. That's his insurance police. The government of the United States should be on its knees every day praying that nothing happens to Snowden, because if something should happen to him, all the information would be revealed and that would make for their worst nightmare.

Q: Could Latin America provide a good place of refuge for Snowden?

Only certain countries, such as various countries in Latin American, China and Russia, have challenged the United States, they have noticed that the United States no longer is in a position of power that it previously had before the rest of the world, and that the rest of the nations no longer have to obey its demands as if they were under imperial orders. In Latin America there is a natural affinity for the United States, but at the same time there is a great resentment for specific historic policies made from Washington for the region. What happened with the aircraft carryign Evo Morales from Europe provoked a very strong reaction, it was as if Bolivia were treated as a colony and not as a sovereign state.

Q: Of the documents Snowden shared with you, is there much more information relating to Latin America?

Yes. For each nation that has an advanced system of communications, which is the case from Mexico to Argentina, there are documents that detail how the United States picks up information from the flow, the programs that are used to capture the transmissions, the amount of information intercepted that is accomplished each day, and much more. One form of intercepting communications is through a United States telecommunications company that has contracts with most of the nations in Latin America. The important thing will be to see what is the reaction of the different governments. I don't believe the governments of Mexico and Colombia will do much in this regard. Perhaps, however, the governments of Argentina and Venezuela will be inclined to take concrete actions.

Translated by Octafish -- Sorry if there are any mistakes. Please let me know and I'll correct.

SOURCE: http://www.lanacion.com.ar/1600674-glenn-greenwald-snowden-tiene-informacion-para-causar-mas-dano

GOT some help from: http://www.spanishdict.com/translation

The great DUer Luminous Animal started an OP on the quotes and their context:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3245975

[ProSense]

9. I love this part:

- Beyond the revelations about the spying system performance in general, what extra information has Snowden?

-Snowden has enough information to cause more damage to the U.S. government in a minute alone than anyone else has ever had in the history of the United States. But that's not his goal. Its objective is to expose software that people around the world use without knowing what they are exposing themselves without consciously agreeing to surrender their rights to privacy. It has a huge number of documents that would be very harmful to the U.S. government if they were made public.

- Are you afraid that someone will try to kill him?

It's a possibility, although I do not bring many benefits to anyone at this point. Already distributed thousands of documents and made sure that several people around the world have their entire file. If something were to happen, those documents would be made public. This is your insurance policy. The U.S. government should be on your knees every day praying that nothing happens to Snowden, because if something happens, all information will be revealed and that would be their worst nightmare.

On top of the "worst nightmare" comment and holding information hostage, he's confirming that Snowden stole information unrelated to the goal of the leak, validating the felony theft charge against him.

[Octafish]

34. I love this part.

Snowden revealed that the NSA has turned its awesome power on the American people, demonstrating that what the late Sen. Frank Church warned us about has become reality:

“That capability at any time could be turned around on the American people and no American would have any privacy left, such is the capability to monitor everything: telephone conversations, telegrams, it doesn’t matter. There would be no place to hide. If this government ever became a tyranny, if a dictator ever took charge in this country, the technological capacity that the intelligence community has given the government could enable it to impose total tyranny, and there would be no way to fight back, because the most careful effort to combine together in resistance to the government, no matter how privately it was done, is within the reach of the government to know. Such is the capability of this technology.

I don’t want to see this country ever go across the bridge. I know the capability that is there to make tyranny total in America, and we must see it that this agency and all agencies that possess this technology operate within the law and under proper supervision, so that we never cross over that abyss. That is the abyss from which there is no return.”

[ProSense]

36. Well,

"Snowden revealed that the NSA has turned its awesome power on the American people, demonstrating that what the late Sen. Frank Church warned us about has become reality: "

...quoting Frank Church has nothing to do with Greewald's idiotic comments. I seriously doubt Senator Church would have approved of Snowden fleeing the country and revealing U.S. state secrets to other countries or Greenwald threatening the U.S.

<...>

The Origins of FISA

As chief counsel of the Church Committee, Frederick Schwarz tells Bill Moyers that the most fundamental lessons learned from the Committee include that "when you start small, you go big...When you start in a way that seems legitimate, it inevitably goes too far."
In reaction to the Church Committee reports pushing for oversight, Congress passed the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) of 1978, which established a secret FISA court responsible for issuing warrants for domestic wiretapping activity. The FISA court consists of seven judges appointed by the Chief Justice and who serve for seven years.

