Some of Snowden's emphases seem to serve an intelligence/police state objective, rather than to challenge them.
a) He is super-organized, for a whistleblower, in terms of what candidates, the White House, the State Dept. et al call 'message discipline.' He insisted on publishing a power point in the newspapers that ran his initial revelations. I gather that he arranged for a talented filmmaker to shoot the Greenwald interview. These two steps - which are evidence of great media training, really 'PR 101' - are virtually never done (to my great distress) by other whistleblowers, or by progressive activists involved in breaking news, or by real courageous people who are under stress and getting the word out. They are always done, though, by high-level political surrogates.
b) In the Greenwald video interview, I was concerned about the way Snowden conveys his message. He is not struggling for words, or thinking hard, as even bright, articulate whistleblowers under stress will do. Rather he appears to be transmitting whole paragraphs smoothly, without stumbling. To me this reads as someone who has learned his talking points - again the way that political campaigns train surrogates to transmit talking points.
c) He keeps saying things like, "If you are a journalist and they think you are the transmission point of this info, they will certainly kill you." Or: "I fully expect to be prosecuted under the Espionage Act." He also keeps stressing what he will lose: his $200,000 salary, his girlfriend, his house in Hawaii. These are the kinds of messages that the police state would LIKE journalists to take away; a real whistleblower also does not put out potential legal penalties as options, and almost always by this point has a lawyer by his/her side who would PROHIBIT him/her from saying, 'come get me under the Espionage Act." Finally in my experience, real whistleblowers are completely focused on their act of public service and trying to manage the jeopardy to themselves and their loved ones; they don't tend ever to call attention to their own self-sacrifice. That is why they are heroes, among other reasons. But a police state would like us all to think about everything we would lose by standing up against it.
d) It is actually in the Police State's interest to let everyone know that everything you write or say everywhere is being surveilled, and that awful things happen to people who challenge this. Which is why I am not surprised that now he is on UK no-fly lists - I assume the end of this story is that we will all have a lesson in terrible things that happen to whistleblowers. That could be because he is a real guy who gets in trouble; but it would be as useful to the police state if he is a fake guy who gets in 'trouble.'
e) In stories that intelligence services are advancing (I would call the prostitutes-with-the-secret-service such a story), there are great sexy or sex-related mediagenic visuals that keep being dropped in, to keep media focus on the issue. That very pretty pole-dancing Facebooking girlfriend who appeared for, well, no reason in the media coverage...and who keeps leaking commentary, so her picture can be recycled in the press...really, she happens to pole-dance? Dan Ellsberg's wife was and is very beautiful and doubtless a good dancer but somehow she took a statelier role as his news story unfolded...
f) Snowden is in Hong Kong, which has close ties to the UK, which has done the US's bidding with other famous leakers such as Assange. So really there are MANY other countries that he would be less likely to be handed over from...
g) Media reports said he had vanished at one point to 'an undisclosed location' or 'a safe house.' Come on. There is no such thing. Unless you are with the one organization that can still get off the surveillance grid, because that org created it.
h) I was at dinner last night to celebrate the brave and heroic Michael Ratner of the Center for Constitutional Rights. Several of Assange's also brave and talented legal team were there, and I remembered them from when I had met with Assange. These attorneys are present at every moment when Assange meets the press - when I met with him off the record last Fall in the Ecuadoran embassy, his counsel was present the whole time, listening and stepping in when necessary.
Seeing these diligent attentive free-speech attorneys for another whisleblower reinforced my growing anxiety: WHERE IS SNOWDEN'S LAWYER as the world's media meet with him? A whistleblower talking to media has his/her counsel advising him/her at all times, if not actually being present at the interview, because anything he/she says can affect the legal danger the whistleblower may be in . It is very, very odd to me that a lawyer has not appeared, to my knowledge, to stand at Snowden's side and keep him from further jeopardy in interviews.
