Wednesday, December 18, 2013

Glenn Greenwald :The Lie of MP Julian Smith And EX-CIA Director Woolsey & John Bolton Call For Snowden's Execution


When it comes to Snowden, Greenwald and NSA revelations it appears Obama and Fox News and Neocons are on the same page demanding that heads literally roll.


First Glenn Greenwald on " The Lie of MP Julian Smith " at http://utdocuments.blogspot.com.br/2013/12/the-lie-of-mp-julian-smith.html


Wednesday, December 18, 2013

The lie of MP Julian Smith
Earlier today, I testified before the EU Parliament's Committee Inquiry on Mass Surveillance of EU Citizens. After my opening remarks, I was asked numerous questions by Committee members. One of them, British Tory MP Timothy Kirkhope, exploited the hearing to ask not about surveillance, but about the journalistic process in which I and the Guardian engaged when reporting on the Snowden documents. Kirkhope specifically tried to advance the ongoing Tory attack on the Guardian that the paper shipped sensitive GCHQ documents outside of the country and should thus be criminally prosecuted.

About this exchange, Kirkhope's Tory colleague in Parliament, Julian Smith, who has been repeatedly calling for criminal prosecution of the Guardian, publicly claimed that - in response to Kirkhope's questions - I "confirmed" that the Guardian had indeed given me files that I did not previously have:

This statement is a lie. It's the exact opposite of reality. Rather than "confirm" any of that, I expressly refused to answer Kirkhope's questions about those matters, explaining that journalistic freedom means that journalists do not have to answer to political officials about the sources of their reporting or their journalistic process. The EU Parliament has posted the full video of my testimony (embedded below); here is the relevant exchange proving that Smith lied (beginning at roughly 46:00):

"Glenn Greenwald: Part of freedom of the press - an important part of freedom of the press that we've been talking about this morning - is that fortunately journalists don't have to answer to government officials about what their sources gave them, or how it is that they got their material. They're allowed to protect their sources and protect their journalistic materials from invasions by questions from the government like some of the ones you just asked."

