Sibel Edmonds destroys Glenn Greenwald

[Nordic]

Wow, Sibel Edmonds, someone I respect immensely, just destroyed Glenn Greenwald here:

http://www.boilingfrogspost.com/2013/12 ... t-bidders/

She makes some really good points.

Be sure to read the comments. She addresses criticisms there. I love this woman.

Checkbook Journalism & Leaking to the Highest Bidders
SIBEL EDMONDS | DECEMBER 8, 2013 46 COMMENTS
The NSA Whistleblowing Case: Something is Awfully Rotten in the State of …?
Imagine a major government whistleblower who leaks his evidence and obtained documents to the highest bidders in the mainstream media and mega corporations. Does that sound awful, disgraceful and despicable? Okay. Now, imagine a pseudo journalist who obtains over 50,000 documents from a government whistleblower, and then takes some of this information and puts it out for bid, reserves a certain portion for a lucrative book deal, and saves the rest for a mega corporation that has a record of screwing whistleblowers. How does that sound? This is what I mean by the title of this commentary: Checkbook Journalism & Leaking to the Highest Bidders.For the past twelve years I have been known as one of the most notorious government whistleblowers, even given the title of The Most Classified Person in the History of the United States by a civil liberties organization. I am the founder and director of a whistleblower organization that includes over 150 national security whistleblowers. I have known and represented over 150 national security whistleblowing cases in Congress and the media. And let me tell you this, I have never seen a case that even comes close to this bizarrely unethical and despicable case.A government whistleblower obtains over 50,000 pages of documents that implicate the government in severely illegal and unconstitutional practices. This whistleblower risks everything, including fleeing the country, in order to leak these documents and let the public know how its government has been breaking the nation’s laws and violating their rights. So he goes to another country and then entrusts all this evidence to a few reporters and wanna-be journalists. Why does he do that? He does it so that these reporters will present all this information to the public: not only those in the United States, but everyone all over the world. Think about it. Why else would someone risk everything, including his own life, to obtain and leak such documents? Are you thinking? Because what would be the point to all this, to taking all these risks, if 99% of these documents remain secret and hidden from the public? Ludicrous, right?Now, here is what happens next: The whistleblower hands over these documents, and goes through a surreal escape journey. So surreal that even Hollywood could not have matched it. Of the handful of reporters who were entrusted with 50,000 documents, a few do nothing. By that I mean absolutely nothing. A couple from this entrusted group does a little bit more. They meet with a few mainstream media outlets, they spend many hours around the table with their mega companies’ mega attorneys and U.S. government mega representatives (the same government that is implicated in these documents). Then what happens? Here is what happens:During the six-month period since they received the documents and the whistleblower’s story broke, the supposed-journalists released 1% (One Percent) of these documents:
Out of reported 50,000 pages (or files, not clear which), about 514 pages (>1%) have been released over 5 months beginning June 5, 2013. At this rate, 100 pages per month, it will take 42 years for full release. Snowden will be 72 years old, his reporters hoarding secrets all dead.
That’s right. A whistleblower breaks the law to obtain 50,000 documents, he flees the country to escape prosecution and jail time, he hands over these 50,000 pages to a handful of individuals in return for their promise to present these documents to the public, six months pass, and the public gets 1% of these documents. But please, wait. This is not all. Far more interesting and troubling things happen meanwhile.The main wanna-be reporter begins his relentless pursuit of high dollars in return for … for what? In return for exclusive interviews where he would discuss some of this material. In return for a very lucrative book deal where he would expose a few extra pages of these 50,000-page documents. In return for a partnership with and extremely high salary from a Mega Corporation (think 1%) where he would … hmmmm, well, it is not very clear: maybe in return for sitting on and never releasing some of these documents, or, releasing a few select pages? That’s right. The culprit is able to use his role in the whistleblower case, and his de facto ownership of the whistleblower’s 50,000-page evidence, to gain huge sums of money, fame, a mega corporate position, book and movie deals … yet, making sure that the public would never see more than a few percent of the incriminating evidence. Of course, secondhand checkbook profiteers tend to be very savvy, able to blow smoke, muddy water, and obscure their real deeds and true personhoods. This particular one is famous for spending years as an ambulance-chasing style attorney, where all he had to do was to write dozens of pages to make cases that were never cases, or make real cases appear as if they never were. Sensible people always advise against using personal background information to expose other non-personal cases of subjects. I agree with these sensible people. I think it is disgraceful to bring in irrelevant personal information to make a case on a non-personal issue. However, sometimes personal information becomes part of the picture and very relevant. Allow me to provide you with an example in our case. What if the personal facts paint a figure that does anything and everything for money and fame? What if a checkbook leaker (or a checkbook censorship agent) is the type of person who has engaged in the following:
· Has represented corrupt mega banks and financial institutions as an attorney to make mega bucks, yet claims to be a Marxist Leninist Socialist who supports the Occupy movement.· Has left short-lived civil liberties activities to set up an exploitive pornography business with names such as Hairy Studs and Hairy Jock… All for money and profit.· Has been known as an individual who has always used anything and everything to bring frivolous lawsuits (many of them) to get rich quick.· Has been representing himself as a Marxist-Socialist, Liberal and Libertarian, simultaneously, and based on circumstances, never having to reconcile the discrepancies between those positions and his partnership with corporate billionaires, his luxurious lifestyle, putting on a Marxist front, representing himself as a Libertarian … and the list goes on. Which one is he? Really?
You see, when you add these qualities and personal history to the fact that a whistleblower and 50,000-pages of documents are being used to make mega money and mega fame, while simultaneously the public at large is being kept in the dark and 99% of these documents are censored, what do you get? A few days ago the checkbook wanna-be journalist released a very long argument in defense of his indefensible actions and practices. I am going to address a couple of those, but I want you to keep in mind that the argument is coming from a person known as an ambulance-chaser attorney and litigious money grabber, thus is brilliant at obscuring facts and realities with mud and distortions. Consider how a partnership with a mega billionaire corporate man is being characterized and fudged here:
It has the backing and is being built by someone whom I am absolutely convinced is dedicated to this model of independent, adversarial journalism.
This is not the first time this supposed pro-whistleblowers and civil liberties oriented wanna-be journalist has described his new Billionaire owner. The new owner has been characterized by him several times as a solid owner with a solid track record on whistleblowers issues, First Amendment, Freedom of the Press, etc. We have been searching and researching the new owner’s record. There is not much to be found to qualify this man as someone with a good record on the significant areas mentioned above. None … except:
Paypal suspended online payments to WikiLeaks in December of 2010 after, its managers said, they read a letter by the State Department indicating WikiLeaks was breaking American laws. In retaliation, a group of Anonymous hacktivists brought down the payment site with DDoS attacks two days later. The hacktivists who were apprehended, known as the PayPal 14, were in court today and accepted plea bargains in order to avoid felony charges.Omidyar has been ‘the director and Chairman of the Board since eBay’s incorporation in May 1996,’ and noted that “eBay owns PayPal.” …
