Part II- David Miranda’s Detainment: The Calico Kitten in Wag-The-Dog?

Dissecting Contradictions & Sensationalism in the NSA-Snowden Scandal

In August 2013 Glenn Greenwald's husband, David Miranda, was detained and questioned by authorities at London's Heathrow airport. Miranda was coming from Berlin, where he had met with Laura Poitras and was given thousands of top-secret Snowden-NSA documents. He had arrived at London’s Heathrow airport while carrying in his laptop a large cache of the highly-publicized NSA documents. He was stopped and interrogated by British authorities for nearly nine hours.

The sensational story of David Miranda’s detention became headline news for nearly two weeks. Mainstream outlets, from CNN and NBC, to the New York Times, Washington Post and NPR, allocated around the clock coverage of the story. For weeks Glenn Greenwald gave numerous interviews of the story and the victimization of his innocent husband. Outside of a handful of news publications no one delved into the facts, contradictions, serious questions, and even more serious implications contained in this sensational plot. Run a search and read the extensive mainstream media coverage of the plot, and you’ll see that every single one of them follows the exact same script and narration to the T.

Researching the history of and combining related facts and statements on Greenwald’s Miranda drama results in dozens of contradictions, unanswered questions, and never-examined implications. For the purpose of this analysis I am going to present only the most significant facts, elements and questions.

Why Me?! What’s in My Laptop?

Let us begin with why and how Glenn Greenwald’s husband, David Miranda, ended up in Berlin, and then in London’s Heathrow Airport, while carrying a laptop loaded with the most secretive stolen NSA documents.

When the story first broke in the media there was a cursory explanation for Miranda’s trip: Oh, he was in Berlin for a short vacation, and while he was there he met with Laura Poitras and downloaded some of the explosive NSA documents into his laptop to take  back with him to Brazil per his husband’s request.

Miranda was on his way home to Rio after a week's vacation in Berlin, where he had visited Poitras, who'd given him some of the Snowden documents to bring back to Greenwald… Greenwald, who'd asked Miranda to bring him the materials, was outraged.

After that initial report went out as the main story line, and became the official narrative, a second version emerged; albeit, not the one publicized as the main narrative.  According to this second version, contradicting the first one, Miranda was hired as Guardian’s employee, he was paid by Guardian to go to Berlin and get the mother-load NSA cache from Laura Poitras. Guardian nonchalantly updated its initial version [All Emphasis Mine]:

While in Berlin, Miranda had visited Laura Poitras, the US film-maker who has also been working on the Snowden files with Greenwald and the Guardian. The Guardian paid for Miranda's flights.

Of course, later, that version became a bit more comprehensive :

First, we learned from The New York Times that The Guardian financed Miranda’s trip to Germany and back. This means Miranda was conducting some sort of official business for the publication. Around the same time, Amnesty International referred to Miranda as “a Guardian newspaper employee.”

No matter- the main publicized narrative remained the same: The poor innocent damsel took an innocent vacation in Berlin, made a brief stop to obtain and download a few thousand top secret stolen documents, went to London carrying this loaded laptop, and lo and behold, the poor thing was stopped and harassed by British authority.

Meanwhile, David Miranda’s version of his role and knowledge began changing and evolving as well.

During the initial stage Miranda batted his eyes filled with confusion and tears, and told Guardian how he was shocked by this unexpected detention, and that he didn’t even know what kind of documents had been downloaded to his laptop. Okay, let’s hear it from his own mouth via the culprit: Guardian [All Emphasis Mine]:

“It is clear why those took me. It’s because I’m Glenn’s partner. Because I went to Berlin. Because Laura lives there. So they think I have a big connection,” he said. “But I don’t have a role. I don’t look at documents. I don’t even know if it was documents that I was carrying. It could have been for the movie that Laura is working on.”

So the outrageous story of this abused and innocent and unknowing damsel plays and plays, and plays again. For days. For weeks. On every channel and print publication.

A few months later, David Miranda’s version of his knowledge and his role in this detention episode changed dramatically. After all it is a drama. In a very lengthy interview over several days, Miranda confessed. Let’s read a few excerpts from the lengthy interview [All Emphasis Mine]:

Miranda knew very well that he was traveling from Rio to Berlin to see Greenwald’s reporting partner, documentarian Laura Poitras, and that he would be returning through the U.K., all the time carrying a heavily encrypted flash drive directly related to the trove of documents that former and now notorious CIA employee Edward Snowden had vacuumed from the National Security Agency and had given to Greenwald earlier in the year.

