search results matching tag: glenn greenwald
» channel: weather
go advanced with your query
Search took 0.003 seconds
Videos (76) | Sift Talk (1) | Blogs (13) | Comments (102) |
Videos (76) | Sift Talk (1) | Blogs (13) | Comments (102) |
Not yet a member? No problem!
Sign-up just takes a second.
Forgot your password?
Recover it now.
Already signed up?
Log in now.
Forgot your password?
Recover it now.
Not yet a member? No problem!
Sign-up just takes a second.
Remember your password?
Log in now.
criticalthud (Member Profile)
thanks back at ya =)
i'm a china analyst serving overseas for the state dept
and you?
In reply to this comment by criticalthud:
thanks. i like your style and your depth of inquiry/understanding.
what do you do?
In reply to this comment by Diogenes:
@<a rel="nofollow" href="http://videosift.com/member/criticalthud" title="member since February 15th, 2010" class="profilelink"><strong style="color:#008800">criticalthud
man, i honestly think it's a hopeless can of worms... and imho, i believe that the continued advance of technology means that even our best efforts in "regulation" or making "fair" the process of political advocacy... well, i think we're always going to be lagging behind
first off, to even discuss the matter we need to divorce ourselves from our partisan political leanings (conservative talk radio, liberal press, wingnut internet content)
next, we need to avoid where possible the all-too-convenient labels, such as "corporatism", as it's much too vague - better to just understand that "big money" will inevitably lead to undue influence peddling in our political process
we should also understand the types of regulations or statutes that were tried (and failed) in the past, i.e. fairness doctrine, equal-time rule, and even the implications of miami herald publishing co. v. tornillo
we also need to reach some kind of concensus on both relevant first amendment provisions, e.g. freedom of speech and and freedom of the press (the latter being a certain candidate for the "big money" moniker) - any tinkering we do here carries disturbing implications
and finally, what the heck are we to do with the internet, where both the speed and pervasiveness of political advocacy easily avails itself to abuse from "big money" - just try imagining how we'd regulate big money from filtering through pacs to banner ads, popups, blogs and web-hosting
all that said... dude, i feel lost as to where to even begin forming a coherent solution - sorry
Diogenes (Member Profile)
thanks. i like your style and your depth of inquiry/understanding.
what do you do?
In reply to this comment by Diogenes:
@<a rel="nofollow" href="http://videosift.com/member/criticalthud" title="member since February 15th, 2010" class="profilelink"><strong style="color:#008800">criticalthud
man, i honestly think it's a hopeless can of worms... and imho, i believe that the continued advance of technology means that even our best efforts in "regulation" or making "fair" the process of political advocacy... well, i think we're always going to be lagging behind
first off, to even discuss the matter we need to divorce ourselves from our partisan political leanings (conservative talk radio, liberal press, wingnut internet content)
next, we need to avoid where possible the all-too-convenient labels, such as "corporatism", as it's much too vague - better to just understand that "big money" will inevitably lead to undue influence peddling in our political process
we should also understand the types of regulations or statutes that were tried (and failed) in the past, i.e. fairness doctrine, equal-time rule, and even the implications of miami herald publishing co. v. tornillo
we also need to reach some kind of concensus on both relevant first amendment provisions, e.g. freedom of speech and and freedom of the press (the latter being a certain candidate for the "big money" moniker) - any tinkering we do here carries disturbing implications
and finally, what the heck are we to do with the internet, where both the speed and pervasiveness of political advocacy easily avails itself to abuse from "big money" - just try imagining how we'd regulate big money from filtering through pacs to banner ads, popups, blogs and web-hosting
all that said... dude, i feel lost as to where to even begin forming a coherent solution - sorry
TYT - Glenn Greenwald Vs. Prof. Lessig On Citizens United
You can't cause the electorate to become educated any more than you can cause people to stop being greedy, unless you're talking OWS-style education.>> ^marinara:
Feb 15, 2010 is the date of this video.
IMHO, there's no good way to prevent cash from deciding elections. public campaign financing is a start. but IMHO an educated electorate is more important.
Dennis Kucinich v. Glenn Greenwald on Citizens United
>> ^Diogenes:
@criticalthud
let's be really clear... i agree with your position on corporate personhood
but... we can use "citizens united" to abbreviate the scotus decision: Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission... and how that decision has overturned several previous legal precedents and aspects of bcra -- and we can also use "citizens united" to refer directly to the non-profit group of the same name...
i'm just pointing out the latter (the npo) filed suit against the fec because they felt that a media corporation (moore, et al) was violating bcra - the fec dismissed their complaint -- then the group made a similar 'documentary' about hillary clinton and promoted it with the same style and timing of moore's anti-bush film - a lower court barred it, stating that it violated the bcra -- this background led us to the troubling scotus decision
what i was pointing out was that bcra, etc, was already allowing corporate political advocacy through the media, i.e. movie producers, book publishers, newspaper conglomerates, and television networks, etc
this, imho, is what really muddies the waters
thanks i really appreciate the clarification. muddy waters for sure. You raise some good points. Especially in distinguishing an over-reach of political influence from entertainment and documentary media. But are we getting to the point where campaign finance legislation will necessarily intrude on free press and the works of film-makers? what is your take? I would prefer to think that legislation could and should be narrowly tailored in this instance.
and (edit)
@bmacs24 I think it makes sense to start with the fundamental underlying legal ambiguity by which the power grab occurs. The war on "terror" is another ambiguous area of laws that also leads to incredible abuse.
