Accuracy in Media

The story carries the great title of “How Edward Snowden Changed Journalism.” But the article doesn’t live up to its billing. The author, Steve Coll, dean of the Graduate School of Journalism at Columbia University, doesn’t want his readers to know that journalism has changed into a form of espionage that benefits the Islamic terrorists anxious to kill us.

To use President Obama’s phrase, you might call it the “fundamental transformation” of journalism.

Coll cannot bring himself to report the truth because Columbia bestowed prestigious journalism awards—the Pulitzers—on the recipients of Snowden’s stolen national security documents.

We called the Snowden awards “Pulitzer Prizes for Espionage.”

Ignoring Snowden’s life in Moscow, in the loving embrace of Vladimir Putin, Coll also fails to report that one of the Pulitzer Prize recipients, Glenn Greenwald, has an affinity for governments, groups and movements opposing the United States. Greenwald spoke publicly in favor of “weakening” America, saying that al Qaeda’s 9/11 terrorist attacks were “very minimal in scope compared to the level of deaths that the United States has been bringing to the world for decades—from Vietnam to illegal wars in Central America…”

What do the people of New York City, where Columbia University is based, think of that?

Canadians may be asking that question as well, now that Greenwald has weighed in on the terrorist attack on two Canadian soldiers, in an article titled, “Canada, At War for 13 Years, Shocked That ‘A Terrorist’ Attacked Its Soldiers.”

Echoing his 9/11 comments about America, he said about Canada: “It is always stunning when a country that has brought violence and military force to numerous countries acts shocked and bewildered when someone brings a tiny fraction of that violence back to that country.”

In other words, Canada inspired this terrorism against its own people.

The despicable Greenwald went on, “If you want to be a country that spends more than a decade proclaiming itself at war and bringing violence to others, then one should expect that violence will sometimes be directed at you as well.”

This is how Snowden’s accomplice Greenwald sees the world—when the West defends itself against terrorism, the West is guilty of terrorism.

Coll’s New Yorker magazine piece appeared as Matt Olsen, who until July led the National Counterterrorism Center, was telling CNN that Snowden’s stolen and leaked documents “changed the way terrorists communicate, causing them to fall out of the U.S. government’s sight.”

“They’ve changed how they encrypt their communications and adopted more stringent encryption techniques,” Olsen said. “They’ve changed service providers and email addresses and they’ve, in some cases, just dropped off altogether.”

Canadians are already dead. Dead Americans will also pay the price. Perhaps the next victim will be your wife, your husband, or your child.

When the next bomb explodes in your neighborhood, or when the next piece of the Middle East falls into the hands of ISIS, you will have Edward Snowden to thank.

By the way, Snowden’s disclosures are also implicated in the Russian invasion of Ukraine, creating another intelligence “surprise” for the U.S.

There is another important conclusion here. By sheltering Snowden and refusing to turn him over to face espionage charges, Moscow is also implicated in the Islamist war against the West.

NSA’s former deputy director, Chris Inglis, talked about the problem in a Washington Times article about how ISIS is “using leaked Snowden info to evade U.S. intelligence.” Rowan Scarborough said Snowden’s “top-secret disclosures” are the key to making the Islamic State killers “harder to find because they know how to avoid detection.”

Coll’s article purports to be a review of a film about Snowden, who comes across “as shrewd, tough, and hard to read.” Wrong again. Snowden was a Ron Paul supporter who should never have gotten a security clearance at the CIA or NSA. He is apparently more of a libertarian than a leftist. But his conduits for secrets are on the anti-American left.

Snowden has become, in effect, an enemy combatant, under the protection of Russia.

For his part, Ron Paul has also emerged as a puppet of Putin, even defending Russia’s takeover of Crimea.

Logan Beirne, author of Blood of Tyrants: George Washington & the Forging of the Presidency, notes that “Just as Snowden sought out a position with inside access to the National Security Agency, [Benedict] Arnold lobbied for command of West Point.”

Beirne adds, “Our founding fathers faced men like Edward Snowden. They sentenced them to death.”

Coll, by contrast, seems to go out of his way to obscure what Snowden and his collaborators were doing. He highlights that Snowden took steps “to protect his data and his communications with journalists made it possible for the Guardian and the [Washington] Post to publish their initial stories and bring Snowden to global attention.”

Coll pretends not to understand that these are the hallmarks of an espionage operation. It’s not an accident that even the Obama administration has indicted Snowden for espionage.

Coll writes about Snowden’s disclosures, saying, “In fashioning balanced practices for reporters, it is critical to ask how often and in what ways governments—ours and others—systematically target journalists’ communications in intelligence collection. For all his varied revelations about surveillance, this is an area where Snowden’s files have been less than definitive.”

Coll is mostly referring to alleged NSA surveillance of American journalists. But who, or what, are those “other” governments? And isn’t it safe to assume that Snowden is under surveillance and control by the Russian secret police?

Coll, who is described as a reporter “on issues of intelligence and national security in the United States and abroad,” has too much experience in this area not to recognize the truth about the Snowden espionage operation. But he won’t tell the truth.

Yes, journalism has changed, and all it takes to understand the change is to visit the Columbia Journalism building, which contains a plaque saying their mission is to “uphold standards of excellence in journalism.”

“Our Republic and its press will rise or fall together,” Joseph Pulitzer wrote, also on a plaque inside the Columbia Journalism building.

Today’s elite journalists don’t seem to care if the country falls, even though their own rights would disappear in the process.



