<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Salon.com > Glenn Greenwald</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.salon.com/writer/glenn_greenwald/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.salon.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 27 May 2012 13:20:45 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>The Authoritarian Mind</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/27/the_authoritarian_mind_2/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/27/the_authoritarian_mind_2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 27 May 2012 11:25:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12928159</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Yet another Afghan family (and a bakery in Pakistan) is extinguished by an airstrike: unleash the justifications]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>(updated below - Update II)</strong></p><p>Yesterday, I <a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/05/26/the_imperial_mind/singleton/">wrote about the rotted workings of Imperial Mind</a>, but today presents a tragic occasion to examine its close, indispensable cousin: the Authoritarian Mind. From <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2012/05/27/world/asia/afghanistan-violence/index.html"><em>CNN</em> today</a>:</p><blockquote><p>A suspected <strong>NATO airstrike killed eight civilians -- including six children</strong> -- in eastern Afghanistan, a provincial spokesman said.</p>
<p>The airstrike took place Saturday night in Paktia province, said Rohullah Samoon, spokesman for the governor of Paktia. He said an <strong>entire family was killed in the strike.</strong></p></blockquote><p>The <em>LA Times</em> <a href="http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/world_now/2012/05/afghan-authorities-nato-air-strike-kills-eight-civilians.html">identified</a> the victims as "Mohammed Shafi, his wife and his six children," and cited the statements from the spokesman for the Paktia governor’s office that "there is no evidence that Shafi was a Taliban insurgent or linked with Al Qaeda." The Afghan spokesman blamed the incident on the refusal of NATO to coordinate strikes with Afghan forces to ensure civilians are not targeted ("If they had shared this with us, this wouldn’t have happened"). <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2012/05/26/world/asia/ap-as-pakistan.html?hp">Also yesterday</a>:</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/05/27/the_authoritarian_mind_2/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/27/the_authoritarian_mind_2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>8</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Imperial Mind</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/26/the_imperial_mind/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/26/the_imperial_mind/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 May 2012 11:53:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12927951</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[American rage at Pakistan over the punishment of a CIA-cooperating Pakistani doctor is quite revealing]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Americans of all types -- <a href="http://www.armytimes.com/news/2012/05/ap-senate-panel-cuts-pakistan-aid-after-doctors-conviction-shakil-afridi-052412/">Democrats and Republicans</a>, even <a href="http://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2012/05/pakistan">some Good Progressives</a> -- are just livid that a Pakistani tribal court (reportedly in consultation with Pakistani officials) has <a href="http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2012/05/23/153362441/33-years-in-prison-for-pakistani-doctor-who-aided-hunt-for-bin-laden">imposed</a> a 33-year prison sentence on Shakil Afridi, the Pakistani physician who secretly worked with the CIA to find Osama bin Laden on Pakistani soil. Their fury tracks the standard American media narrative: by punishing Dr. Afridi for the "crime" of helping the U.S. find bin Laden, Pakistan has revealed that it sympathizes with Al Qaeda and is hostile to the U.S. (<a href="http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2012/05/23/153362441/33-years-in-prison-for-pakistani-doctor-who-aided-hunt-for-bin-laden">NPR headline</a>: "33 Years In Prison For Pakistani Doctor Who Aided Hunt For Bin Laden"; <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/24/world/asia/doctor-who-helped-find-bin-laden-given-jail-term-official-says.html?_r=1&amp;ref=asia"><em>NYT</em> headline</a>: "Prison Term for Helping C.I.A. Find Bin Laden"). Except that's a woefully incomplete narrative: incomplete to the point of being quite misleading.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/05/26/the_imperial_mind/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/26/the_imperial_mind/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>221</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Warrantless spying fight</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/24/warrantless_spying_fight/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/24/warrantless_spying_fight/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 May 2012 13:37:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12926635</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Obama officials demand full, reform-free renewal of the once-controversial power to eavesdrop without warrants]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In 2006, <em>The New York Times</em>' James Risen and Eric Lichtblau <a href="http://www.pulitzer.org/biography/2006-National-Reporting-Group1">won</a> the Pulitzer Prize for their December, 2005 <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/16/politics/16program.html?pagewanted=all">article</a> revealing that the Bush administration was eavesdropping on the electronic communications of Americans without the warrants required by the FISA law (headline: "Bush Lets U.S. Spy on Callers Without Courts" <span style="text-decoration: line-through;">"Officials Say U.S. Wiretaps Exceeded Law"</span>). Even though multiple federal judges <a href="http://www.salon.com/2010/04/01/nsa_4/">eventually ruled</a> the program illegal, that scandal generated no accountability of any kind for two reasons: <strong>(1) </strong>federal courts <a href="http://www.salon.com/2007/07/07/nsa_12/">ultimately accepted</a> the arguments of the Bush and <a href="https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/04/obama-doj-worse-than-bush">Obama DOJs</a> that the legality of Bush's domestic spying program should not be judicially reviewed; and <strong>(2) </strong>the Democratic-led Congress, in 2008, <a href="https://www.eff.org/press/archives/2008/07/09">enacted the Bush-designed FISA Amendments Act</a>, which not only retroactively immunized the nation's telecom giants for their illegal participation in that spying program and thus terminated pending lawsuits, but worse, also legalized the vast bulk of the Bush spying program by vesting vast new powers in the U.S. Government to eavesdrop without warrants (in his memoir, President Bush gleefully recounted that the 2008 eavesdropping bill supported by the Democrats gave him more than he ever expected).</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/05/24/warrantless_spying_fight/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/24/warrantless_spying_fight/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>271</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Egyptian wisdom</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/24/egyptian_wisdom/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/24/egyptian_wisdom/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 May 2012 13:36:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12926677</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[“It is enough that the new president will know he could go to jail if he does something wrong."]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><em>The New York Times</em> <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/25/world/middleeast/egyptians-vote-for-second-day-in-presidential-election.html?pagewanted=1">reports</a> on the inspiring scenes across Egypt as millions wait in line to elect their new President. The article contains numerous quotes from ordinary Egyptian citizens explaining their sense of optimism that democratic accountability is coming to their country for the first time in a very long time, as illustrated by this passage:</p><blockquote><p>Others felt their own power as citizens, for the first time. In a country where a journalist was fined and jailed two years ago for speculating in print about the health of Mr. Mubarak, in this race leading candidates detailed their infirmities, and one volunteered his medical records in a televised debate.</p>
<p><strong>“It is enough that the new president will know he could go to jail if he does something wrong</strong>,” said Mohamed Maher, 28, waiting to vote in Imbaba.</p></blockquote><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/05/24/egyptian_wisdom/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/24/egyptian_wisdom/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>44</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>WH leaks for propaganda film</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/23/wh_leaks_for_propaganda_film/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/23/wh_leaks_for_propaganda_film/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 May 2012 12:32:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12925862</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The administration takes a break from its war on whistleblowers to provide classified information to filmmakers ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>(updated below)</strong></p><p>As is now <a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/05/16/whistleblowers_6/">well documented</a>, the Obama administration has waged an unprecedented war on whistleblowers, prosecuting more of them under espionage statutes than all prior administrations combined: <a href="http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2012/04/obama-has-prosecuted-more-whistleblowers-than-all-other-presidents-combined.html">twice as many as all prior administrations combined</a>, in fact. They are attempting, or have attempted, to imprison whistleblowers who <a href="http://www.thenation.com/article/161376/government-case-against-whistleblower-thomas-drake-collapses">exposed corrupt and illegal NSA eavesdropping</a>, dangerously inept efforts to impede Iran's nuclear program (which <a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-501363_162-57436895/federal-appeals-panel-to-hear-cia-leak-case/">likely strengthened it</a>), the <a href="http://www.whistleblower.org/blog/42-2012/1894-the-truth-about-the-espionage-act-prosecution-against-whistleblower-john-kiriakou">destructive uses of torture</a>, and a <a href="http://www.salon.com/2010/12/24/wikileaks_23/">litany of previously unknown</a> U.S.-caused civilian deaths and other American war crimes.