In December 2005, the NEW YORK TIMES reported that President Bush had authorized the NSA to eavesdrop on American phone calls and emails without obtaining a warrant from the FISA court. That revelation was met with consternation, and investigations, by many in and outside of the political realm.

In August 2007, a temporary amendment to FISA passed called the Protect America Act, which as President Bush explains, modernizes FISA by "accounting for changes in technology and restoring the statute to its original focus on appropriate protections for the rights of persons in the United States - and not foreign targets located in foreign lands." But the battle's not over yet — civil libertarians on both the left and right accused the Democratic Congress of giving in easily on wiretapping and several Members of Congress have vowed to readdress the issue.

- more -

http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/10262007/profile2.html

The PAA expired in early 2008: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023026724

[Octafish]

38. Shows what you know.

"The conditional part of Church's warning - 'that capability at any time could be turned around on the American people' - is precisely what is happening, one might even say: is what has already happened. That seems well worth considering." -- Glenn Greenwald.

The Church Committee was about the last time the Congress successfully reeled in the secret government.

[ProSense]

41. Yeah,

"Shows what you know.

"The conditional part of Church's warning - 'that capability at any time could be turned around on the American people' - is precisely what is happening, one might even say: is what has already happened. That seems well worth considering." -- Glenn Greenwald.

The Church Committee was about the last time the Congress successfully reeled in the secret government.

...what I "know" is that the above has nothing to do with this:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023261520#post6
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023261520#post9

No amount of deflection and obfuscation is going to erase Greenwald's implicit threats.

[struggle4progress]

31. MUSCULOSKELETAL DISORDERS AS A PRIORITY IN ALL HEALTH SYSTEMS

How can we effectively prevent disability by prevention and treatment of musculoskeletal conditions and injuries?

Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
Thursday 11th July – Saturday 13th July 2013
in partnership with WHO, MoH, SLAOT, SBOT and SES
At the time of XXVI ORTRA INTERNACIONAL 2013
The Othon Palace Hotel
Av. Atlântica, 3264
Copacabana Rio de Janeiro
22070-000, Brazil

Specific components of the meeting: ... Symposium on best practices for the modern management of fragility fractures, including prevention of further fractures, in partnership with the Fragility Fracture Network of the Bone and Joint Decade ...

http://bjdonline.org/?page_id=194

[flamingdem]

37. You mean like "Mouthus Loudus" ?

[struggle4progress]

39. "Hoooly shizz! There are three doctors in the lobby of my Rio beachfront hotel! And they're claiming

to be in town for a big conference that's actually happening right frickin now! It's waaay too much of a coincidence for them to be here at the same moment that I am here! There's only one possible explanation: they're undercover CIA agents, sent to spy on me! CIA agents always come in threes!"

[treestar]

48. I can only imagine the paranoia

And how many double agents are there in the Moscow transit lounge? Probably dozens.

[struggle4progress]

32. XXVI ORTRA INTERNACIONAL

http://www.ortra.com.br/

[Octafish]

33. Thank you!

Their cover checks.

[ProSense]

7. Steve Benen:

There's been a spirited debate over the last month about whether, and to what extent, Snowden's revelations have caused actual damage, but Glenn's comments on Saturday, if he was quoted accurately, suggest Snowden has far more damaging materials that he has chosen not to divulge. Indeed, the scope of these materials is apparently staggering -- as Glenn put it, Snowden could do more harm to the U.S. government "in a single minute than any other person has ever had."

Glenn soon after said the Reuters piece on his interview with La Nacion was a distortion of what he actually said. It did not note, for example that he said it's not Snowden's "goal" to do harm to the U.S.

In a separate interview yesterday with the Associated Press, Glenn said Snowden's plans are "nuanced," and media descriptions of a dead-man's pact "have been overly simplistic." Though Glenn understandably did not go into detail, he added, "It's really just a way to protect himself against extremely rogue behavior on the part of the United States, by which I mean violent actions toward him, designed to end his life, and it's just a way to ensure that nobody feels incentivized to do that."

It's that last part that got me thinking over the weekend.

I can appreciate the basic dynamic: Snowden is worried about the United States engaging in "extremely rogue behavior" and trying to kill him. I have no idea whether this fear is justified, but either way, he's apparently put in place some kind of system intended to help ensure his personal safety. We don't know the details, but if Snowden were murdered, extremely damaging information would be shared with the public, and U.S. officials would experience their "worst nightmare."

