Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Octafish

(55,745 posts)
19. The State Targets Dissenters Not Just 'Bad Guys'
Tue May 13, 2014, 12:23 PM
May 2014


Greenwald: From MLK to Anonymous, the State Targets Dissenters Not Just "Bad Guys"

Don't believe the argument that mass surveillance is only a problem for wrongdoers. Governments have repeatedly spied on anyone who challenges their power

by Glenn Greenwald
Published on Tuesday, May 13, 2014 by The Guardian

The following is an excerpt, as it appeared in The Guardian newspaper on Tuesday, from Glenn Greenwald's latest book, No Place to Hide: Edward Snowden, the NSA, and the U.S. Surveillance State, published on May 13, 2013 by Hamish Hamilton:

A prime justification for surveillance – that it's for the benefit of the population – relies on projecting a view of the world that divides citizens into categories of good people and bad people. In that view, the authorities use their surveillance powers only against bad people, those who are "doing something wrong", and only they have anything to fear from the invasion of their privacy. This is an old tactic. In a 1969 Time magazine article about Americans' growing concerns over the US government's surveillance powers, Nixon's attorney general, John Mitchell, assured readers that "any citizen of the United States who is not involved in some illegal activity has nothing to fear whatsoever".

The point was made again by a White House spokesman, responding to the 2005 controversy over Bush's illegal eavesdropping programme: "This is not about monitoring phone calls designed to arrange Little League practice or what to bring to a potluck dinner. These are designed to monitor calls from very bad people to very bad people." And when Barack Obama appeared on The Tonight Show in August 2013 and was asked by Jay Leno about NSA revelations, he said: "We don't have a domestic spying programme. What we do have is some mechanisms that can track a phone number or an email address that is connected to a terrorist attack."

For many, the argument works. The perception that invasive surveillance is confined only to a marginalised and deserving group of those "doing wrong" – the bad people – ensures that the majority acquiesces to the abuse of power or even cheers it on. But that view radically misunderstands what goals drive all institutions of authority. "Doing something wrong" in the eyes of such institutions encompasses far more than illegal acts, violent behaviour and terrorist plots. It typically extends to meaningful dissent and any genuine challenge. It is the nature of authority to equate dissent with wrongdoing, or at least with a threat.

The record is suffused with examples of groups and individuals being placed under government surveillance by virtue of their dissenting views and activism – Martin Luther King, the civil rights movement, anti-war activists, environmentalists. In the eyes of the government and J Edgar Hoover's FBI, they were all "doing something wrong": political activity that threatened the prevailing order.

SOURCE: http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2014/05/13

Gee, WillyT. Wonder what all our posts make us?

