I rarely see these kinds of exchanges on mainstream media but they can be readily found online. The lengths the US will go to deny and deflect is unbelievable.
Take this first video for example. This State Department spokesperson actually said that the government can “use whatever definition of transparency we want.” This woman's definition of “transparency” is pure lunacy. Examples of “transparency” she cited is Obama giving speeches and sharing intelligence with other governments. Say what now? How is Obama standing in front of millions on television and lying to them, telling them that he will provide more oversight on, for example, the NSA spying or the drone campaign, and feeding the people more lies and propaganda on these issues and others, an example of “transparency?” If he were truly transparent he would not have
lied about civilian deaths.
Here is another example. Jen Psaki makes more excuses about the lack of transparency in the Obama Administration by arguing that all discussions about Edward Snowden are classified. But if this is a criminal case, the government often comments on criminal investigations. Why is this one all of a sudden off limits?
This final video is a perfect example of a US spokesperson getting tongue tied. While not coming outright and saying the US government would rather see Edward Snowden gagged, spokesperson Jen Psaki danced around the issue by voicing the US's displeasure that Russia provided Snowden with such a platform to make use of his “freedom” of speech. So which is it? Does Snowden have the freedom of speech, as all US citizens are supposedly allowed, or not? If so, why must they voice their displeasure about Russia allowing him to speak at this news conference? As AP reporter Matt Lee asked, does the US view Snowden as some kind of traitor-spy who shouldn't be allowed to talk about the illegality he exposed? And by the way Ms. Psaki, yes Edward Snowden is a whistle blower. He exposed one of the most massive illegal operations in world history that effects the entire world. Yes, I think that counts as a whistle blower, but you go ahead and continue to repeat that nonsense like a good little patriot. For good measure let's all look to see exactly how the word whistle blower is defined: “a person who exposes misconduct, alleged dishonest or illegal activity occurring in an organization.” Is the wholesale invasion of the entire world's privacy not illegal?! Is this a position that Ms. Psaki would like to maintain? If so, how might she do this? It is logically impossible since the over arching law of the land, the Constitution, forbids such activity by the US government: “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.” (Even the very common government refrain to argue that they do not “collect” your data because to “collect” it is to prepare it “for use by an employee of a DoD intelligence component in the course of his official duties” is unconstitutional since even the “seizing” of such material is illegal) Unless of course, this means that the US is no longer bound by this document, which is what it pretty much comes down to. In which case, we are living under a tyrannical government by definition, one without any checks on its power and no restrictions.