and further developments include : Awards They Couldn’t Accept: The Tragic Irony of Greenwald, Poitras and Snowden
When I was honored as a top global thinker last week, 3 of my co-recipients didn't come. The reason why is chilling By Jesselyn Radack December 17, 2013 "Information Clearing House - "Salon" - I was humbled to have dinner in Washington, D.C., last week with an incredible group of my co-recipients recognized in Foreign Policy magazine’s 2013 list of leading global thinkers. Conspicuously absent in the category of “The Surveillance State and Its Discontents” were the discontents: Glenn Greenwald, Laura Poitras and Edward Snowden — not because they did not want to attend but because these three American global thinkers are unwelcome in the United States. Greenwald has been accused of being a co-conspirator to break the law. The U.S. government has regularly harassed, searched and intimidated documentary filmmaker Poitras at the border. And the U.S. government revoked Edward Snowden’s passport. Greenwald, Poitras and Snowden are on a growing list of journalists, activists and whistle-blowers who are unable to travel freely because of their First Amendment-protected activities. Their fears of persecution are sadly not exaggerated. The United Kingdom detained Greenwald’s husband, Brazilian David Miranda, for nine hours and charged him with violating an anti-terrorism law because he had met with Poitras and carried information (not some illegal substance or terrorist plans) for Greenwald. WikiLeaks journalist Sarah Harrison, who literally rescued whistle-blower Snowden from Hong Kong, has been advised by her attorneys not to return home to the U.K. WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has long been the target of a U.S. criminal investigation, and was forced to seek asylum from Ecuador, but cannot get there. The U.S. has promised not to torture Snowden, but such a “promise” only raises the question: Is that how low a democracy should set the bar — at not torturing someone — rather than providing due process and abiding by international humanitarian standards? The Obama administration’s aggressive prosecution of whistle-blowers under the Espionage Act and willingness to embroil journalists in “leak” investigations and prosecutions casts doubt on the legitimacy of the criminal justice system...
and commentary from Jonathan Turley : Ex-CIA Director Calls For Snowden To Be “Hanged By His Neck Until He Is Dead” Dec. 18, 2013, Jonathan Turley.org
After the Snowden disclosures, Congress has pledged reforms. The White House has admitted abuses. Now a federal judge has declared the entire program to be unconstitutional. Yet, Woolsey wants Snowden dead. Welcome back to America’s Animal Farm.
Meanwhile one of the members of the former Bush administration who ought to be behind bars John Bolton condemns Snowden and warns Obama not to go easy on Snowden. John Bolton: Edward Snowden 'Ought To Swing From A Tall Oak Tree' by Mollie Reilly at Huff Post, Dec. 17, 2013 NSA Puff Piece Is ‘60 Minutes’ Latest Shame, Truthdig, Dec. 16, 2013
Rather than address the many disturbing revelations that have come from the leaks of Edward Snowden—intercepting voice, data and video communications by tapping fiber optic lines, actively working to compromise the security protocols used by online bankers, spying on lovers and world leaders—this report fixates instead on how Snowden pulled off the caper. In fact, Miller frames Snowden’s principled whistle-blowing as, “the most damaging breach of secrets in U.S. history.” The word damaging assumes the United States has been put in danger by Snowden’s leaks, but we know that actually it’s the intelligence establishment, and more specifically the rogue operations at the NSA, that have been endangered by Snowden’s leaks—not American safety.
'60 Minutes' Trashed For NSA Piece The Huffington Post,By Jack Mirkinson , Dec. 16, 2013 "60 Minutes" was trashed all over Twitter on Sunday night for a two-part story on the NSA which critics dubbed obsequious at best.
The piece was fronted by reporter John Miller, who had to tell viewers this at the top of the segment: "Full disclosure: I once worked in the office of the director of National Intelligence, where I saw firsthand how secretly the NSA operates." Miller is also likely set to leave CBS soon to work for the NYPD. Miller also said that the NSA agreed to speak to "60 Minutes" because it believes it has "not told its story well." It certainly found a comfortable place to do that on CBS News. The 25-minute segment consisted mostly of NSA officials dismissing concerns that their surveillance has gotten out of hand and showing off their gadgetry to the CBS cameras. There were no anti-NSA advocates or civil libertarians interviewed on-camera for the piece. The last words in the segment came from NSA chief Keith Alexander: "This is precisely the time that we should not step back from the tools that we've given our analysts to detect these types of attacks."

Meanwhile CBS wins dubious award for botched piece on Benghazi. '60 Minutes' Benghazi Debacle Named 'Error Of The Year'HuffPost, By Jack Mirkinson, Dec. 18, 2013
As if things weren't bad enough for "60 Minutes," the newsmagazine has now been given a prize nobody wants: Poynter's "Error of the Year" award, which it won for its disastrously botched story on the Benghazi attacks.

and so it goes,
GORD.


Friday, December 13, 2013

Jesus & Santa Are White - Megyn Kelly On Fox News

Wednesday, December 11, 2013

Obama's Lies About Syrian Chemical Weapons & USA Hypocrisy Over Nelson Mandela


The USA kept Nelson Mandela on the Terrorist Watch list up til 2008. America therefore can be seen as a supporter of South African Apartheid even after its demise.
The case of Syria just another example of Obama's duplicity .
One wonders if Mandela was still struggling to end Apartheid today would Obama have him removed via targeted assassination or would he praise him???


Seymour Hersh: Obama "Cherry Picked" Intel on Syrian Chemical Attack


Published on 9 Dec 2013http://www.democracynow.org - Investigative journalist Seymour Hersh joins us to discuss his new article casting doubt on the veracity of the Obama administration's claims that only the Assad regime could have carried out the chemical attacks in the Damascus suburb of Ghouta earlier this year. Writing in the London Review of Books, Hersh argues that the Obama administration "cherry-picked intelligence to justify a strike against Assad." The administration failed to disclose it knew Syrian rebels in the al-Nusra front had the ability to produce chemical weapons. Evidence obtained in the days after the attack was also allegedly distorted to make it appear it was gathered in real time.


Watch Part 2 of this interview: http://youtu.be/dgdr2Bm5P-c.


Democracy Now!, is an independent global news hour that airs weekdays on 1,200+ TV and radio stations Monday through Friday. Watch it live 8-9am ET at http://www.democracynow.org.





