Hard News: Interview: Glenn Greenwald
93 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 Newer→ Last
-
izogi, in reply to
Tim Watkins actually allowed to discuss, with some authority, the real issues of trust, responsibility and ethical implications of the Snowden documents
Not just that, either.
On the Dirty Politics theme, David Slack has just been expressing a lengthy amount of frustration at the platform which The Panel has been repeatedly giving to people like Jordan Williams, Steven Franks and David Farrar.
-
CJM,
David Slack’s righteous indignation about Farrar, Williams and Franks appearing on The Panel was quite breathtaking. Amazing shit and I would wager he will not be invited back for such clarity and unashamed critique.
*Izogi, just finished posting.
-
Paul Campbell, in reply to
An then years later it turned out that LBJ had secretly threatened to cut off all our trade ties if we didn’t go and our (National) government acceded without a peep
This is really interesting: can you provide a reference?
Oh that's weird I can't (at least not with a quick and dirty search) I do however remember the big fuss the reveal caused in the early 80s, it seems almost as if there was no internet back then or something
-
mark taslov, in reply to
We all know John is more than economical with the truth or maybe he is just a liar. You pick.
Or sophistry in plain site , listening back to that, the Stuff.co.nz transcription.is fudgy.
The GCSB [Government Communications Security Bureau] does not have access to any information through XKeyscore unless, or any other database, unless they (GCSB?/programs?/databases?) basically comply with the New Zealand law. And the New Zealand law forbids that unless there is a warrant to do so."
Teflon clean. Waste of eardrums. As long as the country’s entertained and that meant something to someone. Bring on the leaders debate….
-
Hebe, in reply to
David Slack’s righteous indignation about Farrar, Williams and Franks appearing on The Panel was quite breathtaking. Amazing shit and I would wager he will not be invited back for such clarity and unashamed critique.
This. David Slack now on the Dirty Politics Roll of Honour.
-
Whether or not gcsb staffers personally use xKeystroke or not seems irrelevant if they are assisting foreign intelligence services to do so, either actively or passively (ie by not trying to stop activity they know to be occuring). Seems like their entire reason for existing is to prevent exactly that. My question for the prime minister is 'what instruction have you given to the gcsb in relation to preventing the NSA from accessing the private correspondence of New Zealand residents?'
-
mark taslov, in reply to
It’s a worthy question, but as Not the Messiah said:
His history here wouldn’t lead you to trust him one little bit.
Anyone convinced of the authenticity of Snowden’s XKeystroke evidence knows what’s up. It’d be easier for the population to trash Wiahope than get polished John to wittingly incriminate himself. But if I may answer in his stead:
"We don’t go through the intelligence capability that we have, but what we do do is we abide by the law."
-
Jack Harrison, in reply to
Key needs to hammered with the law. Law and order.
-
matthew, in reply to
Mr Prime Minister are you abiding by the current law or the law you will be writing once it is demonstrated that your current activities are in fact not within the law.
-
mark taslov, in reply to
The law is a lame duck on this, as Idiot Savant mentioned earlier:
Note that the PM can limit IGIS’s access to information
So if the GCSB or their Minister don’t want the watchdog to bark, they can blind it.
-
mark taslov, in reply to
“To the best of my knowledge, I hope New Zealanders will accept my word on it. Look Matthew at the end of the day what we’ve got here is Kim Dotcom and his foreign political friends coming into town and telling Kiwis what they ought to think four days out from our election. On Saturday New Zealanders are going to the polls to vote, and very very very few of them are going to vote on the sort of nonsense that these guys were parroting on Monday night."
-
mark taslov, in reply to
And speaking of asking the next questions: this letter to the Prime Minister from security specialist Daniel Ayers.
Essential reading. This dwarfs anything yet presented by the NZMSM.
-
"(2)Nothing in subsection (1) shall limit the disclosure to the Minister of information concerning the activities of an intelligence and security agency."
John is probably saying......"If only there was a capital "I" on information and......."
-
Jack Harrison, in reply to
Answer to the law. We have to.
-
insider, in reply to
How on earth can key or the gcsb stop the NSA accessing hotmail, gmail and Facebook traffic originated by nzders? This is the organisation that tapped the German PMs calls. There's no special label on my hotmail that allows me to be NSA free when using a us based service, and nor would I expect it because most of those services say their user agreements are governed under other countries laws.
anyone who thinks that using those foreign services is somehow immune from searching by the government of the services' host country (ie the USA) must be seriously naive. Same as I'm not immune from their laws when I pass through their airports.
-
Geoff Lealand, in reply to
Yes, he was magnificent. Mora just sounded embarrassed and eager to change the subject.
-
Ian Dalziel, in reply to
Words...
Yes, he was magnificent. Mora just sounded embarrassed and eager to change the subject.
aah! all this explains one mystery, I tuned in briefly at some point after this, and wondered at the palpable tension of the recently adrenalised vocal cords and manner of those two...
Good show Mr Slack. -
Haven't seen any media comment lately about appointment of donkey's childhood mate as spook chief. Surely that was dodgy enough to revisit that subject again in the current context?
-
Haven’t seen any media comment lately about appointment of donkey’s childhood mate as spook chief.
David Farrar has a post up where he lists all the important and authoritative people who are saying New Zealanders are not spied on. But the problem is that Snowden and Greenwald have exposed the entire establishment as arse covering and self serving liars. The crisis is as much one of confidence in being able to believe what we are told as much as anything. If Key says "The GCSB does not conduct mass surveillance on New Zealanders" a heft portion of his listeners simply don't believe him, or suspect him of using doublespeak where he has a peculiar interpretation of what "surveillance" is or that someone else might be doing it for us and handing the data back. One of the reasons we need a proper, open and informed formal debate on surveillance and the GCSB/SIS powers is the urgent need to re-establish trust in our authorities in the minds of the general public.