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

K & R !!! WillyT May 2014 #1
The State Targets Dissenters Not Just 'Bad Guys' Octafish May 2014 #19
patriots, boys, patriots grasswire May 2014 #37
Best post evah! Vattel May 2014 #46
Excellent !!! - K & R !!! WillyT May 2014 #54
I'm thinking that there's a conundrum here.... BlancheSplanchnik May 2014 #66
Because it's very different. Also, the USG is both buying AND selling our info in the marketplace. merrily May 2014 #85
that point you explained about our info in the marketplace BlancheSplanchnik May 2014 #153
No, not completely one sided. merrily May 2014 #154
your explanation (including the previous one) was very good BlancheSplanchnik May 2014 #171
What snark? merrily May 2014 #173
I thought you were being snarky to me-- BlancheSplanchnik May 2014 #181
It was not intentional. In fact, I had edited my original version of that sentence merrily May 2014 #182
ok, good then. BlancheSplanchnik May 2014 #184
Good! merrily May 2014 #186
Actually, the Bill of Rights does not "give" us our rights. JDPriestly Jun 2014 #202
Yes, no and maybe. I stand by my statement, as it was phrased, in the context in which I made it. merrily Jun 2014 #215
And the person or entity to whom or which your information, your personal JDPriestly Jun 2014 #201
Oh, I know...that's more what I was thinking when I first posted, actually. BlancheSplanchnik Jun 2014 #216
To "the State," dissenters ARE the bad guys (and gals). merrily May 2014 #84
There is a USG preference for the American Right Le Taz Hot May 2014 #93
I think it's because most government and goverment defenders are the right. merrily May 2014 #95
There is the left and then there is the left. Le Taz Hot May 2014 #101
I agree that there is the left and then there is the left. (We need some new vocabulary words, but merrily May 2014 #105
K & R n/t Hotler May 2014 #150
Thanks for posting. JDPriestly Jun 2014 #200
Recommend! and...Here's Tom Englehardt's Introduction.. Also a Good Read KoKo May 2014 #2
Thanks for posting that. JDPriestly May 2014 #43
Thanks..and if you go to the link he has news reports to back up all of his statements KoKo May 2014 #50
Obama Directive Makes Mere Citing of Snowden Leaks Punishable Offense Octafish May 2014 #155
Glad to get here before the "Snowden is a traitor" folks. zeemike May 2014 #3
Oh come on now ...get with it. Peoples jobs depend on stripper polls. L0oniX May 2014 #6
Is this some kind of federal holiday that the anti-Snowden crowd is taking off? JDPriestly Jun 2014 #203
Dunno L0oniX Jun 2014 #211
Rather than protect the First Amendment, they attack the whistleblower and the reporter. Octafish May 2014 #69
I had never heard of him zeemike May 2014 #76
Me too. I was going to say that sound you hear is the security-state apologists heads exploding. nt silvershadow May 2014 #77
We shall know the truth, and the Truth will set us free Demeter May 2014 #4
K & R " What They Fear Is Light" indeed! L0oniX May 2014 #5
good read. BlancheSplanchnik May 2014 #7
indeed grasswire May 2014 #28
K&R pscot May 2014 #8
How can anyone not get that he is a hero of epic proporations, with a fearless heart of justice? DesertDiamond May 2014 #9
I have no idea. The fact that there are some "Snowden is a traitor" people Nay May 2014 #13
Because he also told China which of their systems we were spying on Recursion May 2014 #70
And This Matters To You Why? - Seems Irrelevant To Others - Further Where Is The Proof? cantbeserious May 2014 #86
As the poster himself said, making it about "Snowden bad" or "Greenwald bad" merrily May 2014 #87
Yes - The Cognitive Dissonance In Left Leaning Authoritarians Is Surely Debilitating cantbeserious May 2014 #88
The left lionized Ellsberg for revealing info that happened to embarrass a Democratic President. merrily May 2014 #90
This *did* hit the fan during the Bush administration. Does nobody else remember 2005? Recursion May 2014 #92
Are you saying th left all supportive of Bush at that time? Is that your point about my post? merrily May 2014 #103
I'm saying comparing illegal to legal surveillance is apples and oranges Recursion May 2014 #115
No, you did not say that at all, or that's what I would have responded to. merrily May 2014 #117
Congress can pass any law it wants, at which point the sanctioned activity is "legal" Recursion May 2014 #118
No, that is "merely wrong." Violations of the Constitution do not become legal when Congress merrily May 2014 #119
So, I see you completely avoided my question Recursion May 2014 #120
I had already answered your question. BTW, how many of my questions and point have you avoided merrily May 2014 #122
There it is again Recursion May 2014 #124
Well, now you've resorted to pretending I said things I never said. Know another word for that? merrily May 2014 #125
Umm.. no, it's exactly what you said Recursion May 2014 #126
Nope. I never said it. I did say that you already had my answer on Tice. merrily May 2014 #127
Ignorance is bliss for trolling behavior. Ichingcarpenter May 2014 #121
Yes, thank you. I know. merrily May 2014 #123
No. Congress did not make all of what the NSA is doing legal. JDPriestly Jun 2014 #206
He did not show us documents. That made the difference. JDPriestly Jun 2014 #205
There will be no difference in reaction from the real left. Le Taz Hot May 2014 #98
Wait for the "No True Scotsman" replies. merrily May 2014 #106
I decided to get involved with my local Democrat party Le Taz Hot May 2014 #109