Or put another way, Snowden is afraid, so he's created an insurance policy of sorts.

It starts to look like a "mutually assured destruction" sort of dynamic: if I go down, you go down; so long as I'm fine, then you're fine, too. The problem, however, is that in this bit of game theory, there are more than two adversaries -- there are quite a few players...Enemies of the United States might find the prospect of a "worst nightmare" scenario quite appealing. Snowden can cause more "harm to the U.S. government in a single minute than any other person has ever had"? I imagine there are all kinds of U.S. adversaries who would welcome such unprecedented, irreparable harm.

- more -

http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/_news/2013/07/15/19484696-snowden-and-the-potential-for-the-usas-worst-nightmare

[treestar]

11. And how is he securing the information?

The Russians could already have it.

I think it's bluffing.

And Snowden's life is not threatened - at least not by the United States. If he is murdered, it could be because Pootie Poot doesn't want to have to deal with him any more.

[randome]

20. Or because Snowden doesn't want to deal with Snowden any more.

That's my biggest fear. He's already shown he's erratic ("I am not here to hide from justice.&quot .
[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]

[ProSense]

27. Putin:

Russia's Putin: signs Snowden is shifting on the U.S

(Reuters) - Russian President Vladimir Putin said on Monday he saw signs that Edward Snowden, the former U.S. spy agency contractor turned fugitive secrets leaker, was shifting towards stopping "political activity" directed against the United States.

Putin, who previously refused to hand Snowden over to the U.S. authorities...Asked on an island in the Gulf of Finland about Snowden's future, Putin said: "How do I know? It's his life, his fate."

"He came to our territory without invitation, we did not invite him. And we weren't his final destination. He was flying in transit to other states. But the moment he was in the air ... our American partners, in fact, blocked his further flight.

"They have spooked all the other countries, nobody wants to take him and in that way, in fact, they have themselves blocked him on our territory...As soon as there is an opportunity for him to move elsewhere, I hope he will do that. The conditions for granting political asylum are known to him. And judging by his latest actions, he is shifting his position. But the situation has not been clarified yet," Putin said.

- more -

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/07/15/us-usa-security-snowden-idUSBRE96E0JC20130715

[Cha]

55. Mahalo PS..

Putin, who previously refused to hand Snowden over to the U.S. authorities...Asked on an island in the Gulf of Finland about Snowden's future, Putin said: "How do I know? It's his life, his fate."

Always has been.

[flamingdem]

28. Seems like Pootin is showing him the door

In an interview today he said he'd be moving on. It's not clear if Ed has the means to move on but talk of asylum is no longer the story.

I don't think he's ready to zap him but Wikileaks had better work on fundraising for that private jet!

[struggle4progress]

40. starring The Not Ready for Prime Time Players!

[allin99]

10. Out of his league, irrisponsible, slipped up. Fool.

[snappyturtle]

14. Your kill the messenger campaign is growing....RE: your linking to previous

personal OPs. With that said, it is easy for Berstein (with his name recognition) to speak out although he himself has not seen the documents Greenwald has. I will give him credit for at least correctly referring to the spirit & actual words Greenwald used in his interview with La Nacion.

You did some creative bolding of type in the quote block from der Speigel. It is the plain type section that reveals the newspaper's opinion.

I would find Berstein once again credible if he got off his lazy soapbox and examined NSA policy rather than going after a reporter. If Berstein were tried and true to his message of political parties spying on each other, which is after all what Watergate revealed, he'd recognize that the NSA spying policy is the same infraction in the modern world. Berstein: your day in the spotlight is over regardless of your decades long incessant attempts to keep it in the dimming limelight. imho

[ProSense]

16. Please

"Your kill the messenger campaign is growing....RE: your linking to previous personal OPs."

...spare me your insights on me.

"With that said, it is easy for Berstein (with his name recognition) to speak out although he himself has not seen the documents Greenwald has. I will give him credit for at least correctly referring to the spirit & actual words Greenwald used in his interview with La Nacion."

You think?

"You did some creative bolding of type in the quote block from der Speigel. It is the plain type section that reveals the newspaper's opinion."

No one ever, ever bolds or highlights text. More obfuscation.

