Re: "NBC's Gregory: Why shouldn't Greenwald be charged?"
*
The insanely paranoid crowd is very loud today. Where do these people draw the line on government secrets? Would they have cheered the release of U.S. atomic secrets to German and Japanese media during WWII or Soviet media just after WWII? Where does all this hatred of Government come from? It's a kneejerk reaction nowadays among the Radical Right to assert that the Government is our enemy, not us, selected from among us by us. Where did all this hatred of society come from? It is shocking how many crazy, antisocial fanatics are loose on Internet message boards. I would really like the Government to investigate these people and see if they are up to any insurrectionary, treasonous activity apart from trying to rip society apart and put one group at another group's throat. Collect and trace IP addresses, then check to see if these people are armed and dangerous. Not every Internet loon is harmless. Some have bunkers and survivalist hoards of food and water, and multiple firearms with thousands of rounds of ammunition. I want Government to protect us from them. Get warrants and do it legally, but do it!
*
The laws upon which this surveillance program operates were passed under BUSH. There is nothing new here.
*
The paranoid, negative, racist people spewing nastiness here would be on the opposite side of the issue if a Republican President were doing the same thing — or even a WHITE Democratic President. Here they are siding with a guy who has fled to TWO Communist countries, when they have always stated their steadfast hostility to Communism! Their outrage is artificial, completely inconsistent with their supposed politics.
*
The Govt is NOT listening in on fone calls, just keeping track of who calls whom. Fone records are NOT the telefone subscriber's, but the telefone COMPANY'S. There is no legal expectation that a COMPANY will keep those records away from Government.
*
Whether Snowden worked for a private company contracted to provide services to Govt or for Govt directly makes no difference whatsoever. He had an absolute legal duty to keep secrets, secret.
*
Xx, do you really think that only private American citizens have received the info Snowden stole and released? Pay attention: the intended subjects of surveillance, for instance, Al-Qaeda, [are] paying very careful attention to this information, and altering their behavior to evade tracking. You may be naive, but the Govt of the U.S. must NOT be.
*
If you really believe that Soros owns, e.g., Fox News, you need to commit yourself to a mental institution. If you do NOT believe it, stop aggravating your betters with trolling.
*
Gregory asks questions. The Founding Fathers asked questions all the time. Stop being absurd.
*
That some people see Gregory as a Liberal and others as an apologist for Republican Conservatives suggests powerfully that he does NOT operate with bias.
*
In this story, two different journalists are on different sides of the same issue. How is that "the media" being "blinded by ideology"?
*
Douglas, all laws are passed with the consent of the people, because they are passed by elected REPRESENTATIVES of the people. Your suggestion that laws duly passed in accordance with the Constitution are not laws unless you approve of them is absurd. It takes members of Congress, both houses, full-time employment to figure out what proposed laws should say and would do. The people don't have the time to do that due diligence, and could not possibly vote directly on all the laws. You're talking arrant nonsense — and paranoid nonsense at that. Esp. paranoid is your suggestion that the U.S. tortures prisoners in U.S. prisons. Seek professional help. Zarquon, releasing government secrets is illegal no matter who does it. Would you have thought it fine for a reporter who got the plans for D-Day from the equal of Snowden in 1944 to publish those plans in German newspapers? Would anyone regard that as protected First Amendment activity? Stop being so naive.
*
Your suggestion that one cannot get different points of view from the hugely diverse media available to Americans by radio, TV, and Internet is indefensibly absurd. This very story was about two different points of view in ONE TV public-affairs show.
*
Seek professional help. Paranoia is treatable.
*
You fool no one. It is only the Radical Right that seeks to divide us, esp. along racial lines.
*
There is no right of media to expose classified information. Period.
*
Perhaps you don't understand WHO classifies information and who has the right to DE-classify it. The President (and, more broadly, the Administration operating under the President's control and with his approval) is the keeper of Govt secrets, and can declassify any it wishes at any time, for any reason.
*
And the responsible editors at the Times, along with Ellsberg, should have been executed. Had that been done, we would have a lot less trouble keeping secrets now.
*
And we all know why you don't like President Obama, that black man in the White House.
*
Gregory asks questions. That is not editorializing and not campaigning for any candidate. You just can't stand the rough-and-tumble of question-and-answer. Go away.
*
Idiotic trolling. Goebbels did NOT approve of media having independence and asking hard questions and permitting adamant answers contrary to the government line.
*
Samuel, your comment is nonsense, and everyone knows it. David Gregory asks questions. His guests answer. How is that being anyone's pawn? Be quiet.
*
You fool no one as to your bias, which is manifest from your use of the insulting Republican term "Democrat party".
*
Plainly neither you nor Jeff believes for an instant that the Govt tracks Internet activity or you wouldn't dare say that on the Internet!
*
I don't know what media you are watching, but very few videos from the BBC appear on the three major TV networks of the United States. You may be confused by the fact that these networks hire some people with disgusting British accents — which they should not — but those foreign reporters work directly for the U.S. network unless the particular story is identified as coming from another source.
*
