tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-974773076690597683.post7016311470745958544..comments2024-03-28T16:08:29.578-04:00Comments on Sardonicky: Comical Plutocrat Blows Smoke At GreenwaldKaren Garciahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15612731479365562803noreply@blogger.comBlogger28125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-974773076690597683.post-29545843233280961792013-06-29T13:54:16.275-04:002013-06-29T13:54:16.275-04:00Maybe I'm just super dense, but this "pro...Maybe I'm just super dense, but this "provocation" is totally going over my head ( besides the aside to James which I didn't catch).<br />This reminds me of the time I was involved in a putatively non partisan group which was a little too go blue! for my taste. They had a speaker and sign up forms to get on their mailing list. After the meeting an email was sent out speaking of enemies in their midst because the sign up list had gone missing. My thought: "perhaps someone misplaced it?" As it turned out the speaker had accidentally taken it.<br />And how was anyone able to discern the gender of Anonymous?<br />Katnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-974773076690597683.post-81742792604092697762013-06-29T10:32:47.623-04:002013-06-29T10:32:47.623-04:00Yes, Will's youtube reference was well worth t...Yes, Will's youtube reference was well worth the time and this has been a very enlightening string. Karen's comment within it ditto.<br /><br />Anonymous mentioned the Hemlock Cup by Bettany Hughes. I've read it twice and it really puts you into the gritty precincts of ancient Athens. And I think she has really nailed the illusive Socrates: Question everything, even democracy, but do no harm. Sorrowfully, it killed him n the endJames F Traynornoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-974773076690597683.post-82589110390083285912013-06-29T07:26:33.923-04:002013-06-29T07:26:33.923-04:00@ Will – Thanks for the link
Consciences of Ameri...@ Will – Thanks for the link<br /><br />Consciences of America…<br /><br />David Halberstam kept on his desk a quote that Albert Camus had written during France's war in Algeria: “I should like to be able to love my country and love justice."<br /><br />“Good leaks,” whispers by government officials in MSM ears.<br /><br />“No one becomes a reporter to make friends, but neither is it pleasant in a situation like the war in Vietnam to find yourself completely at odds with the views of the highest officials of your country. The pessimism of the Saigon press corps was of the most reluctant kind: many of us came to love Vietnam, we saw our friends dying all around us, and we would have liked nothing better than to believe the war was going well and that it would eventually be won. But it was impossible for us to believe those things without denying the evidence of our own senses. And so we had no alternative but to report the truth.” - David Halberstam<br /><br />Ambivalence about whistleblowers? <br /><br />Climate of fear…<br /><br />Shake the foundations of the corrupt invisible government!Denis Nevillenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-974773076690597683.post-15618906121049991022013-06-29T03:50:32.159-04:002013-06-29T03:50:32.159-04:00Here's the youtube video of Glenn Greenwald...Here's the youtube video of Glenn Greenwald's appearance (via Skype) at the Socialism 2013 conference in Chicago last night. Please watch & then share this any way you can with everyone everywhere on planet Earth. Thank you. :)<br /><br />http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uulv4ve6RJ8Willnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-974773076690597683.post-20946750962902875152013-06-28T23:00:06.695-04:002013-06-28T23:00:06.695-04:00Just a little local news:
http://www.sacbee.com/2...Just a little local news:<br /><br />http://www.sacbee.com/2013/06/28/5530481/no-jury-trial-for-beale-afb-anti.html<br /><br />I was at this protest as a legal observer and not wanting in any way to get arrested.<br /><br />Beale AFB is right in my back yard, and 3-4 drones can sometimes be seen flying over the base at night.<br /><br />(I mistakenly posted this in the previous comments section)Elizabeth Adamshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05996557196169451999noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-974773076690597683.post-81297755736869857442013-06-28T22:50:11.805-04:002013-06-28T22:50:11.805-04:00In case someone missed the top comment following R...In case someone missed the top comment following Roger Cohen's NYT essay of this morning:<br />________________________________<br /><br />Karen Garcia New Paltz, NY<br /><br />Thank you for an excellent column, a refreshing gust of fresh air that blows away the usual noxious "blame the messenger" smoke currently stinking up the discourse.<br /><br />Edward Snowden is a hero, not only for revealing an epidemic of abuse by our own government, but for forcing the architects and enablers of the abuse right out of their protective closets. Politicians and corporate media hacks alike have revealed themselves as the self-serving corrupt tools of the oligarchy. Republicans and Democrats alike have been hoisting their well-maintained selves on the "Bring Me the Head of Edward Snowden!" bandwagon. By calling him a traitor, they name us as the enemy. No longer can they pretend that they exist to serve and protect what they so quaintly call "the middle class." They all took a loyalty oath to the Surveillance State.