Tuesday, November 25, 2015
Up at 4:30, wrote until 8, then got ready for work. Worked from 9-12, revising my response to Jeff. I sent it out later in the afternoon. My response ended up being 5800 words long. Crazy, but necessary. Here are a few excerpts:
"When Poitras filmed Snowden in Hong Kong, Snowden anticipated what our government would do once he outed himself as the NSA whistleblower responsible for the Verizon surveillance leak. He knew the government would demonize him and focus the story squarely on him as the villain instead of the illegal activities and lies he exposed. It’s all there on film as it’s happening. He knew exactly what the consequences of his actions were, but he threw away his life anyway, because he couldn’t continue seeing democracy “flushed down the toilet,” knowing what the NSA was doing in secret with no oversight whatsoever. In all your emails on Snowden and his revelations, you haven’t mentioned a single detail Snowden exposed that goes beyond the tepid, lackluster examples you provide (emails and phone metadata is perhaps the worst thing you’ve mentioned). For example, you haven’t mentioned any of the really juicy capabilities he shared, such as the NSA’s ability to access any electronic device anywhere in the world and turn it into a microphone or a camera -- essentially a bug -- even when that device is turned off! Was that a “Casablanca” moment for you, hearing that detail, or did you already know that? Personally, I had no idea that capability existed (and it goes without saying that the NSA doesn’t need a court order to bug anyone it wants...just ask Merkel). If you haven’t seen Citizen Four (or read No Place To Hide), then your perspective is fundamentally limited by a narrative of Edward Snowden the NSA and US Government want so badly for you to believe...
"...Have you already forgotten how your government totally played you back in 2003? Our government is not interested in the truth (no government is). It's interested in controlling the story, maintaining its illusions and ideals, and distracting the masses away from reality and onto a villain (Saddam Hussein, Edward Snowden, etc.). Our entire U.S. history is full of examples where the government's narrative of the truth and the actual truth are at odds with each other. Since 9/11, we've had many examples. Our invasion of Iraq was based on the undeniable U.S. narrative (“absolute certainty,” according to Dick Cheney) that Saddam Hussein had or was building weapons of mass destruction. That turned out to be false. Remember the government narratives of Pat Tillman and Jessica Lynch? Even in the Obama era, we have this breathtaking, larger-than-life government narrative courtesy of Hollywood’s “Zero Dark Thirty” and the CIA’s infamous “enhanced interrogation” techniques, presenting us with the “official” version of the Osama bin Laden raid. Did you read Seymour Hersh’s 10,000-word piece in the London Review of Books back in May, 2015, saying in effect that the entire “official” bin Laden raid narrative was a bogus lie, a “story that stunk from day 1?” http://www.lrb.co.uk/v37/n10/seymour-m-hersh/the-killing-of-osama-bin-laden (The NY Times came out with a piece on Oct. 15 speaking to Hirsch's version of the truth versus the Government's version of the truth (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/18/magazine/what-do-we-really-know-about-osama-bin-ladens-death.html) ....gee, I wonder whose version will withstand the test of time. I’m still waiting for the government to prove Hersh wrong, but so far no such luck)...
"...The guy who pushed the NSA to collect “everything” was former NSA Director Keith B. Alexander. According to the book “Evil Genes: Why Rome Fell, Hitler Rose, Enron Failed, and My Sister Stole My Mother’s Boyfriend,” by Barbara Oakley, one out of every 23 people are Machiavellian personality types, or sociopaths. I can’t prove it, but I bet Alexander is a total sociopath. He fits the profile, not Snowden, but listening to Alexander talk, you’d think he was the nicest guy in the world while Snowden is the sociopath. The one detail that’s worth remembering about sociopaths is how incredibly charming they are (and deceitful)...
"...Your odds of being killed in a terrorist attack are 1 in 20 million, according to Richard Barrett – coordinator of the United Nations al Qaeda/Taliban Monitoring Team (2007-2011 stats). Of course, these are pre-ISIS numbers, so today it may actually be more like 1 in 15 million. I’ve never known you to give up so much in exchange for so little. You are 33,000 times more likely to die from cancer than ISIS. I understand your fears; however, they are wildly, wildly out of proportion to reality. And yet, you’re willing to cede your 1st and 4th amendment rights to this notion that the NSA is going to guarantee your protection against a terrorist. Wow. No, really...WOW!...
"...Privacy matters. It matters a great deal. I don’t want the details of people’s lives being used against them unfairly and inappropriately (like Laura Poitras). You haven’t convinced me at all that I shouldn’t worry about this. History suggests I should worry about this constantly, just as you worry about ISIS harming you. They’re both real and legitimate threats. Finding the right balance to accommodate both is a worthy goal. Snowden offered up his freedom and comfortable way of life to correct that balance. I find his sacrifice heroic. I find his demeanor and motives sincere. I find him credible. I’m perfectly willing to change my mind on Snowden with actual evidence that deems him a traitor who handed over US secrets to other governments (instead of someone exposing the truth to journalists), but if you’re the person to do that, you need to analyze and critique the full, authentic, actual story so much better than you have. And that means putting away the government narrative and NSA talking points intent on demonizing and destroying Snowden’s motivations and character. Until you do that, your perspective on Snowden rings hollow."
It allows feels good supporting Luke Skywalker personalities against the Death Star.
