60 votes

Greenwald to testify before Congress

The Guardian's Glenn Greenwald will testify before a bipartisan congressional group next week about the National Security Agency's surveillance program, he confirmed to POLITICO.

The hearing will take place on Wednesday and comes amid growing congressional concern over the reach of the NSA's surveillance tactics. It will be headed by Democratic Rep. Alan Grayson.

According to the Guardian’s report, Greenwald will testify via video-link from Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
deacon's picture

I know they do more than rep us

they also steal,violate,threaten, lie,and steal some more :)
they also vote against us,vote against their own sworn oaths
did i mention steal?? all of which,they have no right to do
most of them should be brought up on charges of violating their oath's of
most of the reps have voted on,is totally unconst,they know it,we know it,but they do it anyways
now they have created a law that states it is now a crime to protest
when a rep is in the vicinity (THEY WORK FOR US...RIGHT? :)

I do see why you do not post at times on certain posts,I don't agree
at most times with a lot of people,but I do not actively attack them.
that is, unless one does it first,I go on offensive,I figure most are grown adults,and should by now,be able to talk/chat, bring things to the table
with out all the drama and name calling
People seem to have forgotten,we are all in this together,this does make me saddened and sickened does limit the amount of time I am on here

If we deny truth before your very eyes,then the rest of what we have to say,is of little consequence

I agree with your post

and I thank you.

I give you credit for caring, thinking for yourself, being honest, and open.

You're A-OK!

LittleWing's picture

Granger, repeating a lie does not make it true.

FISA and the Patriot Act did not "allow NSA to exist" and the NSA is certainly not 'expiring' as you keep repeating.

The NSA was formally established by Truman in a memorandum of October 24, 1952.

The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) was introduced on May 18, 1977, by Senator Ted Kennedy and was signed into law by President Carter in 1978.

The Patriot Act was passed under George W. Bush on October 26, 2001

The classified documents that Snowden and Greenwald are making public bring much needed attention to the fact that the FISA courts are not providing proper oversight on surveillance as they were meant to do.

If Wars Can Be Started by Lies, They Can Be Stopped By Truth.

quips may be cute

but you are not telling any truth.

I asked WHAT EMPOWERED NSA? FISA and the Patriots Acts.


Snowball and The Spigot arte not telling anyone anything who kept up with the news didn't know. So what make this a big deal?

Move over constitution, because that is NOT where they are going when they go to dictatoirships that Rand warned Snowball.. DON'T GO TO RUSSIA..

You want a global tyrant for a government continue in the direction you're going and tell your self you're wide awake.

Proper oversight? They should be ELIMINATED!

LittleWing's picture

These are YOUR comments..

"The crimes, IMO, are FISA and the Patriot Acts, which legalized, and established the NSA."

"the NSA contract is due to expire. So why is this news NOW? Why not 7 years ago when it began?"

"Must be, because you would rather focus on the NSA than FISA and the Patriot Acts that created it"


I was simply pointing out your errors so you don't continue to make a fool of yourself. I seriously believe you have selective reading comprehension problems as well as a case of narcissistic personality disorder.

If Wars Can Be Started by Lies, They Can Be Stopped By Truth.

I stnad byy what I said

Who empowered you with the right to diagnose me? Not me.

LittleWing's picture

You display the classic description

of all the symptoms. You accuse me of wanting a Global tyrannical government because I pointed out your contradictions. Who empowered you to lie about my beliefs? Not me.

BTW, Why don't you have the common courtesy to use spell check? Spell check does not know if you are dyslexic or not. I have some dyslexia myself but that is no excuse not to take a minute to use spell check. I just used it on your comment title:

I stnad byy what I said < before using spell check

I stand by what I said < after using spell check

If Wars Can Be Started by Lies, They Can Be Stopped By Truth.

Are you a doctor

Or are you just the DP mental health police? You have every opportunity to speak for yourself and tell as many lies as you want to expose you believe.

spell check does not work for dyslexia.

LittleWing's picture

Spell check and dyslexia. I just showed you that it does work

on most mild errors by using your exact words and spelling before and after. I know it may not work on REALLY bad errors or contextual errors but it does work on mild spelling and grammar. No, I'm not a doctor or DP mental health lol!

Here is a program you may be interested in that covers much more than the regular spell check:

There are others available also. I would think since it causes you distress as you have said, then you would be happy to know there is relief.

If Wars Can Be Started by Lies, They Can Be Stopped By Truth.

TY LittleWing

I had no idea they existed.. seems the top one is Ghotit, or maybe they are the best advertized http://www.ghotit.com/get_it_now/

I'm checking it out, very seriously. THANK YOU!!!! seriously
I've tested it on this http://www.ghotit.com/ and I'm buying it.


Hey Granger...

I do respect your opinion however I have a question.

Is it part of the NSA charter to operate on domestic American's or wasn't it supposed to operate on foreign contacts/domestic to foreign communications?

It looks to me that the GOV has indeed overstepped it's bounds but, I'm not claiming to be an expert.

What do you think?

If the Agencies in question are operating 'in secret'
how in the hell are they held accountable?