<br /><br />Snowden could be diagnosed with every malady in the psychiatric DSM, and he'd still be a hero to me. The only law he broke was that of giving aid and comfort the citizenry. He ranks right up there with Thoreau, King, and Ellsberg. The Powers That Be know this, and they are shaking in their shoes. Good.<br />Jay–Ottawahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10360356126450612113noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-974773076690597683.post-88569344920424839812013-06-28T18:58:17.769-04:002013-06-28T18:58:17.769-04:00There was a recent study showing that internet rea...There was a recent study showing that internet readers are influenced as much by the tone of online comments as by articles alone.<br /><br />An article with invented comments was shown to two groups of readers. The first group read civil, constructive comments about the article, while the second group read fake uncivil, flame-war, flame-bait comments.<br /><br />Readers' interpretations of the article differed significantly depending only on the tone of the manipulated comments. The second groups’ opinions were polarized, leading them to misunderstand the original article.<br /><br />Commenting is a privilege, not a right. We have to earn it. We owe Karen a big “Thank You!” for allowing us to comment here.Denis Nevillenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-974773076690597683.post-66701610831580174802013-06-28T15:56:54.365-04:002013-06-28T15:56:54.365-04:00As most of you know, I reserve at my own discretio...As most of you know, I reserve at my own discretion the right to remove comments from this site. I haven't done so lately, because it hasn't been necessary. The last time I had to was because someone was advocating armed violence. I draw the line at that, plus at personal attacks. Usually I will just shut down a thread when it seems to be getting too fraught.<br /><br />As far as Anonymous is concerned, she has the right to withhold her identity, as do we all. That being said, she has come and gone at this site under various monikers since its inception. Her m.o. is as follows: she starts off very inclusively, with much admirable erudition to offer, then gradually pivots into subtle flame-thrower mode with the seeming purpose to foment discord and hijack the thread. Then she disappears. Then she comes back in a new persona. It's the Internet!!!<br /><br />Now, I will address Anon's concerns directly. First of all, the story about the CIA involvement with NYPD is nothing new. I wrote about it more than a year ago when John Brennan publicly praised the Muslim surveillance program. Most recently I referenced this angle in a NYT comment on the police dept overreach. I have been writing about the surveillance state for a long time, way before Edward Snowden blew the whistle. <br /><br /> Secondly, I don't post here every single day on every single issue. This is a one-woman operation.... although, I do encourage outside submissions. I devote about an equal amount of time to Times comments, where let's face it, there is a wider audience. Additionally, I don't want this to be just another news aggregation site, which are a dime a dozen these days. Thus, the less frequent posting than on other venues. I like to take time just to think, do research, and try to be original when I can. <br /><br />Finally, regarding my current post about "idle gossip", I thought it worthwhile to point out the hypocrisy of the mudslinging crowd by slinging a little mud myself -- just to illustrate how the mainstream press is not usually subject to personal attack. What's good for the goose, etc. Plus I hate being serious all the time. It's not good for mental health.<br /><br />Finally -- as I have stated before, if more than one "Anonymous" starts posting, I'll cut them off as a courtesy to the people using original handles, who are trying to hold a discussion. Please use initials or a made-up name, just to avoid unnecessary confusion. Thanks.Karen Garciahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15612731479365562803noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-974773076690597683.post-17288805199310027902013-06-28T15:19:54.684-04:002013-06-28T15:19:54.684-04:00" Look, It's nice that there's a plac..." Look, It's nice that there's a place on the Internet where like-minded <br />people can find agreement, but sometimes it dulls their ability to take in <br />new ideas, or even to acknowledge that their own sexual mores, once <br />considered radical, are somewhat ossified."<br /><br />This statement, in addition to others about shortcomings in our comments is <br />enough for me to publicly request Karen to refuse any further comments from <br />the anonymous Anonymous. We don't need any more space taken up with his or <br />her (I believe it is a her) obsessive diatribes which sow discord (not <br />legitimate differences) and are insulting to those of us who work hard to bring up information that is of help to others in formulating our thinking and political action if needed.<br /><br />I also have serious questions about the real purpose of Anonymous' comments to Sardonicky. !? <br />Pearlnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-974773076690597683.post-35498758878302584342013-06-28T13:46:43.003-04:002013-06-28T13:46:43.003-04:00Thank you, Kat. (And Zee.)