In our next BFP Roundtable video session I will talk more about this, and other eye-brow raising items in Omidyar’s record, including his connections and associations with Iranian lobby groups for “Regime Change” in Iran. But for now, let’s shoot down this muddying counter-argument presented by someone with true expertise in muddying and fudging facts as an ambulance-chaser litigious attorney who has gotten away in life by threatening everyone he could with a lawsuit and libel suits. Now back to lies, contradictions and then muddying it all a la the litigious attorney. For the last few months, whenever pressured about the 99% unreleased documents, the answers have been swinging between two or three more years to we are done with releasing. You see, this was not the case initially, not during the first couple of months prior to signing deals with mega corporate new sugar daddies and mega publishers for the book deals. Here is the triple-talking, mud-making and fudge-creating wanna-be journalist on June 26, 2013, the month the public saga began:
When they met, Snowden supplied Greenwald with a “volume of documents so great that I haven’t actually gone through them all.” Snowden was meticulous — Greenwald described the files as beautifully organized, “almost to a scary degree.” Stories based on the leaked documents will continue for another few months, Greenwald said, but not, he hopes, beyond that. “I get bored with myself,” he said. “If I’m still working on these stories a year from now, I’ll probably be in an asylum somewhere.”…
So what happened since the greasy checkbook reporter made those statements? Please don’t tell me that at that point he was not aware how deep things went or how thick those documents were. Because he knew exactly how deep and how thick, and that they were all meticulously and beautifully organized: Meaning the whistleblower had done all the work for the reporters in advance. This was not a thick pile of hodgepodge documents – they were already analyzed, organized, categorized, sub-categorized, and sub-sub-categorized. As for what happened since June 26, 2013? A lot. A new very lucrative book deal was struck. He is being very secretive and tight-lipped on how many millions of dollars he received from this US mega publisher, however, he had to deal a whistleblower’s document to secure this deal:
According to the publisher, it will “contain new revelations exposing the extraordinary cooperation of private industry and the far-reaching consequences of the government’s program, both domestically and abroad.” …
So there – one reason why a checkbook wanna-be journalist is not providing the public with the information they have the right to know. How is that for integrity?Further, no one is asking the crucial question: With the mega publishing corporations’ record, how is it that they are willing to publish classified government documents? Do you know what these same publishers said about my own book? Here is what they said:
“without the approval by the FBI-DOJ prepublication review board we will not publish your book. The government will come after us.”
So, isn’t it amazing that an American mega publisher, a mainstream American publisher, is giving millions to publish a book that will reveal US government classified material? I can tell you from experience and with one hundred percent certainty: the publisher has the government’s consent. How does that bear with the claims that this checkbook reporter is under arrest and even death threats by the U.S. government? Let me tell you something: it does not. What it tells you is this: A Dog & Pony Show put on by the U.S. government and its agents. The checkbook wanna-be reporter is also securing a million dollar movie deal with Hollywood.
You had to know this was coming. There’s a bidding war heating up between Hollywood studios over the rights to bring Glenn Greenwald’s forthcoming tell-all book about the Edward Snowden affair to the big screen.
Well, as we all know, the CIA blesses these movie deals with mainstream Hollywood. Don’t we? Without the handlers’ blessing no such deal could have been made. When the pretender shows up at the Oscar Gala, ask yourself this: Weren’t they supposed to arrest and maybe even drone the hell out of this guy? So what happened, dude?The exact same questions should be posed for a new mega corporate sugar daddy tucking checkbook journalists under his wing in return for…? Your guess is definitely as good as mine. The billionaire who stomped upon a whistleblower’s account with his PayPal Corporation has suddenly found a heart? I didn’t think so either
In her first interview since leaving Moscow for Berlin last month, Harrison told German news weekly Stern: “How can you take something seriously when the person behind this platform went along with the financial boycott against WikiLeaks?” Harrison was referring to the decision in December 2010 by PayPal, which is owned by eBay, to suspend WikiLeaks’ donation account and freeze its assets after pressure from the US government. The company’s boycott, combined with similar action taken by Visa and Mastercard, left WikiLeaks facing a funding crisis.“His excuse is probably that there is nothing he could have done at the time,” Harrison continued. “Well, he is on the board of directors. He can’t shake off responsibility that easily. He didn’t even comment on it. He could have said something like: ‘we were forced to do this, but I am against it’.”…
In our coming BFP Roundtable we will have first-hand accounts from reporters who have witnessed how our checkbook journalist has been asking for money in return for interviews and documents.I started this commentary by introducing my credentials as a whistleblower and someone who has known and represented many government whistleblowers from the intelligence and law enforcement agencies- hundreds of whistleblowers, honorable people such as NSA’s Russ Tice, DEA’s Sandalio Gonzalez and FBI’s John Cole. In this case of a checkbook wanna-be journalist and a whistleblower, I have nothing but many questions when it comes to the whistleblower in question. I do consider the selfless act of releasing this incriminating information on our government’s illegality heroic; however, I have numerous unanswered questions for the whistleblower in question:
Did he give his full consent to the mainstream and checkbook reporters so that they could sit on 99% of these documents if they chose to?Is he perfectly okay with this disgraceful and opportunist person using these documents to secure millions of dollars in book and movie deals?Does he consider the censorship of 99% of his documents justified and okay? If so, what kind of image does he hope to maintain when the leaking is selective and based on bidding in dollars?Does he have an arrangement where he gets a cut from the opportunist’s mega millions obtained via documents he entrusted him with? If so, wouldn’t that make him tainted and a culprit in this?Why is he in Russia (in exile), when the checkbook opportunist is in the belly of the beast making deals in millions of dollars, and is about to head a $250 Million news corporation set up by his billionaire sugar daddy?
And finally, a bit crudely,
What the fu.. is wrong with this picture?! Because as a whistleblower and an expert on whistleblowers I see thousands of wrong things with this picture!
Please do not get me wrong here. I have no questions but answers when it comes to the checkbook opportunist in question. I have known about him for years, long before this NSA episode. What I don’t have is an answer when it comes to the NSA whistleblower in question. I have been sitting on the fence on this one. Unlike my own whistleblower members, I do not know this guy. I don’t. I have never corresponded with him, and he has never reached out to me or my organization. I keep going from silently cheering and supporting him, to doubting what he is all about. I have never seen a case like this. I don’t think anyone has. However, in light of the case of our checkbook journalist, Mainstream Publishers’ mega million book deals, Mainstream Hollywood’s mega studio deals, Mainstream Media backing and showcasing, and Mega Corporation’s mega millions getting involved … and in all this, zero retaliation or interference from our mega government known for being ruthless on whistleblowers, I just don’t get this case. My experienced gut says something is awfully rotten in the state of … this NSA whistleblower-Checkbook Opportunist Drama Set. I get half of the rotten state, but am still wondering about the other half. # # # #Sibel Edmonds is the Publisher & Editor of Boiling Frogs Post and the author of the Memoir Classified Woman: The Sibel Edmonds Story. She is the recipient of the 2006 PEN Newman’s Own First Amendment Award for her “commitment to preserving the free flow of information in the United States in a time of growing international isolation and increasing government secrecy” Ms. Edmonds has a MA in Public Policy and International Commerce from George Mason University, a BA in Criminal Justice and Psychology from George Washington University.