"I would find Berstein once again credible if he got off his lazy soapbox and examined NSA policy rather than going after a reporter. If Berstein were tried and true to his message of political parties spying on each other, which is after all what Watergate revealed, he'd recognize that the NSA spying policy is the same infraction in the modern world. Berstein: your day in the spotlight is over regardless of your decades long incessant attempts to keep it in the dimming limelight. imho "

You "give him credit for at least correctly referring to the spirit & actual words Greenwald used in his interview with La Nacion," but he should get "off his lazy soapbox and examined NSA policy rather than going after a reporter."

Did you say something about "kill the messenger"? Pure hypocrisy.

[snappyturtle]

21. I know what I said without you regurgitating it. At least if you're going

to repeat my words do it accurately...I used no bold type.

Yes, I definitely said something about killing the messenger....Berstein...obviously! If you can go after Greenwald I can go after Berstein. Let's face it, Berstein is the hypocritical one. He's attacking a reporter for doing his job which is exactly what Berstein did over three decades ago.

[ProSense]

22. Your

I know what I said without you regurgitating it. At least if you're going to repeat my words do it accurately...I used no bold type.

...words are stated "accurately." Everyone can see that the bold is mine.

"Yes, I definitely said something about killing the messenger....Berstein...obviously! If you can go after Greenwald I can go after Berstein. Let's face it, Berstein is the hypocritical one. He's attacking a reporter for doing his job which is exactly what Berstein did over three decades ago."

OK, so you have no problem with what you refer to as "killing the messenger."

Good to know.

[Cha]

56. HaHa!

Did you say something about "kill the messenger"? Pure hypocrisy.

Doncha know? It's okay for snowden lovers. Oh, I'm sorry.. "it's not about snowden!".. except snowden and greenwald made it about them and won't stop.

[bahrbearian]

18. Right On

[temmer]

17. Bernstein is a "hanger-on in lockstep"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023260841

[snappyturtle]

23. Thank you. I hadn't seen that. nt

[polichick]

29. Thanks - I can't even listen to this guy anymore...

when he makes the rounds on TV.

[Whisp]

19. GG the little despicable putz.

He knows he went too far - his nervousness shows in this vid.

But I bet the donations are just pouring in -
drown the gobmint, drown the gobmint!

[msanthrope]

24. "Jumped-up little shit," is the phrase that comes to mind. nt

[AllINeedIsCoffee]

25. K&R. He has overstepped his professional boundaries and is nothing more than a liability. nt

[Scurrilous]

26. Thanks ProSense.

K & R

[flamingdem]

30. Bernstein is a right and he's a respected journalist

It's rich that Greenwald went after his journalistic credibility citing the fact he's hasn't worked for a while, because he's retired maybe!?

[ProSense]

42. He's a hypocrite. n/t

[Cali_Democrat]

35. Greenwald is a very angry individual

I think he needs some help. Clearly he's got anger management issues.

[Major Hogwash]

44. How come Greenwald hasn't been kicked off of Twitter yet??

I wonder what kind of decision making process they use over on Twitter to close accounts.

[sheshe2]

45. K&R! nt

[Scurrilous]

46. Boink.

[deurbano]

47. Greenwald previously called out Bernstein on his (paid) support for the “terrorist” group, MEK.

In other words, Bernstein may be predisposed to be critical of Greenwald, since Greenwald has been critical of him. (Or not...)

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/sep/23/iran-usa

<<Five lessons from the de-listing of MEK as a terrorist group
By Glenn Greenwald

A separate justice system for American Muslims, the US embrace of terrorism, and other key political facts are highlighted

The Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK), or People's Mojahedin Organization of Iran, is an Iranian dissident group that has been formally designated for the last 15 years by the US State Department as a "foreign terrorist organization". When the Bush administration sought to justify its attack on Iraq in 2003 by accusing Saddam Hussein of being a sponsor of "international terrorism", one of its prime examples was Iraq's "sheltering" of the MEK. Its inclusion on the terrorist list has meant that it is a felony to provide any "material support" to that group.

Nonetheless, a large group of prominent former US government officials from both political parties has spent the last several years receiving substantial sums of cash to give speeches to the MEK, and have then become vocal, relentless advocates for the group, specifically for removing them from the terrorist list. Last year, the Christian Science Monitor thoroughly described "these former high-ranking US officials - who represent the full political spectrum - [who] have been paid tens of thousands of dollars to speak in support of the MEK." They include Democrats Howard Dean, Ed Rendell, Wesley Clark, Bill Richardson, and Lee Hamilton, and Republicans Rudy Giuliani, Fran Townsend, Tom Ridge, Michael Mukasey, and Andrew Card. Other prominent voices outside government, such as Alan Dershowitz and Elie Wiesel, have been enlisted to the cause and are steadfast MEK advocates.