Miranda started making arrangements to fly to Berlin and stay with Poitras. The simplest reason, Miranda explains: “Laura doesn’t like to talk on the phone.” …

“David was going to Berlin to talk to Laura anyways,” Greenwald says, “and so he suggested that he just take the documents. Laura trusts David completely, so that became the new plan.” Because Miranda was performing a service to support articles that were to be written for The Guardian, the newspaper paid for his trip and made his travel arrangements

Now that the record establishes the real detention drama beginning as a planned and paid courier service performed knowingly by Greenwald’s husband, contrary to how the mainstream media and the couple played it out initially, we must move to the next equally important fact.

Not All Roads Go Through London

Even before the detention drama, right from the beginning, immediately after the initial Snowden-NSA story broke, Glenn Greenwald’s publicity rounds and his interviews emphasized that he and his partner had become major targets. He consistently expressed his suspicions that they were being watched and spied upon. Of course, it made sense. But here is what didn’t make any sense whatsoever: Sending your lover-husband to Germany to download thousands of top-secret stolen documents sought by all the super powers in the world, under their watchful eyes, and then carry it in a laptop around the world and international airports.

How could one claim that he is a major target, that he and his husband are being watched and spied upon, being threatened, and being robbed, yet, in the midst of all these circumstances, that same person send his lover around the globe to download the most-wanted government data and carry it through antagonistic countries’ airports?

In June 2013, Glenn Greenwald was busy giving interviews on him and his husband becoming a target, and having to take major precautions due to being watched:

Not surprisingly, since Greenwald has deepened his relationship with Snowden, he has taken extra digital security precautions, including communicating only by encrypted e-mail.

“When I was in Hong Kong, I spoke to my partner in [Rio de Janeiro] via Skype and told him I would send an electronic encrypted copy of the documents,” Greenwald noted. “I did not end up doing it. Two days later his laptop was stolen from our house and nothing else was taken. Nothing like that has happened before. I am not saying it’s connected to this, but obviously the possibility exists.”


Here is an excerpt from an interview with Miranda on their laptops being stolen and becoming a target as early as June 2013, when Greenwald went to Hong Kong:

“And that’s when it all started,” Miranda says in a once-upon-a-time tone. It was with this Skype conversation, the couple believe, that Miranda became a target not only of government surveillance but intimidation to suppress Greenwald’s journalism.

Another important point relevant to this insane drama scenario has to do with Greenwald’s husband’s transit airport choice: London’s Heathrow. Of all the countries in the world the two main countries most affected by Edward Snowden’s NSA leaks are: The United States and the United Kingdom.

Glenn Greenwald and his husband did not only ignore the supposed threats and surveillance. David Miranda didn’t only go to Germany, download thousands of stolen NSA documents, and bring those top secret documents back to Glenn Greenwald in Brazil. He also chose the UK’s, London’s, Heathrow airport as his long-haul transit hub.

In case you are not aware, after the United States, Snowden’s leaks targeted and affected the United Kingdom the most. How could Greenwald and Miranda not register this fact? After all, their reports from June 2013 until Miranda’s drama contained many headlines involving the UK. Let me give you a few examples:

June 17, 2013

Documents uncovered by Edward Snowden show British eavesdropping agency GCHQ repeatedly hacking into diplomats' phones, emails: report

June 22, 2013

“GCHQ is worse than US', says whistleblower Edward Snowden as he claims British spies are collecting huge amounts of data from internet and phone calls”

June 21, 2013

GCHQ taps fibre-optic cables for secret access to world's communications

July 7 2013

GCHQ Surveillance: The Power of Britain's Data Vacuum

July 20, 203

On July 20 GCHQ ordered Guardian to destroy Snowden files because its servers weren't secure

In a very thought-provoking article Bob Cesca also asks the same question:

Miranda was transporting volumes of stolen classified documents between two prime movers associated with one of the biggest stories of the Summer — a story that’s embarrassed both the United States and the United Kingdom. He was being paid to do it. Anyone who expected a smooth journey through an international airport without any security issues was lying to themselves.

So why would Greenwald and Miranda pick one of the most risky and threatening airports in the world for their mission involving transporting some of the world’s most classified official documents?

Was London the only available hub to travel from Berlin-Germany to Rio-Brazil? Of course not. Just the opposite. Just run a simple query, and you’ll see that Miranda could have chosen among dozens of flights other than London’s Heathrow. He could have gotten to Brazil via transit in Madrid-Spain, or, Lisbon-Portugal, or, Paris-France, or … But no. Greenwald and his courier husband picked a British airport: London’s Heathrow.

