Citizenfour wins Oscar, Edward Snowden documentary, Laura Poitras film about NSA spying revelations receives Academy award for non fiction films, Citizen four Snowden pseudonym

Citizenfour wins Oscar, Edward Snowden documentary, Laura Poitras film about NSA spying revelations receives Academy award for non fiction films, Citizen four Snowden pseudonym

“His earlier thought returned to him: probably she was not actually a member of the Thought Police, but then it was precisely the amateur spy who was the greatest danger of all. He did not know how long she had been looking at him, but perhaps for as much as five minutes, and it was possible that his features had not been perfectly under control. It was terribly dangerous to let your thoughts wander when you were in any public place or within range of a telescreen. The smallest thing could give you away. A nervous tic, an unconscious look of anxiety, a habit of muttering to yourself — anything that carried with it the suggestion of abnormality, of having something to hide. In any case, to wear an improper expression on your face (to look incredulous when a victory was announced, for example) was itself a punishable offence. There was even a word for it in Newspeak: facecrime, it was called.”…George Orwell “1984″

“A Party member lives from birth to death under the eye of the Thought Police. Even when he is alone he can never be sure that he is alone. Wherever he may be, asleep or awake, working or resting, in his bath or in bed, he can be inspected without warning and without knowing that he is being inspected. Nothing that he does is indifferent.”…George Orwell, “1984″

“The US government is not going to be able to cover this up by jailing or murdering me,”…Edward Snowden


Edward Snowden and I have several things in common.

I hope that we have the opportunity to converse.

From the Guardian February 23, 2015.

“Edward Snowden documentary Citizenfour wins Oscar
Laura Poitras’ film about Edward Snowden and the NSA spying revelations carries off Academy award for non-fiction films”

Citizenfour has won the Oscar for best documentary, for its director Laura Poitras, editor Mathilde Bonnefoy and producer Dirk Wilutzky.

Collecting the award, Poitras, flanked by journalist and collaborator Glenn Greenwald, said: “The disclosures of Edward Snowden don’t only expose a threat to our privacy but to our democracy itself. When the decisions that rule us are taken in secret we lose the power to control and govern ourselves.” Poitras thanked Edward Snowden for his “sacrifices”, and added: “I share this award with Glenn Greenwald and the many other journalists who are taking risks to expose the truth.”

“When Laura Poitras asked me if she could film our encounters, I was extremely reluctant. I’m grateful that I allowed her to persuade me. The result is a brave and brilliant film that deserves the honour and recognition it has received. My hope is that this award will encourage more people to see the film and be inspired by its message that ordinary citizens, working together, can change the world.”

Guardian defence correspondent (and Citizenfour star) Ewen MacAskill said:

“Congratulations to Laura Poitras. When she filmed Snowden, Glenn Greenwald and myself in Hong Kong, it never occurred to me she had something as ambitious as CitizenFour in mind.

I did not even give much thought to why she was filming: just assumed she wanted a record of events for some undisclosed reason, maybe a low-budget film to be used by privacy campaigners. It came as a surprise when I finally saw it, the sheer professionalism of it, and I had no doubt from that point she would win an Oscar.

Good news for Laura. Good news too for Snowden: he can treat the Oscar as one of his biggest endorsements yet.”

Citizenfour chronicles the revelations by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden that burgeoned into the wider NSA spying scandal. The Guardian and theWashington Post simultaneously began publishing Snowden’s leaked information in June 2013, with both publications winning a Pulitzer prize in 2014 for Public Service journalism. The film’s title derives from the pseudonym Snowden used when he first anonymously contacted Poitras.”

Read more:

26 responses to “Citizenfour wins Oscar, Edward Snowden documentary, Laura Poitras film about NSA spying revelations receives Academy award for non fiction films, Citizen four Snowden pseudonym

  1. ”An unfortunate side effect of the development of all these new surveillance technologies is that the work of journalism has become immeasurably harder than it ever has been in the past,”…Edward Snowden

  2. Bob Peterson

    February 18, 2015 by Blaze

    1. Those that talk about “individual liberties”

    2. Those that advocate for states’ rights

    3. Those that want “to make the world a better place”

    4. “The colonists who sought to free themselves from British rule”

    5. Those that are interested in “defeating the Communists”

    6. Those that believe “that the interests of one’s own nation are separate from the interests of other nations or the common interest of all nations”

    7. Anyone that holds a “political ideology that considers the state to be unnecessary, harmful,or undesirable”

    8. Anyone that possesses an “intolerance toward other religions”

    9. Those that “take action to fight against the exploitation of the environment and/or animals”

    10. “Anti-Gay”