Money has also been paid to journalists such as The Washington Post's Carl Bernstein and the Chicago Tribune's Clarence Page. …

…Lesson Four: Legalized influence-peddling within both parties is what drives DC.

MEK achieved its goal by doing more than merely changing the beneficiaries of its actions from Saddam to the US and Israel. It also found a way - how it did so remains a mystery - to funnel millions of dollars into the bank accounts of key ex-officials from both parties, a bipartisan list of DC lobbyist firms, and several key journalists. In other words, it achieved its policy aims the same way most groups in DC do: by buying influence within both parties, and paying influence-peddlers who parlay their political celebrity into personal riches....>>

[Gravitycollapse]

49. Cha-ching.

[okojo]

50. This is what Glenn Greenwald doesn't understand about classified information...

Once classified information, no matter how damaging, or valuable is taken from a secure network, it is compromised. It is like if Edward Snowden was a bank robber, and stated he hasn't spent most of the money he stole, it doesn't give relief to the police. It doesn't matter if Snowden returns most of the information he took without releasing it to the public, he would be charged with everything he took using his security clearance. I don't think Greenwald understands that, the damage has already been done.

At this point, this is becoming a media battle. Greenwald is stating stuff, that he may find shocking, as he did in the La Nación about US meta data acquiring and eavesdropping in Latin America countries. However the LA Times has reported back in 2007 about how Mexico Government was recording and storing data and cell phone communications with the help of the US via the State Department. I don't know about other governments, but the US could have the same deal in place with its allies in Latin America.

[Bolo Boffin]

51. We could kill the hostage, but that just shows

we are classically responsible kidnappers.

Saying that we are trying to harm the hostage is a complete distortion. It's the exact opposite.

[Cha]

52. Greenwald's a vicious bully.. it's gonna come out

at the most inappropriate times.

[Waiting For Everyman]

58. Bad, bad, Greenwald, bad!

That's how childish this comes off, to me. Armchair criticism of how those actively involved in this choose to do it, although inevitable I guess, is really pointless. No matter what anybody doesn't like about it, it's up to them to do it how they see fit, and no amount of complaining is going to put sideliners in the drivers' seat. They're taking the risks, it's their call.

Good response by Greenwald to Bernstein.

In an email to POLITICO, Greenwald returned fire on Bernstein.

"I realize Carl Bernstein hasn't done any actual reporting for a couple decades now, but he should nonetheless take the time to read what he's opining on," he wrote. "The Reuters article he's referencing is a complete distortion of what I actually said in that interview. The point I made is the opposite one: that Snowden has been as responsible as a whistleblower can be in ensuring that only information the public should know is revealed, but not gratuitously harmful information."

Bernstein's reply was a hoot:

Re: 'no actual reporting for two decades," Mr. Greenwald might want to read my reportorial biography of Hillary Clinton -- published in 2008 in Britain as well as the U.S. and around the world -- as a starting point. He also ought to take his beef to Reuters, if he feels he was misquoted by any of us who responded on Morning Joe to the specific quote attributed to him.

Yes, Carl, I'll bet such dangerous beats as "reportorial biography" on Hillary Clinton five years ago and hanging out with Joe Scarborough on Morning Joe are just fraught with danger that must keep you up at night! Don't stick your neck out too far, Carl!

[UTUSN]

59. If only Glen could see himself in all his Replies:

*********QUOTE********

http://ggsidedocs.blogspot.com.br/2013/01/frequently-told-lies-ftls.html

[font size=5]Frequently Told Lies (FTLs)[/font]

by Glenn GREENWALD

.... I'm a right-wing libertarian
Ever since I began writing about politics back in 2005, people have tried to apply pretty much every political [FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: yellow"]label[/FONT] to me. It’s almost always [FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: yellow"]a shorthand method to discredit someone without having to engage the substance[/FONT] of their arguments. It’s the classic [FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: yellow"]ad hominem[/FONT] fallacy: you don’t need to listen to or deal with his arguments because he’s an X. ....

**********UNQUOTE**********