whistleblowers: wikileaks, snowden i...

[Roger Sanchez]

Mislite Tucker Swansonu McNear Carlsonu, domazetu Swanson čikn sup carstva?

[Redoran]

On 30.10.2020. at 7:17, zorglub said:

Nisam pratio, jel' to nešto kao kauboj logika? Hajde da ne pričamo loše o our guy sve dok ne smenimo their guy?

 

Naravno, cela priča se svodi na: "Kako možeš da pišeš bilo šta neafirmativno o DNC dok Hilandar gori? Sad ćemo malo da ispitamo tvoje veze sa GRU."

 

Matt Taibbi je napisao odličan tekst povodom ovoga, vredi pročitati. Nekoliko citata;

 

Quote

 

The traditional method of controlling the press — as described by legendary independent journalists like I.F. Stone — was the quiet aside by the boss, “a little private talk” where a “hint that the reporter seems irresponsible, a little bit radical” would be dropped. Getting the message, and fearing for his or her job, the reporter would back off. Greenwald co-founded the Intercept with this exact scenario in mind, building a structure where “little private talks” with bosses would never happen, and there couldn’t be high-profile dismissals for ideological reasons.

 

What he didn’t guess at was that in some cases, free journalists will become more aggressive propagandists and suppressors of speech than the officials from whom they supposedly need to be protected. This Lord of the Flies effect is what happened with The Intercept.

 

In the Obama years, progressive journalists were infuriated by the disclosures of whistleblowers like Snowden and Chelsea Manning, and aimed their professional ire at the federal government for war crimes, drone assassination, and mass abuse of surveillance authority. The bugbears of the day were intelligence officials who ran these programs and deceived the public about them: people like CIA directors Hayden and Brennan, and Director of National Intelligence Clapper.

 

After 2016, however, these officials presented themselves as norms-defending heroes protecting America against the twin “existential” threats of Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin. Russia, just a few years ago described by Rachel Maddow as a harmless “gnat on the butt of an elephant,” was now reinvented as an all-powerful foe mounting an influence campaign of unprecedented reach, with everyone from Trump to the Green Party to blogs like Truthdig and Naked Capitalism, to Tulsi Gabbard, to Bernie Sanders.

 

A key part of this propaganda campaign was the continual insistence that any criticism of the Democratic Party was, in essence, aid and comfort to our Red Enemy. Would-be progressive journalists horrified by Donald Trump accepted this logic with enthusiasm. Over the course of four years they abandoned their traditional mistrust of the security state and became anxious to stamp out traitors to the cause and keep the news business clean of “Russian” misinformation that might help Donald Trump get re-elected.

 

 

 

Pošto Greenwald nije pristao da duva u ovu tikvu, dobio je tipičan progresivni^tm tretman:

 

Quote

 

When the New Yorker wrote an astonishingly vicious profile of Greenwald, describing his refusal to accept theories of Russian subversion as a pathology inspired by a difficult childhood and confusion over his sexuality, his nominal boss and co-worker, Reed, was happy to chime in about things Greenwald does that are “not helpful to the left.”

 

Greenwald couldn’t possibly just have a different opinion, or be insisting on seeing evidence before believing a collusion story that, by the way, turned out to be wrong. No - his ideas came from being sexually confused, misogynistic, racist, and financially desperate.

 

Or was it even worse? Glenn more than anyone got the treatment for crossing established narratives on Russia or Ukraine: he was accused of being a Russian stooge, even a literal spy. His favorite critics on that score have been those same old, once-disgraced neoconservatives, as well as officials in the Democratic hierarchy, and, of course, other reporters."

 

 

 

[Gandalf]

8 hours ago, Redoran said:

Naravno, cela priča se svodi na: "Kako možeš da pišeš bilo šta neafirmativno o DNC dok Hilandar gori? Sad ćemo malo da ispitamo tvoje veze sa GRU."

besmislica.