Why Not a New Venture: The World’s Best Encryption Services!

Immediately following his husband’s Heathrow Detention Drama Greenwald began handing out his in-advance-prepared canned answer to those who questioned the sanity of having his husband travelling around the world with a laptop filled with thousands of stolen NSA documents. He parroted the following answer: No worries, because the documents were so magnificently encrypted that no one could ever decrypt them. Neither NSA nor MI6, nor MI5, nor CIA, nor any terrorists nor anyone in the world could ever access those documents. Yeah, we are that good. Period. Let’s check out one version of this canned response:

“We both now typically and automatically encrypt all documents and work we carry – not just for the NSA stories,” Greenwald said in an email to Forbes. “So everything he had – for his personal use and everything else – was heavily encrypted, and I’m not worried at all that they can break that.”

Here is another one, where Greenwald claims to have mastered the world’s most amazing encryption technique unbreakable by anyone in this world:

But he told ITV News "even the most advanced intelligence services" would find it "impossible" to access information that he and Mr. Miranda carry across the world because it is too well encrypted.

The responses from my former NSA sources were unanimous. They basically said the following:

Wow. This is phenomenal. This dude didn’t have to sell out to PayPal billionaire Omidyar. With that kind of ability, the man can set up his own shop and make billions of dollars!

Here is a more eloquent and sophisticated response to Greenwald’s claim to have come up with the world’s safest encryption mastery:

Assessments within the information security industry, however, suggest Greenwald’s confidence may be misplaced. In fact, when Conrad Constantine, a research team engineer at AlienVault, was asked what information the authorities may be able to glean from Miranda’s devices, “The short answer," he said, "is whatever they want.”


Let’s put this claim of being a genius aside, and let’s talk about another lie by omission that was exposed after the initial story became the official story.

Greenwald’s courier husband was not only carrying a laptop loaded with top secret stolen NSA documents that were geniusly encrypted. He was also carrying in his pocket a piece of paper that had the codes and passwords to some of these top secret NSA documents. I am not joking. If you had not heard of this before you have the mainstream media to be thankful for, since they made sure that they followed the original scripted-narrative all along.

Here is a follow up exposé on how David Miranda carried the instructions and passwords to some of the so-called encrypted top secret files in his laptop:

The government’s statement claims possession of the documents by Mr. Miranda, Mr. Greenwald and the Guardian posed a threat to national security, particularly because Mr. Miranda was carrying a password alongside a range of electronic devices on which classified documents were stored. Keeping passwords separate from the computer files or accounts to which they relate is a basic security step.

Among the unencrypted documents ... was a piece of paper that included the password for decrypting one of the encrypted files on the external hard drive recovered from the claimant… “The fact that ... the claimant was carrying on his person a handwritten piece of paper containing the password for one of the encrypted files ... is a sign of very poor information security practice.”

As always Greenwald tried to recover from the exposé with his usual fudging. According to him having the instructions, codes and passwords would not help the GCHQ in decryption of the documents. After all, didn’t we say he’d come up with the world’s greatest one and only genius encryption? However, the UK government says otherwise:

Oliver Robbins, a senior adviser for intelligence security and resilience in the Cabinet Office, said that while the memory sticks Mr. Miranda had were encrypted, the Government had been able to view 58,000 pages of highly classified documents on one of them because Mr. Miranda had passwords and basic instructions written on paper he was carrying.

Of course, according to Mr. Greenwald they are all lying, and no one should ever consider his own thick record when it comes to lying and fudging. The example below is a good one to illustrate one more time this consistent trait exhibited by Mr. Greenwald.

Greenwald: They “Denied” My Husband’s Request for an Attorney

We already talked about Greenwald making hundreds of publicity rounds, giving mainstream media interviews, and milking this bizarre-ly scripted detention drama. We have already covered the initial omission of his husband’s paid trip as a courier (aka mule) on the payroll of the Guardian. But that’s not all.

To make the theatrical performance more dramatic and heart-wrenching, Glenn Greenwald went on record dozens of times claiming that his mule husband was denied his right to an attorney while under interrogation. Let us quote him directly from one of his many mainstream interview records [All Emphasis Mine]:

“This is a profound attack on press freedoms and the news gathering process,” Greenwald said. “To detain my partner for a full nine hours while denying him a lawyer, and then seize large amounts of his possessions, is clearly intended to send a message of intimidation to those of us who have been reporting on the NSA and GCHQ. The actions of the UK pose a serious threat to journalists everywhere.