Yes. merrily May 2014 #111
We get here through different paths. Le Taz Hot May 2014 #113
Here is where I MAY being going next: merrily May 2014 #128
Oh, sorry, this is a link to the post where I began merrily May 2014 #129
Glad to see you are supporting Elizabeth Warren. JDPriestly Jun 2014 #207
Why does what matter to me? Proof of what? Recursion May 2014 #91
Do you mean the South China Morning Post? Is this the interview you're referencing? merrily May 2014 #108
All Allegations - No Proof Provided - Sound And Fury Signifying Nothing cantbeserious May 2014 #139
We should see a link soon. merrily May 2014 #112
I guess we won't be seeing that link after all. merrily May 2014 #130
Do you seriously think that China and Russia did not know which of their systems JDPriestly Jun 2014 #204
Because at least some of this happened under Obama's watch. alarimer May 2014 #183
No matter how paranoid or conspiracy-minded you are... alterfurz May 2014 #10
That is a great quote by William Blum. Octafish May 2014 #51
And no matter how much of an establishment apologist you are, merrily May 2014 #110
I hope Comrade Snowden or Rand Paul has a leading role.... nt Cryptoad May 2014 #11
In violating our Constitutional rights? Paul, possibly. Snowden, no. merrily May 2014 #114
How come Snowdens Dossier doesn't even match Historic NY May 2014 #12
That's one thing I want to know, too. Octafish May 2014 #14
Yes, that's what I, too, thought the issue was. merrily May 2014 #132
For one, NSA vs CIA employment. Octafish May 2014 #149
Snowden has what H2O Man May 2014 #34
Yeah, I was wondering that too (nt) Recursion May 2014 #80
The discrepancies between bios are the issue, not the Constitution? merrily May 2014 #131
He is/was a spy. JDPriestly Jun 2014 #208
Hardly... Historic NY Jun 2014 #210
"That meant the NSA was secretly and indiscriminately collecting the telephone records yodermon May 2014 #15
Legality is only one issue Distant Quasar May 2014 #17
The case cited by the poster does not dispose of the legality issue as to what is going on now. merrily May 2014 #134
The applicability of Smith v. Maryland to the NSA's blanket surveillance activities is questionable. Maedhros May 2014 #36
Agreed. Distinguishable on the facts. Very distinguishable. JDPriestly May 2014 #45
exactly Vattel May 2014 #74
Agree, but I would say it's much more than problematic. merrily May 2014 #135
I found this article helpful: Maedhros May 2014 #156
Thank you. I looked quickly at the wiki of the case this morning. merrily May 2014 #157
Thank you for the words of support. Maedhros May 2014 #162
You are most welcome (as are your posts). merrily May 2014 #164
P.S. I really don't want the SCOTUS to get its hands on this. merrily May 2014 #165
Court opinions on whether something is legal or not Vattel May 2014 #48
You do understand that the court is there literally for the purpose of interpreting the law... right TroglodyteScholar May 2014 #62
That is the usual misunderstanding. Vattel May 2014 #63
Interpretations can change, of course TroglodyteScholar May 2014 #64
Trog, you are right. Case law can overturn statute law. Marbury v. Madison, 1803. Manifestor_of_Light May 2014 #67
To be fair, you have to admit that you are moving the goal posts a bit Vattel May 2014 #73
Don't conflate a court interpreting a statute--which Congress can overrule by enacting a new law-- merrily May 2014 #159
I didn't conflate those two things, did I? Vattel May 2014 #167
Your post sure seemed to conflate them. merrily May 2014 #175
hmmm, weird Vattel May 2014 #179
PS merrily May 2014 #163
Nothing you say here is incorrect nor does it contradict what I said. So we agree! Vattel May 2014 #166
None of my posts to you were incorrect. merrily May 2014 #176
Google "Gov. George Wallace denied a Supreme Court decision was the law of the land." merrily May 2014 #158
Here I am afraid you are incorrect. Vattel May 2014 #168
In what respect, Vattel? merrily May 2014 #174
The point is kind of pedantic, but even when a court does overturn an earlier decision Vattel May 2014 #180
Yes, it does. Unless and until Plessy was overturned, it was the law of the land. merrily May 2014 #185
You are quite right that in the case of common law, judges make law and and change law. Vattel May 2014 #189
Please read my post again. I never said that judges amended the constitution. merrily May 2014 #194
Please read my post again. I never said that you did say that. Vattel May 2014 #195
Not in those exact words, but that was the implication, given that the subject was whether judges merrily May 2014 #198
Sorry, that case is easily distinguished. merrily May 2014 #133
FYI: At least one federal court judge has said the NSA collection of date is merrily May 2014 #143
There is no court decision holding that the government has the authority JDPriestly Jun 2014 #209
K & R!!!!!! n/t Holly_Hobby May 2014 #16
Highly recommend. n/t Jefferson23 May 2014 #18
Glenn Greenwald just revealed that NSA is intercepting packages Stainless May 2014 #20
So no spying? No wiretaps? No investigations? What a perfect world you must live in. randome May 2014 #21
Our Constitution is a contract entered into by representatives of the people of the US. JDPriestly May 2014 #29
Once more: are American citizens the targets or not? randome May 2014 #39
If you read the article in the OP, then you know the answer. JDPriestly May 2014 #47