I can't personally cannot accept blanket immunity for any agency and I think there are more devious motives behind their actions.


In Liberty

I think

It's a set up from top to bottom, trhat janet Napolitano should be questioned, not allow to retire to UC, and that Greenwald should be arrested for taking classified documents that were not his to take. I think The Guardian should be sued, and that the Obama administration should be hauled over for this. I think if we were going to remain a sovreign state we would see these kind of things happen, and the reason we are not is becaise this is a sham to get the USA under the UN global government.

What is your basis?

> He accepted documents that were not his to accept.

Why do you believe Greenwald has a duty to refuse to receive information?

Because he didn't have clearance to recieve the classified docum

They were not for his eyes, he didn't have clearance. and it's wrong for the USA to not arrest him.

But why?

Why does HE have a duty to respect that? Where does that duty come from?

If a government decides to declare some information secret, does that mean anyone who talks about that information should be punished, regardless of how that information was obtained?

How far does this extend? Snowden gave classified info to Greenwald who published them. I read Greenwald and learned the information. Hours later I went to an event where I met someone who hosts a ton of stuff with Microsoft. This person was completely unaware of the classified information revealed to me by Greenwald. I told him all about it, so now this person knows.

Should I be arrested? If I understand your position correctly you believe that I should be.

If this person I told subsequently told a coworker who didn't know Microsoft was providing the NSA with direct access to their data, should he be arrested too?

Taking this concept further: Should there be a central database of what information every single person on Earth is authorized to know, and if anyone is found to know something they aren't authorized to know they should be punished?

Because he signed an oath

Do we respect oath keepers here or not? He signed an oath to the constitution and he signed to gain access to classified documents.

Greenwald has not exposed the documents, only made threats to do so.

If I had taken an oath to the constitution, and signed to receive classified documents that could hurt the USA, and I offered them to you, who have no clearance, would you take them?

Granger, I think you would benefit by taking this course.

Introduction to Logic


Many of your posts get down voted because you seem to blatantly post illogical, and inconsistent ideas. Then you move the argument to issues and name calling. It really wastes a lot of peoples time as well as your own. I pray, that is not your real intent here.

Will you answer my questions?

I answered yours in my other reply.

I'm answering your questions

Snowden swore an oath to uphold the constitution and explicitly agreed to keep certain information he received confidential. But his oath to uphold the constitution came into conflict with his agreement to keep certain information confidential. It was impossible to keep both promises.

Greenwald has in fact exposed some of the documents. I'm not sure why it matters to this conversation that he hasn't exposed ALL of the documents. Even if Snowden didn't give Greenwald any documents and merely told him what was going on then Snowden would still be guilty of breaking his promise not to disclose certain information.

If you offered me documents that I thought were interesting I'd most certainly take them. And it wouldn't be wrong of me to do so.

We have whistleblower protection laws

Why didn't Snowden go to The Judge? Why didn't Snowden go to the FBI? Why didn't Snowden go to his congressman man, someone who had CLEARANCE and say, "I'm upset by this and believe it is unconstitutional band because I signed an oath to uphold the US Constitution, and I fear repercussions, I want you, who are CLEARED, to direct me where I can safely file a complaint?"

Why go to a guy who does not live in the USA to have it posted by a IK paper and then flww the USA to communist and dictatorship countries that a imbedded in the UN?

Can you tell me that?

File a complaint?

This is a diabolical rights violation and enslavement scheme of mass proportions being perpetrated on us by the gov't, not Snowden's burger order getting messed up at a fast food joint.

what rights violation?


See the 4th amendment


I don't know

Of course, I don't know why he made the decisions he made or even the identities of everyone who advised him. All I have is speculation.

Maybe he did try to reach out to others and they wouldn't help him?

After all, he did go to the Washington Post first and they wouldn't play along. Then he went to a writer outside of the US to get results.

For all we know some personal problem is what truly motivated him to act. Maybe going out with a spectacular bang was just as high a priority for him as reining in the spies.


I think Snowden is a good guy, who has his heart in the right place, and was duped by people who needed a good guy like Snowden to advance their globalist agenda.

Should I be arrested?

I'm curious what your take is on the questions I pose here:

what about whistle blowers

what about whistle blowers being protected after Ellsberg's stunt with the Pentagon papers? Didn't that establish precedent to protect whistle-blowers who expose wrong-doing?

What about whistle blowers?

Do we have whistleblower protections? YES WE DO.

So why not stay within the USA and use them rather than go outside the USA and lose them to a country that doesn't have them?

No protection was offered to Private Bradley Manning : (

Ellsberg said himself that America has changed immensely since the Pentagon Papers event. America isn't as free as it used to be back in the 70s. Our freedoms are not protected to the degree they used to be. And Ellsberg further said that Snowden did the right thing by leaving America.

Besides, look what happened to PFC Manning when he stayed. : \
Looking at the Manning case, how can you expect whistleblower protections to be effective?

I'm no fan of Ellsburg

Manning's mistake is acting like a civilian while wearing a uniform. When you join the military, you sign away your rights.

That is a FACT that somehow Manning didn't get when he joined.