But Zee, suggesting it...Thank you, Kat. (And Zee.)<br /><br />But Zee, suggesting it is highly possible that any male in Europe or North America is engaged at any time of the day in watching porn is NOT a "low slung aside." Rather, it is statistically relevant to dismissing the criticism of Greenwald by the NYDN.<br /><br />Can we at least concede that point?<br /><br />or failing that, may we at least concede that Jay's generation has a far different take on sexual mores than does my younger generation? We don't have to like porn to acknowledge its ubiquity in our culture, and its irrelevance in the larger NSA story.<br /><br />Further, Jay ignored my use of closed quotes at the beginning and end of the Gawker post. <br /><br />What's more telling is the larger success of that comment, which apparently eluded him.<br />That the commenter cleverly (even Pericles-ianly!) acknowledged the criticisms of GG before making (very cogently) the argument that GG's strengths and contributions over-rode those flaws worked. It was also incredibly effective within a comment board that is still "in flux" with regard to GG.<br /><br />As for Pearl's disappointment that I don't fit her doctrinaire need for consistency, so be it. I've not noticed that said doctrinaire positions make her arguments more effective to anyone but the already converted. Sigh. Look, It's nice that there's a place on the Internet where like-minded people can find agreement, but sometimes it dulls their ability to take in new ideas, or even to acknowledge that their own sexual mores, once considered radical, are somewhat ossified.<br /><br />I iterate (not reiterate, Jay) that there is nothing scabrous about what was reported about GG. And I would add that by getting one's panties in a knot over his porn dealings or tax liens not only disrespects GG's own response (i.e., it's not a big deal!) but does exactly what Karen complains about - takes the focus off of the real story, the NSA. <br /><br />WHICH IS TO SAY: that while Karen and Jay were busy being offended by trite gossip in the NYDN, there were new reports of CIA involvement in the NYPD. <br /><br />That's the real story. Pethaps best to follow up on that, Karen? Rather than picking apart some socialite reporter's irrelevant personal life because he dared tell us that GG is not unlike a whole lot of other private citizens, with their foibles and lawsuits and porn and tax liens. It is only a big deal if jay keeps insisting it is.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-974773076690597683.post-58334084748396466492013-06-28T11:35:06.482-04:002013-06-28T11:35:06.482-04:00Kat--
Well said!
Though I think that Jay has rea...Kat--<br /><br />Well said!<br /><br />Though I think that Jay has reason to be irritated by what he refers to as Anonymous' "low slung aside."<br /><br />Please, everyone, please calm down.Zeenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-974773076690597683.post-46404929437097658842013-06-28T10:51:44.317-04:002013-06-28T10:51:44.317-04:00Good grief! Why the suspicion? I think it is possi...Good grief! Why the suspicion? I think it is possible to support someone, to be a fan, and still have some criticisms.Katnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-974773076690597683.post-90992081290688370672013-06-28T09:48:29.785-04:002013-06-28T09:48:29.785-04:00http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/index.htm
This ...http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/index.htm<br /><br /><br />This will help us survive a flame thrower in our midst. <br />Pearlnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-974773076690597683.post-12384213709458781352013-06-28T00:19:47.899-04:002013-06-28T00:19:47.899-04:00@ Anonymous