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/05/23/wh_leaks_for_propaganda_film/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/23/wh_leaks_for_propaganda_film/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>220</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Rep. Smith on his controversial bills</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/22/rep_smith_on_his_controversial_bills/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/22/rep_smith_on_his_controversial_bills/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 May 2012 17:05:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12925250</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Washington Democrat discusses his bills to ban domestic indefinite detention but allow domestic "propaganda"]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Rep. Adam Smith (D-Wash.) is the co-sponsor of two controversial amendments to the National Defense Authorization Act: one which would ban the use of indefinite detention for any accused Terrorist apprehended on U.S. soil (the House <a href="https://www.aclu.org/national-security/house-fails-pass-amendment-scaling-back-ndaa-indefinite-detention-provisions">rejected</a> that amendment earlier this week), and the other, as Michael Hastings <a href="http://www.buzzfeed.com/mhastings/congressmen-seek-to-lift-propaganda-ban">first reported</a>, which would repeal a long-standing prohibition under the Smith-Mundt Act of 1948 on the dissemination inside the U.S. of State Department information campaigns (what the State Department calls "public diplomacy" and what others call "state propaganda"). Rep. Smith was my guest today on <em>Salon Radio</em> to discuss both of his proposed amendments, and the 15-minute interview, which heavily focuses on his Smith-Mundt proposal, can be heard on the player below (the Smith-Mundt discussion begins at 5:15).</p><p>A few of points on the domestic propaganda issue that we discussed:</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/05/22/rep_smith_on_his_controversial_bills/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/22/rep_smith_on_his_controversial_bills/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>136</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>John Brennan&#8217;s new power</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/22/john_brennans_new_power/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/22/john_brennans_new_power/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 May 2012 12:34:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12924608</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[President Obama's counter-terrorism chief has "seized the lead" in secretly determining who will die by US drone]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>(updated below)</strong></p><p>In November, 2008, media reports strongly suggested that President Obama intended to name John Brennan as CIA Director. But <a href="http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2008/11/glenn-greenwald-andrew-sullivan-celebrate-exceptional-news-john-brennan-wont-be-cia-dir">controversy</a> over Brennan's recent history -- he was a Bush-era CIA official who <a href="http://www.salon.com/2008/11/16/brennan/">expressly advocated</a> "enhanced interrogation techniques" and rendition -- <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/nov/25/obama-white-house-cia-brennan">forced him to "withdraw"</a> from consideration, as he publicly issued <a href="http://www.theatlantic.com/daily-dish/archive/2008/11/brennan-withdraws/208166/">a letter</a> citing "strong criticism in some quarters" of his CIA advocacy.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/05/22/john_brennans_new_power/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/22/john_brennans_new_power/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>96</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Re-visiting Assange&#8217;s show</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/22/re_visiting_assanges_show/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/22/re_visiting_assanges_show/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 May 2012 11:46:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12924577</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It's fruitful to compare his show's first six episodes to the tripe emanating from American political television]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>When it was announced last month that the Kremlin-backed network <em>RT</em> would broadcast a new show from Julian Assange, American media figures predictably <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/18/arts/television/julian-assange-starts-talk-show-on-russian-tv.html?ref=television">erupted</a> <a href="http://www.forbes.com/sites/markadomanis/2012/04/18/julian-assanges-debut-on-russia-today-the-serious-people-say-it-was-really-bad/">with</a> <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/apr/17/world-tomorrow-julian-assange-wikileaks">mockery and scorn</a> despite not having seen a single episode (nobody provokes the animosity of America's establishment media class more than those who meaningfully challenge American government power). Since I <a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/04/18/attacks_on_rt_and_assange_reveal_much_about_the_critics/">participated</a> in the <a href="http://www.rt.com/news/assange-greenwald-show-kremlin-487/">ensuing debate</a>, I thought it would be worthwhile briefly to review the six programs Assange has now produced and let everyone decide for themselves how these programs compare to the criticisms voiced and, more generally, to the quality, substance, and range of debate from America's cable and network news programs. Here are the first six episodes:</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/05/22/re_visiting_assanges_show/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/22/re_visiting_assanges_show/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>112</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Democrats and Bain</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/21/democrats_and_bain_2/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/21/democrats_and_bain_2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 May 2012 13:41:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bain Capital]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12923794</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Executives at Romney's old private-equity firm have donated more to the Democratic Party than the GOP. Why?