I don't know who funded Snowden's flite, so the media have not done a very good job with this story.
*
What rights, Jeff? The right to plot to blow up Americans? The right to conspire to kill Americans? Be quiet.
*
Edward R. Murrow lived during WWII and the Cold War. NEVER did he expose Govt secrets. There, you have your answer.
*
Believe it or not, the Founding Fathers passed laws against espionage, and HANGED people for spying.
*
The media did not elect — and re-elect — that black man in the White House you have such problems with.
*
Are you suggesting that Tim Russert was all in favor of people entrusted with Govt secrets exposing them to the world, including Al-Qaeda? I reject that notion, and do not recall any incident in his history at MEET THE PRESS in which he in any way condoned espionage against the Govt of the United States.
*
You do not for an instant believe the Govt is reading these comments, or you wouldn't dare to say anything against the Govt. Res ipse loquitur.
*
We don't have military coups in the U.S., because the military, unlike some people, is loyal to the Constitution, and knows that it is NEVER authorized to oust a duly elected President. Do you REALLY trust the MILITARY to guard citizens' rights? Of COURSE NOT. So why do you post such nonsense?
*
What is that supposed to mean? You want a Nazi movement to displace the Govt of the U.S.? Or is that "Communist" Obama really a Nazi, the opposite of Communist? Make up your mind. And then be quiet.
*
Translation: President Obama is black, so could not possibly be the legitimate President of the United States. Shut up and go to Stormfront, where you belong.
*
Yes, the free, competitive press is all incompetent or in cahoots with the Govt. Sure, sure (backing away). See a shrink.
*
DW, you need professional help if you think Congress is not authorized to write legislation. Check yourself into a mental hospital, posthaste.
*
The second Greenwald reports on something you don't like, you will turn on a dime and condemn him.
*
And the Rosenbergs were patriots, right?
*
Since when is trying to interrupt terrorist plots "political spying"?
*
If Greenwald were doing the same thing under the Bush Administration, you would be on the other side. It is YOU who have no principles.
*
It's news because someone entrusted with Govt secrets violated that trust.
*
The Bush Administration was not just keeping track of fone records and email exchanges but arresting people and sending them to foreign countries to be tortured.
*
No, the NSA needs to abide by relevant laws. It is NOT a "villain" for doing what it is supposed to do and authorized by Congress — the people's representatives — to do.
*
So the Liberal media are spying on a Democratic Administration? What an interesting, nutso worldview you have.
*
David Gregory was in fact NOT charged during the Bush Administration, so what you say is nonsense.
*
I suspect that even knowingly receiving classified information is a violation of law.
*
The free press was commercial during the time of the Framers of the Constitution. But the Founders were not fools, and knew the difference between freedom and license.
*
That [David Gregory] was in fact NOT charged for his theatrics [in brandishing a loaded gun] shows that he did nothing wrong.
*
Congressional legislation cannot be illegal. Stop talking nonsense.
*
No one who uses the absurd term "sheeple" has any credibility with serious people.
*
Most of the ranting here is by Radical Rightists, paranoid about the Govt, which they regard as the enemy, not by Liberals at all.
*
Asking a question is not cheerleading.
*
Seek professional help. The sky is NOT falling, and NOT everybody is against us.
*
You hear only what you want to hear. Be quiet.
*
You're full of it. Gregory asks questions and listens respectfully to the answers. YOU are the one who is bringing unfairness into your LISTENING.
*
You have not been paying attention. News reports say that Snowden's revelations have helped Al-Qaeda and other enemies of the U.S. to evade surveillance.
*
Responsible, intelligent people do not smile upon espionage.
*
So you are indignant at Gregory's wanting to know how it could happen that the V.P. could shoot somebody in the face? Weird.
*
No, Snowden took an oath to protect secrets and violated it. He is guilty of espionage as well as a violation of his secrecy agreement.
*
You are not a judge — you can't even spell "amendment" — and actual judges have NOT found wrongdoing with the way the Govt is acting to interrupt terrorist plots. I'll trust the courts, not you.
*
Espionage is not journalism.
*
But there he is, host of MEET THE PRESS, and you? You are NOTHING in media (and probably in life).
*
Legitimate journalists operate according to a canon of ethics. You do not. And slander is not protected by the First Amendment, nor shield laws.
*
"Barely mention" this story? It has been the subject of HOURS and HOURS of news coverage.

---

"Analysis: For Obama, a world of Snowden troubles"

Dictatorships respond only to STRENGTH. Obama has got to impose CONSEQUENCES for Chinese and Russian defiance of U.S. interests. We should impose a 5% cut in Chinese access to the U.S. market for each offense against us. The people of China will literally be starving again — and willing to rise in another revolution, this time against the Communist regime — if we end this unintended foreign aid to a Communist government. Russia should be warned that we will resume encirclement of Russia by U.S. missile defenses, and remind Putin that we broke up the Soviet Union, so may very well be able to break up the Russian Federation. Would Putin like us to train, arm, and financially support separatists and terrorists in Chechnya, Dagestan, and elsewhere within Russia? Putin should be shaking in his boots at U.S. power, not sneering with contempt at Obama's weakness.

---

"Egypt's army says it's ready to save nation"

Why does this story write "Mohammed Morsi" when there is no O in the Arabic alphabet? That is why we are now supposed to write "Muslim", not "Moslem". If "Mohammed Morsi" is OK, let's just go back to "Moslem". If we have to write "Muslim", then we also have to write "Muhammed Mursi".

- posted by L. Craig Schoonmaker @ 12:18 AM