FILED UNDER: UNCATEGORIZED TAGGED WITH: BOILING FROGS POST, CHECKBOOK JOURNALISM, CLASSIFIED WOMAN, CONTROLLED OPPOSITION, DEEP STATE, EBAY, EDWARD SNOWDEN, GLENN GREENWALD, GOVERNMENT WHISTLEBLOWERS, GREENWALD BOOK DEAL, GREENWALD MOVIE DEAL, JOURNALISTIC ETHICS, MAINSTREAM MEDIA, NSA, NSWBC, OPPORTUNISTIC JOURNALISM, PAYPAL, PIERRE OMIDYAR, SHADOW GOVERNMENT, SIBEL EDMONDS, WHISTLEBLOWERS, WIKILEAKS
- See more at: http://www.boilingfrogspost.com/2013/12 ... ZTSOq.dpuf

[Nordic]

Oops. This posted twice. Could someone please remove the 2nd?

On edit: never mind, figured out how to delete the 2nd

[JackRiddler]

Imagine

my thesis

Okay. Now, imagine

my thesis. With Edmonds, let's keep imagining it, but in this piece from her, it won't be long before she's presenting what we're supposed to be imagining as already proven, self-evident, in need of no corroboration.

For the past twelve years

now comes the "my struggle" part, let's skip ahead...

and right after that, let's finally get to some facts:

A government whistleblower obtains over 50,000 pages of documents that implicate the government in severely illegal and unconstitutional practices. This whistleblower risks everything, including fleeing the country, in order to leak these documents and let the public know how its government has been breaking the nation’s laws and violating their rights. So he goes to another country and then entrusts all this evidence to a few reporters and wanna-be journalists.

Okay (minus the potshot noted in bold).

Why does he do that? He does it so that these reporters will present all this information to the public: not only those in the United States, but everyone all over the world.

Indeed, that would be a logical presumption. On to the part about Greenwald...

Here is what happens:During the six-month period since they received the documents and the whistleblower’s story broke, the supposed-journalists released 1% (One Percent) of these documents:

So far using a step-by-step strategy of one revelation at a time, no distractions, no multiple stories. Repeatedly seizing the initiative and worldwide attention, forcing media coverage by the timing of the story breaks (as with the move to reveal the Merkel material just as Obama met her). Breaking scandals every couple of weeks, one by one, country by country, each one bigger than the last.

Would Sibel Edmonds have done it any differently? I remember she put out lots of teasers before she finally told her whole story to the London Times.

Snowden isn't silenced, of course, he's stepped up and spoken a few times and unlike Sibel Edmonds, he hasn't objected to how Greenwald has been doing it. Does she even ask what he may be thinking about all this?

Eventually, after many, many miles of text, she will, but we haven't even started defaming Greenwald and we need to do a lot of that, so...

Out of reported 50,000 pages (or files, not clear which), about 514 pages (>1%) have been released over 5 months beginning June 5, 2013. At this rate, 100 pages per month, it will take 42 years for full release. Snowden will be 72 years old, his reporters hoarding secrets all dead.

"At this rate" is nonsense! There's no natural law governing the rate of release. An evident public relations strategy is at work, and so far count me among those who think it has been brilliant.

After a few months worth of the Wikileaks State Department documents, a bunch of people here on this board were making the same complaint, by the way. We'd never see it all! Why are they only releasing this, and not something we'd prefer to imagine is in there?

Now it's all out, of course, and pretty much totally ignored.

Could this be one case where the motto of "keep your powder dry" and keep shooting makes sense?

That’s right. A whistleblower breaks the law to obtain 50,000 documents, he flees the country to escape prosecution and jail time, he hands over these 50,000 pages to a handful of individuals in return for their promise to present these documents to the public, six months pass, and the public gets 1% of these documents.

This repetition is correct. And superfluous.

And the 1% has been spectacular so far. Given how well it's played out, I'm inclined to think the other 99% will be broken in similarly effective fashion, and obviously not over 30 years' time.

But please, wait. This is not all. Far more interesting and troubling things happen meanwhile.The main wanna-be reporter begins his relentless pursuit of high dollars in return for … for what? In return for exclusive interviews where he would discuss some of this material. In return for a very lucrative book deal where he would expose a few extra pages of these 50,000-page documents. In return for a partnership with and extremely high salary from a Mega Corporation (think 1%) where he would … hmmmm, well, it is not very clear: maybe in return for sitting on and never releasing some of these documents, or, releasing a few select pages?

Maybe, shmaybe.

It's possible, but why not just act as if it's already proven?

That’s right. The culprit is able to use his role in the whistleblower case, and his de facto ownership of the whistleblower’s 50,000-page evidence, to gain huge sums of money, fame, a mega corporate position, book and movie deals …

Nice. Let's see what he does with it. I'd love to get a job on that gig myself.

Of course, secondhand checkbook profiteers tend to be very savvy, able to blow smoke, muddy water, and obscure their real deeds and true personhoods.

Tends, schmends. First premises, not empirical.

Now let's get into the usual anti-Greenwald smears for a bit, shall we?

I'll skip the prologue and go here:

This particular one is famous for spending years as an ambulance-chasing style attorney...

Lawyers, right? Skipping further ahead...

· Has represented corrupt mega banks and financial institutions as an attorney to make mega bucks, yet claims to be a Marxist Leninist Socialist who supports the Occupy movement.

Details on the corrupt mega banks and mega bucks, please, and a citation on this supposed claiming of his is evidently lacking.

The fact that he spoke to the Socialism 2013 conference in Chicago? Good for him! A fantastic speech it was, everyone please look it up. Makes for a great hour!

But that speech doesn't make him claiming to be a "Marxist Leninist Socialist," or even a socialist. As if this is necessarily relevant.

Has left short-lived civil liberties activities to set up an exploitive pornography business with names such as Hairy Studs and Hairy Jock… All for money and profit.

Well that settles it. Also invalidates Larry Flynt's political work, right?

Has been representing himself as a Marxist-Socialist, Liberal and Libertarian, simultaneously,

Show please, though it needn't be relevant.

partnership with corporate billionaires, his luxurious lifestyle,

Show please, though it needn't be relevant.

putting on a Marxist front

Is there an echo in here? Plenty more of the same to come!

You see, when you add these qualities and personal history to the fact that a whistleblower and 50,000-pages of documents are being used to make mega money and mega fame, while simultaneously the public at large is being kept in the dark and 99% of these documents are censored, what do you get?

Predicated on the idea that these are being censored, and contrary to the fact that the shit has been coming out in spectacular, effective bursts.

A few days ago the checkbook wanna-be journalist released a very long argument in defense of his indefensible actions and practices. I am going to address a couple of those, but

first, before we address those, in case you didn't catch it yet, let's again repeat the same set of smears, let it sink in already!

I want you to keep in mind that the argument is coming from a person known as an ambulance-chaser attorney and litigious money grabber,

to everyone who hates his guts, the kind of people a la Bill Keller whose hatred should be a badge of honor

It has the backing and is being built by someone whom I am absolutely convinced is dedicated to this model of independent, adversarial journalism.
This is not the first time this supposed pro-whistleblowers and civil liberties oriented wanna-be journalist has described his new Billionaire owner. The new owner has been characterized by him several times as a solid owner with a solid track record on whistleblowers issues, First Amendment, Freedom of the Press, etc. We have been searching and researching the new owner’s record. There is not much to be found to qualify this man as someone with a good record on the significant areas mentioned above.

But let's go for it anyway.

There follows the reality of Paypal, and I agree. But possibly not relevant: Remains to be seen how the quarter-billion Omidyar has supposedly put out to Greenwald is going to be deployed.

Never mind, let's do those riffs again, repetition makes fact!

muddying counter-argument
true expertise in muddying and fudging facts
ambulance-chaser litigious attorney
threatening everyone he could with a lawsuit and libel suits.
lies, contradictions and then muddying it all a la the litigious attorney.
triple-talking, mud-making and fudge-creating wanna-be journalist
greasy checkbook reporter
very lucrative book deal was struck.
secretive and tight-lipped
millions of dollars

Phew!