    11. “Anti-Immigrant”

    12. “Anti-Muslim”

    13. “The Patriot Movement”

    14. “Opposition to equal rights for gays and lesbians”

    15. Members of the Family Research Council

    16. Members of the American Family Association

    17. Those that believe that Mexico, Canada and the United States “are secretly planning to merge into a European Union-like entity that will be known as the ‘North American Union’”

    18. Members of the American Border Patrol/American Patrol

    19. Members of the Federation for American Immigration Reform

    20. Members of the Tennessee Freedom Coalition

    21. Members of the Christian Action Network

    22. Anyone that is “opposed to the New World Order”

    23. Anyone that is engaged in “conspiracy theorizing”

    24. Anyone that is opposed to Agenda 21

    25. Anyone that is concerned about FEMA camps

    26. Anyone that “fears impending gun control or weapons confiscations”

    27. The militia movement

    28. The sovereign citizen movement

    29. Those that “don’t think they should have to pay taxes”

    30. Anyone that “complains about bias”

    31. Anyone that “believes in government conspiracies to the point of paranoia”

    32. Anyone that “is frustrated with mainstream ideologies”

    33. Anyone that “visits extremist websites/blogs”

    34. Anyone that “establishes website/blog to display extremist views”

    35. Anyone that “attends rallies for extremist causes”

    36. Anyone that “exhibits extreme religious intolerance”

    37. Anyone that “is personally connected with a grievance”

    38. Anyone that “suddenly acquires weapons”

    39. Anyone that “organizes protests inspired by extremist ideology”

    40. “Militia or unorganized militia”

    41. “General right-wing extremist”

    42. Citizens that have “bumper stickers” that are patriotic or anti-U.N.

    43. Those that refer to an “Army of God”

    44. Those that are “fiercely nationalistic (as opposed to universal and international in orientation)”

    45. Those that are “anti-global”

    46. Those that are “suspicious of centralized federal authority”

    47. Those that are “reverent of individual liberty”

    48. Those that “believe in conspiracy theories”

    49. Those that have “a belief that one’s personal and/or national ‘way of life’ is under attack”

    50. Those that possess “a belief in the need to be prepared for an attack either by participating in paramilitary preparations and training or survivalism”

    51. Those that would “impose strict religious tenets or laws on society (fundamentalists)”

    52. Those that would “insert religion into the political sphere”

    53. Anyone that would “seek to politicize religion”

    54. Those that have “supported political movements for autonomy”

    55. Anyone that is “anti-abortion”

    56. Anyone that is “anti-Catholic”

    57. Anyone that is “anti-nuclear”

    58. “Rightwing extremists”

    59. “Returning veterans”

    60. Those concerned about “illegal immigration”

    61. Those that “believe in the right to bear arms”

    62. Anyone that is engaged in “ammunition stockpiling”

    63. Anyone that exhibits “fear of Communist regimes”

    64. “Anti-abortion activists”

    65. Those that are against illegal immigration

    66. Those that talk about “the New World Order” in a “derogatory” manner

    67. Those that have a negative view of the United Nations

    68. Those that are opposed “to the collection of federal income taxes”

    69. Those that supported former presidential candidates Ron Paul, Chuck Baldwin and Bob Barr

    70. Those that display the Gadsden Flag (“Don’t Tread On Me”)

    71. Those that believe in “end times” prophecies

    72. Evangelical Christians.…/72-types-of-ameri…/

  3. bob, link doesn’t work.

  4. cabbyaz,
    This is what I mean about Niel Cavuto’s ability to be sarcastic.

    Here he defends FOX, while exposing liberal absurdity.

    Fox’s Neil Cavuto breaks out the sarcasm: Yes, it was somehow Fox that caused the IRS to crack down on conservative groups, Fox that told people you could keep your doctor under Obamacare. Calling ISIS the “JV team”? The measles outbreak? Blame Fox.
    Fox News Host Neil Cavuto Mocks White House, Jokes That Everything Wrong is Fox’s Fault
    Thursday on his Your World show, host Neil Cavuto went after the Obama administration’s near obsession with the coverage it gets on Fox News.

  5. Thanks concerned1.

  6. Holy Obama: News Media Raging Over Obama Religion; See Giuliani Unleash Hell On Obama


  7. Another one of those Friday issuances:

    Obama-Nominated Judge: New Illegal Immigrants Must Be Released

    Even the liberal Jonathan Tobin has this to say, “If liberal federal judges and the president are determined to trash the rule of law in this manner, we are on the verge of a full-blown constitutional crisis,” said Jonathan Tobin, an editor of Commentary magazine, which generally favors large-scale immigration.

