Via Zerohedge.
Glenn Grenwald responds.
The Sunday Times article is even worse because it protects the officials they’re serving with anonymity. The beauty of this tactic is that the accusations can’t be challenged. The official accusers are being hidden by the journalists so nobody can confront them or hold them accountable when it turns out to be false. The evidence can’t be analyzed or dissected because there literally is none: they just make the accusation and, because they’re state officials, their media-servants will publish it with no evidence needed. And as is always true, there is no way to prove the negative. It’s like being smeared by a ghost with a substance that you can’t touch.
This one’s for you Oz. 🙂
Yeah, the Russians have never conquered anyone. They’re peaceful farmers.
I blame Charles XII of Sweden.
I am not a Russophile. I have a good record here at SDA speaking up about Russian rapacity.
The Russians have never conquered me.
The Truth about the Night of June 8, 2015.
Constable Woodall, who was Head of the Hate Crimes Unit at Edmonton Police Service, had been developing a case to charge Norman Raddatz with criminal harassment since February 2014.
(nearly a year and a half of online surveillance)
Woodall and his Hate Crimes Unit had arrived at Raddatz’s home that night to execute a search warrant and notice to appear in court relating to the charge of criminal harassment, which crime Norman Raddatz had been committing via the Internet on his home computer.
Norman Raddatz had no prior criminal record.
Six officers of the Hate Crimes Unit, lead by Woodall and backed up by another 2 uniformed officers, were there to seize Raddatz’s computer and any other material relating to that charge.
Norman Raddatz was a Hate Speech Criminal, just like so many that Constable Woodall had left behind in his birthplace of Great Britain, and it was time to put an end to that speech just like they do it in Jolly Old England.
Constable Woodall was shot dead doing his duty while trying to batter in the front door of the home when Norman Raddatz fired through the door, defending his property and natural right to free speech.
Norman Raddatz’s home burned to the ground with him in it.
The home was never searched, the computer and other materials relating to the charge were never seized.
The Edmonton Police Service lied and obfuscated to the media about the real purpose of the 8 officer’s who arrived at Norman Raddatz’ door all the following Tuesday.
We will never know the truth about Norman Raddatz’s death.
The End.
This could happen to many who comment here at SDA.
Which is the greater imminent threat? Russia, China, or our own government?
From the Zerohedge article, “Do we need to repeat that Russia didn’t attack Ukraine? That if after all this time there is still zero proof for that, perhaps it’s time to let go of that idea?”
This is hogwash. So who sent troops into eastern Ukraine? Uruguay? The so-called militia that has largely taken over all of eastern Ukraine are mostly well trained Russian troops with Russian arms and with their unit insignia removed.
One can debate the legitimacy of the overthrow of Yanocovich (sp). Yanocovich was a Russian stooge whose purpose was to undermine Ukrainian independence and return it to a Russian satellite status.
That said, the allegations that government uses members of the press to further its agenda in many ways no doubt have some veracity. We see this with AGW all the time.
Off-topic
Just announced that Brian Lilley will guest host for Lowell Green at 10:05am’til noon eastern at cfra.com
A not insignificant problem: the “journalist” Glenn Greenwald is wedded to the Snowden files and is neither a credible nor objective source of information himself.
Ad hominem attacks against Greenwald’s credibility aside…
Greenwald’s whole case is that the smear against Snowden is based on nothing more that baseless assertions and innuendo.
(forget the clearcut lies which Greenwald has already proven)
So prove Greenwald is wrong by coming up with the evidence that Greenwald says the media and it’s nameless government sources don’t have. Greenwald says it isn’t there.
Logic dictates that people who say it is have to produce it, that it is there.
I agree entirely, Oz.
One only need look to the CBC for Bias & BS.
One only need look at all the MSM for Misinformation and Disinformation. The continuing calls for Carbon reductions etc are perfect examples of said disinformation.
And yea…all those “statements” that start with: “CSIS spokes persons” confirm this or that, “Government Officials confirm this or that” … or the “Believe that” are all simply designed to make one think/believe a certain way. By an large people lap it up…
Its why I don’t listen to MSM … I rather get my news from other sources.
Fair point. It is interesting to see that the major attack on the piece is coming from “journalists” who have no difficulty whatever floating stories based on “anonymous sources” who may or may not exist outside of the hotel bar if it is a story that they like.
I am more than a little wary of the very concept of Hate Crime, but there is still such a thing as criminal harassment and just because the investigation of whether or not someone was committing it was assigned to police officers who are called a Hate Crimes unit doesn’t mean Norman Raddatz was innocent. It doesn’t take shooting police officers through your door to speak freely.
“Ad hominem attacks against Greenwald’s credibility aside…”
Hardly “ad hominem”. Greenwald is not a disinterested party here. He has a vested interest in continuing to peddle the Snowden story just as long as he can; it is to his advantage to continue to weave conspiracy tales. You seem determined not to be taken in by the “media and it’s [sic] nameless government sources” yet all the while you’re happy to be suckered by some journalist in Brazil.
If Greenwald has access to all the Snowden files, why aren’t they freely available right now – in their entirety – on the Internet? That way we could all judge things on the NSA/GCHQ/CSEC material ourselves.
Wouldn’t that be a true blow for freedom and transparency?
Don’t like what someone is saying on the Internet? Don’t read it, or rebut it, or go to another site.
If Raddatz was sending someone hate mail by the Internet then block his mail address or get a new e-mail address yourself.
Ezra Levant says the answer to hate speech is more speech, not censorship, not imprisonment.
I agree for the sake of the continued existence of free speech.