Otherwise you find yourself caught in the minutiae, trying to re-arrange the top bricks on the shit-stack
radx (Member Profile)
Your video, Glenn Greenwald -- Liberty and Justice for Some, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.
geo321 (Member Profile)
Cheers, mate!In reply to this comment by geo321:
Well done.
Glenn Greenwald -- Liberty and Justice for Some
It's a playlist of 11 parts. *long>> ^Trancecoach:
notlong length=6:48
Trancecoach (Member Profile)
It's actually a playlist that is over 50 minutes long.
In reply to this comment by Trancecoach:
*notlong length=6:48
ghark (Member Profile)
>> ^geo321:
Thanks ghark!
I think you might like this...
Chris Hedges & Amy Goodman on Charlie Rose on OWS (October 24, 2011)
http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/11961#http%3A%2F%2Fwww.hulu.com%2Ffeed%2Fsearch%3Fquery%3Damy%2Bgoodman%26sort_by%3Drelevance%26st%3D0
If you sift it I'll promote it...
yt part one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ACVHfGdR1c8
yt part two: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aXvijFSI_a0
or
yt part one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AJHuZNi7oyQ
yt part two: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rJSQ2baIGRE
In reply to this comment by ghark:
great find Geo321!
Oooh I watched those the other day, really good talk, I assumed it would already be sifted - I just sifted them now, very generous of you!
NORAD on 9/11: What was the U.S. military doing that day?
From www.washingtonsblog.com:
... Dick Cheney was in charge of all counter-terrorism exercises, activities and responses on 9/11. See this Department of State announcement; this CNN article; and this essay.
In fact, 5 war games were scheduled for 9/11, including games that included the insertion of false radar blips onto air traffic contollers’ screens. Specifically, on the very morning of September 11th, five war games and terror drills were being conducted by several U.S. defense agencies, including one “live fly” exercise using REAL planes.
Then-Acting Head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Air Force General Richard B. Myers, admitted to 4 of the war games in congressional testimony — see transcript here or http://www.spiegltech.com/media/McKinney2.rm">video here (6 minutes and 12 seconds into the video).
Norad had run drills for several years of planes being used as weapons against the World Trade Center and other U.S. high-profile buildings, and “numerous types of civilian and military aircraft were used as mock hijacked aircraft”. In other words, drills using REAL AIRCRAFT simulating terrorist attacks crashing jets into buildings, including the twin towers, were run. See also http://www.mdw.army.mil/news/news_photos/Contingency_Planning_Photos.html">official military website showing 2000 military drill, using miniatures, involving a plane crashing into the Pentagon.
Indeed, a former Los Angeles police department investigator, whose newsletter is read by 45 members of congress, both the house and senate intelligence committees, and professors at more than 40 universities around the world, claims that he obtained an on-the-record confirmation from NORAD that on 9/11, NORAD and the Joint Chiefs of Staff were conducting a joint, live-fly, hijack exercise which involved government-operated aircraft posing as hijacked airliners.
On September 11th, the government also happened to be running a simulation of a plane crashing into a building.
In addition, a December 9, 2001 Toronto Star article (pay-per-view; reprinted here), stated that “Operation Northern Vigilance is called off. Any simulated information, what’s known as an ‘inject,’ is purged from the screens”. This indicates that there were false radar blips inserted onto air traffic controllers’ screens as part of the war game exercises.
Moreover, there are indications that some of the major war games previously scheduled for October 2001 were moved up to September 11th by persons unknown.
Now here’s where it gets interesting … Secretary of Transportation Norman Mineta testified to the 9/11 Commission:
“During the time that the airplane was coming into the Pentagon, there was a young man who would come in and say to the Vice President … the plane is 50 miles out…the plane is 30 miles out….and when it got down to the plane is 10 miles out, the young man also said to the vice president “do the orders still stand?” And the Vice President turned and whipped his neck around and said “Of course the orders still stand, have you heard anything to the contrary!?”
[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bDfdOwt2v3Y]
(this testimony is confirmed here and here).
So even if 9/11 wasn’t foreseeable before 9/11, it was foreseeable to Dick Cheney – who had been attacking democracy for nearly 40 years – as the plane was still 50 miles away from the Pentagon.
TYT: Obama Admin Protecting Criminal Banks
Must-read articles:
New York Times: Attorney General of N.Y. Is Said to Face Pressure on Bank Foreclosure Deal
Glenn Greenwald @ Salon: Obama administration takes tough stance on banks
Matt Taibbi @ Rolling Stone: Obama Goes All Out For Dirty Banker Deal
Yves Smith @ naked capitalism: Corrupt Obama Administration Pressuring New York Attorney General to Support Mortgage Whitewash
Obama On WikiLeaks Source Bradley Manning:"He Broke The Law"
Glenn Greenwald commented on it, elaborating on the three disturbing issues I mentioned yesterday as well.
Kucinich: Obama Libya action unconstitutional
Glenn Greenwald had a piece on the presidential authority last week.
radx (Member Profile)
Excellent link. Thanks
In reply to this comment by radx:
Guess where you can get more details on this story, including some rather disturbing connections? That's right, Glenn Greenwald.
Bank of America Plan to Attack WikiLeaks and Others Exposed
Guess where you can get more details on this story, including some rather disturbing connections? That's right, Glenn Greenwald.