Read below to see why I starred the name *Alan Dershowitz* in the
subject line.
Glenn Greenwald VS Alan Dershowitz (2014) "State Surveillance"
This is a full Munk Debate that took place in Toronto May 2, 2014 before an local audience of 2,500 people as well as live on line. Munk is the name of the family that has sponsored a number of important debates including this one. Officially, as given at the beginning, this debate was on whether or not to pass this resolution:
"Be it resolved state surveillance is a legitimate [defense] of our freedoms… ." 1hr35min
Actually, that turned out not to be the topic of the debate, since everyone agreed early that state surveillance is necessary. Glenn Greenwald and Alexis Ohanian, a creator of Reddit, want us to follow the historic general rule of investigators actually explaining to a judge and getting a court order before spying on an American citizen. Alan Dershowitz and retired General Michael Hayden totally oppose any such requirement. That was the debate and still is the debate.
The audience vote on passing the resolution, whatever it means, was, before the debate 33% pro 46% con 21% undecided, with a high percentage indicating openness to changing their minds. After the debate, the audience vote was 41% pro 59% con, the yays having gained eight (8%) percent and the nays having gained 13 percent. https://www.munkdebates.com/debates/state-surveillance
I think everyone has heard of Glenn Greenwald by now. I want to add a bit more about Alan Dershowitz than what appears in his introduction at the May 2, 2014 debate in Toronto, Canada. And yes I'm going somewhere relevant with this. Please bear with me.
In addition to the information that was given about him, Alan Dershowitz has been one of the primary spokesmen for AIPAC, if not the primary spokesperson. AIPAC as you may know is the most powerful Zionist organization in the world aside from the Israeli government itself. I have mentioned AIPAC many times before, particularly at the time of the notorious publication of a study in The London Review of Books in March 2006, a study by Professors Mearsheimer and Walt. Their followup book of similar title, "The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy" was published in August 2007 and was a bestseller. AIPAC is a big part of the so-called Israel Lobby, though the Israel Lobby includes other smaller organizations, like separate organizations of Christian Zionists. According to a Congressional poll back at the time, AIPAC was considered to be the second most influential lobby to Congress hands down, second only to the AARP.
Now the connection: Since a major and directed economic transition--away from agriculture I think--in the 1990s, Israel's economy is now based heavily on the design, manufacture, and sale to much of the rest of the world, including to the United States, of high tech military equipment. Much or most of that high tech military equipment is surveillance equipment including some amazing and major sorts of computer surveillance software. Aside from U.S. businesses, Israel also has a very real and very serious economic investment involving a much higher percentage of its population in the outcomes of any serious debates on the proposition, "Be it resolved state surveillance is a legitimate defence of our freedoms… ," the outcome of the debate in America and the outcomes of the debates in other parts of the world as well. So. Alan Dershowitz, eh? And from listening to him in the above video he obviously wants to be right there involved with the development of any new rules.
Alexis Ohanian made his big point repeatedly, that the universal surveillance capabilities that are now set up, whether or not the full capabilities are used all the time, require that the structure, the hardware and software, be kept insecure enough for the surveillance capabilities to be able to work. He says making the structure more secure, more hacking resistant, would make us more secure. The surveillance state, as it is, is making us less secure, not more secure. It did not appear that Alan Dershowitz understood what self-professed nerd Alexis Ohanian was talking about. Or maybe it was something Alan Dershowitz did not want to talk about even though he was given numerous opportunities.
The straight back of retired General Michael Hayden is an interesting sight if you happen not to have seen it before.
By the way, here is the latest Glenn Greenwald/Edward Snowden disclosure, on The Intercept, the September 5, 2014 publication of another secret document by Glenn Greenwald and some other people who are also important:
The U.S. Government’s Secret Plans to Spy for American Corporations.
Note that it was announced recently--you may have seen it--that our government has added The Intercept to the list of sites that government employees and contractors including military personnel are forbidden to visit. This is another question. Besides the question of whether or not we want to work enough to have fact-based opinions ourselves, do we want our government employees to be allowed to form a fact-based view of the world? I mean, are they American citizens also, at least some of them? ROFLOL
Here are a couple of the things I sent about a year ago. Much has happened since, but I think they are still most interesting if you missed them.