  8.’s dishonest attempt at debunking ‘Obama and the Muslim Gang Sign’ February 23, 2015 Snopes ignores evidence in the article contradicting its points. More

  9. Snopes aka Big Brother.

  10. Cabbyaz, et al.
    From that Daily Caller article:

    “Since 2009, Obama’s senior deputies have repeatedly instructed his immigration agencies to reduce enforcement of immigration laws. For example, since 2009, his aides have given work-permits and temporary residency to 4.7 million migrants, including illegal immigrants, tourists, guest-workers and students.

    That 4.7 million is in addition to the annual inflow of 1 million legal immigrants. Roughly 4 million American youths enter the workforce each year.

    In November 2014, one in every five U.S. jobs was held by a foreign-born worker, up from one-in-six jobs in January 2010, according to federal datahighlighted by the Center for Immigration Studies.”

    Remember the 15 million plus figure entering the workforce that I reported.
    Also remember the approx 9 million net added by people turning 16 (conservative figure).
    The illegals make up the difference.

  11. Snopes is always accurate, right?

  12. What the H…… Become a Democrat!
    Look what someone sent me.

    Why I vote Democrat
    (comment by TheFallofAmerica on March 19, 2014)

    I vote Democrat because I believe it’s okay if our federal government borrows $85 Billion every single month.

    I vote Democrat because I care about the children … but saddling them with trillions of dollars of debt to pay for my bloated leftist government is okay.

    I vote Democrat because I believe it’s better to pay billions of dollars to people who hate us rather than drill for our own oil, because it might upset some endangered beetle or gopher.

    I vote Democrat because I believe it is okay if liberal activist judges rewrite the Constitution to suit some fringe kooks, who would otherwise never get their agenda past the voters.

    I vote Democrat because I believe that corporate America should not be allowed to make profits for themselves or their shareholders. They need to break even and give the rest to the federal government for redistribution.

    I vote Democrat because I’m not concerned about millions of babies being aborted, so long as we keep all of the murderers on death row alive.

    I vote Democrat because I believe it’s okay if my Nobel Peace Prize winning President uses drones to assassinate people, as long as we don’t use torture.

    I vote Democrat because I believe people, who can’t accurately tell us if it will rain on Friday, can predict the polar ice caps will melt away in ten years if I don’t start driving a Chevy Volt.

    I vote Democrat because Freedom of Speech is not as important as preventing people from being offended.

    I vote Democrat because I believe the oil companies’ profit of 3% on a gallon of gas is obscene, but the federal government taxing that same gallon of gas at 15% isn’t obscene.

    I vote Democrat because I believe a moment of silent prayer at the beginning of the school day constitutes government indoctrination and an intrusion on parental authority ….. but sex education, condom distribution and multiculturalism are all values-neutral.

    I vote Democrat because I agonize over threats to the natural environment from CO2, acid rain and toxic waste ….. but I am totally oblivious of the threats to our social environment from pornography, promiscuity and family dissolution.

    I vote Democrat because I believe lazy, uneducated stoners should have just as big a say in running our country as entrepreneurs who risk everything and work 70 hours per week.

    I vote Democrat because I don’t like guns ….. so no one else should be allowed to own one.

    I vote Democrat because I see absolutely no correlation between welfare and the rise of illegitimacy.

    I vote Democrat because I see absolutely no correlation between judicial leniency and surging crime rates.

    I vote Democrat because I believe you don’t need an ID to vote but you do to buy beer.

    I vote Democrat because I believe marriage is obsolete, except for homosexuals.

    I vote Democrat because I think AIDS is spread by insufficient funding.

    I vote Democrat because I think “fairness” is far more important than freedom.

    I vote Democrat because I think an “equal outcome” is far more important than equal opportunity.

    I vote democrat because I would rather hide in a class room while others fight for my freedom.

    I vote democrat because I’m not smart enough to own a gun and I need someone else to protect me.

    I vote democrat because I would rather have free stuff than freedom.

    And lastly, I vote Democrat because I’m convinced that government programs are the solution to the human condition, NOT freedom

  13. Even today, we have so far to go…………sheeples.
    How do they get these articles published???

    ***Without these powerful forces working against her, she appears to be far better positioned than she was eight years ago. If she barely lost then, why would she lose now?***
    Learn the thoughts still prevalent today, if you can stomach it!
    Link below…..