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>(updated below)</strong></p><p>We all know that Bain Capital, Mitt Romney's former firm, is the paragon of capitalist evil, destroying the middle class in order to enrich greedy vulture oligarchs. We also all know that the Democratic Party is the defender of the middle class and the bold adversary of corporate pillaging. That's why <a href="http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/205025-dems-receive-more-bain-dollars-than-gop">these facts</a> generate so much cognitive dissonance:</p><blockquote><p><strong>Democrats have accepted more political donations than Republicans from executives at Bain Capital</strong>, complicating the left’s plan to attack Mitt Romney for his record at the private-equity firm.</p>
<p>During the last three election cycles, Bain employees have given Democratic candidates and party committees more than $1.2 million. The vast majority of that sum came from senior executives.</p>
<p>Republican candidates and party committees raised over $480,000 from senior Bain executives during that time period.</p></blockquote><p>While Romney himself has received more contributions from his former firm than Obama has, "President Obama received a sizable share as well." More generally, "campaign finance records show that Democrats collect more money from Wall Street than does the GOP."</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/05/21/democrats_and_bain_2/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/21/democrats_and_bain_2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>311</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The 2002 political climate</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/19/the_2002_political_climate/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/19/the_2002_political_climate/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 19 May 2012 22:39:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12923458</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[CNN's Connie Chung told US citizen Martina Navratilova to go back to Czechoslovakia rather than complain so much]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Here's something I accidentally just found when I was searching for something else: it's from <a href="http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0207/17/cct.00.html">a July 17, 2002, interview</a> of tennis legend Martina Navratilova, who had been a naturalized U.S. citizen at that point for more than 20 years. She was interviewed by Connie Chung, then the host of a prime-time CNN program, <em>Connie Chung Tonight</em>, where she played the role of neutral journalist. This was the very first question-and-answer exchange; it's just remarkable:</p><blockquote><p><strong>INTRO [announcer]</strong>: Life after center court turns hot. Tennis legend Martina Navratilova, is she anti-American? Tonight, Martina sets the record straight with Connie. . . .</p>
<p><strong>CHUNG [intro]</strong>:  It's not the game that's now getting Navratilova in the news again. The very personal admission to a paper that she wants to adopt a child and some very damaging quotes in German newspaper allegedly made by the tennis phenom. . . . All of this has pitted Navratilova against the country that has given her so much.</p>
<p><strong>CHUNG [interview starts]</strong>: All right. I'm going to read what was said, a quote from that German newspaper. Quote: "The most absurd part of my escape from the unjust system is that I have exchanged one system that suppresses free opinion for another. The Republicans in the U.S. manipulate public opinion and sweep controversial issues under the table. It's depressing. Decisions in America are based solely on the question of how much money will come out of it and not on the questions of how much health, morals or environment suffer as a result."</p>
<p>So, is that accurate? . . . .</p>
<p><strong>NAVRATILOVA</strong>: Well, obviously, I'm not saying this is a communist system, but I think we're having -- after 9/11, there's a big centralization of power. President Bush is having more and more power. John Ashcroft is having more and more power. Americans are losing their personal rights left and right. I mean, the ACLU is up in arms about all of the stuff that's going on right now. . . .</p>
<p><strong>CHUNG</strong>: Can I be honest with you? <strong>I can tell you that when I read this, I have to tell you that I thought it was un-American, unpatriotic. I wanted to say, go back to Czechoslovakia. You know, if you don't like it here, this a country that gave you so much, gave you the freedom to do what you want.</strong></p>
<p><strong>NAVRATILOVA</strong>: And I'm giving it back. This is why I speak out. When I see something that I don't like, I'm going to speak out because you can do that here. And again, <strong>I feel there are too many things happening that are taking our rights away. </strong></p>
<p><strong>CHUNG</strong>: But you know what? I think it is, OK, if you believe that, you know, then go ahead and think that at home. But why do you have to spill it out? You know, why do you have to talk about it as a celebrity so that people will write it down and talk about what you said?</p>
