Banksy´s Nazi-Infused Banality of the Banality of Evil (Hanna Ahrend said) Raises A Lot of Money For A Good Cause


HumanSinShadow.wordpress.com

10.30.13 – 12:48 PM

Banksy’s Nazi-Infused Banality of the Banality of Evil Raises Alot of Money For A Good Cause

by Abby Zimet

Nearing the end of his month-long residency on the streets of New York, street artist and showman Banksy bought a nondescript landscape from a thrift shop for Housing Works, which advocates for the homeless and those living with HIV/AIDS, for 50 bucks. He added a Nazi and his signature to it, and returned it to the shop, which is now auctioning it off online. Current bid on the work, which Banksy classifies on his website as „oil on oil on canvas,“ is $213,513. Go figure….

Read more:

Ursprünglichen Post anzeigen 83 weitere Wörter

Dick Cheney, two videos


HumanSinShadow.wordpress.com

Wednesday, October 30, 2013

Canada
 
Youtube
. Please share this with your fellow Canadians.
and  watch here a Video with Glenn Greenwald about Dick Cheney, too:
Glenn Greenwald „Dick Cheney Engaged In Some Of The Most Radical & Crimi…: http://youtu.be/8sEEPLO-W5M via @youtube

Ursprünglichen Post anzeigen

Is Glenn Greenwald the Future of News?


Portrait of Glenn Greenwald -creator of Unclai...
Portrait of Glenn Greenwald -creator of Unclaimed Territory blog and contributing writer at Salon.com (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

AlterNet [1]             /               By Bill Keller [2], Glenn Greenwald [3]

Is Glenn Greenwald the Future of News?

October 30, 2013  |

 

Editor’s Note: Former New York Times reporter David Cay Johnston interviewed Greenwald for Newsweek in an interview filled with powerful quotes and insights about the future of media in a digital era. „Glenn Greenwald, the lawyer-turned-journalist-turned-global headline for his reporting on leaked NSA documents, says there is about to be a revolution that will radically change how news organizations cover governments and other big institutions.“

Writes Johnston [4]:

The change, he insists, is inevitable because of the pervasiveness of digital content, which has already remade the global economy by allowing instant access to vast troves of information. “Government and businesses cannot function without enormous amounts of data, and many people have to have access to that data,” Greenwald says, adding that it only takes one person with access and an assaulted conscience to leak, no matter what controls are in place.

The far-ranging interview concluded on the central tenet of what motivates Greenwald to do investigative journalism: „The authoritarian response that at its core says when someone in power decrees something is secret we have to quiver in deference, and to challenge that decree is somehow a moral and legal crime. I reject that,“ Greenwald told Johnston. „My nature is that when I see abuses of power, I want to expose those abuses.”

Earlier this month Greenwald announced he was joining a new journalistic venture, backed by eBay billionaire Pierre Omidyar, who has promised to invest $250 million and to “throw out all the old rules.” That news item and David Cay Johnston’s interview caught the eye of Bill Keller, former Executive Editor of The New York Times, now an occasionaly columnist for its op-ed pages, who invited Greenwald to participate in an exange on similar topics. What follows are some of the more important parts of their exchange, which can be read in full here [5].

Keller:Dear Glenn,

We come at journalism from different traditions. I’ve spent a life working at newspapers that put a premium on aggressive but impartial reporting, that expect reporters and editors to keep their opinions to themselves unless they relocate (as I have done) to the pages clearly identified as the home of opinion. You come from a more activist tradition — first as a lawyer, then as a blogger and columnist, and soon as part of a new, independent journalistic venture financed by the eBay founder Pierre Omidyar. Your writing proceeds from a clearly stated point of view.

In a post [6] on Reuters this summer, media critic Jack Shafer celebrated the tradition of partisan journalism — “From Tom Paine to Glenn Greenwald” — and contrasted it with what he called “the corporatist ideal.” He didn’t explain the phrase, but I don’t think he meant it in a nice way. Henry Farrell, who blogs for The Washington Post, wrote [7] more recently that publications like The New York Times and The Guardian “have political relationships with governments, which make them nervous about publishing (and hence validating) certain kinds of information,” and he suggested that your new project with Omidyar would represent a welcome escape from such relationships.

I find much to admire in America’s history of crusading journalists, from the pamphleteers to the muckrakers to the New Journalism of the ’60s to the best of today’s activist bloggers. At their best, their fortitude and passion have stimulated genuine reforms (often, as in the Progressive Era, thanks to the journalists’ “political relationships with governments”). I hope the coverage you led of the National Security Agency’s hyperactive surveillance will lead to some overdue accountability. …..

