Spying on Heads of State
Posted on October 29th, 2013 in Uncategorized | 11 Comments »
So our President is considering banning it—at least when it involves our allies.
Here’s the question I really want to know: Did the NSA spy on the President?
After all, if it spied on the German chancellor, the French president, the Brazilian president, and so on….why stop there? And if it did spy on the President, could it blackmail him?
This story is slowly building; I think it’s the greatest government scandal, and the greatest threat to American democracy, since Watergate. Let’s hope the press—and the public—keep the pressure on. (I have more confidence in the former than the latter.)
11 Responses
10/29/2013 10:02 am
Yes, let’s hope that plutocrats’ magazine WORTH can play its part in keeping the pressure on… especially considering the admirable liberalism and commitment to transparency of its editor.
10/29/2013 2:40 pm
On a different topic, Rubin out finally!
http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2013/10/corporation-transitions-planned-for-2014/?utm_source=SilverpopMailing&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Harvard%20Corporation%20transitions%20(1)
10/29/2013 7:28 pm
“RB is insufficiently transparent,” wrote the anonymous commenter….
10/29/2013 9:05 pm
That is not at all what the anonymous commenter wrote, as you know full well.
10/30/2013 5:24 am
Well, that’s my interpretation of what the commenter wrote, given the general snark of the post. What’s yours?
10/30/2013 7:07 am
As the author of the post, I would take it literally. Compliments to you on your virtues, beginning with (perhaps this part’s a little snarky) an observation about this strange, even dissonant position you find yourself in. Maybe a post, sometime, from you, on being an investigative, progressive journalist whose tendency is to afflict the comfortable, editing a magazine that embraces the most comfortable? Come on Richard! This is the 1% here.
10/30/2013 7:17 am
Ah, okay-well, thank you for the compliment, I guess. I don’t see my values and my job as contradicting each other. I have nothing against wealth per se; what matters, and what Worth tries to emphasize, is how you make it and what you do with it. Sometimes we do feature goods and products that seem over the top. But really, I love the craftsmanship that goes into them, much of which would be lost or wouldn’t exist if it weren’t for these luxury goods, and they certainly do create jobs.
Anyway, if you read Worth carefully, you’ll find a consistent advocacy of what I might call “progressive wealth”….
10/30/2013 9:48 am
I don’t think it’s necessary to personalize the conversation in order to express some skepticism of Mr. Bradley’s “confidence” in the press. That seems a relic of a bygone era, when the press was thought to have different priorities. (Regrettably I’ve not had the opportunity to read “Worth”, as it might very well restore the confidence I lack.) What I see in the press and the broadcast media both is a determination to serve the whims of officialdom, in order both to maintain “sources” and to conform with whichever flavor of conventional wisdom is least likely to upset the audience. There is a reason that Greenwald wrote for the Guardian, and indeed there is also reason why in future he’ll write for another entity even more immune to American political power.
10/30/2013 5:56 pm
Isn’t the Guardian part of the press, Jess? Isn’t Glenn Greenwald? Seems like you’re defining “press” in a tautological way.
10/30/2013 5:56 pm
And Greenwald’s work also appeared in the Washington Post, don’t forget….
10/31/2013 1:10 pm
Greenwald is an exceptional member of the press.
http://ggsidedocs.blogspot.com/2013/10/on-nsa-claims-about-misreporting-of-two.html