According to the publisher, it will “contain new revelations exposing the extraordinary cooperation of private industry and the far-reaching consequences of the government’s program, both domestically and abroad.”

Hope so!

By the way, why did it take Sibel Edmonds three or four years before she finally told her story flat-out? Gagged, sure, but then she defied it. And nothing happened to her!

Anyway, we shouldn't compare, right? It's not like Greenwald's been under any kind of pressure from the empire and its self-appointed guardians.

Or his husband. Right?

With the mega publishing corporations’ record, how is it that they are willing to publish classified government documents? Do you know what these same publishers said about my own book? Here is what they said:
“without the approval by the FBI-DOJ prepublication review board we will not publish your book. The government will come after us.”

Sour, ain't it? I agree with her! They should have published her. (Why was she trying to land a deal with evil mega publisher, by the way?)

However, it does not automatically follow that they're now going to censor, distort, hide, protect evil interests, etc. etc.

So, isn’t it amazing that an American mega publisher, a mainstream American publisher, is giving millions to publish a book that will reveal US government classified material?

Yes and no. Could be business. Could also be a bit of an accomplishment on the part of Edmonds and others who have fought to expand what's possible.

I can tell you from experience and with one hundred percent certainty: the publisher has the government’s consent.

Could be. Show? I know Edmonds can't either way, but that doesn't prove it either way!

How does that bear with the claims that this checkbook reporter is under arrest and even death threats by the U.S. government?

It wouldn't, but you didn't prove it in the first place. Also, please improve the style. Who claimed he's "under arrest"? You mean threatened with, presumably?

Let me tell you something: it does not. What it tells you is this: A Dog & Pony Show put on by the U.S. government and its agents. The checkbook wanna-be reporter is also securing a million dollar movie deal with Hollywood.

All of this exact same stuff was being said about Assange not so long ago.

You had to know this was coming. There’s a bidding war heating up between Hollywood studios over the rights to bring Glenn Greenwald’s forthcoming tell-all book about the Edward Snowden affair to the big screen.

Is there? And is every single production ever that could be remotely called "Hollywood" a propaganda production? Stone's JFK? Parallax View? Executive Decision?

Well, as we all know, the CIA blesses these movie deals with mainstream Hollywood.

Not all of them. The CIA co-produces a whole bunch, but it doesn't mean they're in charge of every movie deal in the U.S.

Also, a deal has yet to be made.

When the pretender shows up at the Oscar Gala, ask yourself this:

When, I will!

Never mind, let's do the chorus one more time!

mega corporate sugar daddy tucking checkbook journalists under his wing
stomped upon a whistleblower’s account
billionaire
has suddenly found a heart?

There follow excellent points against Omidyar:

In her first interview since leaving Moscow for Berlin last month, Harrison told German news weekly Stern: “How can you take something seriously when the person behind this platform went along with the financial boycott against WikiLeaks?” Harrison was referring to the decision in December 2010 by PayPal, which is owned by eBay, to suspend WikiLeaks’ donation account and freeze its assets after pressure from the US government. The company’s boycott, combined with similar action taken by Visa and Mastercard, left WikiLeaks facing a funding crisis.“His excuse is probably that there is nothing he could have done at the time,” Harrison continued. “Well, he is on the board of directors. He can’t shake off responsibility that easily. He didn’t even comment on it. He could have said something like: ‘we were forced to do this, but I am against it’.”

But let's remember this is the same Wikileaks and Assange that was being called a total hoax by a bunch of people on this board not very long ago - including you, Nordic, who saw a shades-of-HMW significance in the fact that Julian's last name begins with ASS.

Never mind. More chorus!

checkbook wanna-be journalist

Finally, we return to the obvious point that was avoided at the start:

I have nothing but many questions when it comes to the whistleblower in question. I do consider the selfless act of releasing this incriminating information on our government’s illegality heroic; however, I have numerous unanswered questions for the whistleblower in question:
Did he give his full consent to the mainstream and checkbook reporters so that they could sit on 99% of these documents if they chose to?

Finally! Excellent question. Again, Snowden has spoken on a few occasions recently, and it hasn't seemed to bother him. Which isn't to say he's happy with Greenwald's strategy. Snowden could be under a lot of pressures or influences, like Greenwald, but are you inside his head to know either way?

Until now it's been supremely good the Snowden, supremely venal and vile the Greenwald. Reminds me of the Greg Palast attempt to lionize Manning while demonizing Assange. Almost like classic divide-and-conquer confusionism, ain't it?

From what we really can see, Snowden picked Greenwald as his first choice to break the stories, on the basis of Greenwald's prior work (not the porn oeuvre). At first Snowden couldn't get at him. Then did get at him through Poitras (the also heroic woman everyone leaves out of all these stories, though she's key). They met in Hong Kong for a good long time before the roll-out of the stories began.

Thus, for all we know, the strategy that has been followed by Greenwald has been according to Snowden's plan and wishes all along! (And it's been very effective so far - I can also repeat myself.)

Edmonds doesn't know that's untrue, so why is she pretending it?

Is [Snowden] perfectly okay with this disgraceful and opportunist person using these documents to secure millions of dollars in book and movie deals?

Speaking of the kind of leading, beat-your-wife questions that only a bad, bad lawyer would ask!

Etc., etc.

Let's move on to tainting the until now utterly heroic Snowden:

Does he consider the censorship of 99% of his documents justified and okay? If so, what kind of image does he hope to maintain when the leaking is selective and based on bidding in dollars?Does he have an arrangement where he gets a cut from the opportunist’s mega millions obtained via documents he entrusted him with? If so, wouldn’t that make him tainted and a culprit in this?

His girlfriend was a pole dancer and he had boxes in his garage, I hear.

More chorus!!!

checkbook opportunist

I just don’t get this case.

No, I don't think you do.

Though it's not impossible you've guessed right about a lot of things, you're presenting your guesses as absolutes.

[coffin_dodger]

And there I was, thinking that I had it all figured out. Fool me once, shame on you - fool me twice, shame on me. I'm starting to feel foolish often, now. Greenwald the celebrity. Using celebrity status to help free us all - but from what? The system that supports his lifestyle? Huh? Why would he do that? How is Greenwald oppressed, exactly? Given free reign of the msm to preach his message? The same msm that is there to pacify us? Free to tell us about the NSA, that anyone interested in these things already all knew about? Promising so much more, but yet to deliver? A sop to the conspiracy minded?

What a powerful man Greenwald has become. A suitcase full of secrets that could crash the system, but no real meat transmitted - just enough to keep 'em keen. Another snippet from the news cycle, waiting to be 'gotten used to' just as the next crisis rears it head, to confound and draw our attention elsewhere.

[RocketMan]

I usually agree with you Nordic, but here I gotta agree with JackRiddler. A weird barrage of bitterness and ad hominems with a dash of cheap moralism on the side. Jealous much?

Sibel Edmonds is indeed a hero but... she might be jumping the shark here.

[Searcher08]

Sibel's piece was a rant - and misses out key issues. It came across to me as the type of piece that can get written when extremely angry and presses the 'Submit' button too soon.

The WikiLeaks documents were all released, using her 'get them into the public domain asap' model and what happened?
Absolutely nothing.
Funny articles in the Daily Mail re cables of US diplomatic staff bemoaning lunch with embarrassingly drunk (Central Asian / African / South East Asian) Ministers about arms deals.

The model of having the public do Open Source research didn't work because the public didn't give a shit. The public did not just need it in bite-sized chunks, it wanted them already chewed and fed via a feeding tube.