 

2016-e su svi redom izveštavali o njenim porukama i pretresali svakakve budalaštine u tim porukama. ispostavilo se da u svim tim porukama nije bilo ničega vrednog pažnje, ispalo je da je "skandal" bio to što je Hilari Klinton pisala i primala nekakvu e-poštu. pa su američki mediji ispali korisni idioti za svinju (i ruske službe). 

 

ovaj put, imamo nekakve poruke koje ponovo ne znače ama baš ništa. samo što se ovaj put niko ne bavi time da nekakve poruke postoje, a pro-Tramp i anti-anti-Tramp gmazovi kukaju jer američki novinari i mediji nisu dva puta naseli na istu fintu.

 

edit: Taibi i Grinvald nisu svinjini korisni idioti, već saputnici.

Edited November 2, 2020 by Gandalf

[Gandalf]

On 30.10.2020. at 23:59, Budja said:

Mislim, proslo je vreme kada sau WaPo y NYT smatrani za gigante novinarstva.

mislim, citirani članak u je izveštavanje o onome što se desilo i ko je šta rekao.

[TdEII]

Zašto bi bilo ko čitao izabrano prepričavanje šta je A rekao B i tumačenje šta su mislili kad su to rekli, ako može da pročita osobu A šta je rekao i kako je mislio kad je to napisao? Istovremeno i reči B, indirektno preko email-ova, za kompletnu sliku.

[Gandalf]

44 minutes ago, TdEII said:

Zašto bi bilo ko čitao izabrano prepričavanje šta je A rekao B i tumačenje šta su mislili kad su to rekli, ako može da pročita osobu A šta je rekao i kako je mislio kad je to napisao? Istovremeno i reči B, indirektno preko email-ova, za kompletnu sliku.

ako bih da saznam šta tvrdi uredništvo, ja ću pročitati šta oni kažu. ti ne moraš. 

 

The Intercept strongly countered those claims, with Editor in Chief Betsy Reed telling The Washington Post in an email that...

[TdEII]

Neravno da ne moram, mene samo zanimalo ako ima neko racionalno objašnjenje preferencije između evo npr. to što pominješ, datih Betsinih email-ova kod Glena (sa celom istorijom)* i Betsinih tvrdnji za novine da nije tako bilo šta je bilo pa je ona rekla to što je rekla. Ne vidim da ima, pa nema svrhe dalje.

 

*Mislim, da se ne lažemo, većina ljudi je do ovog skandala izjednačavala Glena i The Intercept i uredništvo je skupljalo priloge na račun njega. Čak i kada su se prodali e-bay-u i dalje je guran Glen kao ^TM. O integritetu Ridove i uredništva ne bih u detalje, dovoljno je čitanje njenih mejlova. I minimalno poznavanje načina govora i manipulacije. A, da, i elementarno poštenje prema sebi samom.

[Gandalf]

25 minutes ago, TdEII said:

Neravno da ne moram, mene samo zanimalo ako ima neko racionalno objašnjenje preferencije između evo npr. to što pominješ, datih Betsinih email-ova kod Glena (sa celom istorijom)* i Betsinih tvrdnji za novine da nije tako bilo šta je bilo pa je ona rekla to što je rekla.

npr. Taibi nekoga citira: The first hint of trouble came when Reed suggested that yes, it might be a story, if proven correct, but “even if it did represent something untoward about Biden,” that would “represent a tiny fraction of the sleaze and lies Trump and his cronies are oozing in every day.”

 

ovo pod navodnicima sam ukucao u Google. jedini sajtovi na kojima se mogu naći dati citati su oni koji prenose Taibijev tekst. pa pretpostavljam da Taibi tu citira ono što mu je Grinvald rekao u jednoj od epizoda Taibijevog podkasta (ne pada mi na pamet da proveravam tu pretpostavku). obzirom da je Grinvald gnjida i kao čovek i kao komunista, ja mu ne bih verovao na reč. zato bih da pročitam i ono što tvrdi uredništvo.