Randall Robinson on Nelson Mandela, U.S. Backing of Apartheid Regime

Published on 6 Dec 2013

http://www.democracynow.org - In 1964, Nelson Mandela was sentenced to life in prison on Robben Island. He would become the most famous political prisoner in the world and his freedom became a central demand of the international anti-apartheid movement.

Despite growing international pressure in the 1980s, the apartheid government received strong backing from the Reagan administration and Margaret Thatcher in Britain. The African National Congress was considered a terrorist organization by both nations. Mandela was listed on the U.S. terrorist watch list until 2008.

We speak to Randall Robinson, founder and past president of TransAfrica. He helped found the Free South Africa Movement and was arrested many times during the 1980s protesting the apartheid regime.


Watch full coverage of the life and legacy of Nelson Mandela on Democracy Now! at http://www.democracynow.org/topics/ne....



Tuesday, December 03, 2013

US backed Regime Steals Election -Obama's Legacy In Honduras


Xiomara Castro (left) next to the coffin of activist and supporter José Antonio Ardon, in Tegucigalpa. 
Photograph: Gustavo Amador/EPA


Xiomara Castro former first Lady of Honduras 

Honduras Election Fraud- The Real News Network
                                                                                     

More at The Real News                                                                                          
       "Banana Republic" Honduras Open for Business After Tainted Election , 03 December 2013 by lauren Carasik, Truthout
Few observers are surprised at widespread allegations of fraud, violence and intimidation in the November 24, 2013, election in Honduras, a country notorious for corruption; stark and longstanding social, political and economic inequality; and extremely fragile democratic institutions. After all, electoral mischief is what we have come to expect from the pejoratively termed "banana republics," countries in the global south characterized by iron-fisted oligarchic rule, the exploitation of resources and labor for international corporations and misery for the masses.
But although we may want to distance ourselves from the suffering in Honduras, grinding poverty, inequality and anti-democratic principles do not occur in a vacuum: What happens in contemporary Honduran politics is inseparable from its colonial legacy and present-day economic and geopolitical importance to its powerful neighbors to the north and the interests of transnational companies.
...Some critics allege a brilliantly orchestrated campaign to ensure and legitimize Hernandez's victory. Fraud, intimidation and violence before and during the election have a cumulative impact: dirty elections are stolen one vote at a time, through a variety of tactics that start well in advance of voting day. Hernandez's control over all the apparatus of government power, including the Congress, judiciary, military and electoral authority, facilitated the ease of influencing the outcome. The Honduran elite also control the media and its messaging to the electorate - and command a deep well of financial resources to inundate the airwaves and print media, with no public scrutiny of campaign financing.
...The poorly resourced LIBRE was vastly outspent by the National Party. Efforts to influence the outcome included vote buying, discount cards and jobs offered by the National Party, tampering with registered voter rolls to disqualify some voters and include others who could not legally cast a vote, credential buying that compromised multiparty oversight of voting tables, media manipulation, malfeasance in the calculation and transmission of the vote tabulation sheets, and intimidation and violence, including the criminalization of resistance leaders and targeted attacks and killings.

...Despite official results that bitterly disappointed many rooting for a more democratic and egalitarian civil society, Castro has not conceded defeat, and some hope can be salvaged from this contested process. The emergence of the LIBRE Party as a political contender helped break the longstanding stranglehold of the conservative National and Liberal parties. With the TSE giving Hernandez just less than 36 percent of the vote, he commands a weak mandate at best. Without a majority of seats in Congress, the National Party will have to cobble together a coalition to govern, presumably with the center-right Liberal Party. Voter participation of over 60 percent was a significant increase from 2009, an indication that the post-coup disillusionment with the electoral process is fading.

