Video & Multimedia
Related: About this forumGlenn Greenwald Destroys MSNBC's Attempted Propaganda
Glenn Greenwald Destroys MSNBC's Attempted Propaganda
Guardian reporter Glenn Greenwald, who broke the stories on the NSA's phone and internet surveillance programs last week and helped reveal on Sunday the identity of Edward Snowden, the former CIA employee who is behind the NSA leaks, speaks with Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski about his interviews with Snowden.
still_one
(92,489 posts)More revelations in the coming weeks. Oh boy, this might be a series like game of thrones, or dexter
So anything mr. Greenwald doesn't like to hear is propaganda
Grassy Knoll
(10,118 posts)Mika Kicked his ass, and Greenwald talked in circles.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)openness. Pres Obama has prosecuted more than two times the whistle-blowers of all previous presidents. But you dont care about violations of our Constitution you want us to hate Mr. Greenwald.
Grassy Knoll
(10,118 posts)grantcart
(53,061 posts)For the record Mika is a Democrat and Greenwald does not consider himself either a liberal or a Democrat.
Mika for example:
Mika Brzezinski is no poker face, regularly letting her feelings show as she reacts to the stories of the day. But when it comes to emoting, the Morning Joe co-host outdid herself today, reacting to the criticism the panel leveled at Jimmy Carter for his ungracious bashing of the late Ted Kennedy.
In a 60 Minutes interview with Lesley Stahl, a clip from which Morning Joe aired, an embittered Carter flatly says the failure to get national health care during his administration was Ted Kennedy's "fault." Carter accused Kennedy of "deliberately blocking" Carter's proposed legislation, in order to deny him a major legislative achievement.
Mika, daughter of Carter's National Security Adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski, has a history of defending Carter on the show. Check the video as Mika grimaces in discomfort, and interjects various rebuttals, as her fellow panelists unload on the 39th president.
Read more: http://newsbusters.org/people/mika-brzezinski?page=6#ixzz2W1TeDvcW
Greenwald for example:
http://web.archive.org/web/20070927000806/http://www.workingforchange.com/webgraphics/HowWouldAPatriot_preface.pdf
I held views on some matters that could be defined as conservative, views on others that seemed liberal. But I firmly
believed that our democratic system of government was sufficiently insulated from any real abuse, by our Constitution and by the checks and balances afforded by having three separate but equal branches of government.
. . .
I believed that Islamic extremism posed a serious threat to the country, and I wanted an aggressive response from our government. I was ready to stand behind President Bush and I wanted him to exact vengeance on the perpetrators and find ways to decrease the likelihood of future attacks. During the following two weeks, my confidence in the Bush administration grew as the
president gave a series of serious, substantive, coherent, and eloquent speeches that struck the right balance between aggression and restraint. And I was fully supportive of both the presidents ultimatum to the Taliban and the subsequent invasion of Afghanistan when our demands were not met. Well into 2002, the presidents approval ratings remained in the high 60 percent range, or even above 70 percent, and I was among those who strongly approved of his performance.
. . .
(regarding Bush's invasion of Iraq) I still gave the administration the benefit of the doubt. I believed then that the president was entitled to have his national security judgment deferred to, and to the extent that I was able to develop a definitive view, I accepted
his judgment that American security really would be enhanced by the invasion of this sovereign country.
Greenwald does display a clear hatred of the President and an affection for Ron Paul and for many the former is all you need to be an outstanding liberal and the latter is conveniently forgotten.
In any case Greenwald goes to some lengths to explain that he is not a liberal and this is one time I think we should take him at his word.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)She was desperately trying to push an agenda and visibly not happy when she couldnt get him to say what she wanted. She turned to help from that nitwit that could only say that the terrorists make us spy.
Mika tried to equate Snowden with Manning. When Mr. Greenwald pointed out that the criticism of Manning was that he flooded the media with data without knowing the damage it might do. Greenwald tried to point out that Snowden and journalists carefully review the data released and didnt release any data that might be damaging to the nation or operatives. Mika kept trying to interrupt this explanation as it clearly didnt fit her agenda.
grantcart
(53,061 posts)have found him prone to cherry pick his facts so I prefer to read exactly what he says.
In any case my point is that you castigated the poster for choosing a conservative over a liberal or a Republican over a Democrat and you felt that it "said a lot about the poster" that they would make that choice.
Now that you know that your facts are wrong and in fact you are the one that is choosing a libertarian Rand supporter who hates Obama over an established Democratic pundit (whose father served in the Carter administration) do you still feel that it "says a lot to the poster" or do you think it might be judicious to change your rather patronizing comment that was based on an assumption that you were 100% wrong on?
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)at "killing the messenger". She was rude and tried to direct his answers.
grantcart
(53,061 posts)Your words:
It says a lot about you that you choose to side with Mika a conservative over Mr. Greenwald
I am aware that many feel that hatred for Obama and criticism of national security seems like bona fides for a liberal but Greenwald, in the preface to his book, admits to warm and supportive feelings for President Bush up to and after the invasion of Iraq. He consistently praises Rand.
Your characterization of Greenwald as a liberal is not consistent with his own words where he says "some of my positions are conservative".
The issue is not Mika's treatment of Greenwald, which may or may not be true (but I find it odd that Greenwald, a well established litigation attorney graduating from the hard knock NYU law school would have difficulty with a television personality) but your patronizing comments to Grassy knoll and your expansive view of being able to judge that his/her comment "says a lot" about the poster indicating some type of deep moral disapprobation based on favoring a 'conservative' over a 'liberal' when in fact the reverse is true.
zeemike
(18,998 posts)that is why they must be shot.