    Not ONE mention of Benghazi.

  14. I wonder if this has anything to do with the usurper?

    James O’Keefe: “I Am Afraid for My Life”

    Journalist set to release bombshell story
    by Paul Joseph Watson | February 23, 2015

    “We have a story we’re going to release this coming week and I’ve never thought about this before but I am afraid for my life on this one,” O’Keefe tweeted on Saturday.

    Whatever its nature, the story promises to be a big one given the impact generated by O’Keefe’s previous work.

  15. BOOM! Lt. Col. Allen West doesn’t waste any time exposing Obama and the hypocritical mainstream media.

    Do you agree with what Allen West just said about Obama?

    WATCH Allen West Smack Down Obama, Explains Exactly Why He Doesn’t Love America
    ‘If you love something, you don’t…’

  16. This is the first of a five-part series on the conspiracy that is manipulating the U.S. government to aid the establishment of a global Islamic State. Very good analysis.
    Dean M., if you are reading here, you will appreciate the revelation of Islamic influence on the Nazi machine against Jewish people.

    The Betrayal Papers: Muslim Brotherhood Captured US Under Obama


  17. bob strauss | February 23, 2015 at 5:06 pm |
    I wonder if this has anything to do with the usurper?

    James O’Keefe: “I Am Afraid for My Life”
    Bob, I read somewhere that the info is going to be released tomorrow morning. We shall see.

  18. cabbyaz | February 23, 2015 at 9:13 pm |

    bob strauss | February 23, 2015 at 5:06 pm |
    I wonder if this has anything to do with the usurper?

    James O’Keefe: “I Am Afraid for My Life”
    Bob, I read somewhere that the info is going to be released tomorrow morning. We shall see.
    Thanks cabbyaz, I will keep my eyes peeled, and hope it’s info that will end this national nightmare.

  19. The Conservative Insurgent II


    Obama’s recent remarks comparing ISIS militants to medieval Christian Crusaders proves he is absolutely clueless about history. As ISIS continues to gain ground throughout the Middle East as they chop off heads, incinerate hostages, execute gays, stone women to death, rape and enslave girls, Obama is busy blaming Christianity and the Crusades. It is absolutely appalling and unforgivable for the president to attempt to put in perspective the actions taken today by ISIS, al-Qaeda, Taliban, Boko Haram, al-Shabaab, Khorasan Group, etc. by claiming that just as many atrocities have taken place in the name of Christ…which is absolutely FALSE! How Obama could go back 1,000 years in history and pick up something that Christians did in response to Islamic aggression and somehow blame Christians for the burning of a Jordanian pilot, for accused homosexuals being thrown off buildings, for Christians being crucified on crosses, and for the cutting off the heads of children who are Christians is just plain despicable.

    Historical facts prove that Islam, including the prophet Muhammad, launched their own Crusades against Christianity long before the European Crusades. The first Crusade began in 1095… 460 years after the first Christian city was overrun by Muslim armies, 457 years after Jerusalem was conquered by Muslim armies, 453 years after Egypt was taken by Muslim armies, 443 after Muslims first plundered Italy, 427 years after Muslim armies first laid siege to the Christian capital of Constantinople, 380 years after Spain was conquered by Muslim armies, 363 years after France was first attacked by Muslim armies, 249 years after the capital of the Christian world, Rome itself, was sacked by a Muslim army, and only after centuries of church burnings, killings, enslavement and forced conversions of Christians.

    By the time the Crusades finally began, Muslim armies had conquered two-thirds of the Christian world. The Crusaders only invaded lands that were Christian. They did not attack Saudi Arabia or sack Mecca, as the Muslims had done (and continued doing) to Italy and Constantinople. Their primary goal was the recapture of Jerusalem and the security of safe passage for pilgrims. The toppling of the Muslim empire was NEVER on the agenda.

    The greatest crime of the Crusaders was the sacking of Jerusalem, in which 3,000 people were said to have been killed. This number is dwarfed by the number of Jihad victims, from India to Constantinople, Africa and Narbonne, but Muslims have never apologized for their crimes and never, ever will.

    One of the most tragic facts is that Mecca, the geographic heart of the Muslim community, was the largest slave market in the Muslim world all the way up until the 2Oth century when the standards of the international community, championed by the West informed Muslims that chattel slavery is a violation against dignity, humanity and their own standing in global affairs. But today, slavery is alive and well in many Muslim countries in Africa. The death toll from 14 centuries of the Muslim slave trade in Africa is estimated at over 112 MILLION!