Please, read whole article here:


David Cameron May Take ‚Tougher Measures‘ Against The Guardian


David Cameron May Take ‚Tougher Measures‘ Against The Guardian.

October 28, 2013 „Information Clearing House – „Huffington Post“ – David Cameron has indicated the government may try and use „tougher measures“ against The Guardian to prevent it from publishing further revelations about the activities of British intelligence agencies. Speaking in the House of Commons on Monday afternoon, the prime minister said while the government had not yet been „heavy handed“ in how it responded to the dissemination of leaks from NSA whistle-blower Edward Snowden – it could crack down if it continued. „We live in a free country so newspapers are free to publish what they want,“ he said. However he added the articles in The Guardian had made „this country less safe“. And he urged newspapers to use „judgement and common sense“ when deciding to publish material. „I don’t want to have to use injunctions or D-Notices or the other tougher measures. I think its much better to appeal to newspapers‘ sense of social responsibility,“ he said. But he added: „If they don’t demonstrate some social responsibility it would be very difficult for government to stand back and not to act.“ … read more…

Glenn Greenwald: „The NYT helped to kill journalism as a potent force for checking power“


Government Attorneys Implicated in Ethics Scandal


Monday, October 28, 2013

Government Attorneys Implicated in Ethics Scandal

Janet Phelan Activist Post
A scandal is brewing in Chicago which threatens to make Operation Greylord look like a dress rehearsal for a cotillion. Starting with a seemingly innocuous question, tendered to press liaison Jim Grogan at the Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission (ARDC) in Illinois, a boil of corruption got inadvertently pricked, which threatens now to reveal a subterranean cancer in the legal system in Illinois.
For those who are unaware of Greylord, here is a bit of history: back in the eighties, a collaborative effort by the FBI, IRS and a couple of outraged judges and attorneys resulted in one of the biggest takedowns of public officials in the history of Illinois. At the end of the 3 1/2 year undercover operation, a total of 92 people were indicted, including 17 judges, 48 lawyers, ten deputy sheriffs, eight policemen, eight court officials, and state legislator James DeLeo.
The extent of the takedown might have mitigated further predatory acts by those in the legal system. Thirty years later, however, the corruption that was supposedly expunged by Greylord has simply become systemic.
Back to Jim Grogan. Grogan, who is an attorney as well as ARDC press liaison, declined to reply to questions from this reporter as to why no statements of economic interests could be found for the attorneys who work for the ARDC. The law governing economic interests reporting is in place to ensure that those working in government capacities are not being influenced by financial lures and temptations. These statements are mandated by 5 ILCS 420 to be filed every year for nearly everyone who works in a government capacity…

Glenn Greenwald: „Gerade Deutschland hat am meisten profitiert“ Glenn Greenwald fordert von Berlin Schutz für Snowden


The Guardian-Reporter Greenwald fordert von Berlin Schutz für Snowden

„Gerade Deutschland hat am meisten profitiert“

AFPAFP – vor 21 Minuten

  • Der US-Journalist und Enthüllungspartner des früheren US-Geheimdienstmitarbeiters Edward Snowden, Glenn Greenwald, hat von Deutschland Schutz für den verfolgten Computerexperten gefordert. "Gerade Deutschland ist eines der Länder, das am meisten von den Enthüllungen Snowdens profitiert", sagte Greenwald der ARD

    AFP – Der US-Journalist und Enthüllungspartner des früheren US-Geheimdienstmitarbeiters Edward Snowden, Glenn Greenwald, hat von Deutschland Schutz für den verfolgten Computerexperten gefordert. „Gerade …Mehr  Deutschland ist eines der Länder, das am meisten von den Enthüllungen Snowdens profitiert“, sagte Greenwald der ARD  Weniger 

Der US-Journalist und Enthüllungspartner des früheren US-Geheimdienstmitarbeiters Edward Snowden, Glenn Greenwald, hat von Deutschland Schutz für den verfolgten Computerexperten gefordert. „Gerade Deutschland ist eines der Länder, das am meisten von den Enthüllungen Snowdens profitiert“, sagte Greenwald.