Releasing all of these files documents in one go would have the same effect.

Her assertion that the records were highly organised is the key one, because it isn't the volume of release that matters, but the key content, and it sounds like Snowden had already created ( an 'Executive Summary', if you will)

She also left out that the post-Greenwald Guardian is now (apparently) under great (and little publicised pressure) regarding the legality of their Snowden data release, with a reasonable possibility of prosecution, spearheaded by 'Common Purpose' graduate Cressida Dick, promoted for her role in the Jean Charles de Menezes killing.
This follows the very public destruction of the Guardians copy of the Snowdon materials by UK Intel Services.

A concern that I have around this is a type of 'Surveillance-fatigue' setting in, as well as a kind of 'Overton Window' effect, where the degree of tolerated surveillance is just so extreme, that most people will not want to cope with it and settle for something... easier.

In an analogous situation to 9/11, where having to deal with the Deep State or transnational 'Meta Groups' or Mossad and the ISI working together is just too much of a mindfuck... perhaps that is where Senator Graham's putative 'Limited Hangout of the Saudis' could be so much easier to digest..

I also found this very worth reading; it adds weight to Sibel's points.
At the very least, the Greenwald / e-bay axis needs looking at...

http://ohtarzie.wordpress.com/2013/10/18/a-harbinger-of-journalism-saved/

A Harbinger of Journalism Saved
Posted on October 18, 2013 by Tarzie

The NSA Leaks spectacle continues through the Looking Glass of remaking compliance and profiteering as glamorously dangerous defiance, on its way to becoming the Obama ’08 of mass surveillance reform. It continually vindicates everything I write on this blog, while posing no credible threat to the Intelligence Community and its corporate satellites.

And what of those corporate satellites, anyway, many of which are situated in Silicon Valley, where the new patron of improved journalism, Pierre Omidyar, made his $8.5 billion fortune? Does it matter there is but a half-degree of separation between Omidyar and, say, Palantir, the company that aims to be the super-sophisticated Google of the surveillance apparatus, and which at one time co-conspired against Glenn Greenwald, Omidyar’s new partner in rescuing journalism? What does it mean that the Omidyar Network and the CIA’s investment arm, In-Q-Tel (which started Palantir) have investments in common?

What does it mean that new hire Greenwald sits on a trove of secrets that, if they still matter at all, must surely implicate many of Omidyar’s associates and friends, and whose upcoming book based on those secrets promises ”new revelations exposing the extraordinary cooperation of private industry”? Well perhaps Twitter, that most excellent human ant farm for students of power and status, has provided a hint of how this auspicious partnership between the savior of journalism and The 123rd Richest Person in the World might work.

Some people recently expressed concerns to Greenwald about his new partner, on grounds that Omidyar’s Ebay is the parent of PayPal, a company that froze Wikileaks’ account in 2010, under government pressure, for ‘activities that encourage, promote, facilitate or instruct others to engage in illegal activity.’

To which Greenwald replied,

“he wasnt running the company & i believe spoke out against it, but tell me which mefia [sic] company is ok to work with?”

This is stock Greenwald: the now habitual contempt for anyone asking a question of this kind; an ‘I believe’ which provides weasel room if it turns out what he’s saying is untrue; and an assertion that is technically true but largely meaningless for those who dig a little deeper, which Greenwald knows most people won’t do.

In actual fact, Omidyar was, as he remains, chair of Ebay at the time of the incident, so, no, not running PayPal, but certainly in a position to influence it. And yes, he did ‘speak out’ if by speaking out you mean taking to the pages of his little Honolulu paper under the auspices of his ‘editorial board’– wringing his hands a bit over government interference, while fully endorsing PayPal’s acquiescence to that interference, without even a court order having been issued. From the editorial:

The executives [of PayPal and other companies] have a fiduciary duty to do what’s best for their shareholders. And if they didn’t respond to government warnings, they very well could risk their own business being shut down.

As speaking out goes, this is the very bare, ass-covering, having-it-both-ways minimum, not least because the 123rd richest person in the world can get his largely symbolic hand-wringing published anywhere, and elected not to.

So what have we learned that might either feed or temper our hopes for the ‘momentous’ new journalism venture we breathlessly await alongside a book, a movie and maybe an HBO series:

1. When it truly mattered, Omidyar, for all his handwringing — as a board chair and advocate of company shareholders — sided with the State against what the State perceived as a threat.

2. Greenwald is showing the same loyalty to Omidyar he showed to the Guardian, a loyalty that endorsed every withheld document and every redaction, and too frequently manifests as evasion and sneering contempt for people asking questions. Here he is once again casting compliance as defiance, the alchemy he embodies lately.

3. Greenwald’s evasions on behalf of his new boss continue the trend of objectively distancing himself from the less mediated, genuinely disruptive whistleblowing Wikileaks symbolizes, a tendency that started when he and Snowden almost certainly lied about Snowden’s better-than-Manning meticulousness, and continues each time he invokes the ‘dumping’ straw man for various ends.

Sorry folks, but I don’t think this bodes well for the promised renaissance in afflicting the comfortable, but then I’ve never been persuaded to the revolutionary potential of either billionaires or self-serving liberal reformists. I do hope, however, that when Omidyar seeks access to Greenwald’s precious trove — as he no doubt will — Greenwald’s tendency to hoard at last intersects with the public good.

Whatever the case, viva the new journalism. It’s gonna change everything.

(A hat tip to Arthur Silber, who planted the seeds for this post)

UPDATE

I guess Glenn didn’t like this post. Here he is today (10/19/13), keeping it classy by hee-lariously replying to a parody account. My my — singling out obscure bloggers for abuse via sycophant-provided straw men. Anti-authoritarian heroes ain’t what they used to be. But having remade acquiescence as dissidence, he now reinvents anti-authoritarianism along similar lines. It’s fair to see this as a harbinger too. Imagine what Glenn can do with obscure radicals when he’s working for Omidyar. Fight the Brooklyn blogger power, Glenn! Free the Billionaires!

For the record, I still respect Scahill, who, from what I can tell, isn’t a liar, or a bully, does not claim to be saving journalism or toppling the government, does not grossly exaggerate his own risks, and probably would never stoop as low as Greenwald and his idiotic acolytes do now, though Glenn, in his peerlessly shitty way, clearly wishes to drag him in. This is how thin-skinned authoritarians behave when they’re out of arguments.

GG must be overjoyed to have finally found a Tarzie he can win an argument with.

[Hammer of Los]

...

Jack and Searcher nailed the points there.

It's a shame even fellow whistle blowers and truth tellers can't get along.

...

[Nordic]

Sibel isn't a writer. Greenwald is.

She writes anyway. Yes, she coulda/shoulda worked this over before hitting "send" but the content is what's important.

Here's one of the biggest points:

So, isn’t it amazing that an American mega publisher, a mainstream American publisher, is giving millions to publish a book that will reveal US government classified material? I can tell you from experience and with one hundred percent certainty: the publisher has the government’s consent. How does that bear with the claims that this checkbook reporter is under arrest and even death threats by the U.S. government? Let me tell you something: it does not. What it tells you is this: A Dog & Pony Show put on by the U.S. government and its agents. The checkbook wanna-be reporter is also securing a million dollar movie deal with Hollywood.
You had to know this was coming. There’s a bidding war heating up between Hollywood studios over the rights to bring Glenn Greenwald’s forthcoming tell-all book about the Edward Snowden affair to the big screen.

