Monday, July 8, 2013

BREAKING: New Snowden Interview

The second part of an exclusive interview with Glenn Greenwald and Laura Poitras of former NSA contractor Edward Snowden is out: Here.

Although released today, the interview was recorded in Hong Kong on June 6, 2013.


  1. Does anyone find the melodramatic content of these videos to be off-putting? The first video had the opening shot of the docks with the low-screen movie style heading saying- Hong Kong. I was surprised it didn't have the randomly generating numbers that turn individually into title letters as seen in modern spy thrillers. The second video opens with the dramatic all caps SNOWDEN Interview part 2.
    I know this is a minor stylistic criticism but, it would be much more irrelevant if Snowden had revealed much in the way of new information. These videos are heavy on style and light on content, yet promoted like they are bombshell worthy.
    Come on....they are brief and vapid, the Sibel Edmonds and James Corbett (recent) interviews with whistle blower Russel Tice are far more revelatory without the flare.
    One more question I have for people here is, has anyone been reading Justin Raimondo's coverage of the Snowden affair? In one of the early articles he actually admitted to crying, when he saw the above mentioned vapid interview. Then, while I was re-reading his recent "Edward Snowden as a Symbol" (vulgar herofication, IMO) there appeared at the top of the page a pollster type embedded add with a picture of Snowden saying in big red and blue letter Hero or Traitor, Vote Here Now!

    Raimondo isn't the only one. (Wenzel, as per usual, hasn't jumped on the boobus hysteria, but retained cool-headed analysis), but unfortunately what I see is some sound libertarians abandoning critical thinking in order to have a Hero.

    1. Call me naive, I've always thought Snowden was legit.

      In that context I do think what he's done is heroic. I'll take the arrows and slings for it.

      I think the "drama" surrounding him is mainly due to the MSM coverage(unlike the other whistle blowers you mentioned).

      This "hysteria" as you point out correctly is because of the very fact that Boobus has been widely informed and there is always ratings to be had in that context by the MSM, which drives the hysteria further.

      Do I think the US gov't will find a way to use this to their advantage?

      Sure. Heck, the uproar over illegal NSA spying as now widely distributed to the masses information networks is a huge "victory" for them in that there are NOT and most likely never will be any concrete steps taken to stop it.

      That is the US govt victory party. They've acclimated Boobus to yet another abuse heaped on to the multitudes of others.

      Do I think they planned such an outcome, with Snowden as the patsy? Nope.

      That's doesn't mean I'm right though, it's just my conjecture.

      Only time and information from reliable sources will tell.

    2. I don't wish to throw anything at you.

      Personally I am withholding judgement as to whether or not he is legit, but like I said above he is at the very least light on any new revelations. The story has drama, international intrigue, what have you, and perhaps this is enough to account for the popularity of the story. It is also an opportunity from a pro-freedom propaganda point of view. All that is well and good, but then again when do big scandals in America get me with true reform (as in getting the State to STOP)? More often what happens is people become used to the scandal as the new normal. The public has been coniditioned to accept people thrown in jail for insane laws, torture, rendition, assassination, government drug running/prohibition, perpetual war for perpetual peace, etc (folks here know how the list goes). I do not claim one way or the other, but I believe it is at least possible that this is a psy-op against the American people, particularly the semi-alternative media (Anti-war?). Factor in the Ron Paul donation made by Snowden (or at least in his name)and it looks like a juicy worm for a libertarian fish.

      One more point: Booz Allen is "Bushed up," so to speak, at one level or another, no? (I am relying on EPJ for that bit) People familiar with the Bush crime family are aware of the time tested technique used by both Bushes of burring stories to allow honest reporters to dig them up. This gave the reporters satisfaction that they had truly uncovered something. A bite. To my mind Greenwald fits the profile perfectly. Works for an establishment paper, known for being independent, and as we can see he went all in on this story.


    3. I can see the possibility of the US govt knowing Snowden was going to "pop" and purposely let him do so.

      Obviously there's a track record of this type of behavior and even further the US govt letting their mark get "out of control", I'll grant that.

      I have a hard time given the interviews and what I know currently about Snowden in buying the notion that he is part of any gov't scheme knowingly.

      From that perspective I think he appears genuine and his actions heroic.

      The thing is, gov't is such a mix of incompetence and competence at times, extremes's hard to know if they were clueless on Snowden before hand or not.

      Either way I think you and I agree that in the big picture it probably doesn't matter much if Snowden is in league with them or not.

      Gov't has used this situation to paint itself as the victim and whistleblowers in general as "evil". They've created a national Stockholm syndrome among much of the populace and basically used this circumstance to cement further abuses on the sheeple.

    4. Fair enough brother man.

      Perhaps in time more of the story will surface.

      Wenzel rightly pointed out the significance of Snowden's remark about the U.S "turn key-tyranny." I think this and the high-level blackmail system are some of the most significant aspects of the surveillance state, but there is another key element as well.

      The idea of the Panopiticon has been tossed around lately (Raimondo, again). The point of the Panopiticon is to ensure we self-censor/self-police and spy on others. But such a system doesn't function unless the people are aware of it. It is from this key perspective that the system has to gain from widespread inculcation of the masses to the existence of the surveillance State. To my mind the next step is get people used to the idea of Americans being persecuted openly in the courts with "evidence" drawn from the surveillance system.

      Again, I am not saying because the State benefits from this that they have contrived the lot of it (I am also not totally discounting this possibility). If the guy is the real deal then hats off to him for quitting his job and I hope he that he isn't murdered or finding himself in a cell next to Bradley Manning.