Here is Greenwald again, even more specific in his lie:

The official - who refused to give his name but would only identify himself by his number: 203654 - said David was not allowed to have a lawyer present, nor would they allow me to talk to him.

Then, one day later, the Guardian’s story changed. So did Greenwald’s. Only after the media reported that Miranda “refused” a lawyer because he didn’t trust the UK. Here is Guardian changing its original story line again:

He was offered a lawyer and a cup of water, but he refused both because he did not trust the authorities.

A Publicity Stunt, or, the Calico Kitten in Wag-the-Dog?

Now that we have documented the contradictions and lies pertaining to David Miranda’s paid and in-advance-calculated mission trip, Greenwald and Miranda’s never-explained bizarre choice of the London Heathrow Hub, the genius encryption claim accompanied by instructions and password codes for the treasures in Miranda’s laptop, the lies on being denied an attorney, let’s examine the possible purposes for this sensationalized Heathrow Detention Drama.

I am going to go back to the lengthy interview given by David Miranda to Natasha Vargas-Cooper. According to Miranda, his stay with Laura Poitras in Berlin had other equally important business purposes. What business matters? Well, according to Miranda, during this time period, in August 2013, Greenwald and Poitras were spending time and energy securing the best and most lucrative movie and other life-rights deals [All Emphasis Mine]:

Miranda started making arrangements to fly to Berlin and stay with Poitras. The simplest reason, Miranda explains: “Laura doesn’t like to talk on the phone.” And there was plenty to talk about — primarily movie rights. Studios started courting Miranda, Greenwald, and Poitras for rights to their story since Poitras’ first images of an unshaven Snowden began to saturate the news cycle. (All signs point to a Sony-helmed production with Ed Norton perhaps playing Greenwald; Greenwald says he doesn’t care much which actor is chosen, but half-jokingly adds that only David Miranda could play David Miranda — “Who else could be so smoldering and broody?”) He planned to go Berlin to meet with Poitras and her editors to strategize on getting the best and “most serious” version of their story made into a movie, Miranda says.

Miranda flew to Berlin on Aug. 18 and did the typical club and upscale restaurant scene with Poitras and some of her friends in and around Alexanderplatz. Poitras and Miranda hashed out some details about movie rights.

Now remember, this is only two months after the Snowden-NSA story became public. Yet we have Greenwald and Poitras already busily involved in securing the best and most lucrative movie and book right deals. Could this be a strategically timed marketing and publicity stunt to drive up the price of their business, movie and book deals? Was this a marketing ploy created by Poitras-Greenwald and Miranda-who is also striving for high-sums and movie deals? Before you write-off such a logical possibility, consider it based on Miranda’s talent, goals and objectives [All Emphasis Mine]:

Miranda has the day off from a cramped school week that includes a major group project on branding and marketing for a local café. Miranda is in his final year at university, where he is majoring in communications. He would ideally like to become a marketing and communications specialist for a major media company, particularly one with a thriving video game department.

Glenn and I have talked all the time about what doing these stories would do to our lives. Since we met, I’ve pushed him and supported him,” Miranda says. He starts counting on his fingers: “I’ve helped him negotiate contracts; I make sure he gets paid what he deserves — Glenn just wants to work and sometimes will do it for cheap.

How much publicity would a well-plotted and well-acted detention drama at Heathrow Airport create? A lot. Didn’t it? How much value would it add to their movie and book rights? Tremendously, of course. Wouldn’t it? Thus, considering all the contradictions, omissions, lies, and exaggerations, could this be a publicity stunt? Highly possible.

There is also a logical possibility of even higher-level directorates and producers for this melodramatic detention story that never added up. Let us watch a short clip from another one of my favorite movies, Wag the Dog, in order to understand what I’m referring to:

Had the establishment and their script writers decided to insert a cat in their wag-the-dog script? If so, which character is David Miranda in this scripted drama? Is he the Albanian damsel running across Heathrow Airport? Or is he the Calico Kitten being held, shown-off and commoditized by the damsel (his wife-Glenn Greenwald)? I leave the answer up to you. Your call.

# # # #

Sibel Edmonds’ Series on NSA-Snowden-Glenn Greenwald

Part I: The Doomsday Insurance Cache That Was, and Then Never Was

Dear Mr. Snowden, It’s Time to Come Out & Take a Stand Publicly as to Your Intentions

Establishment-Made Heroes, Blind Seekers of Saviors & Suckers

Green-Light for Greenwald: Government Duplicity or Government Duality?