But Honduras is at grave risk of spiraling into even-more-brutal repression. Peaceful student protests on November 26 were met with a violent crackdown. Exacerbating fears of escalating repression against resistance protagonists is the news from human rights groups and the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) that a hit list is circulating, containing the names of prominent human rights defenders, lawyers, union leaders, indigenous rights activists, teachers and opposition party members targeted for death, reminiscent of the 1980s, when death squads were lethally employed to silence dissent. Those reaping the economic and geopolitical benefits of Honduras' status quo will not cede ground easily. In the oft-cited words of Frederick Douglass, "Power concedes nothing without a demand." And so courageous Hondurans fighting for a more just, equitable and democratic society march on, with the winds of history blowing at their backs. 

also see:   Hundreds of protesters confront cops after ‘stolen’ Honduran election by Agence France-Presse, Nov. 26, 2013 via the Raw Story                                                                                                                   
and:
   Thousands march in Honduras after election controversy Xiomara Castro and her leftist Libre party demand election recount, saying she was robbed of presidency Dec. 2, 2013,Guardian .com
Thousands of people marched peacefully through the capital of Honduras on Sunday in support of the opposition presidential candidate Xiomara Castro and her claim that last weekend's election was fraudulent.
..Both Castro and her husband, the former president Manuel Zelaya, who was ousted by a coup in 2009, led the protest march from a pickup truck carrying the body of a militant of their Libre party, who was shot dead hours before the demonstration began. "We are here to denounce the culture of death promoted since the coup. This can only be a political crime," said Zelaya, whose removal from office has left Honduras polarised.
...Castro alleges that tally sheets were altered, dead or absent people were included in the voter registry and polling stations were left open to election fraud.
Castro, 54, called the election "a disgusting monstrosity that has robbed me of the presidency" and said she would not recognise the Hernández government.
and for more background see:
                                             
   Welcome to Honduras, the most dangerous country on the planet Drug wars have made Honduras, the original banana republic, the world’s most dangerous country Philip Sherwell Nov. 16, 2013, The telegraph
                                 
and further on President Obama's involvement in Honduras: In the beginning President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton at least publicly condemned the military Coup in Honduras replacing democratically elected President Zelaya but was this just public posturing while in reality secretly supporting the coup .
  Obama on Honduras                        
 Uploaded on 30 Jun 2009 President Barrack Obama comments on the military coup in Honduras and states that Manuel Zelaya is the President recognized by the United States.



Hillary Clinton On Honduras Coup d'etat 2009
Hillary appears to condemn the Coup but appears to suggest that President Zelaya may have been trying to pervert in some way the democratic process and Honduran law and institutions for his own benefit ie prolonging term of office and making radical changes to Honduras Constitution. Zelaya wanted to hold a referendum to pose the possibility of making changes to the Constitution which had in fact been written mainly by American advisors with American political, military and corporate interests in mind .

So she leaves the question open about Zelaya's intentions regarding the Honduran Constitution and its legal apparatus and institutions. So her beef maybe with the way in which the ousting of Zelaya took place .


Secretary Clinton Meets With Honduran Foreign Minister
Uploaded on 28 Apr 2010
U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton holds a bilateral meeting with Honduran Foreign Minister Mario Canahuati, at the Department of State April 28, 2010.




 Human Rights are viewed by Neo-Liberals as equivalent somehow to Neo-Liberal Capitalism ie economic opportunity , full employment at low wages , rampant consumerism , rapacious unfettered capitalism and American Hegemony ???

Those in need in a Neo-Liberal society are taken care of by volunteer NGOs or government run organizations  similar to those of Conservative Pro-Capitalism Christians ala the poor house, the tread mill laws of the 19th century.

President Obama has either changed his tune since the the Coup took place in 2009 to fit the present reality of 2013 in Honduras ie Real Politik or was always in favor of a less democratic more hardline government in power in Honduras as a more reliable partner for US imperialist interests in South America and its pro-neo-liberal anti-leftist obsession favoring "Fascism lite" .  
                                                                                                                                         

 


Also checkout :



   #OWS UPDATE: Obama Props Up Corrupt Anti-Democratic 1% Elite In Honduras Feb. 21, 2012 Gordspoetryfactory.blogspot.ca


 Honduras Coup Earns Global Condemnation But Supported By Fox News & The Wall Street Journal July 6, 2009,Gordspoetryfactory.blogspot.ca


 #OWS Update Wikileaks Cables : Proof 2009 Obama Backed Honduran Coup D'Etat & Another Big Fire In " Honduras, Gordspoetryfactory.blogspot.ca, Feb. 22, 2012

Monday, December 02, 2013

Canadian Gov't Smears Journalist Glenn Greenwald To Avoid Questions About Its Involvement With NSA Spying At G8 & G20 Summits


Canadian government in order to distract from criticisms over its role with NSA spying at G8 and G20 summits joins US & UK smear campaign of journalist Glenn Greenwald.