Up at 4:30, wrote until 8, then got ready for work. Worked from 9-12, revising my response to Jeff. I sent it out later in the afternoon. My response ended up being 5800 words long. Crazy, but necessary. Here are a few excerpts:
"When Poitras filmed Snowden in Hong Kong, Snowden anticipated what our government would do once he outed himself as the NSA whistleblower responsible for the Verizon surveillance leak. He knew the government would demonize him and focus the story squarely on him as the villain instead of the illegal activities and lies he exposed. It’s all there on film as it’s happening. He knew exactly what the consequences of his actions were, but he threw away his life anyway, because he couldn’t continue seeing democracy “flushed down the toilet,” knowing what the NSA was doing in secret with no oversight whatsoever. In all your emails on Snowden and his revelations, you haven’t mentioned a single detail Snowden exposed that goes beyond the tepid, lackluster examples you provide (emails and phone metadata is perhaps the worst thing you’ve mentioned). For example, you haven’t mentioned any of the really juicy capabilities he shared, such as the NSA’s ability to access any electronic device anywhere in the world and turn it into a microphone or a camera -- essentially a bug -- even when that device is turned off! Was that a “Casablanca” moment for you, hearing that detail, or did you already know that? Personally, I had no idea that capability existed (and it goes without saying that the NSA doesn’t need a court order to bug anyone it wants...just ask Merkel). If you haven’t seen Citizen Four (or read No Place To Hide), then your perspective is fundamentally limited by a narrative of Edward Snowden the NSA and US Government want so badly for you to believe...
"...Have you already forgotten how your government totally played you back in 2003? Our government is not interested in the truth (no government is). It's interested in controlling the story, maintaining its illusions and ideals, and distracting the masses away from reality and onto a villain (Saddam Hussein, Edward Snowden, etc.). Our entire U.S. history is full of examples where the government's narrative of the truth and the actual truth are at odds with each other. Since 9/11, we've had many examples. Our invasion of Iraq was based on the undeniable U.S. narrative (“absolute certainty,” according to Dick Cheney) that Saddam Hussein had or was building weapons of mass destruction. That turned out to be false. Remember the government narratives of Pat Tillman and Jessica Lynch? Even in the Obama era, we have this breathtaking, larger-than-life government narrative courtesy of Hollywood’s “Zero Dark Thirty” and the CIA’s infamous “enhanced interrogation” techniques, presenting us with the “official” version of the Osama bin Laden raid. Did you read Seymour Hersh’s 10,000-word piece in the London Review of Books back in May, 2015, saying in effect that the entire “official” bin Laden raid narrative was a bogus lie, a “story that stunk from day 1?” http://www.lrb.co.uk/v37/n10/seymour-m-hersh/the-killing-of-osama-bin-laden (The NY Times came out with a piece on Oct. 15 speaking to Hirsch's version of the truth versus the Government's version of the truth (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/18/magazine/what-do-we-really-know-about-osama-bin-ladens-death.html) ....gee, I wonder whose version will withstand the test of time. I’m still waiting for the government to prove Hersh wrong, but so far no such luck)...
"...The guy who pushed the NSA to collect “everything” was former NSA Director Keith B. Alexander. According to the book “Evil Genes: Why Rome Fell, Hitler Rose, Enron Failed, and My Sister Stole My Mother’s Boyfriend,” by Barbara Oakley, one out of every 23 people are Machiavellian personality types, or sociopaths. I can’t prove it, but I bet Alexander is a total sociopath. He fits the profile, not Snowden, but listening to Alexander talk, you’d think he was the nicest guy in the world while Snowden is the sociopath. The one detail that’s worth remembering about sociopaths is how incredibly charming they are (and deceitful)...
"...Your odds of being killed in a terrorist attack are 1 in 20 million, according to Richard Barrett – coordinator of the United Nations al Qaeda/Taliban Monitoring Team (2007-2011 stats). Of course, these are pre-ISIS numbers, so today it may actually be more like 1 in 15 million. I’ve never known you to give up so much in exchange for so little. You are 33,000 times more likely to die from cancer than ISIS. I understand your fears; however, they are wildly, wildly out of proportion to reality. And yet, you’re willing to cede your 1st and 4th amendment rights to this notion that the NSA is going to guarantee your protection against a terrorist. Wow. No, really...WOW!...
"...Privacy matters. It matters a great deal. I don’t want the details of people’s lives being used against them unfairly and inappropriately (like Laura Poitras). You haven’t convinced me at all that I shouldn’t worry about this. History suggests I should worry about this constantly, just as you worry about ISIS harming you. They’re both real and legitimate threats. Finding the right balance to accommodate both is a worthy goal. Snowden offered up his freedom and comfortable way of life to correct that balance. I find his sacrifice heroic. I find his demeanor and motives sincere. I find him credible. I’m perfectly willing to change my mind on Snowden with actual evidence that deems him a traitor who handed over US secrets to other governments (instead of someone exposing the truth to journalists), but if you’re the person to do that, you need to analyze and critique the full, authentic, actual story so much better than you have. And that means putting away the government narrative and NSA talking points intent on demonizing and destroying Snowden’s motivations and character. Until you do that, your perspective on Snowden rings hollow."
It allows feels good supporting Luke Skywalker personalities against the Death Star.
No comments:
Post a Comment