    If one goes back to 1971, when Muslim armies in Bangladesh began the mass slaughter of Hindus, through the years of Jihad in the Sudan, Kashmir and Algeria, and the present-day Sunni-Shia violence in Iraq, the number of innocents killed in the name of Islam easily exceeds five MILLION. In fact, Islamic terrorists have currently carried out 25,176 acts of deadly terrorism since 9/11.

    Islam is associated with Islamic terrorism because that is the association that the terrorists themselves choose to make. They credit their motivation and success to religion. Islam isn’t hijacked by extremists – it is what sustains them. This distinguishes Islamic terrorism from mere criminal activity, and it is part of what makes Islam so very, very different from other religions. Many people would prefer to bury their heads in the sand or look for ways to recast Islamic terror to fit their own political agenda, but the fact is that violent Muslims are quite explicit about the religious certainty that compels and justifies their actions.

    In Islam, we confront a civilization with an arrested development and history. We’re trying to negotiate with subhuman savages who are perpetually stuck in the 7th century. It’s as though a portal in time has opened and 7th century hordes are pouring into our world. Unfortunately, they are now armed with 21st century weapons. We are at war with Islam. It may not serve our immediate foreign policy objectives for our political leaders to openly admit this fact, but it is unambiguously so.

    Muslims are nothing more than primitive barbarians who condone and advocate genocide, terrorism, suicide bombings, murder of homosexuals, female genital mutilation, chattel slavery, destruction of churches and synagogues, beating of females, pedophilia, honor killing, stonings, beheadings, acid attacks, rape as a tool of ‘jihad’, murder of apostates, bearbaiting, cruelty to animals, blasphemy laws… The list is almost endless. Islamic countries openly imprison, torture, and kill Christians and burn down their churches. They’re against educating women, force them to wear burqas, won’t allow them to drive, or even leave their house without a male relative.

    The ONLY future devout Muslims can envision is one in which ALL infidels have been converted to Islam, subjugated, or killed. The tenants of Islam simply do not admit anything but a temporary sharing of power with the “enemies of Allah.” Moderate Islam, REALLY moderate, really critical of Muslim irrationality, scarcely seems to exist. If it does, it’s doing an outstanding job at hiding…just as Christianity did in the 14th century…and for the very same reasons. Consider Muslims will riot, murder, rape, and burn down embassies over silly cartoons of their prophet, videos critical of their religion and burning of the Quran, yet they are totally silent when Muslims commit atrocities like the Boston Marathon bombing, 9/11, 7/7 London attacks, Madrid bombing, Benghazi attacks, Fort Hood shooting, USS Cole attack, Beirut bombing, Lee Rigby, Daniel Pearl, and James Foley beheadings, the Jordanian pilot incineration by ISIS, etc. In fact, Muslims from around the world celebrate these vicious attacks.

    In our dialogue with the Islamic world, we must understand we are confronted by backward ‘beings’ who hold beliefs for which there is simply no rational justification and which therefore cannot even be discussed. Yet, these are the very beliefs that underlie many of the demands they make upon us!

    Given what most Muslims believe, genuine peace in this world is absolutely impossible. At this very point in history, give most Muslims the freedom to vote, and they will freely vote to tear out their political freedom and liberty by the root! They will enthusiastically shackle themselves to their backward religious dogma. We should never, ever forget the possibility they would do everything possible to curtail our freedom, if they only had the power to do so. The Arab world is now economically and intellectually stagnant to a degree that few could have ever thought possible. The Muslim religion is so unreformed since it was created that nowhere in the Muslim world has there been any real advance in science, literature, or technology in the last 500 years.

    We must abandon political correctness, accept the evils of moral relativism, and address our misguided infatuation with multiculturalism. When multiculturalism is a one-way road it leads directly to cultural suicide. Multiculturalism’s evil twin is moral relativism, in which people accept actions from a particular group for beliefs which you would condemn otherwise. The blind acceptance of Islam is a great example of this. It’s time for us to finally admit that not all cultures are at the same stage of moral development. I understand this is a very politically incorrect and radically impolite FACT to point out, but it is true nonetheless. As a modern Western civilized society, we have clearly outgrown our tolerance for deliberate torture, rape, and murder of innocent people. We would do good to finally realize the Muslim world has not…and they’re extremely unlikely to do so in the foreseeable future.