Again I hate to cast any skepticism on what seems to be a great story of a brave spy coming in from the cold in the service of American freedom. And I would never raise such questions in public if I had not been told by a very senior official in the intelligence world that indeed, there are some news stories that they create and drive - even in America (where propagandizing Americans is now legal). But do consider that in Eastern Germany, for instance, it was the fear of a machine of surveillance that people believed watched them at all times - rather than the machine itself - that drove compliance and passivity. From the standpoint of the police state and its interests - why have a giant Big Brother apparatus spying on us at all times - unless we know about it?
Reader Comments
Amerikagulag, yep I agree with you. It remains to be seen whether this is all a part of the game, especially with another component possibly coming into view soon [Link].
Why 'hate' (and/or hesitate at all to apply) skepticism?
What part of government or modern machine/robot/computer and war and spy culture can you still believe (trust) in?
I find none.
ZERO.
The glasses he's wearing are the give-away for me. People who wear that style are always suss.
Whether or not we should/shouldn't 'shoot the messenger', at least the message is out in public view now. That alone is valuable, and could potentially work to the greater good.
What upsets me, though, is I really REALLY wanted to send off a letter to my rep, Diane Feinstein, telling her how much I dislike the idea of the gov't having a database of all our activities available for anyone to potentially abuse for *any* twisted reason by anyone with access to it (or even hackers) beyond just trolling for terrorists...but then I realized if I did send such a letter - simply pointing out what the existence of that database could lead to and not even hinting on what I think about the terrorist stuff - I'd just get myself investigated and on their sh*t list. So much for democracy when I fear even being heard for raising a reasonable point because it might get me blacklisted
She seems to be having trouble with the fact that he is:
a) articulate and quite obviously intelligent
b) well organised and very well aware of the apparatus that he served or was in.
I mean, how dare he be those things!
Because, this, of course, negates or casts dispersions on his character which is odd. Because usually it is the "Powers That Be" or people he used to work for who do that.
"Curiouser and curiouser!" As Alice in Wonderland might have said....
Privacy isn't just a right, it's vital to Citizen Security.
But don't bother contacting the Red Queen of the Senate.
but perhaps not for the same reasons.
Noticeably absent from the conversation of late regarding this subject is the fact that it is ISRAELI companies doing most of the spying and turning the intelligence over to the NSA. Does than NOT create an even more mysterious scenario? While I laud the whistleblowers, I question, not only the timing, but the intentions as it could be an Israeli plany designed exclusively to embarrass Obama into acting on the Middle east, namely Syria. Israel is bent on creating their 'Greater Israel" and they want their lapdog Obama to 'go git 'em'. So far he's been reluctant, but as it turns out, he's decided to move sooner since this Big Brother story surfaced.
I'm appalled and incensed by the Israeli factor in all this spying. Truly the UIS government is serving a foreign power.
In the past, people have posted here on SOTT similar observations about Julian Assange/WikiLeaks.
Ralph Waldo Emerson
On Thursday, BBC promoted the view that - since NSA is looking at UK citizen's private communications - then UK law officials should be allowed the same privilege. There was nothing tentative about it. I believe it was asked as a leading question to a convenient 'expert' who validated the suggestion - end of story.
it is certainly possible/probable that this guy is a plant, but the arguments naomi klein advances don't really convince me.
This guy is not some dumbass Army private who found a toy (secret information) and decided to play with it. This guy spent 5 years planning this and thinking it through. Also, a HS drop out who can pull down 200 grand isn't a dumbass. He has to be pretty bright.
Things aren't always complicated and our govt isn't as smart and calculating as you think. They are typically brutish dumbasses. I know because I work with them every day.
But it really doesn't matter, as Crowley, of the CIA's COD, spoke of using such individuals to get out the message. Assange seems to have been a useful tool, and this guy could be much the same along the controlled 'leak' program. So much 'heat' on the NSA and so little, as usual, on the CIA. Perhaps a little in-fighting is what we are witnessing along with the usual 'free will' methodology of obtaining the public's permission through silent acceptance within the apathetic mindset. Wasn't Hitler quoted on this site the other day about the slow introduction/release of such means to do so?
