Virtually
nothing is being said about how billionaire Pierre Omidyar, essentially
the owner of the Snowden docs, has shut down the release, analysis and
custodial care of the archives claiming lack of funds. This decision was
made just this past March, 2019 with the full participation and
agreement of Glenn Greenwald and Jeremy Scahill.
Understanding
the historical significance of the Snowden cache, Laura Poitras
screamed bloody murder that this important treasure trove has been
summarily shuttered, particularly since only 10% of the documents have
ever been released.
The
raison d'etre of the new company Poitras, Greenwald and Scahill created
in partnership with Omidyar called The Intercept (First Look) was for
Omidyar to finance the herculean effort of responsibly releasing the
Snowden documents.
To
date, however, once Omidyar got control of the goods around October
2014, only a trickle of the Snowden archives has seen the light of day.
The remainder of the digital documents are in dire danger of never being
released -- or worse, being destroyed, accidentally or otherwise.
Remember,
from June of 2013 when the Snowden event happened to late 2014, for
weeks on end all we heard about were the Snowden docs, with one side
saying they're a violation of national security, and the
Greenwald/Poitras side championing the right to whistleblow state
secrets.
So
now that the famous Snowden archives have been unilaterally shut down
by Omidyar, Greenwald, and Scahill, why is hardly anyone from the left,
right, or center raising red-flag alarms? Even Snowden himself has been
suspiciously silent.
We
would not know about any of this were it not for Poitras who released
the private emails explaining how she was excluded from this momentous
decision. She exposed how alleged budget concerns were a smokescreen
since a mere 1.5% of the Intercept budget was allocated to the Snowden
archives team anyway.
Since
the very beginning, my sister Colleen and I have wondered what manner
of subterfuge has been going on with Greenwald et al. For a long time
now, a few brave critics have raised serious questions about Snowden,
Poitras, Greenwald, Scahill, and Omidyar to the ire of indignant
leftists who deem them all sacred cows immune to criticism.
Over the years, a multitude of dubious actions surrounding Omidyar beg massive exposure. To wit:
- His many connections to the NSA
- Cutting WikiLeaks' PayPal account, and supporting the criminal prosecution of Anonymous when they hacked PayPal
- Attempting to steal Craigslist for which in an unusual move against a corporate principle, a Delaware judge all but called Omidyar a thief
- Helping fund the neo-nazi coup d'etat in Ukraine
- Detrimentally undermining women's microfinancing in India
- After taking over Intercept and poaching star reporters, barely allowing anyone to publish their whistleblowing articles (e.g., Ken Silverstein, Matt Taibbi)
- And much more
Past
duplicity notwithstanding, this recent development of the shuttering of
the Snowden docs is an unprecedented violation of the public trust.
Those documents belong to the American people, no matter how deftly
Omidyar purloined them -- or whatever deals-with-the-devil Greenwald et
al signed on to. As Greenwald purportedly said in December 2014 when
asked why he joined forces with Omidyar, "What billionaire do you expect
me to go with?"
Why
is the press silent on such a momentous issue? Why has Greenwald
colluded in this outrageous new development, including the ousting of
Poitras?
With
the arrest of Julian Assange, Greenwald has rightfully spoken out in
strong opposition to the extradition. Nonetheless, it is the height of
unseemly opportunism when Greenwald sent the attached email on April 11
to The Intercept's readers bemoaning Assage's arrest. . . and then
asking readers to support free speech by donating -- not to Assange's
legal defense! -- but rather to the already richly-endowed Intercept,
the very organization that is abandoning the valuable assets entrusted
to them by Edward Snowden, another besieged whistleblower.
Further worth noting is Greenwald's interview with NPR on April 11, the day of Assange's arrest in which in a tweet Greenwald
claims the interview "became contentious" when NPR characterized him as
a "colleague of Julian Assange." Why on earth would being a colleague
of Julian Assange offend Greenwald?
Although Glenn Greenwald does a lot of superb work, his handling of the Snowden docs and his alliance with Pierre Omidyar should ring alarm bells.
Below
are some starter articles. Pass them on to journalists and beseech
them to publicize the memory-holing of the Snowden archives.
MintPress: Silencing the Whistle: The Intercept Shutters Snowden Archive, Citing Cost, March 30, 2019
MintPress: How One of America’s Premier Data Monarchs is Funding a Global Information War and Shaping the Media Landscape , February 18, 2019
__._,_.___
Attachment(s) from Marcy J. Gordon | View attachments on the web
Post from Cat McGuire
Links from
Marcy J. Gordon My friend Cat McGuire’s commentary and analysis may be of interest to readers on this list.
Post from Cat McGuire
Links from
Marcy J. Gordon My friend Cat McGuire’s commentary and analysis may be of interest to readers on this list.
Marcy
1 of 1 File(s)