Squealing on them when they are doing there crimes is proof of their arrogance and jerkiness
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)still_one
(92,489 posts)that isn't a distraction, and if people had made an issue of it when the patriot act was passed, or they turned out to vote this would not be an issue today.
Greenwald is another Chris Hitchinson, and the names that I apply to both of them is how I feel.
I also think Nader is another one who believes in his own importance beyond what it really is.
DaDeacon
(984 posts)whathehell
(29,100 posts)Many things were legal (child labor and poll taxes come to mind) before enlightened people made them illegal.
truedelphi
(32,324 posts)"Deep." I mean, this program is funding an awful lot of Mercedes and upscale homes and people who point out that "just because it's legal might not mean it's moral or desirable" need to realize how sad it would be if all those folks at Booz had to get real jobs.
whathehell
(29,100 posts)I don't know about the "deep" part (I assume you were being facetious) but you're right.
Just because something is "legal" in one country or another, at a given period of time, doesn't mean it's
morally correct, or that it will remain legal.
NorthCarolina
(11,197 posts)is the most troubling aspect. Is this America or China?
nineteen50
(1,187 posts)it was legal as if that makes it right and we should just forget that our privacy and fourth amendment is nothing but shite paper.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)you have the truth. Where did you learn the truth?
limpyhobbler
(8,244 posts)Lots of right wing tools inhabit Democrat web forums.
Catherina
(35,568 posts)for a good old-fashioned plonk
still_one
(92,489 posts)Whose tool are you, that you decide that you should personally insult me. I am not a public figure, nor do I make policy. I just have an opinion like you, but I do not go saying you are "someones tool"
You don't like my opinion, that is your choice, but I won't call you a tool.
limpyhobbler
(8,244 posts)Was talking about people trying to discredit Greenwald & Snowden with personal smears.
People who do that are right-wing tools.
I don't even know what you wrote.
railsback
(1,881 posts)That's so cute.
limpyhobbler
(8,244 posts)railsback
(1,881 posts)Wow. What a 'journalist'
LoL
MikeDE
(9 posts)This guy didn't destroy anything except his own reputation. Glen Greenwald is an out right asshole who if you look at his past reporting is never about the story just about protecting it or himself. This story has been around for years and your a moron or just wasn't paying attention that it was going on. The only people upset this now are Republicans who are only interested in damaging the president and Democrats who for what ever reason are upset that someone maybe reading or listening in or their thoughts about the reality show of the day. By the way before you attack me, I have voted democrat in every Election along with monetary doantions and volunteer work.
GeorgeGist
(25,326 posts)Enjoy your stay.
frylock
(34,825 posts)are shitting their pants. yep.
still_one
(92,489 posts)question is after 13 years why has one made an attempt to change the Patriot Act?
I can tell you right now, the current congress has no inclination to change, and the only way that will happen is electing people who will, but until a significant number of people with a common goal can organize, it isn't going to happen
Laelth
(32,017 posts)The enlightened amendments failed. You are right to say that, for the moment, Congress has no desire to amend the act, but with enough public pressure (both domestic and foreign) this could change very rapidly.
I hope the President chooses wisely, gets out in front of this issue, and sides with the people and the Constitution.
Here's why I think it would be wise for him to do so: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022979078
-Laelth
frylock
(34,825 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)Calling Mr. Greenwald names is not very open minded. It's childish and an attempt at distraction from the issue.
still_one
(92,489 posts)Because I can refer you to a lot of posts on DU, where Greenwald is not thought very highly of.
I don't agree with your litmus test
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)to add to the discussion.
The issue is what is our government doing spying on us?
still_one
(92,489 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)This isnt about Mr. Greenwald and calling him names is a pathetic way of trying to distract from the real issue.
Is our government spying on us? You seem to want to put your fingers in your ears, close your eyes and scream expletives at Mr. Greenwald.
If you favor a democracy then you should at least keep an open mind and when someone reports possible Constitutional violations, you should want it investigated in the open and straightened out one way or the other. Of course there is the other choice. To live in ignorant bliss as offered by authoritarian rule. It does make you life easier. Let Big Brother do your thinking.
"Fascism is painless, it takes on many changes..."
still_one
(92,489 posts)As far as regarding the NSA issues, by all means, it is way over due to being discussed, but greenwald is no hero to me, he is a publicity hound, and until he shows some real substance instead of what we have already known for years, he is just the little boy crying wolf
As far as constitutional violations, that is not a done deal either. I can almost guarantee that congress won't do squat about it, and I am a little dubious about the Supreme Court doing something about it since they have allowed the patriot act to stand
nineteen50
(1,187 posts)so lets forget it and kòu tóu to the power elite and just go back to our porridge. Could I have more please?
Douglas Carpenter
(20,226 posts)Laelth
(32,017 posts)-Laelth
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)Very impressive job.
navarth
(5,927 posts)and I am a bit dismayed to read people calling him a jerk. I've seen him speak a number of times and he's never been a jerk. Makes me wonder about the people calling him names.
WhoIsNumberNone
(7,875 posts)I assume that's also him shuffling papers and tapping his mic, too- But only while Greenwald is talking.
And don't even get me started on that "no way the Congress would have passed this in 2001" bullshit...