He, like Assange, could be active or passive in their role and not even be aware of it, as Assange could have been better prepped to avoid the last London embassy move if the operation was actually planned, for if it was, that is rather pathetic, and again proves the point about lack of opposition.
But as has been mentioned, the whole 'free will' aspect in this situation fits all the others as the 'window' of opportunity approaches. They do seem to be playing it by the book as the script pages get turned, one by one.
Iran's gonna move some troops in like Hezbollah into the Syrian adventure, and the 'rug-pulling' plan seems to remain in play on all fronts. That creeping imperial mindset as it infects one part of the body at a time, spreading like an invasive species, so of course our 'friends' from the neo-Judah group would be involved, though their core program of elimination of the old or real group remains a priority. It seems all the eggs are being put in one basket. That reminds me of the Roman warcraft, which was fine as long as they were hardened, well experienced troops against a known enemy and not over-extended on the fringe.
How long before many of these people realize they are all being 'played'? And are therefore 'expendable' themselves? Maybe all those hollowpoints are intended for riotous sheeple, but members of their own who have served their purpose and are no longer of use.
Snowden's a plant in the way some are suggesting. Why risk having a conscious liar make mistakes that expose your hand when you can easily manipulate someone who really believes what they're saying?
For me the best point made by Wolf is in that last paragraph. The point here is to convince us that they see all and thus induce us to self-condition our behaviour towards greater compliance at a time when the world is coming apart at the seams.
I predict an Epic Fail!
There's an even more cynical motive behind letting us know about the extent of the surveillance grid. It's to demoralize us. They are saying, "Yes, we are monitoring your every activity, and there's not a flippin' thing that you can do about it! Neener neener neener!"
In other words, they want us to conclude that resistance is futile.
"Why have a giant Big Brother apparatus spying on us at all times - unless we know about it? "
"Of course, the whole point of having a doomsday machine is lost if you keep it a secret. Why didn't you tell the world, ehhh??!!!!" - Doctor Strangelove
He obviously didn't read the manual on how "real whistleblowers" are supposed to act. Really, though? I've thought about how I would respond if I had to blow the whistle on something and what he did isn't much different than how I'd have done it.
But I'm also a government shill and we are all watching you.
Hmmm, if you're not shi##in' (we wouldn't want the PTB control freaks - er, uh, I mean masters - , on account of lil ol' me, being so disgusted by my use of profanity, to feel compelled in breaking free for even a moment from their criminal scheming, raping, pillaging, killing, torturing, stealing, trafficking, etc., now, would we?) us, and you're a certified Machine (pathocratic/corporatocratic, hierarchical, energy-sucking, lie system) agent, then why would we even believe your comments (i.e., the subsequent contradiction/paradox inherent in your statements, as appropriately reflected in the classic, paradoxical statement 'This sentence is false.' If the statement is true, then the inherent value of the sentence, being proclaimed as false by the message embedded within the statement itself, transforms the whole ball of wax into, instead of a case of the "either/ors," a case of "both," which, depending on the frame of reference, is contradictory (self-referentially defeating, senseless, absurd) or paradoxical (both true and false at the same time, kind of begging for / invoking a meta-level frame of reference).
Regardless, the above is intended to portray how, if we believe you, then we must also, for those of us, which is, by now, most, if not all of us, in the 'right here and now' at SOTT, knowing the Machine is a system of lies (illusion, or fiction-fabricating and -projecting) simultaneously realize that, based on your being an agent (Mr Smith?), it is your duty to propagate the lies; thus, why would we believe anything you state in comments to us?
...and they needed a 3rd revision of the Pentagon Papers plot, so close to Assange's 2nd version of it.
It's really a perfect plan when the whistleblower is genuine and the message is 20+ years old. Well, actually you can start just after the first metropolitan telephone line was installed.
The plot of the lone whistleblower is that you need something emotional and a romance to reach a wider public.