Edited November 2, 2020 by Gandalf

[TdEII]

Ja ne poznajem Glena lično, pa ne mogu da ocenjujem kakav je kao čovek i komunista. Ali vidim kako radi i meni je to dovoljno da izrazim sumnju u tvoju procenu njegovog karaktera. Koliko je to uopšte relevantno.

 

I ne znam zašto koristiš Google (in general , pa onda i in particular na temu) za prepričavanje kad lepo imaš email:

 

Response of Betsy Reed yesterday - Our intention in sending the memo was for you to revise the story for publication. However, it's clear from your response this morning that you are unwilling to engage in a productive editorial process on this article, as we had hoped.   It would be unfortunate and detrimental to The Intercept for this story to be published elsewhere.  I have to add that your comments about The Intercept and your colleagues are offensive and unacceptable. - Betsy

 

Ovo je negde na polovini teksta, memorandum je Peter Maass-ov potpisanog kao senior editor TI i dugačak je. Doduše, ipak nešto kraći  od Genovih poruka.

 

Mislim da bi u nastavku pričali jedan mimo drugog, nema smisla. Have a nice day!

[zorglub]

13 hours ago, Redoran said:

his nominal boss and co-worker, Reed, was happy to chime in about things Greenwald does that are “not helpful to the left.”

 

Dovoljno je i ovo. Jebeni idioti i njihovo shvatanje levice. Najkorisnije budale ovakvom poretku.

[Gojko & Stojko]

Edward Snowden Reconsidered

SaE

[Indy]

Ne može neoliberalnije.

[Weenie Pooh]

2 hours ago, Gandalf said:

npr. Taibi nekoga citira: The first hint of trouble came when Reed suggested that yes, it might be a story, if proven correct, but “even if it did represent something untoward about Biden,” that would “represent a tiny fraction of the sleaze and lies Trump and his cronies are oozing in every day.”

 

ovo pod navodnicima sam ukucao u Google. jedini sajtovi na kojima se mogu naći dati citati su oni koji prenose Taibijev tekst. pa pretpostavljam da Taibi tu citira ono što mu je Grinvald rekao u jednoj od epizoda Taibijevog podkasta (ne pada mi na pamet da proveravam tu pretpostavku). obzirom da je Grinvald gnjida i kao čovek i kao komunista, ja mu ne bih verovao na reč. zato bih da pročitam i ono što tvrdi uredništvo.

 

"Ja ukucao u Gugl, kaže Gugl nema ništa, dva puta ništa je ništa, crva nije ni bilo..."

 

 

Drugi pasus Betsinog blebetanja sadrži citat koji si tražio. Nema na čemu!

[Weenie Pooh]

1 hour ago, Indy said:

Ne može neoliberalnije.

 

Horseshoe theory mrsomuđenje. "Vidite, u podršci Snowdenu su se ujedinili far left i far right, libertarijanci i autoritarijanci  Dakle jasno je da iza svega stoje Sovjeti. Da li ste znali da da Duck Duck Go ima kao jednog od partnera ruski Yandex? Ne budimo šmitovski #svejetoisto belolistićari!"

 

Quote

If there’s one thing Greenwald, Assange, and their followers got right, it’s that the United States became a tremendous economic and military power over the last seven decades. When it blunders in its foreign or domestic policy, the US has the capacity to do swift and unparalleled damage. The question then is whether this awesome power is better wielded by a liberal-democratic state in an arguably hypocritical way but with some restraint, or by an authoritarian one in a nakedly avowed way and with no restraint. 

 

Uvek ta ista idiotska dilema. "Hoćete ovako ili hoćete još gore?"

[Gandalf]

22 minutes ago, Weenie Pooh said:

Drugi pasus Betsinog blebetanja sadrži citat koji si tražio. Nema na čemu!

mislio sam da Grinvald tu nešto izvrće. ne izvrće sam citat, ali se citira van konteksta.  gnjida.

 

hvala.

Edited November 2, 2020 by Gandalf