Greenwald-Omidyar Venture: Blurring Lines Between Being A Source & Being A Journalist

Greenwald Goes on Record: “I Don’t Doubt PayPal Cooperates with NSA!”

BFP Report- Omidyar’s PayPal Corporation Said To Be Implicated in Withheld NSA Documents

Checkbook Journalism & Leaking to the Highest Bidder

Sibel Edmonds is the Publisher & Editor of Boiling Frogs Post and the author of the Memoir Classified Woman: The Sibel Edmonds Story. She is the recipient of the 2006 PEN Newman's Own First Amendment Award for her “commitment to preserving the free flow of information in the United States in a time of growing international isolation and increasing government secrecy” Ms. Edmonds has a MA in Public Policy and International Commerce from George Mason University, a BA in Criminal Justice and Psychology from George Washington University.

FB Like

Share This

This site depends….

This site depends exclusively on readers’ support. Please help us continue by SUBSCRIBING, and by ordering our EXCLUSIVE BFP DVDs.


  1. Sibel: thanks for giving so much substance to my gut-feelings. It all felt to glib, too thought out and improvised at the same time, too orchestrated. Now I know why. Articles like this, which don’t prove anything but carefully present the facts of the case, are much too rare. But we need them to dissect future scenes of the play ourselves. Keep it up!

    • CuChulainn says:

      Tjeerd,since your website gives no email (though there is a place for an email address) let me make the banal correction that the noun is belief, not believe. Thanks for your wonderful website & stimulating work.

  2. Since the media didn’t focus on the passwords/instructions (blows my mind, BTW), could there be a ploy beyond publicity? Something like ‘how can we allow the UK access to the docs and.make it look innocent?’

    I have no clue what these Keystone reporters have been up to with these stunts and ridiculous claims, but it’s just unflipping believable. Period.

    Good work and hilarious writing, Sibel. Keep it up!

  3. colinjames says:

    Sibel Edmonds: keepin it real since September 11, 2001.

    I swear to gawd it’s like the entire world is turning into a made for TV movie. A bad one. Cheeseball. Only, the actors are making a mint instead of trying to salvage a career from the ashes of their former fifteen minutes of fame, like the cast of 90210 or something. Hey maybe Luke Perry can play GG! And whats-his-f*ck can play Miranda… the wanna-be DJ guy, Brian something? Ahh who gives a crap… Eff GG and this rapidly turning into a ridiculous sideshow from what was once a seeming godsend to the public interest. This is really starting to pitas me off. Good work as always.

  4. he carried a password on paper in his own handwriting??
    will that go in the movie?

  5. Thanks again Sibel. As much as I enjoy you’re interest in Greenwald of late, I wonder why it matters at this point. Yes, he’ll get rich (assuming the story has legs this year) and this new venture with a publisher will go to a point until he’s bored with it or it fades in memory. We don’t know where the story will take us. We also don’t know if these short opps (If that’s what they were) lead to anything more than the next MSM feed to support ongoing projects De Jour, bla bla. I agree, it’s yet another chunk of “Feeding” we see over and over.

    My point? A rabbit hole is just that. Chase it at your leisure or peril depending on point of view. It could be nothing more than another fake drama to get people comfortable with being scanned/watched/etc. We have those in abundance.

    What’s to be gained following this small time noise maker living in paradise with his boyfriend? Brazil? Really?

    Obviously I’m baiting, so by all means, clear the air on why you think this is worth you’re time 😉

    • Eric, I know you weren’t asking me, but I’m compelled to respond.

      WTF? Really?

      1. Your slope is pretty slippery. Think about the logical conclusions of what you’ve asked/suggested, when applied to any current issues.
      2. I’d imagine that the exposure of gg is not only important for everybody, as it pertains to evidence of serious and ongoing crimes against everybody, but a little extra personal for Sibel,since she sacrificed so much to bring similar evidence to the public. In light of this, I also imagine your question/suggestion is insulting. It is to me, though that may not have been your intention.
      3. Just think about the implications of what gg and the oligarch led keystone journos are setting up for future attempts at whistle blowing.