Also, if Greenwald is indeed demanding huge sums of money for interviews, when he's sitting on the truth that would benefit, well, HUMANITY, that seems a bit sleazy to me, too.

I've always adored Greenwald. His writing is awesome, and he covers stuff that nobody else will touch. But she is making some really good points here about his motivations and his integrity.

Can you really be a whore for the truth?

That's the question.

[Wombaticus Rex]

Sibel isn't a writer. Greenwald is.

Ed Zachary, I think that is really all that dulled the edges of this essay; as others have noted, it is a rant, repetitive, discursive and angry.

That anger, however, is both understandable and objectively justified.

[stillrobertpaulsen]

I hate this shit.

Just a first impression, I've only read the first several paragraphs so I'll be giving a more informed opinion later. But you know what this reminds me of? Remember about ten years ago, Daniel Hopsicker raggin on Michael Ruppert around the time Crossing the Rubicon was getting published? That's what this feels like again.

I'm sure most of you have red what great love and respect I have for Sibel Edmonds, but I don't like what I see here. I'm a big fan of Daniel Hopsicker too, but I felt implying Ruppert was a sell-out was kind of beneath him. Same thing with Edmonds and Greenwald. It just reeks of a holier-than-thou purity test. She's made the same veiled implication earlier this year toward Valerie Plame; as though having a Hollywood movie made about you is instant proof that your credibility is compromised. Maybe I'll feel differently after reading the whole article and comment replies, but this is giving me a terrible vibe. The sour grapes vibe.

[bks]

We needed this thread, thought I thought it would get started by WRex over the spat Mark Ames and Greenwald are involved in. Key links below, but let's get it all out right here:

https://www.nsfwcorp.com/dispatch/extra ... e-omidyar/

http://pando.com/2013/11/27/keeping-secrets/ (do not miss comments)

http://pando.com/2013/12/01/the-privati ... -responds/

[Wombaticus Rex]

I hate this shit.

...

It just reeks of a holier-than-thou purity test.

Agreed.

A big part of why I don't relay Mark Ames beef -- I think giving a fuck is a tactical mistake, and I do plan on dying at some point, so that informs the priorities of my information diet.

Motherfuckers always have the same argument, you know?

I prefer to pass sweeping judgments in scorched earth terminology because it makes for less engagement and more time to read.

[Nordic]

Today she takes it a step further. If what she's saying is true, she's got good reason to post angry rants:

http://www.boilingfrogspost.com/2013/12 ... documents/

BFP Breaking News- Omidyar’s PayPal Corporation Said To Be Implicated in Withheld NSA Documents

SIBEL EDMONDS | DECEMBER 11, 2013 9 COMMENTS

The U.S. Government, An Implicated Billionaire, Fortune-Seeking Journalists & A Public in the Dark

The 50,000-pages of documents obtained by NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden contain extensive documentation of PayPal Corporation’s partnership and cooperation with the National Security Agency (NSA), according to three NSA veterans. To date, no information has been released as to the extent of the working relationship and cooperation between the two entities- NSA and PayPal Corporation. What’s more, the billionaire owner of PayPal Corporation has entered into a $250 Million business partnership with two journalists-Glenn Greenwald and Laura Poitras, a journalist duo who possess the entire cache of evidence provided by Edward Snowden. Despite earlier pledges by the journalists in question, only one percent (1%) of Snowden’s documents has been released.

BFP was recently contacted by a retired NSA official who claims that the documents obtained by NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden contain extensive documentation pertaining to NSA’s partnership with major U.S. financial institutions, including credit card companies and PayPal Corporation. The official, who requested anonymity, also alleges that a deal was made in early June, 2013 between the journalists involved in this recent NSA scandal and U.S. government officials, which was then sealed by secrecy and nondisclosure agreements by all parties involved.

Upon receiving this report BFP contacted three other high-level former NSA officials for additional information and comments.

On December 11, 2013 we contacted Mr. William Binney, a former top official at the National Security Agency (NSA), and asked him to comment on the legitimacy of the above report, and whether he had any knowledge of the partnership and cooperation between NSA and financial institutions such as PayPal. He confirmed the legitimacy of the report and added:

The NSA has had the cooperation of major financial institutions, including credit card companies, to obtain all financial transactions of these companies’ clients-international and domestic. Further, the NSA not only obtains and stores the financial data of Americans and foreigners, but it also shares them with other government agencies such as the FBI and DEA.

When asked about the apparent conflict of interest and controversy involving the new business venture between the journalists in question and PayPal’s billionaire owner Pierre Omidyar, he had the following statement:

Sunlight, transparency, is the only cure; the only way to bring about needed changes. This is why the public is entitled to have all the evidence and documents. The partnership with PayPal’s owner, thus, the new ownership of Mr. Snowden’s documents by an individual who is implicated in these documents, presents grave concerns and consequences, and a major conflict of interest for transparency, integrity and whistleblowers.

Russell Tice, a former NSA Intelligence Analyst and Capabilities Operations Officer, also confirmed the report, and stated that based on his knowledge, NSA regularly obtains financial information from major financial institutions, including credit card companies and PayPal. In January 2009, during an interview with Keith Olberman, he stated that information from credit card records and other financial transaction was being collected and stored by NSA (See the interview here).

On December 10, 2013, in an exclusive interview with BFP, Mr. Tice expanded upon the NSA-Financial Institutions collusion:

For NSA, information from financial institutions such as PayPal is equally if not more valuable and sought after than that obtained from social media and other software companies such as Facebook, Microsoft and Google.” He added, “I wouldn’t doubt the existence of evidence and documents implicating corporations such as PayPal within the large cache obtained by Edward Snowden. The partnership and data collection arrangements have existed for many years.”

When asked about his opinion on Glenn Greenwald’s new $250 Million venture partnership with PayPal Corporation’s billionaire owner Pierre Omidyar, multi-million dollar book and movie deals, and recent unexplained immunity from the U.S. government, he stated the following:

“I would be outraged and highly vocal if I were in Edward Snowden’s shoes. For a journalist whom I had placed my trust in to go and withhold documents meant for the public?! For the journalist to make fortune and fame based on my sacrifices and disclosure?! Forming a lucrative business partnership with entities who have direct conflicts of interest?! No. That wouldn’t have been acceptable.”

Despite our submitted requests for confirmation, denial or comments, PayPal has refrained from responding to this report and contained allegations.

Other whistleblowers from the intelligence community have also expressed grave concerns over the serious implications of the recent venture partnership between journalist Glenn Greenwald and PayPal owner Pierre Omidyar. Indeed, the journalists in question have decided to hold back the release of the remaining 99% of the whistleblower’s documents, and have been inconsistent and vague as to when and how much they intend to release further documents. Their decision to withhold the majority of the documents appears to coincide with their new $250 million business venture with PayPal’s Omidyar, and recent mega-bucks book and movie deals.
Crytome.Org’s John Young, whom we sought comments from for this news story, considers the claims by these former NSA insiders valid and legitimate:

Government access to financial transactions has always been top priority for all government agencies, worldwide. Nothing is more important to governments than where the money is, especially money for taxation required to avoid death-stake in the heart of governments. So it is consistent that NSA (and other spies) have access to all on- and off-line financial services providers. As you know, financial services are required to cooperate with their governments, perhaps second only to defense industries, perhaps first due to the need to track worldwide arms sales. Control of arms means control of wealth, and nothing is more appreciated by the few wealthy to offload arms cost to millions of taxpayers.