In your comments at the end of the pr...@ Anonymous<br /><br />In your comments at the end of the previous post the slurs made against Glenn Greenwald, like “self-righteous,” “unrealistic,” “solipsistic,” “rigid,” etc., are found in paragraphs that lack quotation marks. YOU forgot the quotation marks; I didn’t not see them. And now you fault me for careless reading and not knowing where Gawker left off and your very own Anonymous self began? <br /><br />No matter. Those missing quotation marks around many paragraphs of your comment would not have made that much difference in my evaluation of what you and that other unnamed writer from Gawker were up to.<br /><br />The screed you so approvingly placed before us from Gawker is in no way in praise of Greenwald. It is craftily designed to sink Greenwald ever so slowly in the eyes of others on one count or another, nailed down by frequent repetition, which you carry on in this subsequent post.<br /><br />In a following comment, above, you repeat the same stuff as the Gawker writer. Another ploy is to give praise, then offer some readers a reason to take it away: "... I'm proud to call him a fellow American no matter where he lives right now." Oh yeah, he's one of those ex-pats in Brazil. Hmm.<br /><br />You reiterate yet again the same points broached by the tabloid and recycled in the comment from Gawker. But you're sophisticated and generous; you understand. What’s a little investment in porn? What’s a little corner-cutting with the IRS? Heh, heh. <br /><br />You keep assuring us, as if that's necessary, that Greenwald is not a sleaze, despite these several peccadilloes we keep reviewing. We aren’t “purists,” are we? –– shades of Obama’s dismissal of “purists.” <br /><br />Oh, and thank you for the low-slung aside addressed to me: “For all we know, you're watching porn as we speak.”<br /><br />Whether it’s Gawker speaking or yourself, you are both in agreement. It was you, Anonymous, who introduced the long Gawker passage in question as “one of the most admirable defenses of Greenwald … I've read.” Give. Me. A. Break.<br /><br />That Gawker quote you praised yesterday and your rehash today (of obscure, dated, nuanced and private issues) are brush marks of the same smear against Greenwald.Jay–Ottawahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10360356126450612113noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-974773076690597683.post-34290306727883360132013-06-27T23:45:35.298-04:002013-06-27T23:45:35.298-04:00@ Anonymous
For Izzy Stone, as for Aristophanes, ...@ Anonymous<br /><br />For Izzy Stone, as for Aristophanes, the figure of fun and the dangerous subversive are one and the same.Denis Nevillenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-974773076690597683.post-70702188519863835112013-06-27T22:16:24.915-04:002013-06-27T22:16:24.915-04:00"Do you live in a monastery? Good God, Jay, n..."Do you live in a monastery? Good God, Jay, none of what was reported about GG was untrue or even bad."<br /><br />Anonymous: I find this sentence troubling for a number of reasons which should be obvious. I am also troubled about a lot of the double speak coming from you. I don't mind other opinions but they should have clarity, reason and respect for others on our comment page. I don't feel that from you nor any kind of clarity and focus regarding your opinions regardless of their source of origin.<br /><br />Reread Karen's columns and learn how to operate the scalpel effectively.<br />Pearlnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-974773076690597683.post-63333093651886349882013-06-27T21:21:15.178-04:002013-06-27T21:21:15.178-04:00Thanks, Denis, for that succinct batch of quotes f...Thanks, Denis, for that succinct batch of quotes from Edward Bernays, Aldous Huxley, Milton Mayer, plus your own comments interspersed. I plan to provide printed copies of them to several relatives with substantial need of increased political consciousness. Unfortunately, it probably won't make much difference to most, but I keep trying anyway. One of my nieces has shown some signs of political awakening, but still has quite a long way to go. As for the average American, he/she ranks somewhere between a head of cabbage and a nematode.<br /><br />And I've been meaning to read some Bernays myself, hopefully I can find the time later this summer. (Right now I've got a pile of books, scientific and not, with higher priority).Fred Drumlevitchhttp://www.freddrumlevitch.blogspot.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-974773076690597683.post-82978209491857238662013-06-27T19:11:59.875-04:002013-06-27T19:11:59.875-04:00
Thanks, Pearl.
