General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsGlenn Greenwald debates Michael Hayden this Friday on surveillance
You can watch it live (free) by registering at Munk Debates here:
https://www.munkdebates.com/debates
6:30 PM East Coast
State Surveillance
Be it resolved state surveillance is a legitimate defence of our freedoms
Hayden and Dershowitz on the Pro side. Greenwald and Ohanian on the con side.
- See more at: https://www.munkdebates.com/debates/state-surveillance#sthash.FQydzXwm.dpuf
Jesus Malverde
(10,274 posts)Or is he still sitting on them after he sold them to pierre omidyar?
The fact that someone in possession of the "crown jewels of intelligence" wasn't arrested immediately upon return to the US says it all. The fix is in.
Now he's sitting down with the STAZI spymaster...priceless or what was the price?
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)And the fact that a person would shirk the opportunity to debate their adversary in an open forum that has hosted hosted many other debates, is just simply bizarre.
Jesus Malverde
(10,274 posts)He's received 250 million from omidyar to start a joint venture.
He hasn't been arrested.
He could debate the "opposition" or destroy it.
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)He has hired Greenwald and others to work for the organization.
He didn't give Greenwald 250 million dollars. In fact, Greenwald's "beat" at First Look is just a small part of a broader media organization.
What "is all" being said by the fact that he was not arrested?
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)Really. How would Greenwald do this?
And what does "not being arrested" have to do with anything? Name one journalist in the U.S., in modern times, who has been arrested for publishing classified docs.
Not being arrested is the standard. It is not an anomaly.
KoKo
(84,711 posts)Jesus Malverde
(10,274 posts)JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)Hello. My name is John Cook, and as of three weeks ago I became the editor-in-chief of The Intercept. Since then, we havent published much material on the site, and thats been on purpose. Id like to take a moment to catch interested readers up on where we are and what you can expect from us over the coming weeks and months.
The site launched in February with an announcement from co-founders Glenn Greenwald, Laura Poitras, and Jeremy Scahill that The Intercept was coming online with an initial short-term focus on stories about the operations of the National Security Agency, based in large part on an archive of documents provided by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden. The decision to begin publishing at that point was based on a commitment to continue the work of reporting on, publishing, and explicating those documents. It was not based on an assessment that everything that one needs for the successful launch of a news web sitestaff, editorial capacity, and answers to questions about the sites broader focus, operational strategy, structure, and designhad been worked out.
Those things still have not been worked out, and over the past three weeks I have begun the process of resolving them in collaboration with the remarkably talented team that has already been assembled here. Until we have completed the work of getting staffed up and conceptually prepared for the launch of a full-bore news operation that will be producing a steady stream of shit-kicking stories, The Intercept will be narrowly focusing on one thing and one thing only: Reporting out stories from the NSA archive as quickly and responsibly as is practicable. We will do so at a tempo that suits the material. When we are prepared to publish those stories, we will publish them. When we are not, we will be silent for a time, unless Glenn Greenwald has some blogging he wants to do, because no one can stop Glenn Greenwald from blogging.
There are a lot of stories out there right now that we are very eager to coverthe Heartbleed vulnerability, the Senate intelligence committees report on the CIAs torture program, the presidents claim that he wants to end the intelligence communitys bulk collection programsin depth and in detail. But you shouldnt expect to be hearing from us on much aside from the very specific work of the documents, which is itself time-consuming and exacting, for some small, indeterminate, but discrete period of time as we get the site set up to operate for the long term. It is of course very gratifying that some folks out there who admire the excellent work our reporters have done are eager to see what we come up with in this new venture, and we appreciate the attention and curiosity.
https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/04/14/passover-greetings-editor/
Patience. I do not know anything about the Intercept other than what I read on their website and on the internet. But the information above pretty much answers your question in my opinion.
bahrbearian
(13,466 posts)Gary Garrison
(31 posts)Focus.
Gary Garrison
(31 posts)Or not?
Jesus Malverde
(10,274 posts)and both are stateside, apparently hanging out with spooks. Fuck dershowitz by the way.
Im going to have to google gellman.
DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)Jesus Malverde
(10,274 posts)Seems they've turned off the tap.
The news about the NSA has gone dark.
Letting them regroup and get back on the offensive.
Gary Garrison
(31 posts)That's Greenwald Derangement Syndrome.
Gellman who?
KoKo
(84,711 posts)Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)pacalo
(24,721 posts)Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)Registration is free.