General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsSnowden Stuck It to the Overclass - For All of Us
There was a guy named Steve Kangas. He wrote an interesting article called "Origins of the Overclass". Steve was a pioneer of the early internet, a former Army intelligence guy and a very early blogger. For his trouble, he was found a few yards away from Richard Mellon Scaifes office in Pittsburgh, dead of gunshot wounds, "self inflicted". (Scaife is the right wing mogul who funded the "Arkansas project, the "great right wing conspiracy" to bring down Bill Clinton.)
An excerpt from "Origins of the Overclass" -
<snip>
The Origins of the Overclass
By Steve Kangas
The wealthy have always used many methods to accumulate wealth, but it was not until the mid-1970s that these methods coalesced into a superbly organized, cohesive and efficient machine. After 1975, it became greater than the sum of its parts, a smooth flowing organization of advocacy groups, lobbyists, think tanks, conservative foundations, and PR firms that hurtled the richest 1 percent into the stratosphere.
"The origins of this machine, interestingly enough, can be traced back to the CIA. This is not to say the machine is a formal CIA operation, complete with code name and signed documents. (Although such evidence may yet surface — and previously unthinkable domestic operations such as MK-ULTRA, CHAOS and MOCKINGBIRD show this to be a distinct possibility.) But what we do know already indicts the CIA strongly enough. Its principle creators were Irving Kristol, Paul Weyrich, William Simon, Richard Mellon Scaife, Frank Shakespeare, William F. Buckley, Jr., the Rockefeller family, and more. Almost all the machine's creators had CIA backgrounds."
.......
"The most obvious criticism of the New Overclass is that their political machine is undemocratic. Using subversive techniques once aimed at communists, and with all the money they ever need to succeed, the Overclass undemocratically controls our government, our media, and even a growing part of academia. These institutions in turn allow the Overclass to control the supposedly "free" market. It doesn't win all the time, of course — witness Bill Clinton's impeachment trial — but it does score an endless string of other victories elsewhere, all to the detriment of workers, consumers, women, minorities and the poor. We need to fight it with everything we've got."
<snip>
To any D.U.er who thinks Snowden is a TRAITOR... call me bad names, kick me around, but you owe it to yourself to read this - I promise it will change your view of what Snowden is doing. Here is the link -
http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-overclass.html
If you see what I have seen after reading this, you might agree with me that what Snowden has done is avenged the Kennedys, Paul Wellstone, Arron Swartz, and a host of others to numerous to name who have been assassinated or "suicided" in the vicious attempts to subvert our democracy by the overclass. I, for one am grateful. It won't stop them - it might slow them down and ever so hopefully cause the majority to finally open their eyes and realize what is being stolen from them.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
xchrom
(108,903 posts)randome
(34,845 posts)The only thing that matters is if he has evidence of his claims.
He does not.
And the longer this goes on, the more stupid moves and statements he and Greenwald make, the more some seem to want to elevate him even further.
He's not just a privacy advocate. He's not just Paul Revere. Now he's engaged in some kind of class struggle?
Good God, the Legend Of Snowden grows. And grows. And grows.
And he still has no evidence of his claims.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]
warrprayer
(4,734 posts)to read the link... and read what happened to Kangas. You might want to give it some thought. Even if it doesn't change your mind, you might be shocked. The internet was still new and it scared the shit out of the old farts... my opinion is Kangas was whacked for writing this article. 
But I'll read it anyway...you never know what you might learn, if you have the courage to look!
warrprayer
(4,734 posts)there are people like you on D.U. 
HardTimes99
(2,049 posts)of the 'WORKING CLASS.'
What class do you think people like James Clapper and Keith Alexander inhabit? Or whose interests do they serve?
randome
(34,845 posts)The OP was about Snowden. My post was about lack of evidence. Clapper and Alexander are not part of those topics.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]
HardTimes99
(2,049 posts)off rents, dividends and profits)?
Read the OP title again, please.
randome
(34,845 posts)"I am not here to hide from justice." Give me a break. Now he's sending classified information to Der Spiegel, who were forced to redact it themselves.
Way to go, Snowy!
Just because he was a working stiff does not mean he is pure as the driven snow. He thinks he is but until he shows evidence of his outrageous claims, I feel no compulsion whatsoever to see his motives as any part of a 'class struggle'.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]
HardTimes99
(2,049 posts)randome
(34,845 posts)Not sure what your point is.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]
HardTimes99
(2,049 posts)the means of production, i.e., he's a worker and not a rentier or parasite, we can move to your personal politics. (My point will soon become evident, I trust.)