      • Right. This is going to have incredible consequences: from damage to the notion of whistleblowing & whistleblowers to “The Worst” form of corporate media that has ever existed. With Internet we were supposed to go the other way: from corporate-government controlled info to the people-sourced. Now we are seeing the opposite. It is that, and the biggest damage to the whistleblowers and the public perception of WB’ing. And much more, including the creation of Panopticon state perception…

        Xicha, please keep a record of those who are not seeing now and holding on to their notion of significant vs insignificant. When the time comes I want to address them directly;-)

      • Xicha (and Sibel) It was not my intent to insult anyone. Playing a little “Devil’s Advocate” into the conversation. Hopefully, that’s OK. I assumed the potential “Panopticon” (Good One BTW) and all it’s implications were talked to death here and other places. Perhaps Not.

        • I understand Eric. I’m also amazed at the thickness of Sibel’s skin, with all the insults, discounting, and hand-waving she has been enduring on forums like twitter. Please don’t take my reply as an insult to you – just trying to relay the significance and frustration, and opportunity involved. These exposes are having a real effect and can be supported. Thanks

        • Eric, I didn’t take it as an insult.

          More than Panopticon angle, I’m concerned about the impact on whistleblowing and whistleblowers. Can you imagine what it would do to past-current and future WBs when (and if) the dark side (the nefarious side) of this story comes out?
          It’s been a constant battle to establish the importance, legitimacy, of “Real” whistleblowers. I believe, in the last few years, with people like Drake, Binney, … people began to see the WB’s service and sacrifices … This guy is being marketed as a “Real” whistleblower by the mainstream media. He doesn’t seem to be. When this same MSM begins to show the “Rea” side (which will happen sooner or later), then, we’ll be seeing a huge backlash against “All” whistleblowers; whether real or semi or pseudo.

          Maybe one way for the establishment to eliminate positive view of and support for “real” whistleblowers? Possible. Even as a ‘possibility’, that would go a long way: damaging WB’ing & WB’s image and connotation.

          You know how they are trying to fund academic research-studies & counter-measures to counter, work against, “Conspiracy Theorists”? Like those who even question 9/11? Well, this is related. For more answers on 9/11 we have to depend on more whistleblowers (future as well). When (and if) they show (by their own script) how the man they built up as a “hero” was a fraud, spy, or whatever, they would achieve discrediting any and all legit future whistleblowers as well.

          Does that make sense? Or does it sound too cynical? Or may be to conspiratorial?

          • have you all seen this?

            i stood next to a certain courageous individual who politely questioned glenn greenwald in the hall at the new britain, ct. civil liberties conference in dec ’12 after his keynote speech. gg was asked to speak out honestly about 911 truth. (sorry, i forget his exact question)
            but he declined the opportunity. i think he lacks courage on this topic.

            in the attached article above (a pointed, public response, perhaps, to sibel edmonds’ criticisms of gg at (see roundtable #2 at that site, & discussion which sheds much light on the shortcomings of integrity in his new rich business partner), gg fails to include that he will not be constrained ‘politically.’

            indeed, what IS it that constrains his reporting on 911truth?

            he says in this article: “the level of journalistic independence I enjoy will be at least as much as it’s been for the last seven years. ….’ AND: ‘Ultimately, in terms of “conflicts of interest”, how is this different from working with any other media outlet? Salon has very rich funders: do you think I suppressed stories that conflicted with their business interests? Democracy Now is funded by lots of rich people: do you think Amy Goodman conceals big stories that would undermine the business interests of her funders?’

            i surely DO think both salon and amy goodman SUPPRESS certain stories, namely the truth and lies of 911. due in large part to efforts here at boiling frogs, we are so much more aware than most!!!!!! thank you!

          • Thank You – Cynical? Not at all. Few know what it’s like to breath the same air of the people who play this Bernaysian Game. By All Means, Proceed!

            I think the latest Eye Opener is yet another admission that here’s little to chew on at this point. That said, if making noise in this small corner nets attention from a few more people, it’s worth it.

      • I actually kind of do get where Eric is coming from here to be honest. Mainly because I feel that we’ve already closed the case on GG’s dishonest motives, thanks to Sibel’s previous articles. Therefore, it does seem a slight waste of time to keep harping on the issue of him, when it couldn’t really be any more obvious that this guy is lying tool. Just a thought.

        • I don’t think Sibel’s anywhere close to being finished with exposing GG. If you’re bored of it, try supporting the stories on twitter, where Sibel suffers attacks, where minds are changing, and where the celebrity GG fans are experiencing major cognitive dissonance. Can’t stop us now.

