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
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: WAIT!!!!!!!! [View all]DirkGently
(12,151 posts)162. PRISM was operating under an illegal interpretation of the law in 2011.
The administration won't release the judgment showing how it was breaking the law, or explain how it is conducting PRISM now so as not to continue breaking the law.
And now, look. They're talking about declassifying information, specifically to deal with what's been released. That is a good thing.
I don't see it as a matter of personal animosity from Greenwald or anyone else. It's the question of whether we will continue to buy the specious argument that government intrusion is so top-secret that it is exempt from public review.
That's Bush's idea, and now is the time to put it to bed, which is what a lot of us expected from Obama in the first place.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
214 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
+1 Money talks, even if I donate 5 dollars on the straight up it's still a sign of support
uponit7771
Jun 2013
#3
Pretty soon, both the far right and far left will be talking about the FEMA camps.
JoePhilly
Jun 2013
#17
Ahh, essentially doing the equivalent of an O'Reilly "Cut his mic off" act.
Fantastic Anarchist
Jun 2013
#30
Bush committed "warrantless wiretapping". Do you know what "warrantless" means? False equivalence
Tarheel_Dem
Jun 2013
#133
+1, whistle blowing is outing someone doing something illegal. Leaking is for the sake of a good sto
uponit7771
Jun 2013
#153
More sophistry, what does Obama have to "defend"?!?! He doesn't even need a warrant!!!!
uponit7771
Jun 2013
#15
Excellent post. And I am dismayed how many eat up his lying smears about Greenwald.
Luminous Animal
Jun 2013
#53
This is not what I said, you're misrepresenting what I said AGAIN.. not surprised. Regards
uponit7771
Jun 2013
#68
So you're in favor of "the President's domestic surveillance of citizens"
LondonReign2
Jun 2013
#146
I'm in favor of you knowing the difference between spying and surveying too
LondonReign2
Jun 2013
#154
wow Glen Greenwald worked for CATO? he write a paper on drug policy for them as part of a debate
azurnoir
Jun 2013
#22
I do not look at these latest revelations to be an attack on the President
snappyturtle
Jun 2013
#25
The accusation of war monger was the OP's, not mine. I was meerly pointing out
snappyturtle
Jun 2013
#43
No, he didn't kill the Tienanmen Square guy. He just killed his credibility. nt
SunSeeker
Jun 2013
#44
I'd find him more credible if he didn't lavish praise on Chinese "free speech" while bashing the US.
SunSeeker
Jun 2013
#67
You keep avoiding the point that he praised China, which has terrible abuses.
SunSeeker
Jun 2013
#75
...If she were a winger? YES!! She's NOT a winger like Greenwald and Snowden.
uponit7771
Jun 2013
#89
OFFS, Hong Kong is no haven of free speech. I can't believe you are singing its praises.
SunSeeker
Jun 2013
#119
Oh, but he did support Iraq! Not only did he support it, he was Bush fanboy who got duped!
Tarheel_Dem
Jun 2013
#138
If he doesn't want to live in a country where there has ever been an atrocity, he's got slim picking
SunSeeker
Jun 2013
#52
It's stupid to go to a country with even worse abuses & lavish praise on it while bashing the US.
SunSeeker
Jun 2013
#61
Yeah, lets take the Carlyle Groups, Cato, Rand Paul supports and Bush appoligist at face value...
uponit7771
Jun 2013
#70
Don't have to be a conspiracy to look at the background of those who are telling this story and
uponit7771
Jun 2013
#81
IF they supported Bush to a shill level like Glen or Ron Paul like Snow they're NOT to be trusted...
uponit7771
Jun 2013
#157
How did the preface of Greenwald's book attacking Bush make him a "shill" for Bush?
DirkGently
Jun 2013
#159
And the "hero" volunteered to fight in the Iraq war after believing everything Bush/Cheney said.
bushisanidiot
Jun 2013
#65
DING DING DING!! Needs to be a Top Post too. When I see a progressive that isn't bashing Obama
uponit7771
Jun 2013
#78
thx I need them, gotta look at things plainly sometimes ... don't know why ANYONE is listening to
uponit7771
Jun 2013
#87
...if the messenger was a war mongering, cato institute winger who supported Rand Paul then we shoul
uponit7771
Jun 2013
#93
I know he is not a liberal, he is a libertarian, but i did not know he supported the Iraq war
still_one
Jun 2013
#94
Support Iraq war AND wirte for CATO and is an asshole, and Snow didn't contribute 15 dollars he gave
uponit7771
Jun 2013
#125
Irrelevant to the question, the question was did he support Bush's war the answer = YES
uponit7771
Jun 2013
#151
REALLY?!?! He even says he gave them the benefit of the doubt!!! I NEVER gave that bastard the
uponit7771
Jun 2013
#158
Me neither. But most of America did, for a moment. Doesn't make him a "shill."
DirkGently
Jun 2013
#160
I agree, if that was the ONLY thing I would agree but it wasn't. Glen is an ass, CATO I contributor
uponit7771
Jun 2013
#161
Yup, it be froggy. But consider that the media is all we got. Besides memory and brains.
freshwest
Jun 2013
#131
Anyone who calls Greenwald "war mongering" clearly has not read Greenwald
Bjorn Against
Jun 2013
#136
And then he became one of the most vocal critics of the Bush Administration
Bjorn Against
Jun 2013
#141
Yeah after it was seen that Bush was losing!! The SECOND there were no WMDs found guys like Glen
uponit7771
Jun 2013
#150
I agree, only after the shit hit the fan though...like most kkkons they dropped the Bush admin like
uponit7771
Jun 2013
#166
And then they all started blogging extensively and expertly on how Bush's actions
Hissyspit
Jun 2013
#177
"I accepted his judgment that American security really would be enhanced by the invasion of this ...
uponit7771
Jun 2013
#165
All these recs for an OP that starts out with two lies in the first sentence
Hissyspit
Jun 2013
#174
Washington Post has not only backed away from its initial reporting, it now says that Obama won't
Number23
Jun 2013
#176
Boo. Common lies used by right-wingers and Obamabots to smear Greenwald because of the stuff he says
limpyhobbler
Jun 2013
#210