Yes or no: Do you support the interests of the global working class (meaning those who have to work to survive)?
randome
(34,845 posts)If you mean support the idea that you are free to seek work for anyone you choose and to use your particular talents to their fullest, of course I support that.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]
HardTimes99
(2,049 posts)appeals to nationalism or patriotism, particularly when those appeals serve as little more than disguises for the interests of the global ruling, i.e., rentier, class.
You've already acknowledged one that Snowden is (or 'was') a member of that global working class and that, broadly defined, you support the efforts of the global working class.
So here's my question (and my point): do Snowden's actions and efforts support the interests of the global working class or do they support the interests of the global ruling, i.e., rentier, class?
randome
(34,845 posts)Without evidence, it's pretty clear to me that he is working to advance his own warped sense of self-worth.
How can anyone look at his claims and simply take his word for everything?
I once worked for the Social Security Administration (SSA). If I said the agency was selling all your personal info to drug cartels, you might be worried a bit, right? But you'd probably want to see evidence of my claim before you go off on a mission to destroy SSA.
Why is Snowden any different?
He claimed that armed with an email address, he could personally spy on anyone, including the President. Makes you wonder why he didn't snatch an email to prove it to us.
He claimed the NSA had 'direct access' to the world's Internet providers. All the companies involved say that's bullshit.
He claimed the NSA can watch our thoughts form as we type. Any evidence they are doing that? No.
He claimed the NSA is downloading the Internet on a daily basis. Any evidence? No.
He said he "saw things" but he has never said what that means.
He was not an Intelligence Analyst so he was never in a position to "see things" in the first place. If he somehow gained access through hook or crook, why didn't he get something to support his claims?
There is a reason China didn't want him, Russia doesn't want him and even the Wikileaks attorneys don't want him. http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002310173
[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]
HardTimes99
(2,049 posts)indicting you personally for them).
Specifically, on one hand, you seek to discredit Snowden by saying he has shown no 'evidence' for his claims. But, on the other hand, you seek to indict Snowden by claiming he has sent damaging information to Der Spiegel (and, presumably, others).
This smacks a bit of wanting to have your cake (no evidence) but eat it too (intel provided to Der Spiegel). It makes your claims a trifle difficult to respond to, as they seem to shimmer and move as effortlessly as a desert mirage or a kaleidoscope.
But perhaps I should back up a step. You previously claimed that the interests of the global working class are not 'uniform.' So I must ask you, by way of establishing initial premises, do you agree that there is such an entity as a 'global working class'? Perhaps you do not. That's fine but, if so, it seems we are like two ships passing one another in the night. My ship, the good ship "Internationale" crosses paths with your ship, "The U.S.S. Exceptional". We flash Morse code at one another but our signals are so much gibberish, each of us speaking a different language.
xtraxritical
(3,576 posts)randome
(34,845 posts)And Snowden did not furnish evidence of his claims. That is a separate issue from giving spying details to foreign journalists. The spying details don't seem to have anything to do with his claims and that's probably why Der Spiegel redacted that information.
There are too many countries with too many cultures to think they are all part of a 'global working class'. Does China have a more uniform 'working class' than America? Perhaps.
Is there a 'working class' in some Islamic countries that forbid women from the kind of freedoms we enjoy here? Absolutely.
So in a sense there is a 'global working class' in that there are employees and there are employers all across the planet. But in different cultures, those two words mean different things, such as in a sweatshop in China.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]
sulphurdunn
(6,891 posts)in Congress. It seems that the government's only interest here is in discrediting and silencing Snowden, which is odd, considering he has no evidence.
randome
(34,845 posts)Letting Chinese journalists see them and sending to Der Spiegel what they described as 'dangerous' elements they decided to redact.
The man's a thief. Of course he is wanted by the authorities.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]
sulphurdunn
(6,891 posts)to any foreign power. That is why for justice to be done he can't be disappeared into the bowels of federal detention for several years before being heard. I'm sure you appreciate the fact that our government has no respect for the Bill of Rights and is not afraid to ignore it openly anymore.
randome
(34,845 posts)Why should Snowden be treated any differently from any other thief? I would stand beside him if he had any evidence that supported whistleblowing.
Instead, he and Greenwald have elected themselves our new Supreme Court rulers. They will decide for us what merits 4th Amendment rights.
'No respect for the Bill of Rights'? That's a rather expansive charge. If you're talking about phone metadata, I'm sure you already know how the courts have ruled on that for decades.
If you mean anything else, cite some evidence.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)One reported that he had the orders in his hand to pull the phone records on Alito and on numbers associated with our president (before he became president).
Obama has admitted that the NSA gets all our metadata. Once you could see the FISA order requiring Verizon to save all records of communications, it is very simple to go from there to realizing that the government can tap right into the system either through satellites or electronically with a "wire" or other electronic connection into the phone or internet provider's system and obtain all the records on any individual.