We asked Mr. Young how he viewed the implications of the same billionaire who is allegedly implicated in these documents, buying out the involved reporters (both of them) and getting ownership of the whistleblower’s leaked documents:

Billionaires are as obliged as financial services to cooperate with governments in order to protect their wealth and to guard against excessive taxation, expropriation, confiscation, prosecution, stigmatization and exclusion from government contracts. Cooperation with governments is essential for wealth accumulation, the greater the wealth the greater the cooperation… Whistleblowing on the whistleblowing industry is overdue, but that will take courage and ingenuity to avoid appearing to have been taken over by those expecting to avoid full disclosure.

Here is what WikiLeaks had to say about Pierre Omidyar and his PayPal Corporation’s war on whistleblowers:

“How can you take something seriously when the person behind this platform went along with the financial boycott against WikiLeaks?” Harrison was referring to the decision in December 2010 by PayPal, which is owned by eBay, to suspend WikiLeaks’ donation account and freeze its assets after pressure from the US government. The company’s boycott, combined with similar action taken by Visa and Mastercard, left WikiLeaks facing a funding crisis.

“His excuse is probably that there is nothing he could have done at the time,” Harrison continued. “Well, he is on the board of directors. He can’t shake off responsibility that easily. He didn’t even comment on it. He could have said something like: ‘we were forced to do this, but I am against it’.”

Whistleblower William Russell, who served with the NSA, U.S. Secret Service, and as an officer and transport pilot with the U.S. Marine Corps, had the following reaction to this exploitive PayPal-Journalist-Government collusion:

I completely agree with these whistleblowers. This is a major conflict of interest and highly convoluted. Omidyar has billions at stake if the details of his cooperation with government is ever exposed. So this guy pays $250 million and buys out the 2 journalists who have the entire cache?! Simply outrageous!”

Sibel Edmonds, the founder and director of National Whistleblowers Coalition (NSWBC) which represents over 150 government national security whistleblowers, states:

We have been told that these journalists have had over one hundred meetings with U.S. government officials in order to clear what “could be” or “could not be” released. That’s a fact, and it is highly disturbing. On one hand they say the government considers these documents and revelations highly classified and stolen property. Yet, we see a mainstream publisher offering millions of dollars to the journalist, and getting a ‘go ahead’ from the US government to publish it. We see a billionaire corporate man, never known for being pro civil liberties or Human Rights, and someone who is implicated in these illegal government activities paying off the journalists and getting ownership of the NSA documents. We see a government sanctioned Hollywood mega-million movie deal. We see lies, inconsistencies, contradictions, censorship, voluntary withholding, exploitation of a whistleblower … This smoke and mirrors filled fakery stinks to high heaven!

As stated by Guardian’s Rusbridger, who recently gave evidence to the British parliamentary committee about stories based on Snowden’s NSA leaks: Greenwald and the Guardian had consulted with government officials and intelligence agencies – including the FBI, GCHQ, the White House and the Cabinet Office – on more than 100 occasions before the publication of stories.

The enormous conflict of interest and ethical impropriety of PayPal owner Omidyar’s business venture with Glenn Greenwald, the journalist in possession of the documents, is not limited to PayPal being directly implicated in documents exposing NSA’s illegal activities and operations. There are other equally disturbing and outrageous facts that put in question the integrity of the journalists, including their sudden enormous gains, wealth, fame, and the apparent government’s consent.

There is documented evidence illustrating Pierre Omidyar’s historical attitude and position on publishers, reporters and whistleblowers who publicize incriminating government documents. Here is one, coming directly from billionaire Omidyar:



That’s right. The above twit was typed by Omidyar’s own fingers on July 16, 2009.

But please don’t be mistaken. Pierre Omidyar doesn’t only talk the talk. No sir, the man actually walks his talk. Slightly over a year after Omidyar made the above statement he engaged in the following action:

NEW YORK: US-based online payment service PayPal has decided to block financial transfers to WikiLeaks after governments around the world initiated legal action against the whistleblower website.

“PayPal has permanently restricted the account used by WikiLeaks due to a violation of the PayPal Acceptable Use Policy, which states that our payment service cannot be used for any activities that encourage, promote, facilitate or instruct others to engage in illegal activity,” PayPal said in statement released late Friday.

Wikileaks was not the only whistleblower entity to fall victim to PayPal’s war on government whistleblowers’. In 2011, two years after freezing Wikileaks’ account, Omidyar’s PayPal cut off the account for Bradley Manning Support:

Glyn Moody now points us to the news that PayPal has also decided to cut off the group “Courage to Resist,” which was handling funds for Bradley Manning’s defense effort. PayPal admits there’s no legal basis for this. Apparently, the company just doesn’t believe that some people should be allowed a fair trial.

The report also notes that they’ve had a PayPal account in good standing since 2006, with no problems at all. It’s only once they were taking funds for Bradley Manning that PayPal shut them down. This is somewhat horrifying, frankly, and raises serious questions about PayPal as a business worth trusting.

Then, yet another recent example of violations inflicted by PayPal, this time upon Mailpile. Mailpile attempted to create a webmail client that is built with both security and usability in mind to counter government’s intrusions into hosted webmail accounts:

PayPal, for reasons known only to PayPal, has decided to freeze their funds and won’t let Mailpile access the money that people donated… PayPal is demanding an insane level of detail into Mailpile’s personal finances and business… Even worse, it seems that the folks at PayPal recognize that it holds power over Mailpile, and seems almost to be lording that power over them…

The history of the billionaire’s stand and actions, when it comes to liberties, whistleblowers and freedom of the press, seems to be limited to: opposing, fighting and quashing government whistleblowers at every chance. Simply put, Mr. Omidyar has been consistently maintaining his stand as a billionaire who is pro-government, anti-government whistleblowers, and against transparency.

Omidyar’s pro government and anti-whistleblowers philosophy and principles are shared equally when it comes to his partners and close associates. Here is Mr. Omidyar’s PayPal Partner and close friend- Max Levchin, who says that the NSA isn’t being evil, and that the agency’s violation is for our own good and protection from terrorists:

The NSA is designed to protect us from terrorism, so even if it oversteps its bounds, PayPal co-founder Max Levchin says we shouldn’t hate it. That’s diametrically opposed to the sentiment of many in the tech industry, including Michael Arrington who thinks the NSA’s spying doesn’t stop terrorism — it is terrorism.

“I think it’s ridiculous for a citizen of a country that view his government’s duty to protect me, protect all of us from evil, from harm, from terrorists, from foreign powers meaning ill — to classify a body of government that is designed to figure out what might hit us next and prevent it, throwing them into an evil bucket is just thoughtless.”

Let’s watch Pierre Omidyar’s PayPal partner and close friend in action, shall we?



PayPal Co-Founder Defends NSA Surveillance

This interview was conducted in the summer of 2013. This was right in the midst of the Edward Snowden and NSA Scandal. This is what Pierre Omidyar and his closest friend and PayPal partner believed then. And this is what they believe now. There has been no change either in Omidyar’s or his partner’s position and belief since. There has been zero indication of either of them seeing the light called civil liberties.
PayPal co-founder Max Levchin is not the only PayPal man who is pro-NSA illegal surveillance and corporate-government partnerships in targeting the population at large. Here are other PayPal Men and former partners who have been directly linked to government spying and surveillance operations, and of course, the CIA:

Palantir Technologies, a Silicon Valley firm, is, according to the tipster, providing the technology that enables the mass-surveillance NSA project known as PRISM.