-
Josh Petyt, in reply to
Yes. The thought that they may be turning a blind eye to mass surveillance of New Zealand residents (or anyone for that matter), never mind being complicit in the action, is completely unacceptable. I would go further and state that our spies should be actively working against anyone that is spying on us. If that means giving back the encryption rings, clubhouse keys and bidding a teary farewell to our 5 Eyes BFFs then so fucking be it.
Mass surveillance doesn't work, creates potential for great harm and is an unacceptable affront privacy.
-
So, is all this stuff basically an admission that John Key signed off on having Daryl Jones murdered because ... metadata?
You know.
https://www.google.co.nz/search?q=cia%20kill%20metadataAnd we give them all our metadata, so when some dude, who no one local thought was at all radical despite the beatup in the press, when he took a trip to a friendly allied country, Yemen, and hooked up with a few Aussies for a date cruise (there's no booze, but they have lovely dates), and one of five people in that group may have gotten on the watchlist by ...
Being in the same building as someone on the watchlist.
Getting a phone call from someone on the watchlist.
Reading a website that is visited by people on the watchlist.
Being on the same plane as someone on the watchlist.
...And then they all phoned each other, and met up, making them a conspiracy of people on the watchlist, so we dropped a giant bomb on them and killed them. Because Al Qaida. Ter'ism. Etc.
I mean, they were soooo sure about Ahmed Zaoui. Because when he said "FIS", they thought he said "yes". In an ambiguous way that totally gave up the game that he was a terrorist. For years. That's their actual recorded standard of evidence. Got accent? Need bombed. Totally a secret terrorist. And no you don't get to see the evidence against you, because you'd just lie about it. Terrorist.You're all on the list now, BTW.
Not to worry, if you've nothing to hide, you've nothing to fear. Unlike the GCSB, who've got everything to hide.
-
I dunno why Kiwis imagine that our security services pay the least regard to the law. It has been shown time and time again that they do not. Over the course of the time I've lived in Aotearoa there have been numerous instances of both SIS and GCSB acting outside the law and it is always dealt with in the same way, the way that it was dealt with when KDC caught them 'at it'.
First of all the sadly misnamed 'security services' deny they were acting illegally, then, if forced to admit that the unwarranted interceptions/searches/ break-ins did take place, they do as their masters in the US do.
They drag out a lawyer's opinion which states he/she believes that reading the terms of the act very closely , that they can in fact behave in this manner even though it was absolutely prohibited by legislation.Once again we must remember that both GCSB and SIS were expressly forbidden from spying on citizens or permanent residents, yet an Englander recruited into NZ intelligence, seemingly on the basis of his Royal Navy experience, obtained a law degree at night school while working for GCSB, then provided an opinion that the prohibition could be ignored, so GCSB went ahead and spied on KDC plus 87 NZ citizens.
They would still be doing this right now, without our knowledge, and supported by John Key's sophistry & semantics, if KDC hadn't had the resources to confront NZ's intelligence services and force the truth into the light of day.What happened next? KeyCorp regime retrospectively changed the law, stripping away basic protections from all of us.
I can't believe we still have to talk about this, yet there is a collective amnesia which is enabled by the media that not only plays down this awful assault on our rights as citizens - along with the governments deliberate sabotage of the rule of law, it portrays the whole dreadful scenario as 'a good thing'. We are meant to think that this wasn't a horror story designed to dis-empower us all, it was in fact a classic example of the government protecting the citizenry. As they say, you couldn't make that shit up.The CIA pulled the same stunt in the US. They tortured hundreds of innocents, killing quite a number in the process, on the basis of a careerist lawyer with his eye on the main chance giving them a letter saying he didn't believe starvation, beatings and water boarding constituted torture.
Most of the people who copped this treatment were not al Quaeda masterminds, they were tourists with Arabic sounding names who had bee travelling through Afghanistan at the time, (It is important to remember Afghanistan was at peace, for the first time in about 150 years, between the Taliban taking over the government and the start of the US invasion)
Once the US made it known there was a $5000 reward (payable in gold) for 'suspects' every war ravaged no-hoper in Afghanistan went on the lookout for a Patsy and a good whack.
These dodgy legal 'opinions' frequently stay hidden because they have been marked 'Top Secret' or whatever. Right up until someone manages to find a piece of thread linked to them and pulls on the thread in exactly the right way.
Who can possibly know what manner of illegality is currently countenanced by our security services just because somewhere in some drawer in Wellington they have tucked away a piece of paper from a desperate with an LLB who reckons it is all good?
There is no point in claiming "the law says this" or "the legislation says that". The only way to truly know what is going on, would be to send in a mob of honourable Kiwis from across the political spectrum who have sufficient mana and nous to rip the truth out the security agencies sweatily self-interested paws.
-
Steve Barnes, in reply to
And no you don’t get to see the evidence against you, because you’d just lie about it. Terrorist
Yeah, just lie about it, that seems to be enough to keep JK clean.
Unfortunately we are not in a position to say "Pack your cardboard box and security will see you out of the building John, and no, we will not tell you why, you would just lie about it and confuse matters, good bye" -
izogi, in reply to
David Slack’s righteous indignation about Farrar, Williams and Franks appearing on The Panel was quite breathtaking.
Franks is being given a right-of-reply to David Slack on The Panel in a moment (currently 4.48pm).
-
Franks is being given a right-of-reply to David Slack on The Panel in a moment (currently 4.48pm).
Mind boggling. Mora is a joke.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.