<p><strong>NAVRATILOVA</strong>: I think athletes have a duty to speak out when there is something that's not right, when they feel that perhaps social issues are not being paid attention to. As a woman, as a lesbian, as a woman athlete, there is a whole bunch of barriers that I've had to jump over, and we shouldn't have to be jumping over them any more.</p>
<p><strong>CHUNG</strong>: Got you. But sometimes, when you hear celebrities saying something, do you ever say to yourself, I don't care what so and so thinks, you know. Yes, go ahead and say whatever you want to say. But you're not a politician. You're not in a position of government power or whatever.</p>
<p><strong>NAVRATILOVA</strong>: No. And I just might do that. I may run for office one of these days and really do make a difference. But...</p>
<p><strong>CHUNG</strong>: Are you kidding me?</p>
<p><strong>NAVRATILOVA</strong>: <strong>No, I'm not. One of these days, hopefully. But when you say go back to Czech Republic, why are you sending me back there? I live here. I love this country. I've lived here 27 years. I've paid taxes here for 27 years. Do I not have a right to speak out? Why is that unpatriotic?</strong></p>
<p><strong>CHUNG: Well, you know the old line, love it or leave it. </strong></p></blockquote><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/05/19/the_2002_political_climate/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/19/the_2002_political_climate/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>369</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Drone filmmaker denied visa</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/18/drone_filmmaker_denied_visa/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/18/drone_filmmaker_denied_visa/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 May 2012 14:29:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12922633</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A Pakistani student is unable to accept his film festival award because he is denied the right to enter the U.S.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Muhammad Danish Qasim is a Pakistani student at <a href="http://www.iqra.edu.pk/">Iqra University’s Media Science</a> and is also a filmmaker. This year, Qasim released a short film entitled <em>The Other Side</em>, a 20-minute narrative <a href="http://tribune.com.pk/story/377392/pakistani-students-win-international-award-for-film-on-drones/">that</a> "revolves around the idea of assessing social, psychological and economical effects of drones on the people in tribal areas of Pakistan." A two-minute video trailer of the film is embedded below. <em>The Express Tribune</em> <a href="http://tribune.com.pk/story/380304/the-other-side-shooting-drones/">provided this summary</a> of the film, including an interview with Qasim:</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/05/18/drone_filmmaker_denied_visa/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/18/drone_filmmaker_denied_visa/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>211</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Federal court enjoins NDAA</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/16/federal_court_enjoins_ndaa/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/16/federal_court_enjoins_ndaa/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 May 2012 21:14:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12921682</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[An Obama-appointed judge rules its indefinite detention provisions likely violate the 1st and 5th Amendments ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>(updated below)</strong></p><p>A federal district judge today, the newly-appointed <a href="http://abovethelaw.com/2011/05/correction-ex-cravath-partner-nominated-to-s-d-n-y-is-pretty-stinking-rich/">Katherine Forrest</a> of the Southern District of New York, issued <a href="http://sdnyblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/12-Civ.-00331-2012.05.16-Opinion-Granting-PI.pdf">an amazing ruling</a>: one which preliminarily enjoins enforcement of the highly controversial indefinite provisions of <a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/12/16/three_myths_about_the_detention_bill/">the National Defense Authorization Act</a>, enacted by Congress and <a href="http://www.salon.com/2011/12/15/obama_to_sign_indefinite_detention_bill_into_law/">signed into law</a> by President Obama last December. This afternoon's ruling came as part of a lawsuit brought by seven dissident plaintiffs -- including Chris Hedges, Dan Ellsberg, Noam Chomsky, and Birgitta Jonsdottir -- alleging that the NDAA violates "both their free speech and associational rights guaranteed by the First Amendment as well as due process rights guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution."</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/05/16/federal_court_enjoins_ndaa/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/16/federal_court_enjoins_ndaa/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>471</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Obama&#8217;s new free speech threat</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/16/obamas_new_free_speech_threat/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/16/obamas_new_free_speech_threat/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 May 2012 12:48:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12921323</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[An Executive order seeks to punish U.S. citizens even for "indirectly" obstructing dictatorial rule in Yemen]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>(updated below - Update II)</strong></p><p><strong></strong>There is substantial opposition in both Yemen and the West to the new U.S.