30 votes

'Greenwald is considered a radical because the American press refuses to believe the government itself has taken a radical turn'

No Place to Hide: A Conservative Critique of a Radical NSA - The Atlantic

Glenn Greenwald's new book is far more grounded in traditional American norms, laws, and values than the surveillance programs it is critiquing.


Glenn Greenwald's new book, No Place to Hide, reproduces a secret National Security Agency document that sums up that agency's radical approach to surveillance:

Collect it all. Know it all. Exploit it all.

That totalitarian approach came straight from the top. Outgoing NSA chief Keith Alexander began using "collect it all" in Iraq at the height of the counterinsurgency. Eventually, he aimed similar tools at hundreds of millions of innocent people living in liberal democracies at peace, not war zones under occupation.

The strongest passages in No Place to Hide convey the awesome spying powers amassed by the U.S. government and its surveillance partners; the clear and present danger they pose to privacy; and the ideology of the national-security state. The NSA really is intent on subverting every method a human could use to communicate without the state being able to monitor the conversation.

U.S. officials regard the unprecedented concentration of power that would entail to be less dangerous than the alternative. They can't conceive of serious abuses perpetrated by the federal government, though recent U.S. history offers many examples.

Continue reading:

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

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

I'm reading the book now and

I'm reading the book now and recommend it highly. It reads like a novel so don't pass on it because you think it'll be dull.

Greenwald tells us much more than we knew about the heroic actions of Edward Snowden. We can thank this young man for carefully picking the right journalist and for much of the planning of the manner in which the reveal occurred.

The Snowden revelations would not have happened in the way they did had Edward Snowden not been the principled and highly motivated and intelligent young man that he is, and had Glenn Greenwald not been the determined pit bull of a human rights advocate that he is.

We owe a debt of gratitude to them both.

I must be willing to give up what I am in order to become what I will be. Albert Einstein

The American media is owned....

by the FCC. They OBEY.


The American Media is owned by the CIA ("Operation Mockingbird"), and by Wall Street.

They control what gets on the Air, and what does not.

There MSM isn't "the press".

There MSM isn't "the press". They are the propaganda wing of the U.S. government.

"In reality, the Constitution itself is incapable of achieving what we would like in limiting government power, no matter how well written."

~ Ron Paul, End the Fed

I disagree

It's not that the press refuses to believe the government has taken a radical turn.

They absolutely know it because they are a part of it.

They just don't want us to know it. Their job is to manipulate us.


Part of this manipulation is the weird conflation/obfuscation going on with the words radical and conservative. It seems deliberately sloppy in order to confuse.

SteveMT's picture

Do you mean to say: ".. 'has' taken a radical turn"

The press gives Greenwald short shrift and refuses to believe that there is anything wrong with the government because the press itself was taken over by the government decades ago. The MSM are government mouthpieces; they hardly ever criticize the government because they are synonymous with government. The MSM's neutral treatment of such a heinous act as government spying on its own citizens exposes the collusion between the MSM and the government.

Michael Nystrom's picture

From the article:

Targeted surveillance "is consistent with American constitutional values and basic precepts of Western justice," Greenwald continues. Notice that the authority he most often cites to justify his position is the Constitution. That's not the mark of a radical. In fact, so many aspects of Greenwald's book and the positions that he takes on surveillance are deeply, unmistakably conservative.

What kind of constitutionalist is Greenwald

Doesn't he know that the job of the president is to "keep the American people safe" and that liberty must be sacrificed to preserve security.


You Jest, of course …

… but there are many here who still knee jerk that because Glenn Greenwald is regarded as in the left/progressive camp socially, we can make assumptions as to the parameters of his juris-prudence. Silly collectivist presumption.

Glenn is a real constitutional scholar. He understands and can articulate the principles ... and has the training, together with an inclination and talent to be one of its finest defenders, which he proves to be on every occasion I've witnessed where he is called to the challenge. In fact, I am not aware of a single episode where he has taken a position at odds with my understanding of those same principles. If one of you is aware of an example of Glenn taking up a position of questionable merit with respect to the Constitution, I would find it interesting you alerting me. From what I’ve seen, he gets it:.

“Revealingly, the central function of the Constitution as law--the supreme law--was to impose limitations not on the behavior of ordinary citizens but on the federal government. The government, and those who ran it, were not placed outside the law, but expressly targeted by it. Indeed, the Bill of Rights is little more than a description of the lines that the most powerful political officials are barred from crossing, even if they have the power to do so and even when the majority of citizens might wish them to do so.”
― Glenn Greenwald, With Liberty and Justice for Some: How the Law Is Used to Destroy Equality and Protect the Powerful

Yes, He Gets It

He used to be a mainline Democrat, but when Obama continued the Bush policies he had no problem leaving that reservation. He has principles.

"Bipartisan: both parties acting in concert to put both of their hands in your pocket."-Rothbard