MP Calandra Criticizes Greenwald/CBC Partnership on NSA Stories Instead of IllegalCSEC Spying at G8 & G20




But documents give proof of USA Spy operation on Canadian Soil during G8 and G20 summits which was fully supported by the Canadian government at the authority of Prime Minister Harper in conjunction with President Obama's Whitehouse. During that period the NSA was given carte blanche to spy on supposedly friendly allied countries taking part in the summit. America trusts no one or to put it in proper context no government can trust the USA not to be spying on it to gather intelligence it can use to put pressure on said countries ie bribe, blackmail, a bit of arm twisting gangster style. But then again US intelligence including the CIA has always had an unsavoury gangsterish side since its conception in the 1940s whether in Iran or Guatemala or later in Vietnam, Honduras, Chile, Cuba, Libya so why would anyone be surprised . As for Obama he has proven he has little interest in the niceties or quaintness of International Law and the Sovereignty and rights of other nations or human rights in general. He has also shown himself to be even a more strident defender of national security and secrecy than his predecessor Pres. W. Bush and has gone out of his way to expose and destroy Whistleblowers and others committed to truth and exposing government ethically questionable actions and wrong-doing and criminal activities.

Snowden Docs Reveal Joint NSA/CSEC Spy Op During 2010 G8/G

Published on 28 Nov 2013
11/27/2013

Top secret documents retrieved by U.S. whistleblower Edward Snowden show that Prime Minister Stephen Harper's government allowed the largest American spy agency to conduct widespread surveillance in Canada during the 2010 G8 and G20 summits.




Lies and Dirty Politics
Canadian MP Smears Greenwald/CBC, Nov. 30, 2013, Information Clearing House



and reply from Glenn Greenwald:


Wall Street Journal's Alistair MacDonald "reports" an outright lie

By Glenn Greenwald

The Wall Street Journal's Toronto-based reporter, Alistair MacDonald, last night published what can only be described as an outright lie. Here's what he claimed:


. @CBC admits it paid taxpayer's money to @ggreenwald for access to Snowden's documents but won't say how much. #NSA #NSAFiles #cdnpoli
— Alistair MacDonald (@macdonaldajm) November 29, 2013

And this:


Interesting that @cbc admission it paid Glen Greenwald for access to #NSA docs only came after we enquired, not last night when aired
— Alistair MacDonald (@macdonaldajm) November 29, 2013

Not only is it patently false to say that the CBC paid me for "access to Snowden's documents" - more on that in a minute - but MacDonald must know that his claim about what CBC "admits" is also patently false. Here's what the CBC's Director of News Content, David Walmsley, actually wrote about our relationship:


For those of you wondering, CBC News is currently in a freelance relationship with Glenn Greenwald. As both a journalist and a commentator, Greenwald has written for many prestigious media outlets in recent years, ranging from The Guardian to the New York Times to Salon.com.

He will write and report for CBC News and will help provide context and analysis on the documents from the NSA. Greenwald knows these files well. He has spent months exploring the global role of the NSA working with material taken by a former National Security Agency employee, Edward Snowden.

As with all CBC News content, stories generated by CBC reporters and Mr. Greenwald that are connected to these documents will be held to CBC journalistic standards.

Indeed, that is exactly what the contract provides and is exactly what I'm doing for CBC: writing news stories for them as a freelance journalist, alongside CBC staff journalists and editors. What is particularly laughable is MacDonald's self-praising boast that he was the one who uncovered this relationship: in fact, the very first (and so far only) article we published at the CBC on this story featured my byline right at the very top of the article:



So the breaking discovery from this intrepid, fearless Wall Street Journal investigative reporter is that the freelance journalists who reported on a big story for a large media outlet with a byline were paid for their work. Is that ever not the case?

