Glenn Greenwald

  • July 26, 2012

    by Joseph Jerome

    America’s confidence in the news media has hit an all-time low, a recent Gallup poll reveals.

    Today, a mere quarter of Americans holds much faith in the press. It is difficult to pinpoint exactly what is responsible for this precipitous decline. But a good place to start may be the media’s transformation from watchdog into, as Glenn Greenwald puts it, “inept stenographers.”

    The New York Times, for instance, recently admitted it grants politicians, campaigns, and senior policymakers final editing power of on-the-record quotations:

    From Capitol Hill to the Treasury Department, interviews granted only with quote approval have become the default position. . . . It was difficult to find a news outlet that had not agreed to quote approval, albeit reluctantly. Organizations like Bloomberg, The Washington Post, Vanity Fair, Reuters and The New York Times have all consented to interviews under such terms.

    The revelation comes after The Times sought reader input on whether it “should challenge 'facts' that are asserted by newsmakers.” Readers had evidently become “fed up with the distortions and evasions that are common in public life,” The Times wrote in January.

    Six months later, The Times has demonstrated just how far distortions and evasions seep into its own reporting. Modern political reporting has embraced what press critic Jay Rosen calls “The View from Nowhere.” 

    “Something happened in our press over the last 40 years or so that never got acknowledged,” he writes. “[T]ruthtelling was surpassed by other priorities the mainstream press felt a stronger duty to. These include such things as ‘maintaining objectivity,’ ‘not imposing a judgment,’ [and] ‘refusing to take sides.’”

  • May 29, 2012

    by Jeremy Leaming

    As a presidential candidate in 2008, Barack Obama leveled broadsides against the counterterrorism efforts waged by the administration of George W. Bush. Deep into President Obama’s term many see a continuation if not drastic advancement of Bush counterterrorism policy.

    In an extensive piece Jo Becker and Scott Shane report for The New York Times that Obama has “preserved three major policies – rendition [where prisoners are sent to secretive sites to undergo harsh, often brutal interrogation], military commissions and indefinite detention – that have been targets of human rights groups since the 2001 terrorist attacks.” 

    The story also states that the president, who as a candidate railed against the military prison at Guantanamo Bay, and promised if elected to close it, did not have a plan to convince Congress to shutter the prison.

    A major piece of The Times reporting focuses on the personal involvement of the president in sessions to determine which terrorist suspects to kill or capture. “It is the strangest of bureaucratic rituals: Every week or so, more than 100 members of the government’s sprawling national security apparatus gather, by secure video teleconference, to pore over terrorist suspects’ biographies and recommend to the president who should be the next to die.” The president, The Times reports, will then sign off on who to target.

    In a piece titled “Obama the Warrior” for Salon, Glenn Greenwald highlights the support Obama has garnered from some of the far right architects of the Bush counterterrorism policy, noting a progressive myth that the far right never lauds the president:

    Virtually every one of the most far-right neocon Bush officials – including Dick Cheney himself – has spent years now praising Obama for continuing their Terrorism policies which Obama the Senator and Presidential Candidate once so harshly denounced. Every leading GOP candidate except Ron Paul wildly praised Obama for killing U.S. citizen Anwar Awlaki without a shred of due process and for continuing to drop unaccountable bombs on multiple Muslim countries.

  • November 20, 2011

    by Jeremy Leaming

    As has been the case for too many involved in the Occupy Wall Street demonstrations, so it was at UC Davis, where a group of students engaging in peaceful, political assembly was confronted with excessive use of force by authorities.  

    OWS’s website states, in part, “Such incidents are unfortunately common,” and a “daily reality” of the country’s “marginalized communities.”

    As noted here, police actions to suppress OWS demonstrations have turned brutal in New York City, Boston, and Oakland, among others. The pepper-spraying of a group of University of California, Davis students involved in peaceful OWS protests, was captured on video, showing, as The Huffington Post reports, “the students seated on the ground as a UC Davis police brandishes a red canister of pepper spray, showing it off for the crowd before dousing the seated students in a heavy, thick mist.”