Snowden was in the top echelons of the system management. He was a star computer expert. He could easily have done this.
My great-aunt was "central" in a small town when I was a child. I remember very clearly how she plugged calls on party lines into the system and how she could listen to any call she wanted (and often did).
Later, I worked for a couple of years for the phone company. That was way back when. I remember how the huge rooms where the phone wires connected into the system worked and how they looked.
Everything is done electronically now, but the basic principal is the same. It is a system of connections and circuitry. The wires carry the electronic signals that are translated into sound or visual communications by your computers.
If you have ever been on a conference call, you know how easily you can talk to more than one person at a time. That's what this system can do. In addition, it collects all of our metadata -- the most valuable part of the system. That metadata is important because it gives the government the ability to reconstruct our social networks, to know our needs, our convictions, our political affiliations, our obsessions, our interests, our weaknesses and our strengths. They know what games you play or don't play. In many cases, they can know what you read. They have all the records.
Obviously, they don't use all this information or even bring it up on everyone every day. But because they collect the metadata and because the FISA court is secret and readily hands out its orders and because the communications industry is under a FISA court order to save all our actual data and not just the metadata, the government has a tight grip on every person in the country and many overseas.
Any politician from any country that makes a phone call that could be embarrassing is at the mercy of the American NSA.
And so are we all. Because some very innocent event can be twisted and used to seriously jeopardize a career or a marriage or someone's health. It is a very dangerous thing to have that much information available to the NSA, a political organization.
A person has to have a little intelligence and a bit of experience with life to figure it out, but Snowden gave us all the evidence we need if we just use a little reason and logic.
Does this help?
randome
(34,845 posts)He last worked for the NSA in 2005 and every year he seems to come up with new allegations.
And of course that was in 2005 when Bush was found to be violating laws and privacy left and right. It was the modifications to the Patriot Act that put more controls in place.
Of course someone at the NSA could be abusing the metadata. But without evidence to support that they are, why believe that's happening?
From the PowerPoint slides that were released, it appears that data is requested from the FBI and then there are 4 levels of approval before it can even be looked at.
Carl Bernstein said that looks like a pretty good system and I agree. The fact that Snowden could not get access to personal data strongly implies that it's well protected.
And I don't know why you characterize Snowden as in the 'top echelons' or as a 'star' when all he did was copy internal NSA documents and was unable to go deeper into the NSA.
We could use more information about how the data is protected but I don't see any reason so far to be worried about it.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)They can then take that information to your employer, to whomever they want.
This is dangerous stuff. I'm sorry that you don't really understand the implications of it.
No one is safe if the government has a storage facility full of this kind of information.
bornskeptic
(1,330 posts)According to the testimony at the hearing a few weeks ago there are only ten people authorized to access it at all, including the director and deputy director. Probably the other eight would also be at Fort Meade or in the vicinity. Given he level of security it seems to be accorded, it would be rather silly to send the data bouncing around on the internet.
randome
(34,845 posts)Why does Snowden appoint himself to a level above that of our judicial system and think he has the right to overturn these decisions?
I've pointed this out before: if NSA did not have copies of the metadata in a locked box system, every time they had a warrant to search it, the warrant would need to be issued to every single telecom in the country. An insanely time-consuming and complicated process that would, in effect, render it useless.
So as long as there are safeguards and restrictions in place, I have no problem with them having copies of the data.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)not related to a criminal investigation.
So, those "courts say" arguments just don't hold water.
The law is that they should have to request issuance of a warrant based on probable cause in each individual case. That is the point of the Fourth Amendment. If the Fourth Amendment doesn't mean individual warrants based on probable cause in each case, then what does it mean?
questionseverything
(11,861 posts)http://www.themediaconsortium.com/reporting/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/affidavit-bp-final.pdf
My name is Babak Pasdar, President and CEO of Bat Blue Corporation. I have given this affidavit to
Thomas Devine, who has identified himself as the legal director of the Government Accountability
Project, without any threats, inducements or coercion.
I have been a technologist in the computer and computer security industry for the past nineteen years
and am a "Certified Ethical Hacker" (E-Commerce Consultants International Council.) I have worked
with many enterprise organizations, telecommunications carriers, as well as small and medium sized
organizations in consulting, designing, implementing, troubleshooting, and managing security systems.
This statement is to make a record ofmy concerns about the privacy implications for our society from
what I personally witnessed at a major telecommunications carrier, as summarized below.
~snip~
Our plan that evening was to migrate a set of users to the new firewall, and then determine if and how it
impacted access and functionality. We started testing and, all-in-all, the small users test migration went
very well. The test went so well that we then set out to migrate over 300 sites that were carrier owned
or affiliate locations. These 300 or so sites were mostly sales offices. We migrated the locations by
redirecting their traffic to the new firewalls. All was going extremely well. As the night went on you
could feel the relief taking over the anxiousness everyone had felt earlier.
