Comment

Greenwald Asks: "Are There Any Meaningful Differences Between Ellsberg and Snowden?"

505
LeftyRambles2413 (HappyWarrior)6/14/2013 9:54:59 am PDT

re: #499 lawhawk

I get that Stone’s a conspiracy nutter and thinks everything the government does is evil. They’ve done some pretty awful things and treated entire classes of people like crap. Stone’s Born on the Fourth of July is probably his best film (and Tom Cruise’s best performance by far) - and it was spot-on in how the government failed veterans, especially those who came back from Vietnam with all manner of injury. They were treated as disposable and that resonated with Stone because he was of the Vietnam era.

But he repeatedly veers off into conspiracy land.

The Snowden claims aren’t a conspiracy. They aren’t even half of what Snowden and Greenwald claim them to be (that is if Greenwald can even understand the material he was given, which upon further consideration finds that he doesn’t). Far from being groundbreaking news, he’s rehashing a program that was known in 2006, and which appears to have been acting in a lawful manner. There’s no evidence proffered that it was anything but a legal program with checks and balances - only Greenwald’s innuendo to suggest that something might be amiss.

And that doesn’t begin to touch on Snowden’s claims about the US hacking China. Even if everyone suspects it’s occurring, Snowden isn’t the one to make that public. That’s Espionage Act violation at its core.

Good director, just a bad political and historical commentator. His new show argues that FDR let Pearl Harbor happen on purpose- the original Turther movement.