    The university’s chancellor, The New York Times reports, suspended some of the campus officers involved in the incident, and that “students and others affiliated with the Occupy U.C. Davis protests have called for the chancellor’s resignation.

    Glenn Greenwald, for Salon, says the “The now-viral video of police officers in their Robocop costumes sadistically pepper-spraying peaceful, sitting protesters at UC-Davis (details here) shows a police state in its pure form.”

    Greenwald says the brutality against OWS protestors, in demonstrations nationwide, is far too common a response, but highlights some “points to note about this incident,” such as:

    Despite all the rights of free speech and assembly flamboyantly guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution, the reality is that punishing the exercise of those rights with police force and state violence has been the reflexive response in America for quite some time. As Franke-Ruta put it, “America has a very long history of protests that meet with excessive or violent response, most vividly recorded in the second half of the 20th century.” Digby yesterday recounted a similar though even worse incident aimed at environmental protesters.

    The country’s history of allowing this type of reaction to political protests has been exacerbated, Greenwald continues, by developments “in the post 9/11 world,” such as the government’s aggressive “para-militarization” of the ”nation’s domestic police forces by lavishing them with countless military-style weapons and other war-like technologies, training them in war-zone military tactics, and generally imposing a war mentality on them. Arming domestic police forces with para-military weaponry will ensure their systematic use even in the absence of a Terrorist attack on U.S. soil; they will simply find other, increasingly permissive uses for those weapons."

    See Greenwald’s entire comments here.

    UC Davis Chancellor Linda P.B. Katehi said in statement that she feels the students “outrage,” adding she was “deeply saddened that this has happened on our campus ….”

    Meanwhile, others on campus are calling for the chancellor’s resignation. As The Huffington Post notes, an English professor, Nathan Brown, has released an open letter to the chancellor, calling for her resignation. He wrote, "You are responsible for it because this is what happens when UC Chancellors order police onto our campuses to disperse peaceful protesters through the use of force: students get hurt."

    Other commentators note that the brutality against OWS protestors is unlikely to oppress the messages being amplified about the nation’s growing wealth gap and the out-of-control power that Wall Street holds over policymakers.

  • November 25, 2009

    Lawyers Harangue Solicitor General: In their brief on civil immunity for the architects of torture, attorneys representing four former Guantanamo detainees offered what "may be the most eloquent statement on the issue I've seen yet," says Daphne Eviatar at The Washington Independent.

    Detainee Affairs Resignation: Phillip Carter is leaving his post as deputy assistant secretary of defense for detainee policy. Glenn Greenwald and Marcy Wheeler offer their takes.

    OLC Nominee: Is Dawn Johnsen on the cusp of being confirmed as the Office of Legal Counsel's top lawyer?

    KSM & the Death Penalty: Critics are concerned that executing Khalid Shaikh Mohammed and others convicted in terror-related charges may martyr them.

    More KSM: Adam Serwer untangles the arguments for and against trying KSM in federal court at The American Prospect's blog.

  • October 30, 2009

    Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid offered cutting remarks this week, criticizing unnamed senators who are obstructing President Obama's confirmation-level nominees. In that speech, Reid failed to specifically note the nomination of Dawn Johnsen to lead the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel (OLC), however, raising eyebrows at some progressive organizations calling for her confirmation.

    "Nearly 40 organizations have called on Reid to schedule a vote on Dawn Johnsen," reports The Hill this morning. "Several members of this coalition are frustrated that Johnsen's nomination has languished in the Senate for nearly eight months despite Democrats' control of 60 seats."

    Johnsen has drawn criticism from some chambers for her dedication to reproductive rights and for being among the first and most outspoken critics of the Bush torture program. Glenn Greenwald, characteristically tongue-in-cheek, frames the discussion another way: "Dawn Johnsen's belief in the rule of law disqualifies her from Senate confirmation."