At one point I overheard C1 and C2 talking about skipping a location. Not wanting to do a shoddy job
I stopped and said "we should migrate all sites."
C1 told me this site is different.
I asked, "Who is it? Carrier owned or affiliate?"
C1 said, "This is the 'Quantico Circuit.'''
I remember that he paused and looked at me as did C2. I inquired, "Quantico, Virginia? Is this a store
location?"
C1 responded, "No."
"Is it what I think it is?", I asked.
Response to HardTimes99 (Reply #32)
bvar22 This message was self-deleted by its author.
Half-Century Man
(5,279 posts)So, internationalist is the new communists. The Bourgeois are the renters, and the Proletariats have just been translated to working class.
If this worker/renter/internationalist thing is your idea; I suggest a book called "the Communist Manifesto" by Karl Marx. It's a damn good read, a bit naive, but good.
HardTimes99
(2,049 posts)folks like Adam Smith and David Ricardo to mean those who make their livings, not from the sweat of their brow or brain, but from rents and dividends from properties and ownership of the means of production.
I sense some muted red-baiting (not wholly unexpected, given the neo- and quasi-McCarthyism practiced so often during L'affaire Snowden).
What, may I ask, is your point?
Half-Century Man
(5,279 posts)At my most right, I'm a social democrat. I mean no disrespect.
I usually welcome political discussion and over the years I have had several conversations with people who thought they had made a new social system or improved socialism. Sadly I had to tell them Marx beat them to it. (I spent 25+ years as a factory rat. Ample proof of America's failing educational system).
I was wondering if you might be a member or a student of communism. As certain stigmas are associated with communism, I wondered if the words had changed to avoid prejudices built in the system.
HardTimes99
(2,049 posts)to comments I now see I was only too ready to misconstrue.
I have read widely, if eclectically, in Marxist source material, beginning with the Communist Manifesto and (portions of) Das Kapital and moving through commentary such as that of Herbert Marcuse amd E.P. Thompson. One of my as-yet unrealized life goals is to read Das Kapital in German, a task which shall require much preliminary dusting off of German grammar and vocabulary!
I adopted changes to the lexicon mainly to suit the spirit of the OP with its reference to 'Overclass' (a term I do not believe Marx ever explicitly used). I do not believe it is possible to improve much on the system of (democratic) socialism as Marx and his followers envisioned. I have no doubt that I have failed to secure jobs in the past and will do so in the future due to my radical leftist leanings, but I have never formally joined any socialist party. I suppose I would label myself a 'fellow traveler' (keeping with that spirit of self-administered red-baiting 
warrprayer
(4,734 posts)
liberal N proud
(61,201 posts)Just for moral support. If you are not in Snowdens camp these days you get blasted all over the place.
randome
(34,845 posts)
[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]
sulphurdunn
(6,891 posts)Snowden is either a legitimate whistle blower or he is not. So, long as the government hunts him as public enemy #1 there will be no chance of finding out. He should be invited home under immunity as an asylum seeker to testify before Congress.
randome
(34,845 posts)The authorities want to stop him from giving away more national security secrets.
You steal crap, you pay the penalty. You don't give asylum to thieves just because they say they stole for a good reason.
Snowden is not a whistleblower. Without evidence to back up his claims, he is nothing but a thief.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]
sulphurdunn
(6,891 posts)of a foreign head of state forced down to look for him. The President spoke personally with Vladimir Putin about the Russians giving him asylum. Revoking his passport was done to strand him. The government wants him bad. I don't think such actions are taken to silence a thief who, according to you, has no evidence to support his claims.
randome
(34,845 posts)I can see why you word it that way but it's not my understanding of what happened. Granted, we could both be seeing things the way we want to see them.
Again, though, Snowden is a thief. When Roman Polanski ran to hide in France, there was some diplomatic effort to get him back, too. I'm not saying that Snowden is on the same level as a child molester, only that countries behave in a similar fashion when a high-profile individual is wanted to be charged with crimes.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]
liberal N proud
(61,201 posts)You would still give him immunity? Immunity for a crime others have been sentenced to death for?
If what he hold is as bad as they say it could be, immunity is not acceptable.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)support with evidence?
randome
(34,845 posts)He has made no claims about NSA agent names so his sending that information to Der Spiegel is a completely separate issue.
He is working now to hurt the country and other people's lives. Allegedly.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)intelligence and experience to visualize the process. I explain in #81.
sulphurdunn
(6,891 posts)He's comparing the rulers to the ruled, and if the NSA isn't linked to Snowden, what is it linked to?
randome
(34,845 posts)If he is 'hero' of the working class, then that fairly defines his employer as management.