„Die deutsche Regierung muss ja nicht dankbar sein, aber sie sollte das tun, wozu sie gesetzlich verpflichtet ist, nämlich Menschen, die politisch verfolgt werden, zu schützen“, sagte Greenwald der ARD, wie tagesschau.de meldet. tattdessen lasse die Bundesregierung zu, dass US-Behörden Snowden „bedrohen und seine Rechte beschneiden“ – „trotz all dem, was Snowden für die deutsche Öffentlichkeit getan hat“, betonte Greenwald. „Die Deutsche sollten sich die Frage stellen, warum ihre Regierung so handelt, und sie sollten ihre Regierung auffordern, die Grundrechte von Mister Snowden endlich wirkungsvoll zu schützen.“

Außerdem sollten die Deutschen sich fragen, weshalb Bundeskanzlerin Angela Merkel (CDU) und ihre Regierung die Spionageaffäre um den US-Geheimdienst NSA „erst jetzt ein offizielles Thema“ werden lassen, da „auch sie betroffen ist“, sagte Greenwald angesichts der Empörung über ein von der NSA mutmaßlich abgehörtes Handy der Kanzlerin. Greenwald rechnet nach eigenen Worten damit, dass schon bald weitere Informationen über die NSA-Spionage in Deutschland und anderen Ländern als Licht kommen werde.

Greenwald äußerte sich vor diesem Hintergrund auch zu Forderungen, Snowden in Deutschland vor einem Untersuchungsausschuss zu befragen. „Er sollte befragt werden.“ Snowden habe eine „riesige Erfahrung“ mit Praktiken der NSA. „Aber das wird er nicht ohne Weiteres tun – außer wenn sich die deutsche Regierung auch dafür einsetzt, seine grundlegenden Rechte zu schützen“, sagte Greenwald.

Der Blogger und Enthüllungsjournalist Greenwald hatte in den vergangenen Monaten eng mit Snowden bei dessen Enthüllungen zusammengearbeitet. Snowden fand vorübergehend in Russland Zuflucht vor Verfolgung durch die US-Behörden.

Orwell: No One Ever Seizes Power with the Intention of Relinquishing It.


Orwell: No One Ever Seizes Power with the Intention of Relinquishing It..

Orwell: No One Ever Seizes Power With The Intention Of Relinquishing It.

By Aaron Dykes

October 27, 2013 „Information Clearing House – 1984 describes the ultimate tyranny to come. Or the retro-nightmare future that might-have-been, had it not been outdone by reality. Aldous Huxley – famous author, heir to the intellectual threads of Eugenics, Darwinism, Fabian Socialism and Humanitarian Scientism as a world religion – made his disagreements with his former pupil George Orwell quite clear in a 1962 speech at Berkeley as well as in writings like Brave New World: Revisited.

Orwell’s stark and forceful police state manufactured and maintained order with the psychological dominance of the ever-watchful Big Brother, by utilizing high-tech surveillance, the editing of reality, the propagation of dizzying misinformation and rule by an iron fist.

For Aldous Huxley, however, Orwell had missed the point. The Nazis and Soviets were incomplete models for the emerging world order. The real tyranny was scientific in its approach, sophisticated and slight in its maneuvered hand. Mankind wouldn’t face naked oppression as much as he would be pacified by easily obtained goods, engineered societal rewards and the use of literal opiates – refined pharmaceutical drugs – to make the masses “learn to love their servitude.” This would constitute the ultimate revolution – oligarchical domination administered by a scientific and expert elite. What Orwell had described would be crude compared to the studied social programs of indoctrinated helplessness.

But Orwell had not missed the point at all (certainly not entirely) – he understood that this was domination nonetheless, no matter how concealed the bludgeoning arm was behind the velvet gloved-hand. The true purpose of socialism is not the “good of others” [i.e. the masses] but the control by the few – the elite or oligarchy – of the many by an overarching system that made them controllable.

That system is collectivism – everyone under one net. Oligarchical collectivism – government by, for and of the megacorporations, the elite, and their agents and elected.

Orwell wrote it in his book – buried in the plot as the manual for the Big Brother system, written by the exiled archenemy and original framer of their system Emanuel Goldstein. His book was titled: “The Theory and Practice of Oligarchical Collectivism.”

What is the ultimate aim of this system, in its rawest form? It is later answered by O’Brien, as he tortures Winston:

“The Party seeks power entirely for its own sake. We are not interested in the good of others; we are interested solely in power. Not wealth or luxury or long life or happiness: only power, pure power. What pure power means you will understand presently. We are different from all the oligarchies of the past in that we know what we are doing. All the others, even those who resembled ourselves, were cowards and hypocrites. The German Nazis and the Russian Communists came very close to us in their methods, but they never had the courage to recognize their own motives. They pretended, perhaps even believed that they had seized power unwillingly and for a limited time, and that just round the corner there lay a paradise where human beings would be free and equal. We are not like that. We know that no one ever seizes power with the intention of relinquishing it. Power is not a means; it is an end. One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes the revolution in order to establish the dictatorship.”

(Full Length Speech) Aldous Huxley – The Ultimate Revolution, 1962

© 2013 Truthstream Media

Glenn Greenwald : As Europe Erupts Over US Spying, NSA Chief Says Government Must Stop Media


Glenn Greenwald : As Europe Erupts Over US Spying, NSA Chief Says Government Must Stop Media.