-backed Yemeni President, Abed Rabbo Mansour Hadi. Hadi was the long-time Vice President of the Yemeni dictator Ali Abdullah Saleh, and after Saleh finally stepped down last year, Hadi became President as part of an "election" in which <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2012/02/21/world/meast/yemen-elections/index.html">he was the only candidate</a> (that little fact did not prevent Hillary Clinton from congratulating Yemen "on today's successful presidential election" (successful because the U.S. liked the undemocratic outcome)). As it does with most U.S.-compliant dictators in the region, the Obama administration has since been propping up Hadi with large amounts of money and military assistance, but it is now <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/president-obama-executive-order-will-give-treasury-authority-to-freeze-us-based-assets-in-yemen/2012/05/15/gIQALWPUSU_story.html">taking a much more extreme step</a> to ensure he remains entrenched in power -- a step that threatens not only basic liberties in Yemen but in the U.S. as well:</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/05/16/obamas_new_free_speech_threat/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/16/obamas_new_free_speech_threat/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>256</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Likely victory for MeK shills</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/15/likely_victory_for_mek_shills/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/15/likely_victory_for_mek_shills/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 May 2012 12:47:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12920624</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Former U.S. officials, paid to advocate for a designated Terror group, are now on the verge of succeeding]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>(updated below)</strong></p><p>A <a href="http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Middle-East/2011/0808/Iranian-group-s-big-money-push-to-get-off-US-terrorist-list">bipartisan band</a> of former Washington officials and politicians has spent the last two years aggressively advocating on behalf of the Mujahedin-e Khalq (MeK), an Iranian dissident group that has been <a href="http://www.state.gov/j/ct/rls/other/des/123085.htm">formally designated</a> for the last 15 years by the U.S. State Department as a "foreign Terrorist organization." Most of those former officials have been paid large sums of money to <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/14/opinion/sunday/an-iranian-cult-and-its-american-friends.html?_r=1&amp;pagewanted=all">speak at MeK events and meet with its leaders</a>, thus developing far more extensive relations with this Terror group than <a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/02/10/israel_mek_and_state_sponsor_of_terror_groups/">many marginalized Muslims</a> who have been prosecuted and punished with lengthy prison terms for "materially supporting a Terrorist organization." These bipartisan MeK advocates have been demanding the group's removal from the Terror list, advocacy that has continued unabated despite (or, more accurately, because of ) <a href="http://rockcenter.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/02/08/10354553-israel-teams-with-terror-group-to-kill-irans-nuclear-scientists-us-officials-tell-nbc-news">reports</a> that MeK is trained and funded by the Israelis and has been perpetrating acts of violence on Iranian soil aimed at that country's civilian nuclear scientists and facilities (also known as: <a href="http://mediakit.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2012/03/when-terrorist-group-not-terrorist-group">Terrorism</a>).</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/05/15/likely_victory_for_mek_shills/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/15/likely_victory_for_mek_shills/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>168</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Andrew Sullivan&#8217;s father figure</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/14/andrew_sullivans_father_figure/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/14/andrew_sullivans_father_figure/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 May 2012 16:21:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12920193</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The tearful Newsweek writer speaks on why paternalistic acceptance from the president is so meaningful]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>(updated below - Update II - Update III [Tues.] - Update IV <strong>[Tues.]</strong>)</strong></p><p>Andrew Sullivan -- who has become the <a href="http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/2012/01/16/andrew-sullivan-believes-obama-even-deserves-credit-for-things-obama-opposes/">most reliable</a> <a href="http://articles.businessinsider.com/2012-01-16/politics/30631077_1_barack-obama-approval-rating-jobs">media hagiographer</a> of an American President since . . . . the 2002 version of Andrew Sullivan under President Bush -- spent the past three years continuously insisting that President Obama's opposition to same-sex marriages <a href="http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com/2011/06/obama-to-fake-changing-mind.html">was</a> largely <a href="http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com/2012/05/so-did-biden-back-marriage-equality-nope.html">irrelevant</a> ("We will win not by begging presidents to back us (they have no role in a matter involving state legislatures, governors and courts")). Based on that view, he <a href="http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com/2012/05/will-obama-evolve-in-a-few-hours.html">constantly berated</a> gay groups and gay activists for complaining about Obama's opposition to marriage equality: "<strong>this desperate desire among some gays for some kind of affirmation from one man is a little sad</strong>," he wrote just last week. But that was when President Obama opposed same-sex marriage, so defending the President required one to voice that position.