I don't feel myself 'ruled' by anyone. I do feel 'constrained' by rules and laws and societal norms but 'ruled' does not describe my attitude toward the world.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]
sulphurdunn
(6,891 posts)Do you believe the US is governed or ruled as a mass society, not a collective of individuals?
randome
(34,845 posts)That's why we have stalemate in Congress right now. The two-party system is strangling the government and elements within both parties (especially the GOP) are strangling the GOP at the same time.
It's a mess. Hopefully, with changing demographics, this is the last, long gasp of the GOP.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]
sulphurdunn
(6,891 posts)For a representative democracy to function, the political class must be representative of those who elect them. The safest way to ensure that is by demographic representation. That is unlikely when all members of the Senate and half the members of the House fall within the 99th percentile of wealth and to the best of my knowledge no member falls within even the 50th percentile.
randome
(34,845 posts)Outlaw all gifts, no matter if reported or not?
Mandate a low income?
Term limits, even?
Forbid all lobbying? No, that won't work. We have benign lobbyists, too.
Maybe forbid all lobbying except through computers? That would take personalities and personal pressure out of the equation.
I just don't know.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]
sulphurdunn
(6,891 posts)that does not constitute evidence in support of his claims. I've been a working man all my life, and since most of the people I know come from the working class, so do most of the big hearts and big assholes.
HardTimes99
(2,049 posts)have had to work for a living all my adult life. I hope I come from the former ('big hearts') and not the latter category. Just don't ask my wife
Snowden's claims have been cooroborated and expanded upon in part by other NSA whistleblowers like Binney and Tice. Were Snowden to provide 'evidence,' the same people who have discredited him for his failure to supply said evidence would immediately move to impeach him for the quality (or lack thereof) of said evidence. So the lack of evidence means less to me than the partial corroboration of his claims (and the fact that Snowden's disclosures helped uncover Clapper's perjury while under oath before the Senate).
sulphurdunn
(6,891 posts)about this, and I think you're right. Also, a nobody with no evidence is nothing to fear for the Clappers in government. So why are they in panic mode over him? Well, like you say, his efforts (backed by fact or not) have succeeded in shining a bright light into the dark recesses of the national security state apparatus that hasn't happened since the '70s. The difference today is that Congress isn't going anywhere near it and corporate media is down playing it while essentially advocating for the government's position. That in itself is a bigger issue than the veracity of Snowden's claims.
markiv
(1,489 posts)well, i am impressed that he gave you an exclusive interview
do you have a transcript you can share? you can put this whole thing to rest and save us all some time
randome
(34,845 posts)I suppose it is more accurate to say he has not shown us evidence of his claims.
Quite an omission for someone who claims he could spy on anyone, including the President, if he only had an email address.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]
markiv
(1,489 posts)sulphurdunn
(6,891 posts)randome
(34,845 posts)Why didn't he prove that? Pull someone's email to show us?
He claims the NSA can watch our thoughts form as we type. Why not provide evidence of that? An analyst's report, maybe?
He claims the NSA has real time access to all the Internet providers. They all claim this is bullshit. Maybe a transcript showing data retrieved in this manner?
He clearly did not have the access he claims because he was never able to get anything other than internal NSA documents. His failure to get personal data of any sort strongly implies the data is well protected against misuse.
In his first video, he said two or three times that he "saw things" but he's never explained what that means. It's just a nefarious-sounding phrase, I guess.
I'll believe anything, root for Snowden all the way, if he only shows evidence of his claims.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]
sulphurdunn
(6,891 posts)in an impartial forum. Our government, having already branded Snowden a traitor, has no interest in revealing the truth one way or another. Furthermore, if what happens to political prisoners and whistle blowers anymore is any example, and were I Snowden, I'd get as far away as possible. Let's address the issue of motive. What do you think his motive was?
randome
(34,845 posts)"I am not here to hide from justice." And then he runs away to hide in Moscow.
He is never specific about anything. And some of the PowerPoint slides he stole directly refute some of his claims. I don't see how anyone can call him a whistleblower without judging by the evidence presented.
Actually, I do see how that happens. There is an overwhelming thirst for heroes. Anyone who jumps up and says, "Oh! Pick me! I'll be the hero!" is automatically granted that status without detailed examination.
We are ripe for demagogues and cultists. I'm surprised we haven't succumbed to that yet.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]
sulphurdunn
(6,891 posts)I haven't seen the power point you allege he stole. Could you send me a link to it?
randome
(34,845 posts)But here is a Wired article about some of the slides.