Palantir (which, at time of writing, had not responded to requests for comment) was founded in 2004 by, among others, venture capitalist Peter Thiel and CEO Alex Karp. It’s a sort of second-party data intelligence company–it’s not a public company, but it was founded with early investment from the CIA and is heavily used by the military and the White House. Karp is an ex-PayPal guy, and leveraged his expertise in security he gained at PayPal (which was constantly fighting off hackers) into his new venture.

Here is more on this CIA Company and its originators, all from PayPal’s early days:

Palantir’s advisors include Condoleezza Rice and former CIA director George Tenet, who says in an interview that “I wish we had a tool of its power” before 9/11. General David Petraeus, the most recent former CIA chief, describes Palantir to FORBES as “a better mousetrap when a better mousetrap was needed” …

We must not forget PayPal’s position and its actual business goals. PayPal is an international e-commerce business allowing payments and money transfers to be made through the Internet. It operates in 190 markets and manages more than 232 million accounts, more than 100 million of them active. PayPal allows customers to send, receive, and hold funds in 26 currencies worldwide. It is subject to the US economic sanction list and subject to other rules and interventions required by US laws or the government. All that, and the fact that PayPal has always been a valuable asset and partner of the U.S. government, even when it comes to operations directed against the people’s rights and privacy.

Remember, NSA wants access to our data. All data. Based on the latest revelations we already know that:

“Companies like Google, Facebook, Apple, Microsoft — they all get together with the NSA and provide the NSA with direct access to the backends to all of the systems you use to communicate, to store your data, to put things in the cloud, and even just to send birthday wishes and keep a record of your life. And they give the NSA direct access that they don’t need to oversee, so they can’t be held liable for it.”

So far, Greenwald and the rest of the mainstream media have been emphasizing a handful of company names valuable to the NSA as great sources of data gathering on individuals – companies and organizations such as Facebook, Google, Apple, Yahoo and Microsoft. Now think about it, if NSA is that interested in garbage personal details we post on Facebook, how interested would it be in a far more telling database such as PayPal, where it can get all our expenditures, money transfers, payments and donations?

Prior to Snowden revelations we had NSA’s easy access to and control of telecommunication companies such as AT&T and Verizon. Recently, based on less than 1% of Snowden’s documents we became aware of NSA’s incestuous partnership with social media and software companies such as Facebook, Google, Microsoft and Apple.

We still don’t have access to 99% of Snowden’s NSA documents and revelations. Obviously the 50,000+ page documentations includes many other companies and organizations, including those in possession of the public’s financial transaction data. We are talking credit card companies and other related financial institutions. More importantly, we are talking about one of the world’s largest online money transfer entities, PayPal Corporation.

Thus, we all should be alarmed when we see that those implicated in the whistleblower’s documented evidence are now forming a multi-million dollar business venture with those in possession of that evidence. We all must question the unexplained changes in the U.S. government’s position on the ownership and publication of these documents. We must all be wary when we see how readily mainstream publishers and Hollywood studios are signing up to publicize these documents and the case with some unexplained immunity. We have to ask ourselves: what has changed? What gives? Only a few months ago there was all this talks about apprehension, jailing, hanging and droning of all parties involved. Only a few months ago the parties involved put on a magnificent show on how they were threatened, endangered, and were going to be persecuted and prosecuted. Then, suddenly, something changed. Something gave. Was it a secret deal struck between the government and the involved parties establishing immunity and support in return for something much more cynical and dark? Was it the involved parties using the cache as a blackmailing tool to secure a $250 million payoff? Was it a solemn oath to withhold and never release the ‘real’ deal in return for a glamorous life with Hollywood studio deals and multi-million dollar book contracts?

Which one is it? We have no way of knowing, since lips seem to have been sealed, and the release of the ‘real’ documents has been vaguely put on hold for years to come. On the other hand, thanks to some ‘real’ whistleblowers out there, we are getting some information putting this smoke and mirrors filled stage into perspective. Even if so far we have gotten to see only the tip of this convoluted and corrupted iceberg.
- See more at: http://www.boilingfrogspost.com/2013/12 ... mRW7l.dpuf

[Nordic]

Related to the last post:

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2013/12/ ... ngton.html

Is the NSA Blackmailing Its Overseers In Washington?

Are the Intelligence Committees Being Blackmailed?

During the Vietnam war, the NSA spied on two prominent politicians – Senators Frank Church and Howard Baker – as well as critics of government policy Muhammad Ali, Martin Luther King, and a Washington Post humorist.

A recently declassified history written by the NSA itself called the effort “disreputable if not outright illegal.”

The main whistleblower who revealed the Vietnam-era spying was Christopher H. Pyle. Pyle told Rob Kall of OpEdNews:

They targeted Sen. Frank Church and Sen. Howard Baker. It could mean they were trying to get information or dirt on senators involved in the Church committee and Watergate committee investigations respectively — either to learn something about their investigations or to discredit them.

***

We still need more information about what happened then. But more critically, we need more information about what’s happening now. These revelations raise the obvious question: If the NSA was targeting people like Sen. Frank Church, who were in a position to oversee the NSA — is that happening now? That is, are people like intelligence committee chairs Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Mich.) and other congressional leaders — who are supposed to be providing oversight themselves — compromised in some way by the NSA? If so, as seems quite certain from the recent Edward Snowden revelations, then how can they conduct genuine oversight of the NSA with their committees?”

***

If I were a member of congress, I would be terrified that NSA would do to them what J. Edgar Hoover did to members back during his time.

Sound paranoid?

Maybe. But remember:

The NSA has been tracking people’s porn in order to discredit them. The New York Times reports that this type of behavior has been going on for a long time: “J. Edgar Hoover compiled secret dossiers on the sexual peccadillos and private misbehavior of those he labeled as enemies — really dangerous people like … President John F. Kennedy, for example”.

A high-level NSA whistleblower says that the NSA is spying on – and blackmailing – top government officials and military officers, including Supreme Court Justices, high-ranked generals, Colin Powell and other State Department personnel, and many other top officials

Another very high-level NSA whistleblower – the head of the NSA’s global intelligence gathering operation – says that the NSA targeted CIA chief Petraeus

Blackmail of Congress members may be common

Postscript: Of course, there’s always the carrot.

Share this:

[Searcher08]

I hate this shit.

Just a first impression, I've only read the first several paragraphs so I'll be giving a more informed opinion later. But you know what this reminds me of? Remember about ten years ago, Daniel Hopsicker raggin on Michael Ruppert around the time Crossing the Rubicon was getting published? That's what this feels like again.

I'm sure most of you have red what great love and respect I have for Sibel Edmonds, but I don't like what I see here. I'm a big fan of Daniel Hopsicker too, but I felt implying Ruppert was a sell-out was kind of beneath him. Same thing with Edmonds and Greenwald. It just reeks of a holier-than-thou purity test. She's made the same veiled implication earlier this year toward Valerie Plame; as though having a Hollywood movie made about you is instant proof that your credibility is compromised. Maybe I'll feel differently after reading the whole article and comment replies, but this is giving me a terrible vibe. The sour grapes vibe.

Me too.
The Hopsicker mud-slinging was due to him having a notion that Ruppert was 'the man for the job' and that he should drop everything and behave like an on the ground gumshoe, which when combined with Hopsickers skills in diplomacy (ie zero) created really bad and useless conflict.

The genuine issues about the billionaire's neolib Network, with it's disastrous venture into micro-financing which truly fucked up so many poor Indians lives, getting covered in a shitstorm of nasty. Yuck.

UPDATE: The BFP post is actually pretty devastating...