But agents of the state going armed to someone’s home, and breaking down their door to seize their property to prove in court that someone has been saying naughty things on the Internet so that you can imprison them?
No. A crime is a crime, deal with the crime.
Had Raddatz assaulted anyone? No. The charge would be assault.
Had Raddatz threatened anyone? No. The charge would have been uttering a threat.
Raddatz had no prior criminal record, the Edmonton Police Chief himself said that they expected no resistance. That tells me how dangerous, after a year and a half of surveillance, that Raddatz was assessed to be.
Why should a thought, any emotion, be illegal?
Hate police are Thought Police and Hate Crime is Thought Crime.
Which thought or what way of thinking will become illegal next?
*You’re a poo-poo head and I hate you!
Now go forth and report me to the Hate Crime Unit.
* no I don’t hate you, The Tooner, just making a point
“Hardly “ad hominem”. Greenwald is not a disinterested party here. He has a vested interest in continuing to peddle the Snowden story just as long as he can”
You merely made a general attack against Greenwald’s credibility. That is ad hominem.
You didn’t address any individual points Greenwald made nor have you yet proven him wrong on any of them.
Yes, Greenwald is an interested party, I am too.
Interest alone doesn’t make anyone wrong.
Greenwald didn’t peddle this story, he is responding to stories others ‘peddled’ and showing the assertions they contain to be baseless. We wouldn’t even be reading what Greenwald said about their stories if they hadn’t first ‘peddled’ them.
“If Greenwald has access to all the Snowden files, why aren’t they freely available right now – in their entirety – on the Internet?”
Has Greenwald made that claim. I must have missed where he did. What Greenwald has stated, which I have read, is that the there is no evidence that Russia has those files.
Do you have evidence that Russia does?
Like cgh, I agree with Oz on this one. Some of the wankers in here ain’t got a clue,right jjm
tooner, you really need to update your info on cops “over-stepping” their mandate. It happens a lot, and it is always hard to get justice when it does happen because you are fighting the whole legal system
Let’s see…Snowden is very well paid, has status and a great job (one many in IT would kill for). He literally risks his life, throws away his career and becomes an international pariah…for what?
The writing has been on the wall for decades as to where the security state is going…and it is no place good. Ever since convicted/pardoned John Poindexter pronounced the formation of the (slapped down) Total Information Awareness (TIA) program in the fall of 2001 any with eyes could see where the program was headed. Now “rational actors” here are positing that somehow a man who literally threw away his life to illustrate in living color how low our intelligence agencies have sunk and how dangerous they have become to what we supposedly stand for is criticized by armchair quarterbacks for providing true smoking gun as well as loaded gun evidence (in their own words, on their own stationary) of the innumerable crimes they are committing “on our behalf, to keep us safe (from threats they have created).
I guess Judith Miller was busy and missed the “scoop”.
Thus sayeth the great Oz:
“If Greenwald has access to all the Snowden files, why aren’t they freely available right now – in their entirety – on the Internet? That way we could all judge things on the NSA/GCHQ/CSEC material ourselves.” For exactly the operational security reasons claimed in the bogus, made up from whole cloth story that prompted this whole thread. Greenwald is filtering the stories to protect the guys on the ground. He is on the side of the law and what the spooks are doing is not legal (kind of ironic that all the Magna Charta stories are rolling out). Full stop. End of discussion. The guys in the field are only doing as ordered and don’t deserve to be thrown under the bus. The guys in the corner offices who know what they are doing is both illegal and evil do.
“If Greenwald has access to all the Snowden files, why aren’t they freely available right now – in their entirety – on the Internet? That way we could all judge things on the NSA/GCHQ/CSEC material ourselves.”
That’s a quote from JJM at 12:05 which I attempted to address.
But thank you for saying I am ‘Great’, it made me blush.
“For exactly the operational security reasons claimed in the bogus, made up from whole cloth story that prompted this whole thread. Greenwald is filtering the stories to protect the guys on the ground.”
What charmingly naïve nonsense. Greenwald is no better placed than I am to decide what has to be “filtered” and who is to be “protected”.
If “state surveillance” is such a big conspiracy that it must be dealt some sort of death blow, then publish all the stolen NSA files and to hell with protecting anybody.
Fiat iustitia ruat caelum.
“If “state surveillance” is such a big conspiracy that it must be dealt some sort of death blow, then publish all the stolen NSA files and to hell with protecting anybody.”
No IFs. A federal U.S. court told Obama to end it. What sort of death blow did you have in mind?
My apologies for falsely fingering you…that said where can I find out more about the Edmonton thing. I’ve heard none of what you are reporting and was curious what brought this about.
Check out the Edmonton Journal. They have several stories about Constable Woodall, including stories prior to his death.
In them they state that Woodall was from England, was Head of the Hate Crimes Unit, was at Raddatz’s home to execute a search warrant, had been developing the case(which was an Internet case) starting in February 2014, that the Hate Crimes Unit was also serving a summons to appear for criminal harassment, that Raddatz was expected to give no resistance, that the Journal had done a search and found no criminal convictions on Raddatz, etc.
All of the Edmonton Journal stories lionize Constable Woodall and the information I stated appears in bits and piece throughout those stories.
http://www.edmontonjournal.com/Const+Daniel+Woodall+hailed+defender+diversity+friends+colleagues/11121752/story.html
You can find other article links about Constable Woodall beside the main article. Check them all and look for the information that I provided above.
Notwithstanding being a longtime conservative, I have hard time to “trust” MSM journalists, especially when they’re being lapdogs to big government.
I’m with GG on this one.