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2013/06/snowden-powerpoint/
[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]
sulphurdunn
(6,891 posts)JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)randome
(34,845 posts)I don't even require proof, as some are demanding. Just evidence, something to point to these claims as real.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]You should never stop having childhood dreams.[/center][/font][hr]
Cha
(319,494 posts)altar of grreenwald and don't forget their buddy, ass ange.
el_bryanto
(11,804 posts)out, as your text seems to indicate. Please forgive me if I have read you wrong.
Bryant
warrprayer
(4,734 posts)http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x455573
I believe I expressed this as my opinion.
Lots of stuff here for you.
el_bryanto
(11,804 posts)speculation, you reference critically that Clinton Death List, which was also, of course unfounded speculation.
Fuck unfounded speculation, no matter who does it. Unfounded speculation makes us stupider. And we are already stupid enough.
No offense, and I am not calling you stupid. I am just saying giving into unfounded speculation is stupid.
Bryant
bahrbearian
(13,466 posts)el_bryanto
(11,804 posts)particularly when you are accusing someone of murder and assassination, than, I am required to condemn it.
warrprayer
(4,734 posts)and you are free to have your own. Strange you would defend someone like Scaife on a democratic website. 
el_bryanto
(11,804 posts)I'm defending requiring evidence before you accuse somebody of murder.
bahrbearian
(13,466 posts)el_bryanto
(11,804 posts)While I might not agree with the Kennedy conspiracy theorists in all details (or even most) they do present evidence. You can weigh their evidence against the evidence presented by the Warren Commission. I might find their evidence wanting in some details but it's at least there.
You, on the other hand, have no evidence than the fact that you dislike Scaife.
Bryant
siligut
(12,272 posts)This cannot be overstated as it is used against us as often as not. For these people, the thinking has been done for them, whether they realize it or not.
(Bertrand Russell)
bahrbearian
(13,466 posts)warrprayer
(4,734 posts)which may have got him added to the "list"
the wiki entry about Steve Kangas for those who don't know the story
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Kangas
warrprayer
(4,734 posts)"The following is a typical example of how the "New Media" operates. As most political observers know, the Republicans suffer from a "gender gap," in which women prefer Democrats by huge majorities. This is, in fact, why Clinton has twice won the presidency. But, curiously enough, as the 90s progressed, conservative female pundits began popping up everywhere in the media. Hard-right pundits like Ann Coulter, Kellyanne Fitzpatrick, Laura Ingraham, Barbara Olson, Melinda Sidak, Anita Blair and Whitney Adams conditioned us to the idea of the conservative woman. This phenomenon was no accident. It turns out that Richard Mellon Scaife donated $450,000 over three years to the Independent Women's Forum, a booking agency that heavily seeds such female conservative pundits into the media. (23)"
http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-overclass.html
Octafish
(55,745 posts)From Kangas:
Besides creating foundations, the CIA helped organize the business community. There have always been special interest groups representing business, like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the National Association of Manufacturers, and the CIA has long been involved with them. However, after 1973, a spate of powerful new groups would come into existence, like the Business Roundtable and the Trilateral Commission. These organizations quickly became powerhouses in promoting the business agenda.
Their efforts clearly succeeded. With the 1975 SUN-PAC decision, corporations persuaded government to legalize corporate Political Action Committees (the lobbyist organizations that bribe our government). By 1992, corporations formed 67 percent of all PACs, and they donated 79 percent of all campaign contributions to political parties. (20) In two landmark elections — 1980 and 1994 — corporations gave heavily and one-sidedly to Republicans, turning one or both houses of Congress over to the GOP. Democratic incumbents were shocked by the threat of being rolled completely out of power, so they quietly shifted to the right on economic issues, even though they continued a public façade of liberalism. Corporations went ahead and donated to Democratic incumbents in all other elections, but only as long as they abandoned the interests of workers, consumers, minorities and the poor. As expected, the new pro-corporate Congress passed laws favoring the rich: between 1975 and 1992, the amount of national household wealth owned by the richest 1 percent soared from 22 to 42 percent. (21)
The CIA also helped create the conservative think tank movement. Prior to the 70s, think tanks spanned the political spectrum, with moderate think tanks receiving three times as much funding as conservative ones. At these early think tanks, scholars typically brainstormed for creative solutions to policy problems. This would all change after the rise of conservative foundations in the early 70s. The Heritage Foundation opened its doors in 1973, the recipient of $250,000 in seed money from the Coors Foundation. A flood of conservative think tanks followed shortly thereafter, and by 1980 they overwhelmed the scene. The new think tanks turned out to be little more than propaganda mills, rigging studies to "prove" that their corporate sponsors needed tax breaks, deregulation and other favors from government.