Does MacDonald write his articles for free for the Wall Street Journal, or is he paid for his work? How much is he paid? Why has he not disclosed this? What is he hiding? Let the journalists who write articles for big media outlets without being paid for their work step up and be the first to support this attack.

MacDonald's claim that CBC paid for "access to Snowden's documents" is equally false. The CBC does not have "access to Snowden's documents". They only have access to the specific, carefully selected documents that we are reporting on together. What they're paying for - under a standard joint freelance contract with both me and my freelance colleague Ryan Gallagher - is the work that freelance reporters always do: selecting and analyzing the material to be reported and then participating in the drafting and finalizing of the article and reporting (for both TV and print): extensive work we all did together.

Aside from being completely standard, having a genuine freelance contract with media outlets is the only way to report on these documents. If we did not have such a contract, then the US government and its apologists (the very same people now criticizing us for having these contracts), would claim (dubiously but aggressively) that we were acting as a "source" or a distributor of documents, rather than as journalists in reporting them, and thus should lose the legal protections accorded to the process of journalism. As a result, we ensure that we negotiate a standard freelance contract so that nobody other than charlatans (such as those employed by the Wall Street Journal) could contest their authenticity and normalcy (for the extensive work we did in reporting and writing this story - one that broke news all over Canada and then the world - Ryan Gallagher and I were paid a joint freelance fee of $1,500).

This is, yet again, nothing more than the standard tactic of distraction we see over and over. Just as was true of the Manning war crimes disclosures: there is a small cottage industry of pundits, bloggers, and journalists who evince zero interest in the substance of the revelations about NSA and GCHQ spying which we're reporting on around the world. The people I'm referencing literally almost never mention any of the actual revelations, but are instead obsessed with spending their time personally attacking the journalists, whistleblowers, and other messengers who enable the world to know about what is being done.

Everyone having any sort of public impact merits critical scrutiny, and that certainly includes me. But when that scrutiny comes in the form of blatantly absurd and false attacks like the one from the Wall Street Journal - and from people who devote no time or attention to the substance of the revelations - then it seems clear that the attacks are little more than means of doing the NSA's dirty work for it: trying to discredit the journalists reporting on the story to ensure attention is shifted away from the spying revelations.

As I said from the start, I'll answer these kinds of attacks now and then but it won't succeed in distracting attention from what matters. In the last six weeks alone, we've reported on NSA and GCHQ documents in Germany, France, Spain, Norway, Holland, the U.S., the UK, and now Canada. More stories are coming in these and other countries in the next two weeks. Nothing is going to stop or even impede our reporting the newsworthy stories around the world that show what is being done to internet freedom and individual privacy by the world's most powerful factions operating in the dark and with no real accountability.

UPDATE (Sat.): On Twitter yesterday, MacDonald acknowledged that his accusations were fundamentally false, but tried to pass it off as merely a "clarification" of his defamatory claims:



Clarifying, @CBC tells me it paid @ggreenwald as freelancer not paid for access to NSA documents
— Alistair MacDonald (@macdonaldajm) November 29, 2013

Those, evidently, are the ethics of The Wall Street Journal: if you publish radically inaccurate but incendiary accusations that are then proven totally false, don't retract them or apologize for them: just pretend you're "clarifying".

Moreover, after devoting numerous tweets to publicly demanding that I disclose my compensation arrangement for the story I worked on with CBC, MacDonald acknowledged that I fully answered his questions, but repeatedly refused to disclose his own compensation. He first tried to justify that double standard this way:


@ggreenwald you campaign on transparency. I don't. Again, my questions on you pay are valid given that and over moral positions you take
— Alistair MacDonald (@macdonaldajm) November 29, 2013

Apparently, MacDonald, though claiming to be a journalist, does not campaign for transparency. Isn't that rather elemental to the job? He then justified his refusal to adhere to his own disclosure demands this way:


@ggreenwald all night, a few tweets? My salary has no bearing on my work, because my positioning is different to yours. All the best
— Alistair MacDonald (@macdonaldajm) November 29, 2013

The idea that journalists should be forced to disclose their compensation arrangements is moronic, but if you're going to impose that demand on others, you don't get to exempt yourself. So add that to the journalistic ethics of the Wall Street Journal: disclosure of compensation is for other journalists, but not for themselves.