Anonymous, should you choose ... <br /><br />Thanks, Pearl. <br /><br />Anonymous, should you choose to sign the letter, you can check the anonymous box. James F Traynornoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-974773076690597683.post-49930960647953194642013-06-27T18:27:16.303-04:002013-06-27T18:27:16.303-04:00http://www.justforeignpolicy.org/act/snowden http://www.justforeignpolicy.org/act/snowden Pearlnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-974773076690597683.post-11968776562674280892013-06-27T17:56:54.937-04:002013-06-27T17:56:54.937-04:00addendum to comment to Jay:
when I wrote that I di...addendum to comment to Jay:<br />when I wrote that I didn't care "what kind of porn he invests in" I was thinking "gay or straight - so what?" Although it seemed obvious to me, I should have further qualified it as "porn made between/among consenting adults".<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-974773076690597683.post-24639452676407676482013-06-27T17:46:55.331-04:002013-06-27T17:46:55.331-04:00Denis,
Aristophanes made fun of everyone, but cons...Denis,<br />Aristophanes made fun of everyone, but consult your I.F. Stone, it was a little more complicated than Socrates earning a bad rap. A couple of add'l recent books that also shed light (more light than I.F. Stone!) are Bettany Hughes weighty "The Hemlock Cup" and the quick-and-dirty "The Death of Socrates" - both by woman scholars and both delish.<br /><br />I'll admit being amazed that the kind of people who find the VS catalogue either "pornographic" or "fatuous" somehow manage to read through enough of it to form an opinion as to the purity of its content. Hmmmm... Right or left, the Puritan nature of America lives! Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-974773076690597683.post-72045159453024099812013-06-27T17:29:55.070-04:002013-06-27T17:29:55.070-04:00Jay,
You apparently missed that I clearly stated t...Jay,<br />You apparently missed that I clearly stated that the comment I added to the last post was from a Gawker reader, and I thought it was high praise - both measured, thoughtful, and wide-ranging in its assessment. Go back and read it, maybe you'll get it on second read.<br /><br />Separately, there's nothing "mucky" about what The Daily News reported. GG did nothing illegal, nor does he dispute their facts. I merely pointed out that:<br />1) Porn is both legal and ubiquitous, so why be offended that he was involved as an investor? For all we know, you're watching porn as we speak. SO WHAT? I don't care. <br />2) He's a lawyer, and he sued someone. So???? <br />3) So he owes the IRS money. For God's sake, Jay, in this economy a lot of ordinary people owe the IRS money, it doesn't make them bad people. About a quarter of my colleagues have the IRS putting liens on their earnings. SO WHAT? <br /><br />GG is who he is. I'm proud to call him a fellow American no matter where he lives right now, what he owes the IRS, or what kind of porn he invests in. And, as with Spitzer, I don't expect the boldest lawyers (or any other profession) to be perfect choir boys. <br /><br />Do you live in a monastery? Good God, Jay, none of what was reported about GG was untrue or even bad. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-974773076690597683.post-80787320178458513882013-06-27T17:08:26.507-04:002013-06-27T17:08:26.507-04:00@Anonymous
From the last two comments (yours) on ...@Anonymous<br /><br />From the last two comments (yours) on Karen’s previous post:<br /><br />"Some may find this [Greenwald's] approach self-righteous and unrealistic. Others, solipsistic and rigid. I think it is all those things, but those things are the entire point of journalism."<br /><br />HUH?<br /><br />"One may disagree with his notion of "truth”, one may disagree with his tactics, but one cannot dispute the value of it over process and tabloid."<br /><br />HUH?<br /><br />"Self-righteous?" "Unrealistic." "Solipsistic?" "Rigid?" "His notion of 'truth?'" "His tactics."<br /><br />You still talking about Glenn Greenwald?<br /><br />I don't think Greenwald and his writing are remotely described by any of the qualities you just pinned on him. What you say boils down to faint praise, as in an oh-so-subtle attack against him and his work.<br /><br />And here on this later post by Karen you're promptly first to recite in well-ordered detail the tabloid's supposed muck on Greenwald.–– and to chuckle it all away dismissively, of course, but item by item, nevertheless. How sophisticated, how thorough.<br /><br />What are you up to?Jay–Ottawahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10360356126450612113noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-974773076690597683.post-51821739991531971552013-06-27T17:05:49.367-04:002013-06-27T17:05:49.367-04:00My wife thinks Victoria's Secret ads are porni...My wife thinks Victoria's Secret ads are pornigraphic, while I say they're an unsuccessful attempt at the erotic; the ladies' expressions are a little fatuous. Glenn Greenwald's sexual predilections are his business. <br /><br />I really admired his handling of the Meet the Press incident. As for the NYDN thing. Well hell, that's just plain embarrassing. Glenn Greenwald and Karen Garcia- two of my favorite people.<br /><br />As for Aristophanes, I did think he gave Socrates something of a bad rap. So Socrates liked the parties<br />the oligarchs threw, but he also liked to hang out in the Athenian red light district. Kind of like Greenwald's hanging out in the intellectual red light district of Twitter.<br /> <br /> James F Traynornoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-974773076690597683.post-25038254418037762322013-06-27T16:43:03.025-04:002013-06-27T16:43:03.025-04:00"“Look at the orators in our republics; as lo...<i> "“Look at the orators in our republics; as long as they are poor, both state and people can only praise their uprightness; but once they are fattened on the public funds, they conceive a hatred for justice, plan intrigues against the people and attack the democracy.” </i> – Aristophanes, Plutus<br /><br />So, in other words, human nature has changed but little since the Golden Age Of Greece.<br /><br /><i> "Power tends to corrupt, absolute power corrupts absolutely." </i> --Lord ActonZeenoreply@blogger.com