Of course, think-tank studies are useless without publicity, and here the CIA proved especially valuable. Using propaganda techniques it had perfected at the Voice of America and Radio Free Europe, the CIA and its allies turned American AM radio into a haven for conservative talk show hosts. Yes — Rush Limbaugh uses the same propaganda techniques that Muscovites once heard from Voice of America. The CIA has also developed countless other media outlets, like Capital Cities (which eventually bought ABC), major PR firms like Hill & Knowlton, and of course, all the Agency’s connections in the national news media. (22)
And some wonder why Rush Limbaugh got a microphone.
warrprayer
(4,734 posts)to thank you all for your replies!
Laelth
(32,017 posts)-Laelth
Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)
Progressive dog
(7,606 posts)this stuff would make sense. We could just ignore the Robber Barons and their heirs, the ones who gave the US a steep wealth distribution, through most of our country's history.
The US kept women from voting until 1920, the black Americans theoretically gained the vote soon after the civil war, but until the Voting Rights act, 100 years after the civil war and 175 years after our country's founding, states and localities kept many from voting.
Now we have state governments aided by a RW supreme court trying to take us back to a complete loss of civil rights for blacks and other minorities, by stripping power from the Federal government. We have state governments who are trying to strip women's right to choose.
As to Snowden, he is not a traitor, but he is an alleged felon, who fled to avoid prosecution. He is either a tool or a dupe of the very people who want to shrink our Federal government, who want to equate our present administration with the outlaw Bush, and want to harm our nations foreign policy in favor of countries that can be more easily exploited.
GliderGuider
(21,088 posts)I understand why the global corporate overclass developed. IMO the opportunity was created by a largely natural process of cultural evolution, but the golden opportunity was recognized and seized by those in power. I'm so happy to see Snowden sticking a thumb in their eye. This isn't just about putting the boots to America, though that's how the nationalist authoritarian corporate apologists on here are spinning it.
JEB
(4,748 posts)shitting a ring around themselves.
watoos
(7,142 posts)was, "it won't stop them."
We knew about Vietnam and still went into Iraq. We knew about the plight of the Russians invading Afghanistan, and we still went into Afghanistan.
Yeah, Snowden revealed some nasty stuff, but nothing is going to change. JFK talked about abolishing the CIA, and look where that got him.
Bottom line; the only thing that Snowden will end up accomplishing is weakening Pres. Obama.
I hope that Snowden is a hero, and not a pump handle for the Carlyle group. If he turns out to be the latter, mission accomplished.
wtmusic
(39,166 posts)Maybe it will increase oversight, or embolden other whistleblowers. Maybe we will get a review of Patriot.
I don't believe nothing has changed since Snowden, but it's easy to expect too much. He can light the fire but if the public doesn't keep it going, it will go out.
warrprayer
(4,734 posts)sad that Steve Kangas met his demise in Pgh.s golden triangle. 
cantbeserious
(13,039 posts)eom
CrispyQ
(41,011 posts)It should be required reading & discussion in HS.
At a 1973 Conference Board meeting of top American business leaders, executives declared: "We are fighting for our lives," "We are fighting a delaying action," and "If we don’t take action now, we will see our own demise. We will evolve into another social democracy." (17)
The CIA to the rescue
In the mid-1970s, at this historic low point in American conservatism, the CIA began a major campaign to turn corporate fortunes around.
They did this in several ways. First, they helped create numerous foundations to finance their domestic operations. Even before 1973, the CIA had co-opted the most famous ones, like the Ford, Rockefeller and Carnegie Foundations. But after 1973, they created more.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)
arely staircase
(12,482 posts)warrprayer
(4,734 posts)The CIA needs to send Snowden a STERN MESSAGE!!!
Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)Safetykitten
(5,162 posts)Laelth
(32,017 posts)-Laelth
Historic NY
(40,085 posts)railsback
(1,881 posts)handed over sensitive materials, classified identities, over to Der Spiegel, who won't publish them in fear of ENDANGERING LIVES.
Scooter Libby, eat your heart out.
struggle4progress
(126,394 posts)Nobody can really do anything with statements like
... The origins of this machine, interestingly enough, can be traced back to the CIA. This is not to say the machine is a formal CIA operation, complete with code name and signed documents. (Although such evidence may yet surface — and previously unthinkable domestic operations such as MK-ULTRA, CHAOS and MOCKINGBIRD show this to be a distinct possibility.) But what we do know already indicts the CIA strongly enough. Its principle creators were Irving Kristol, Paul Weyrich, William Simon, Richard Mellon Scaife, Frank Shakespeare, William F. Buckley, Jr., the Rockefeller family, and more. Almost all the machine's creators had CIA backgrounds ...