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/05/14/andrew_sullivans_father_figure/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/14/andrew_sullivans_father_figure/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>297</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Chomsky on Obama</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/14/chomsky_on_obama/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/14/chomsky_on_obama/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 May 2012 15:11:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12920135</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Bush disappeared and tortured those the US disliked, while the Obama administration simply "murders them"]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Appearing <a href="http://www.democracynow.org/2012/5/14/noam_chomsky_on_wikileaks_obamas_targeted">on <em>Democracy Now</em></a> this morning, Noam Chomsky said the following:</p><blockquote><p>If the Bush administration didn’t like somebody, they’d kidnap them and send them to torture chambers.</p>
<p>If the Obama administration decides they don’t like somebody, they murder them.</p></blockquote><p>Though a bit oversimpified -- the Bush administration killed plenty of people, while the Obama administration makes use of <a href="http://www.thenation.com/article/161936/cias-secret-sites-somalia">kidnapping</a> and <a href="http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2011/01/gulet-mohamed-suing-get-home">torture chambers</a> albeit <a href="http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2011/08/proxy-detention-gulet-mohamed">by proxy</a>; also, as <a href="https://twitter.com/#!/mrlv426/status/202060115833143296">this tweeter</a> noted: it's "unfair to say the Obama administration kills those it doesn't like, since they claim power to kill people <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/white-house-approves-broader-yemen-drone-campaign/2012/04/25/gIQA82U6hT_story.html">without even knowing who they are</a>"  -- this concise comparison just about about sums it up. But it's important to note that President Obama has progressivism in his heart and that makes all the difference in the world.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/05/14/chomsky_on_obama/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/14/chomsky_on_obama/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>104</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Various matters</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/11/various_matters_17/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/11/various_matters_17/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 May 2012 10:19:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12918986</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Causes of Yemeni terrorism, Obama and marriage equality, lawlessness in Libya, and the 2012 election]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>(1) </strong>On Wednesday, I was on Cenk Uygur's Current TV show with Michael Hastings discussing the Yemen bomb plot, and the video of that seven-minute segment is below. The discussion focused on the way in which U.S. "counter-Terrorism" policy in Yemen causes the very Terrorism it ostensibly seeks to battle. Yesterday, <em>The Washington Post</em> <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/us-launches-airstrike-in-yemen-as-new-details-surface-about-bomb-plot/2012/05/10/gIQAz3vfGU_story.html">reported</a> on several U.S. attacks in Yemen from this week alone and noted: "The latest strikes, aimed at al-Qaeda operatives in southern Yemen, bring <strong>the total this year to at least 15, about as many as in the previous 10 years combined</strong>"; just this morning, <a href="http://news.antiwar.com/2012/05/10/us-drones-air-strikes-kill-17-in-southern-yemen/">17 more people</a> were killed by U.S. airstrikes in Southern Yemen. The Obama administration recently leaked that it was <a href="http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2012/04/201242665054283749.html">escalating</a> its attacks in Yemen to target those who names it does not know -- not only with drones but also <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/05/10/yemen-missiles-idUSL5E8G9E5I20120510?irpc=932">from the sea</a> -- and <em>The Nation</em>'s Jeremy Scahill <a href="https://twitter.com/#!/jeremyscahill/status/200731855656464384">wrote</a> this week that still more escalation is likely: "It seems there's going to be a pretty serious, widespread bombing campaign with ground support in southern Yemen very soon."</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/05/11/various_matters_17/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/11/various_matters_17/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>447</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Wall Street&#8217;s immunity</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/10/wall_streets_immunity/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/10/wall_streets_immunity/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 May 2012 10:09:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12917877</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Why has the Obama administration so aggressively protected the financial industry from legal accountability?