Oh, the metadata again. randome May 2014 #49
The Social Security Administration does not compile and analyze your data with huge JDPriestly May 2014 #60
If the laws need to be updated, I don't have a problem with that. Why would I? randome May 2014 #104
A couple of other whistleblowers tried to warn us without bringing out the huge array of JDPriestly May 2014 #172
So many things backasswards LiberalLovinLug May 2014 #30
I am afraid of nothing. randome May 2014 #41
That must be why you think the Constitution is 'old and outmoded.' Octafish May 2014 #58
+100 nt Mojorabbit May 2014 #78
Which still avoids answering, let alone, asking, the question of whom the NSA monitors. randome May 2014 #96
Exactly. It's modified legally only by amendment. Let someone put a modification to a vote. merrily May 2014 #137
Wow. Marr May 2014 #152
Truth to ones allies? LiberalLovinLug May 2014 #160
'Allies' as in liberal thinkers of DU. Not 'allies' as in international espionage. randome May 2014 #161
No they'll never end spying, its been going on since mankind first days LiberalLovinLug May 2014 #191
We do have public oversight of the NSA. Not enough, admittedly. randome May 2014 #192
Freeedom is not possible... nikto May 2014 #40
Once more: are the actions of the NSA directed at American citizens or not? randome May 2014 #42
How is it that you know the answer as to whether the NSA's actions are directed at American JDPriestly May 2014 #53
I don't know the answer, although I have my inclinations. randome May 2014 #99
You have just made my argument. JDPriestly May 2014 #177
Why play games? YES. Octafish May 2014 #55
And was this info from the NSA provided as a consequence of international monitoring? randome May 2014 #100
So why continue to spew the company line when you're both shown wrong? Octafish May 2014 #147
There is no 'company line' for me. randome May 2014 #148
+1000000 The denial is beyond absurd at this point. woo me with science May 2014 #187
Wow nikto May 2014 #61
The way to rid the Bill of Rights of the Fourth Amendment (and others) is merrily May 2014 #82
Not sure why this needs to continue to be stated. randome May 2014 #94
It does when government is involved. merrily May 2014 #97
Sorry, I made the wrong point. randome May 2014 #116
Assuming you are correct, and I don't yet know of a reason to assume that, merrily May 2014 #136
A fair point but if we start mandating that our laws apply to the world... randome May 2014 #142
"If we start mandating?" The Constitution was ratified in 1789. merrily May 2014 #146
Well, at least bringing up that point out of nowhere spared you from the Constitutional issues. merrily May 2014 #107
The NSA was not supposed to turn its powers on the citizens of the United States. Octafish May 2014 #24
New business for IT folks -- debugging NSA spyware. ancianita May 2014 #33
K N R DirkGently May 2014 #22
Thanks for posting. JEB May 2014 #23
This should answer the question as to whether Snowden was a patsy. JDPriestly May 2014 #25
Well, the question was whether Greenwald was a patsy (or at least dupe) Recursion May 2014 #71
Many here at the "Underground" fear the same thing villager May 2014 #26
Kicked and recommended! Enthusiast May 2014 #27
Naive, self-serving. moondust May 2014 #31
I think we are gonna see a lot more unsettling relevations Ichingcarpenter May 2014 #32
"Organized crime." JDPriestly May 2014 #56
Seeing how CIA has done business with NAZIs, Mafia, and Wall Street, yes. Octafish May 2014 #59
Yes. I know about Gehlen. I will have to read Blowback. Somehow I missed it. Thanks. JDPriestly May 2014 #75
K&R#80 n/t bobthedrummer May 2014 #35
Hating Snowden=Hating freedom=hating privacy=hating AMERICA nikto May 2014 #38
Sunlight = Democracy Agony May 2014 #44
Absolutely! Octafish May 2014 #72
The US is a republic, but sunlight is necessary for that as well. merrily May 2014 #138
NO ONE IS GONNA BUY YOUR BOOK GLENNY Capt. Obvious May 2014 #52
He's a poopiehead!!! QC May 2014 #57
nanabooboo merrily May 2014 #83
actually, I am.... mike_c May 2014 #178
. MohRokTah May 2014 #65
Rec 840high May 2014 #68
Gratias, Amatorem Veritatis. DeSwiss May 2014 #79
Whut?! No "transparency"?!?! blkmusclmachine May 2014 #81
To Greenwald's and Snowden's detractors and propaganists Le Taz Hot May 2014 #89
Agree. Disturbing to watch. djean111 May 2014 #102
And puzzling. merrily May 2014 #140
"I say, you are traitors to this country and to it's citizens" ProSense May 2014 #144
It's so cheesy, it makes my teeth hurt. randome May 2014 #145
+10000 I wish I could rec this post. It should be on the top of every forum. woo me with science May 2014 #169
Göbbels 101 Octafish May 2014 #190
^^^this^^^ ...and for those making K&R notes - K & R L0oniX Jun 2014 #212
Let there be light. merrily May 2014 #141
K&R. Great interview on Democracy Now yesterday. Overseas May 2014 #151
This thread was worth logging in to rec. Thank you, Octafish. woo me with science May 2014 #170
K & R Quantess May 2014 #188
Kick n/t bobthedrummer May 2014 #193
This deserves to stay on top. nt woo me with science May 2014 #196
kick woo me with science May 2014 #197
kick woo me with science May 2014 #199
punt L0oniX Jun 2014 #213
kick L0oniX Jun 2014 #214
kick woo me with science Jun 2014 #217
kick woo me with science Jun 2014 #218
kick woo me with science Jun 2014 #219
kick woo me with science Jun 2014 #220
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»'I Have Been to the Darke...»Reply #19