Comments

  • JW

    OH BOO HOO! If the NSA needs to spy on everyone to stop terrorism, then why weren’t they able to stop what happened in Oklahoma? No Cliff, the NSA is just another example of Big Government and as a conservative you should be opposing it.

  • Joel
  • Erudite Mavin

    Excellent article with the continued facts on Marxist and Radical Islamic apologist Snowden and Greenwald.
    This is a subject that must not be pushed aside.

  • disqus_smWiOrvPtd

    Today’s journalist has been conditioned to loathe the authority of our founding fathers. He does not resonate with the traditional journalist who was an individual knight with his own thoughts. The journalist is a part of a larger collective, his thoughts and rights are determined by the consensus. His security is in group think. It matters not if the nation falls, because his identity with the collective, guarantees him a place with the victors. See Nelson Mandela.

    Like abortion and no-fault divorce, collecting records on citizens is a direct import from the Soviet Union. Once you’ve wiped the blood off of the manifest, it ought to be obvious what the NSA’s intentions are. Our government is NOT the same people who said a social security number would never be used for anything other than social security. They are far worse.

    Moscow’s protection of Edward Snowden creates the perception in the eyes of many conservatives, that the NSA is therefore benevolent. In the long run, this agency will be anything but good.

  • JW

    That’s what I’m saying.

  • jaimelmanzano

    Journalism
    has lost its credibility.

    Actually, it never had much to start with.
    Its pretensions, as an institution on which democracy depends, just
    don’t hold up on close examination. It has proven incapable of confining itself to
    reporting timely and factual narrative. Never did. Early on, it tasted power, and learned to
    aspire to persuade, even control, the duly elected to pursue the agenda it saw fit to pursue.

    No longer can the profession – if it ever could – be trusted to surface
    information critical to the functioning of government. It merchandises
    politics with the same verve of a streetwalker seeking to sate puerile
    appetites – the sensuous versus the sensible. And it
    pursues its trade mainly for three things – ego, money, and power – no
    different from the selected facts, gossip, and innuendo it lards into what it cooks up
    for public consumption.

    To get the attention of a mule, sometimes it
    is necessary to hit it on the head with a two-by-four. The “mule” actually is the
    credulity of the public. Not journalism.
    That “profession” left the barn long ago, leaving its word-stream of steaming detritus for history to muck out for significance.

    And

    when journalism fails in its proclaimed role to report “the facts” and tell “the truth” it excuses its performance citing past iconic failures – e.g., Adams vs. Jefferson – as if their manipulations
    paper over the deceit of
    present “professional” practitioners.

    Journalism, and present-day media
    roil in a product of the towering commercial success of past proprietors and staff, like those of Hearst, Pulitzer, Sulzberger, and Murdoch. Their fingerprints and failings are reflected in past advocacies and oversights. “Remembering the Maine”, the Tong-kin
    Gulf and, Benghazi stand out along with purposeful, if not selective, blindness affected in reporting the Holocaust, wars (the WW’s, Israel, Iraq, Iran, and Afghanistan), and social values (family, marriage, sex, and religion). Regional interests and opinion color reporting and editorial conclusions. But, like the drip-drip of
    Chinese water torture, the public suffers the pain and
    loss of each misconception as reports filed drill down into the open wound of
    the targeted skull.

    Memory
    is short. Appreciation fades. History is replete with the ruins of
    civilizations that came and went with the development and growth of powers that overstepped their reach, and – like old soldiers – faded away. Human culture and forms of governance, like Icarus, yearning to fly, fashioned wings with
    feathers and wax, soared, flew too close to the Sun, lost cohesiveness, disintegrated, and
    plunged to death below. Mankind aspires to rule over Nature, but Man’s humanity turns out to be overly ambitious. Like the Devil in the Old Testament, trying to be God is a bit much.

    The U.S. is largely history’s present iteration of
    humanity’s evolving effort to survive. And like civilizations in the past, It may well be finding itself at a precipice – so to speak – with its “tit in the
    wringer” being wrung out for the future to dry out in the sun to clothe whatever follows.

    The dangers being faced are large and growing. Human extinction, like that of the dinosaurs, is in play. However – should it survive – it deserves better journalism.

  • Tbear

    Journalism in America is dead!!!! If it was alive we would not have an anti-American president.

  • JW

    Spying on citizens comes from the Soviet Union. You’re more in line with the commies than with the founding fathers.

  • Capnmikey

    Pravda and Izvestia are also called “journalism”…totally controlled by the Soviet government..(like NPR!)..Talk Radio is the only journalism still alive in America…Michael Savage, Mark Levin, et al…the left wing radical media gave us the empty suit in the White House…

  • Erudite Mavin

    You accuse others of what you, Snowden and Greenwald actually are.

  • JW

    And yet you are the one defending Obama’s NSA program.

  • Erudite Mavin

    NSA program is one in process for years before Obama.

  • JW

    PRISM was started under Bush in 2007 (a big neo-con who wouldn’t get my vote either), but Obama has defended it and continued these programs unabated. In May of this year he ordered phone companies to hold the records instead of the government, but this is no real change and will end up costing the phone companies a ton of money.

  • Erudite Mavin

    Bottom line, you don’t want or believe in National Security, typical of the Left and Libertarians

  • JW

    No, I am a pro-privacy advocate. The journalist whose writings I follow is not a communist, she is Alyona Minkovski. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alyona_Minkovski