Babble like this is useless
Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)struggle4progress
(126,394 posts)warrprayer
(4,734 posts)got a bad case of dead for publishing that "rant"
struggle4progress
(126,394 posts)rant was exposed by other people in the 1960s and 1970s, which were more politically volatile than the 1990s
many of those topics have been the subject of careful informative articles
kangas OTOH just dumps it together into an un-nourishing mish-mash
warrprayer
(4,734 posts)during the '90s not many were aware of the Arkansas project and who was behind it. Kangas helped expose Scaqife, and wwas in the process of doing more digging when he died. I also believe Scaifes henchman, Armistead, used a ruse to gain acess to Steves office and took his hard drive.
struggle4progress
(126,394 posts)warrprayer
(4,734 posts)of my life. (till 1980) Didn't learn of his dirtbaggery till later
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)struggle4progress
(126,394 posts)just pick one of my posts, click the little red-x-decorated grey pawn icon near my username, and then select the appropriate option
should you need further guidance on how to use this feature, please feel free to visit the WH or ATA forums, where you will find the friendly staff are eager to assist
Cleita
(75,480 posts)in unsavory and in my opinion illegal spying activities is Richard Melon-Schiafe. He is one of the big problems in this country and should be investigated so thoroughly that even his socks are turned inside out and a colonoscopy administered to find out what he's hiding up his ass.
warrprayer
(4,734 posts)
Puzzledtraveller
(5,937 posts)
moondust
(21,306 posts)Who do you think is going to have their asses in the trenches?
(Hint: It won't be the 1% or their children or grandchildren.)
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)
warrprayer
(4,734 posts)
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts) warrprayer
(4,734 posts)... it seems, can read "Origin of the Overclass" and understand how it relates to what Snowden is doing. The rest... well, we agree to disagree. Just finished watching Conrads "Lord Jim" on TCM. It seems to fit....
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)The Jungle also works
warrprayer
(4,734 posts)best cover song ever
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)warrprayer
(4,734 posts)ends up enslaving us?
moondust
(21,306 posts)I guess it depends on how you define "slavery" and how much you are willing to risk to be sure you avert it. Keep in mind that many state secrets are about other countries. If history tells us anything it is that some world leaders can be reactionary, overconfident, and highly unpredictable.
You have a right to risk your own life and limbs as you see fit, but you don't have a right to risk those of others. Neither does Batshit Eddie.
warrprayer
(4,734 posts)...
warrprayer
(4,734 posts)get mad at me, kick me, whatever you feel and I'll respect that. But please read "Origin of the Overclass" (link in the op) - and think. That's all I ask, and thanks for your post.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)I fear we cannot ascribe rationality to our leaders and irrationality to others. Tht said, I know Americans have the memory of gnats, so you might have forgotten already.
Regardless...tell me when did ww3 start? I know we have a protected, even coddled population, but war is good for ratings. So I suppose our very controlled press would be on that like well flies to shit, excuse the expression.
Now the most boring economic new alliances...those are happening, but hardly does that involve a single infantry man with a riffle. Moreover, those are very much self inflicted and a reaction to...neo liberal policies that even Americans should take to the streets over.
So short question...when exactly did ww3 start? I surely missed it and nooz gathering is part of my job.
truedelphi
(32,324 posts)Six million dead, made homeless or wounded in Nam, plus over 50,000 of our service people.
Then we supported Pol pot, so that another (at least) two million can be added to the mix, after the war in Nam ended.
Then the people of Central America, and also our Nato war against the Serbs. Then another one million in Iraq, and all those who have died in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
With the new "war on eternal terrorism" about to turn on us citizens, especially those of us who don't agree with "authorities" about things like Fracking, or abortion, or Monsanto, things could get very ugly.
Waiting For Everyman
(9,385 posts)There are lots of books on this subject, as well as Congressional hearings which actually used to be useful in digging up information.
Highly recommended. This is like a sequal to "War is a Racket". Taken together, they are a pretty accurate picture of the elites' hidden agenda.
warrprayer
(4,734 posts)during the '90s, no one really understood where all the "scandals" of the Clinton administration were coming from. Kangas exposed Scaife, or at least helped to. The info in "Origins of the Upperclass" was not, at the time, common knowledge for most people. Probably quite a bit of the new "Obama scandals" are being manufactured by the same actors. It is disheartening that so many of Obamas "defenders" on this site are the same ones who attack and ridicule someone like Kangas. I'm not quite sure what to attribute it to.
Waiting For Everyman
(9,385 posts)I meant sources up until now have corroborated. The Scaife stuff in real time, yes, was something new. I didn't mean at all to detract from Kangas' work.
Good point you brought up, because I didn't mean that at all.
warrprayer
(4,734 posts)It wasn't you I was referring to as a detractor... some of the pom pom people is who I meant