Yeah, blurring the lines between "reality" and "fiction" seems to be one of the PTB's main obfuscating, 'smoke-and-mirrors' tactics, so much so that it seems to be one of their all-pervasive, inter-twined, strategic initiatives woven into the Matrix tapestry, and winding its way like a snake or a worm, all throughout, and at every conceivable level, even the nano level.
@theodocius:
The thing I like most about Jon Rappoport is that it doesn't seem he's trying to gain a step on everybody else. Though he thinks a lot and offers cogent analysis, he's not about outwitting or outthinking everybody else to make himself look smart.
He understands that that is what psychopaths do. (Btw: we're all or almost all, nearly hopelessly and totally under their influence and control, it is a dreadful situation today.)
Honest people offer themselves as help.
And I think he does.
In my opinion, honesty pays in ways that our current predatory money system NEVER will and NEVER can.
We have a very very very serious problem (with dishonesty and psychopathy).
Help!
ned
Ned, good day to you, and hope the weather and other conditions up in MN are kind, even if Monsanto, Syngenta, Dupont, etc., are not...
Okay, fair enough.
Just so you know, I've asked you some questions over here [Link], which are asked in order to throw light on some of the mind-messing occurring as of late.
Up to you, of course, if you wish to answer. Just trying to keep it above board so as to cast light on subjectivity.
Also, speaking of which, although I, too, have enjoyed some of Rappoport's material, there are so many who have become damaged by the system (subjectivity, lies, assumptions have a deleterious, fracturing effect on our consciousness). Consequently, information coming from those who have become damaged, may similarly be affected.
Maintaining vigilance, cross-correlating data sets, and networking are key components one can utilize to increase objectivity aimed for truth.
Personally, I take it as a red flag that Rappoport has a connection to Jeff Rense, who, in turn, within my current worldview, has been connected (continues to be?) to some individuals like Alex Jones (co-opted? plugged in from the start? damaged? all of the above?) and Jay Weidner (psychopathized? psychopathic?).
Wasn't completely sure what your perceptions were before, with a situation like this one concerning this [Link]fox cub, but since you just said, "Help!", you may be more inclined to helping.
There are some, however, who get their kicks in other ways: [Link]. If you are one of these, it may be good to know that the universe has, embedded within it, course correction instructions to balance things out.
"Knowledge protects, ignorance endangers!"
Regardless, we have some some big things going down right now: [Link].
Happy Pop's Day~
Remember: This guy has been thinking about this for along time. He is also a very disciplined person. The fact that he held this level of position in the NSA without even a High school Diploma is testament to his extreme intelligence level. I would venture to say he has rehearsed this move over and over for years in his head.
So let's cut him a little slack and watch what happens.
She raises some legitimate points but she fails to raise what might be the most important question and it leaves her open to the same question. Why doesn't either Edward Snowden, Glen Greenwald or many other media reporters including Naomi Wolf mention ECHELON? echelon was reported on 60 Minutes in 2000 so it should be well known to anyone that is well informed. This should be a very important question since it enables them to debate the subject as if the spy program was developed after 9/11 which is false ECHELON existed before 9/11 and it did all the things that Edward Snowden claimed and it was exposed before Snowden came out with it.
This should raise doubts about almost everyone involved in the reporting of this subject. Either they didn't do a very good job researching it or they intentionally ignored ECHELON.
Also many of the tactics that Naomi claims have been revealed to her through confidential sources have also been revealed in numerous books or articles that aren't confidential so if she did enough research she almost certainly could have cited them instead of relyi8ng on anonymous sources and her case would have been better.
He's a plant and simply by design, made to expose the length to which the government is watching everyone. Whether he's real or a plant remains to be seen.
My indicator is whether ANYTHING is done about this big brother apparatus. If not, then we'll know he's a plant. If the dubious named, "Patriot Act" is repealed or curtailed, then we'll know this is not a test.
It's not whether they 'catch' him or not but whether 'lawmakers' act on their feigned outrage.