          James puts it together really well today here:

          • I’m now twitting, but only have 1 real follower 🙁

            @zicatanka (hint hint nudge)

          • Aww, I’ll follow you Xicha! =)
            I’ve had an account for ages, but practically never twit. lol
            Actually, come to think of it I’m not even sure that I remember what my twit handle is anymore.
            I think it might be: @pr3ciousroy, or @Amanda, herself (just a heads-up there) 😉

          • Woohoo, thanks hohum! So comforting in the big bad world of twitter.

          • lol I am still so confused with the inner workings of twittery. I don’t think that I ever really fully grasped the art of the twit, thus I feel like an idiot fumbling in the dark on that site. *Hold me* =/

          • Bradley Fuller says:

            I hear you. I merely mentioned BFP and the investigation being done in another comment section and received an accusation of blasphemy. However, it was very easy to set things in proper perspective with a reference that when it comes to telling the truth there are no sacred cows, not with a G.G , L.P. or perhaps even an E.S..

          • BennyB-DoubleD says:

            Right on Bradley. I feel that the work Sibel’s been doing has continued to be valuable in putting together a case that can’t just be scoffed off by people who are still blindly defending Greenwald and friends. I thought the first article out of the series was a bit harsh, but by the third one when she’d put down so much information to support her arguments and people were still lashing out at her for daring to question GG’s integrity and repeated dismissal of the 250 million pound conflict of interest sitting in the room it just became comical to me. Some people here have expressed in various shapes or forms the sentiment that this work doesn’t seem to be netting any new or critical information. Every time I’ve had the urge to respond to comments of this nature and express why I disagree or what point I think isn’t being considered, Xicha’s just been quicker on the draw and articulated essentially what I would’ve wanted to say more concisely than my style permits. On that note I apologize to Xicha for not weighing in to counter suggestions that repeated responses in defense of Sibel were merely editorial heroics on horseback.

            Sibel has an ultra precision, high powered BS detector and each subsequent sweep of the phony narrative has IMO netted more valuable information, illustrating how absurd the “official” story is. I’ve found this analysis helpful in rethinking some of what’s happened and thinking about the story as a whole from a more informed perspective. I agree with those who suggest that further disclosure is unnecessary to taking steps toward addressing the surveillance/police state in a way that penetrates the wall of indifference and complacency and I have some ideas on this front which I’d like to come back to. Still, the main thing is, I don’t think the angle Sibel’s been covering is somehow peripheral to the process of discussing strategies to work with the information and confirmations we have about the NSA’s activities. Edward Snowden’s status as a very public whistleblower complicates the matter significantly and the threat of character assassination turns confronting the issue as a whole into a sort of “hostage situation” that requires understanding ‘who’s playing the game? and who’s getting played?’ as much as it’s possible. (btw: I like the double question used there, so don’t be surprised if I come back and use it later;)

            Anyway, that’s enough of my bad action movie metaphors for now though. I know I’m pretty far from contributing anything new to the conversation, but those are my thoughts for what they’re worth.

            Keep up the great work Sibel, I appreciate what you’re doing =]

          • Bradley Fuller says:

            Benny, I hear what your saying and I am in agreement. Ms. Edmonds is doing yeoman service in drawing down the amazing number of permutations that could be. Snowden has to speak on this whole situation to clear the air. Time will tell very soon if no further files are released by Greenwald and Poitras what the nature of their game is. As of now I would think “First Look News” will be still born because of a massive infection of corruption.

  6. CuChulainn says:

    another anglle on Snowden
    Greenwald “said the continued imprisonment of Jonathan Pollard attests to the hypocrisy of the US administration.”

  7. @Thymesup: Well, he and Scahill and Poitras and Amy Goodman and the rest of the ‘Pendejo’ club are consistent that way when it comes to 9/11. Even within their narratives they link many of their stories to 9/11 as a starting point, and then, they just stop right there; not a step further. As I said: Pendejo Club.

    • One other thing: I don’t like people coming and cussing here instead of discussing the topic/issues rationally. On the other hand, as indicated above, I don’t mind multi-lingual (other than English) phrases now and then;-)

      Seriously, I may not cuss publicly (99% of the time), however, inside my head, not only I cuss, but I do it in 4 or 5 different languages. That makes it 5 X cussing per round.

      • My Etheopian business neighbour cusses all the time to his clients. I feel left out 😉

      • Bradley Fuller says:

        Personally I like the German manner of cussing. The implied derogatory statement seems so innocuous, unless of course your German. While us crude North Americans might call someone a M.F., the worst in German translates basically as “the thunder the smoke and the cross”.