sent 8/15/13 fascinating story: How Laura Poitras Helped Snowden Spill His Secrets
sent 9/6/13 "NSA surveillance: A guide to staying secure"; new Snowden documents today
Larry
--
Larry at Blogspot "undisclosed recipients" email message archive, no logging in, no public comments
http://larryatblogspot.blogspot.com/2014/06/sent-61514-1-fox-news-must-die-2-what.html
Glenn Greenwald VS Alan Dershowitz (2014) "State Surveillance"
This is a full Munk Debate that took place in Toronto May 2, 2014 before an local audience of 2,500 people as well as live on line. Munk is the name of the family that has sponsored a number of important debates including this one. Officially, as given at the beginning, this debate was on whether or not to pass this resolution:
"Be it resolved state surveillance is a legitimate [defense] of our freedoms… ." 1hr35min
Actually, that turned out not to be the topic of the debate, since everyone agreed early that state surveillance is necessary. Glenn Greenwald and Alexis Ohanian, a creator of Reddit, want us to follow the historic general rule of investigators actually explaining to a judge and getting a court order before spying on an American citizen. Alan Dershowitz and retired General Michael Hayden totally oppose any such requirement. That was the debate and still is the debate.
The audience vote on passing the resolution, whatever it means, was, before the debate 33% pro 46% con 21% undecided, with a high percentage indicating openness to changing their minds. After the debate, the audience vote was 41% pro 59% con, the yays having gained eight (8%) percent and the nays having gained 13 percent. https://www.munkdebates.com/debates/state-surveillance
I think everyone has heard of Glenn Greenwald by now. I want to add a bit more about Alan Dershowitz than what appears in his introduction at the May 2, 2014 debate in Toronto, Canada. And yes I'm going somewhere relevant with this. Please bear with me.
In addition to the information that was given about him, Alan Dershowitz has been one of the primary spokesmen for AIPAC, if not the primary spokesperson. AIPAC as you may know is the most powerful Zionist organization in the world aside from the Israeli government itself. I have mentioned AIPAC many times before, particularly at the time of the notorious publication of a study in The London Review of Books in March 2006, a study by Professors Mearsheimer and Walt. Their followup book of similar title, "The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy" was published in August 2007 and was a bestseller. AIPAC is a big part of the so-called Israel Lobby, though the Israel Lobby includes other smaller organizations, like separate organizations of Christian Zionists. According to a Congressional poll back at the time, AIPAC was considered to be the second most influential lobby to Congress hands down, second only to the AARP.
Now the connection: Since a major and directed economic transition--away from agriculture I think--in the 1990s, Israel's economy is now based heavily on the design, manufacture, and sale to much of the rest of the world, including to the United States, of high tech military equipment. Much or most of that high tech military equipment is surveillance equipment including some amazing and major sorts of computer surveillance software. Aside from U.S. businesses, Israel also has a very real and very serious economic investment involving a much higher percentage of its population in the outcomes of any serious debates on the proposition, "Be it resolved state surveillance is a legitimate defence of our freedoms… ," the outcome of the debate in America and the outcomes of the debates in other parts of the world as well. So. Alan Dershowitz, eh? And from listening to him in the above video he obviously wants to be right there involved with the development of any new rules.
Alexis Ohanian made his big point repeatedly, that the universal surveillance capabilities that are now set up, whether or not the full capabilities are used all the time, require that the structure, the hardware and software, be kept insecure enough for the surveillance capabilities to be able to work. He says making the structure more secure, more hacking resistant, would make us more secure. The surveillance state, as it is, is making us less secure, not more secure. It did not appear that Alan Dershowitz understood what self-professed nerd Alexis Ohanian was talking about. Or maybe it was something Alan Dershowitz did not want to talk about even though he was given numerous opportunities.
The straight back of retired General Michael Hayden is an interesting sight if you happen not to have seen it before.
By the way, here is the latest Glenn Greenwald/Edward Snowden disclosure, on The Intercept, the September 5, 2014 publication of another secret document by Glenn Greenwald and some other people who are also important:
The U.S. Government’s Secret Plans to Spy for American Corporations.
Note that it was announced recently--you may have seen it--that our government has added The Intercept to the list of sites that government employees and contractors including military personnel are forbidden to visit. This is another question. Besides the question of whether or not we want to work enough to have fact-based opinions ourselves, do we want our government employees to be allowed to form a fact-based view of the world? I mean, are they American citizens also, at least some of them? ROFLOL
Here are a couple of the things I sent about a year ago. Much has happened since, but I think they are still most interesting if you missed them.
sent 8/15/13 fascinating story: How Laura Poitras Helped Snowden Spill His Secrets
sent 9/6/13 "NSA surveillance: A guide to staying secure"; new Snowden documents today
Larry
--
Larry at Blogspot "undisclosed recipients" email message archive, no logging in, no public comments
http://larryatblogspot.blogspot.com/2014/06/sent-61514-1-fox-news-must-die-2-what.html