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>(updated below)</strong></p><p>Of all the ignominious actions of the Obama administration, the steadfast, systematic shielding of Wall Street from criminal liability is probably the most corrupt in the traditional sense of that word. In <em>Newsweek</em> this week, Peter Boyer and Peter Schweizer have <a href="http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2012/05/06/why-can-t-obama-bring-wall-street-to-justice.html">an excellent examination</a> of what happened and why, tying together crucial threads. First they lay out the basic facts, including the core deceit of the President's campaigning for re-election like he's some sort of populist crusader:</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/05/10/wall_streets_immunity/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/10/wall_streets_immunity/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>185</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Obama &#8220;evolves&#8221; on marriage</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/09/e_3/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/09/e_3/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 May 2012 19:35:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12917530</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The president deserves credit for his actions in this civil rights area, regardless of his motives]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>(updated below - Update II [Thurs.])</strong></p><p>President Obama today became the first American president to endorse same-sex marriage, <a href="http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/05/09/obama-likely-to-speak-about-same-sex-marriage-in-interview/?">telling</a> <em>ABC News</em>'s Robin Roberts: "it is important for me to go ahead and affirm that <strong>I think same-sex couples should be able to get married</strong>." His record on LGBT equality has <a href="http://news.firedoglake.com/2012/04/12/white-house-nixes-executive-order-prohibiting-lgbt-discrimination-by-federal-contractors/">not been perfect</a>, but it is one area where he has been quite impressive. He engineered the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell. His Justice Department is refusing to defend the constitutionality of DOMA in court, a very unusual step. He has ushered in a series of important federal spousal benefits for gay employees of the federal government. And now, for the first time, the office of the American President is officially supporting a policy that a mere decade ago was deemed truly radical: same-sex marriage. Those are real achievements. And, as <a href="http://www.politico.com/politico44/2012/05/poll-gay-marriage-support-squishy-122729.html">virtually</a><a href="https://twitter.com/#!/ppppolls/status/200035055287013379"> all polls</a> reflect -- underscored by last night's <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2012/05/08/politics/north-carolina-marriage/index.html">landslide defeat</a> for marriage equality in North Carolina -- they carry genuine political risk. He deserves credit for his actions in this civil rights realm.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/05/09/e_3/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/09/e_3/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>320</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>US attack kills 5 Afghan kids</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/08/us_attack_kills_5_afghan_kids/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/08/us_attack_kills_5_afghan_kids/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 May 2012 14:17:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=12916713</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The way in which the U.S. media ignores such events speaks volumes about how we perceive them]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>(updated below - Update II)</strong></p><p>Yesterday, I noted <a href="http://www.pajhwok.com/en/2012/05/07/children-among-20-killed-isaf-air-raids">several</a> <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/2012/05/07/gIQAPi6l7T_story.html">reports</a> from Afghanistan that as many as 20 civilians were killed by two NATO airstrikes, including a mother and her five children. Today, the U.S. confirmed at least some of those claims, <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/08/world/asia/united-states-confirms-airstrike-wrongly-killed-afghan-family-members.html?smid=tw-nytimes&amp;seid=auto">acknowledging and apologizing for</a> its responsibility for the death of that family:</p><blockquote><p>The American military claimed responsibility and expressed regret for an airstrike that mistakenly killed six members of a family in southwestern Afghanistan, Afghan and American military officials confirmed Monday.</p>
<p>The attack, which took place Friday night, was first revealed by the governor of Helmand Province, Muhammad Gulab Mangal, on Monday. His spokesman, Dawoud Ahmadi, said that after an investigation they had determined that a family home in the Sangin district had been attacked by mistake in the American airstrike, which was called in to respond to a Taliban attack. . . . The victims were the family’s mother and five of her children, three girls and two boys, according to Afghan officials.</p></blockquote><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/05/08/us_attack_kills_5_afghan_kids/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/08/us_attack_kills_5_afghan_kids/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>272</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