    • BennyB-DoubleD says:

      I can’t help wondering if their silence is the result of some sort of implied threat. Maybe one of them woke up in the middle of the night after discussing the idea of doing a real story on 9-11 and saw Dick Cheney standing outside their window in S&M gear or something else comparably disturbing…

  8. cleanloops says:

    I have to say something about your hilarious husband/wife/partner dig. The terms “husband” and “wife” are only correctly applied to a natural marriage, since it is only a husband and wife can transfer and create natural rights by marriage. It is interesting that a “partner” relationship excludes this possibility, and lays bare the fraud that is gay marriage. Sorry if I offended anyone here. While its off point, you did bring it up.

  9. BennyB-DoubleD says:

    I don’t think the semantics or the nature of Greenwald’s relationship with Miranda do anything to change the dynamics of the story (both of them are still sleaze bags;). You’re entitled to your own opinion about gay marriage, but I don’t think it’s a valuable contribution to this discussion.

    I feel sort of like a jackass saying that on the heels of my previous comment and perhaps I set a bad precedent. I joke around a lot in my comments here, but I try to avoid doing it in a way that’s offensive or distracting to other members. I hope that other people will let me know if I do cross that line though.

    Regarding my previous comment though; I actually was serious about the question, but I presented it comically, in part, so people could ignore it if felt like a detour.

    Anyway, let me step out of traffic 😉

  10. Bradley Fuller says:

    As the strings are pulled and untangled the real story line is beginning to appear. If the real truth that these three,GG,DM.LP, turns out that they have absconded with Snowden’s files with the aim of profiting their careers will cease to exist in any meaningful way, unless those files are released in a very timely manner. The next set of questions will be aimed at Snowden himself if the “three profiteers” are indeed guilty. This story has a way to go yet but don’t be surprised if it has an unhappy ending. Excellent investigative journalism being done here that if correct should win an award or two while defining a new level of state subterfuge. Great round table discussion also by four intelligent people. Great blog, one of the best.

  11. Powerful analysis and journalism here. I’m enjoying reading all of this work, on Snowden, et al. I’d be remiss though, if I didn’t express disappointment in the continual use of ad hominem and/or appeals to ridicule (however one cares to parse it) employed within the content. I really don’t see the point or usefulness. Just expressing my 500 cents worth.

    • Bradley Fuller says:

      Andrew, While the definitions of husband/wife are not incorrect, they do seem to be put forth with a tone of disparagement and do take away from the otherwise logical investigative questioning of the article.

  12. Bradley Fuller says:

    This is my analysis of the situation to date and without any comment on the present circumstances from Snowden. Snowden flees the U.S. with an apparent treasure trove of documents implicating the NSA and others in unconsitutional operations. Next Snowden apparently passes off all these documents to Greenwald et al while enjoying a stay in Russia. Greenwald and the Guardian have many many meetings with the various spook agencies over what will be released to the public. The releases only confirm what we all thought was taking place. Some feigned indignation and cancelled contracts by foreign govts. take place but it’s business as usual within the empire. Why is Greenwald and accomplices now not the most wanted on the face of the planet? That is answered by the contract with the NSA friendly billionaire Omidyar and other deals with other interests sealing the spying documents from further being revealed unless, as before, permitted. Snowden’s motive was to spark debate. With this being accomplished, albeit within the controlled parameters of a mainstream discussion and the general acceptance of this “new norm” we have Snowden’s declaration of “mission accomplished”. Next we have negotiations for his return home. The question is “mission accomplished” by who. Perhaps the whole purpose of these controlled revelations is to ease the population over the hurdle of the further dismantling of the constitutional republic and the bill of rights without too much of a fuss being kicked up. Perhaps we can look forward to more “leaks” with the same purpose in mind. Perhaps leaks from the TPP with internet accessibility is on the up coming agenda, to further ease the population in relinguishing further freedom of speech rights? It is my strong belief, which may be incorrect, that this whole event could be filed under “herding”.

  13. Bradley Fuller says:

    P.S to my above comment: My paranoia may be showing but perhaps the world oligarchy is much further along in the sequence of prescribed events than we think. What if the coming world economic collapse and the Pacific pivot, with it’s threat of nuclear war, are the final orchestrated manipulations for the ushering in of the “One World Government” as envisioned by the world’s power elites? The new monetary money standard could very well be a new cryptocurrency electronically controlled by the power elites to quell any and all dissent of the population majority. Those opposed, which might be a considerable number, could be dealt with by the new internal militarized forces with back up from more serious forces if necessary. Drone use and complete surveillance would provide continued compliance going forward.

Speak Your Mind