[–] obnoxious_commenter [S] ago
A question i posed to a friend...
Everyone asks, " What is the limited hangout operation concealing?"
Any international or national non-MSM media that is harmful to US interests and that can potentially threaten control over thoses interests.
In following the events in Syria, the source of the chemical strike were revealed. The plan to strike Syria failed because Russian media and US non-msm was influential enough to persuade the US into not attacking Assads regime. This was damaging to US interests and its control in geopolitics.
A few months later, Snowden and Greenwald begin the conversation on issues that are not damaging to US interests, but are of great interest to Americans. Now, the US is back in Syria, now trying to eradicate ISIS and accusing Syria of more chemical weapons attack.
[–] obnoxious_commenter [S] ago (edited ago)
That's Greenwald, from December of 2013. 10 months later...
Glenn Greenwald Speaks - Ottawa - 10/25/2014
At the 1:38:00 mark, oh this is not an exact transcript of this part. I am just human and did as best as I could.
In regards to peoples temptations that he has all the documents with regards to climate change, and that he can release them at any moment....
Well he does have all the documents that Snowden gave him. Those he has, but is clearly not willing to release them all. Why wont he?
Greenwald said he wrote about climate change, but it was in relation to the topics covered in the Snowden revelations. Interesting is how he said that if snowden took documents on climate change, it would of been reported on already. Then, was the article on spying at Climate conferences not about climate change, but on government spying? Well no shit, he just said so! Its all ok so long as its to prevent the threat of terrorism. Remember, Greenwald said this about our instincts and emotions.
Greenwald juxtaposes the threat of climate change to that of terrorism by distinguishing each as a long term or short term threat. So topics of concern which undermine how terrorism triggers a tribal instinct in us, which is that we have been attacked as a collective, need to be guarded against. Climate change can manipulate the collective into not taking terrorism as a serious threat, which could leave us vulnerable to terrorists.
However, he agreed with the premise of the question, that human beings are bad at evaluating risk. He implies terrorism is a short term issue while climate change is long term. The collective has chosen terrorism to be more pertinent even though he agrees that climate change is a larger threat. That is some hella cognitive dissonance right there and a display of how journalism has little to no influence on policy.
In terms of the US Government and its national interests, short term issues are more important to the collective than long term issues, especially when those issues effect the individual. This is the knowledge which empowers propaganda and explains why topics like climate change, must not be allowed to threaten the collective belief of ongoing terrorist threat.