  20. Edward Snowden questions & answers on Reddit:

    “Mr. Snowden, if you had a chance to do things over again, would you do anything differently? If so, what?
    [–]SuddenlySnowdenEDWARD SNOWDEN 4270 points 15 hours ago*x4
    I would have come forward sooner. I talked to Daniel Ellsberg about this at length, who has explained why more eloquently than I can.
    Had I come forward a little sooner, these programs would have been a little less entrenched, and those abusing them would have felt a little less familiar with and accustomed to the exercise of those powers. This is something we see in almost every sector of government, not just in the national security space, but it’s very important:
    Once you grant the government some new power or authority, it becomes exponentially more difficult to roll it back. Regardless of how little value a program or power has been shown to have (such as the Section 215 dragnet interception of call records in the United States, which the government’s own investigation found never stopped a single imminent terrorist attack despite a decade of operation), once it’s a sunk cost, once dollars and reputations have been invested in it, it’s hard to peel that back.
    Don’t let it happen in your country.”

    “To Greenwald & Poitras: What was the most alarming revelation(s) you discovered throughout this process, and is there more to come?
    To Snowden: What validation do we have that Putin is being honest about NOT spying in Russia?
    [–]glenngreenwaldGLENN GREENWALD 1874 points 16 hours ago
    For me personally, the most shocking revelation was the overall one that the explicit goal of the NSA and its allies is captured by the slogan “collect it all” – meaning they want to convert the internet into a place of limitless, mass surveillance, which is another way of saying they literally want to eliminate privacy in the digital age:
    There is definitely more significant reporting to come. Our colleagues at the Intercept – Jeremy Scahill and Josh Begley – just last week reported one of the most significant stories yet on the NSA and GCHQ’s ‘s hacking practices:
    [–]SuddenlySnowdenEDWARD SNOWDEN 1854 points 16 hours ago
    To tag on to the Putin question: There’s not, and that’s part of the problem world-wide. We can’t just reform the laws in one country, wipe our hands, and call it a day. We have to ensure that our rights aren’t just being protected by letters on a sheet of paper somewhere, or those protections will evaporate the minute our communications get routed across a border. The only way to ensure the human rights of citizens around the world are being respected in the digital realm is to enforce them through systems and standards rather than policies and procedures.”

    “Dear all,
    how can we make sure that people still want to leak important information when everyone who does so puts the rest of their lives at stake?
    [–]SuddenlySnowdenEDWARD SNOWDEN 2014 points 14 hours agox3
    Whistleblower protection laws, a strong defense of the right for someone charged with political crimes to make any defense they want (currently in the US, someone charged with revealing classified information is entirely prohibited from arguing before the jury that the programs were unlawful, immoral, or otherwise wrongful), and support for the development of technically and legally protected means of communications between sources and journalists.
    The sad truth is that societies that demand whistleblowers be martyrs often find themselves without either, and always when it matters the most.”

    “What’s the best way to make NSA spying an issue in the 2016 Presidential Election? It seems like while it was a big deal in 2013, ISIS and other events have put it on the back burner for now in the media and general public. What are your ideas for how to bring it back to the forefront?
    [–]glenngreenwaldGLENN GREENWALD 2752 points 15 hours ago*
    The key tactic DC uses to make uncomfortable issues disappear is bipartisan consensus. When the leadership of both parties join together – as they so often do, despite the myths to the contrary – those issues disappear from mainstream public debate.
    The most interesting political fact about the NSA controversy, to me, was how the divisions didn’t break down at all on partisan lines. Huge amount of the support for our reporting came from the left, but a huge amount came from the right. When the first bill to ban the NSA domestic metadata program was introduced, it was tellingly sponsored by one of the most conservative Tea Party members (Justin Amash) and one of the most liberal (John Conyers).
    The problem is that the leadership of both parties, as usual, are in full agreement: they love NSA mass surveillance. So that has blocked it from receiving more debate. That NSA program was ultimately saved by the unholy trinity of Obama, Nancy Pelosi and John Bohener, who worked together to defeat the Amash/Conyers bill.
    The division over this issue (like so many other big ones, such as crony capitalism that owns the country) is much more “insider v. outsider” than “Dem v. GOP”. But until there are leaders of one of the two parties willing to dissent on this issue, it will be hard to make it a big political issue.
    That’s why the Dem efforts to hand Hillary Clinton the nomination without contest are so depressing. She’s the ultimate guardian of bipartisan status quo corruption, and no debate will happen if she’s the nominee against some standard Romney/Bush-type GOP candidate. Some genuine dissenting force is crucial.”


    Reference your last post……

    I love a patriot !!!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s