As Europe Erupts Over US Spying, NSA Chief Says Government Must Stop Media With General Alexander calling for NSA reporting to be halted, US and UK credibility as guardians of press freedom is crushed By Glenn Greenwald October 27, 2013 „Information Clearing House – „The Guardian“ – The most under-discussed aspect of the NSA story has long been its international scope. That all changed this week as both Germany and France exploded with anger over new revelations about pervasive NSA surveillance on their population and democratically elected leaders. As was true for Brazil previously, reports about surveillance aimed at leaders are receiving most of the media attention, but what really originally drove the story there were revelations that the NSA is bulk-spying on millions and millions of innocent citizens in all of those nations. The favorite cry of US government apologists -–everyone spies! – falls impotent in the face of this sort of ubiquitous, suspicionless spying that is the sole province of the US and its four English-speaking surveillance allies (the UK, Canada, Australia and New Zealand). There are three points worth making about these latest developments. • First, note how leaders such as Chancellor Angela Merkel reacted with basic indifference when it was revealed months ago that the NSA was bulk-spying on all German citizens, but suddenly found her indignation only when it turned out that she personally was also targeted. That reaction gives potent insight into the true mindset of many western leaders. • Second, all of these governments keep saying how newsworthy these revelations are, how profound are the violations they expose, how happy they are to learn of all this, how devoted they are to reform. If that’s true, why are they allowing the person who enabled all these disclosures – Edward Snowden – to be targeted for persecution by the US government for the „crime“ of blowing the whistle on all of this? If the German and French governments – and the German and French people – are so pleased to learn of how their privacy is being systematically assaulted by a foreign power over which they exert no influence, shouldn’t they be offering asylum to the person who exposed it all, rather than ignoring or rejecting his pleas to have his basic political rights protected, and thus leaving him vulnerable to being imprisoned for decades by the US government? Aside from the treaty obligations these nations have to protect the basic political rights of human beings from persecution, how can they simultaneously express outrage over these exposed invasions while turning their back on the person who risked his liberty and even life to bring them to light? • Third, is there any doubt at all that the US government repeatedly tried to mislead the world when insisting that this system of suspicionless surveillance was motivated by an attempt to protect Americans from The Terrorists™? Our reporting has revealed spying on conferences designed to negotiate economic agreements, the Organization of American States, oil companies, ministries that oversee mines and energy resources, the democratically elected leaders of allied states, and entire populations in those states. Can even President Obama and his most devoted loyalists continue to maintain, with a straight face, that this is all about Terrorism? That is what this superb new Foreign Affairs essay by Henry Farrell and Martha Finnemore means when it argues that the Manning and Snowden leaks are putting an end to the ability of the US to use hypocrisy as a key weapon in its soft power. Speaking of an inability to maintain claims with a straight face, how are American and British officials, in light of their conduct in all of this, going to maintain the pretense that they are defenders of press freedoms and are in a position to lecture and condemn others for violations? In what might be the most explicit hostility to such freedoms yet – as well as the most unmistakable evidence of rampant panic – the NSA’s director, General Keith Alexander, actually demanded Thursday that the reporting being done by newspapers around the world on this secret surveillance system be halted (Techdirt has the full video here): The head of the embattled National Security Agency, Gen Keith Alexander, is accusing journalists of „selling“ his agency’s documents and is calling for an end to the steady stream of public disclosures of secrets snatched by former contractor Edward Snowden. „I think it’s wrong that that newspaper reporters have all these documents, the 50,000 – whatever they have and are selling them and giving them out as if these – you know it just doesn’t make sense,“ Alexander said in an interview with the Defense Department’s „Armed With Science“ blog. „We ought to come up with a way of stopping it. I don’t know how to do that. That’s more of the courts and the policy-makers but, from my perspective, it’s wrong to allow this to go on,“ the NSA director declared. [My italics] There are 25,000 employees of the NSA (and many tens of thousands more who work for private contracts assigned to the agency). Maybe one of them can tell The General about this thing called „the first amendment“. I’d love to know what ways, specifically, General Alexander has in mind for empowering the US government to „come up with a way of stopping“ the journalism on this story. Whatever ways those might be, they are deeply hostile to the US constitution – obviously. What kind of person wants the government to forcibly shut down reporting by the press? Whatever kind of person that is, he is not someone to be trusted in instituting and developing a massive bulk-spying system that operates in the dark. For that matter, nobody is. Leaving As many of you likely know, it was announced last week that I am leaving the Guardian. My last day here will be 31 October, and I will write my last column on that date.