Yet another huge vindication of Edward Snowden's whistleblowing and the reporting it enabled:
The European Court of Human Rights rules the mass surveillance program of GCHQ (the UK version of NSA) illegal: violating both privacy rights and press freedom.
While the west is currently wallowing in an orgy of self-righteousness over Belarus' thuggish arrest of a dissident journalist, realize that the two people who arguably did the most to expose the truth about the US Govt -- @Snowden & Assange -- are exiled & imprisoned.
Assange and Snowden are the west's Roman Protasevich, and are treated exactly the same as Lukashenko treats him, up to and including the lawless forced landing of a Bolivian plane in order to nab Snowden. The US/UK have no moral credibility to preach.
It's always fun and easy to condemn the bad acts of distant, enemy governments. Doing that lets you feel better about your own tribe.
But in the US/UK - like Belarus - journalists are "free" only if they stay unthreatening. Those who expose power end up in Belmarsh or exile.
The US Govt isn't attempting to imprison Snowden and Assange for life *despite* the crucial work they did in exposing state corruption, lies and illegalities. They're being persecuted precisely *because* they did that. Condemning Belarus is designed to distract you from that.
Here's the NYT today trying to explain why the US/EU's forced downing of Bolivia's plane to arrest Snowden is different and more noble than what Belarus did to the Ryanair plane to arrest their dissident. And note the use of "whataboutism": inquiries about consistency are barred.
This has been the core, overarching function of the corporate press for decades: acting as state media, they insist that what the US does -- CIA assassinations, coups, disinformation campaigns, dictator support -- is better and more noble than the same acts done by US enemies.
Our forcing down a plane in order to arrest someone we think is on board is better than their forcing down a plane in order to arrest someone they think is on board. 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸
One key fact that's being overlooked (on purpose) in the discussion of what the US/EU did to Evo Morales' plane is that they thought Snowden was on board because Bolivia had granted him asylum. Think about that: Obama was prepared to violate asylum norms in order to nab Snowden.
Here's @mtaibbi on the lengths the US corporate press is willing to go to whitewash what Obama and key EU states did when forcing the Bolivian President's plane to land so that they could kidnap Snowden out of Bolivian asylum custody.
Please take the time to watch this video in which Russell Brand (@rustyrockets), long associated with the left, explains why the united pre-election censorship by the corporate press and Silicon Valley of the Biden Family laptop archive was so dangerous:
Brand uses clips of the interview I did with him, but this is his 15-minute monologue -- very insightful and plain-spoken -- about why this was such a menacing event.
US media & tech giants united to bar millions of Americans from hearing this reporting before they voted.
Relatedly: this @DouthatNYT column is very smart and important. As the liberal-left gains cultural hegemony and political power, they no longer need or want anti-authoritarian theorists like Foucault. Factions that become dominant turn authoritarian:
What Belarus did, while illegal, is not unprecedented. The dangerous tactic was pioneered by the same U.S. and E.U. officials now righteously condemning it.
At the time, EU states falsely denied that they forced the downing of Bolivia's plane, but ultimately admitted the truth.
The whole world suspected who was behind this dangerous and illegal downing of the Bolivian President's jet: the US.
In 2013, it was left to the US State Dept spokesperson -- Jen Psaki -- to answer questions. As always, she refused even basic transparency about the US role.
The only reason Pelosi's More-Capitol-Police-Funding bill passed is because @AOC, @JamaalBowmanNY & @RashidaTlaib spent a year demanding "Defund the Police!" for everyone else, but then did what they had to (voted "present") to ensure they got more police funding for themselves:
It's one of the most cynical, opportunistic and deceitful things I've seen in awhile. Credit to @CoriBush, @IlhanMN & @AyannaPressley for voting with all GOP House members to try to stop this bill, but at least 3 Squad members ensured more police funding.
Three Squad members -- all of whom recently chanted "Defund the Police" -- all had the power to kill a $1.9 billion increase in Capitol Police and security spending.
Three other Squad members -- @IlhanMN, @CoriBush and @RepPressley -- joined all GOP members in voting "no." But all Squad members previously said they opposed this.
So just enough of them voted "no" to create an appearance of radical resistance while achieving nothing.
The Intercept's editors went to the media reporters at both WashPost and The Daily Beast to voice all sorts of accusations against me. Their smear campaign never ends.
These are the emails I get when The Intercept and their well-funded staff attack me. Thanks for the harassment.
When will The Intercept stop endangering journalists and subjecting us to harassment campaigns by inciting this sort of hatred among their small but vicious readership?
They already have Antifa followers vowing to target the journalists attacked by them:
Also, I cannot wait for either one of these articles The Intercept tried to plant against me -- in the WashPost or The Daily Beast -- to be published so that I can publish my full responses to their questions about the Intercept and their top editors. 🙏
Less than a year after Democrats and liberals led a nationwide anti-police protest movement, they unite to vote to spend $2 billion more to boost security at the Capitol (6 Squad members, to their credit, voted no or abstained).
No matter what is done to the police, those who control power and money will always have ample armed security to protect themselves, as House Democrats just demonstrated.
See this thread on why the Democrats' bill which just passed by one vote -- that, among other things, spends $2 billion more on Capitol police and otherwise increases security state measures at the Capitol -- is so dangerous: