An activist, a community organizer. In a sense, what are you doing . Youre living off the great capitalist explosion of wealth that you didnt even create. Up, many strong men set its hard to know where to begin. Nobody said americas the most charitable place. But there are a couple of assertions that you have to take on faith that are astonishing. One is the idea that americas great invention was wealth creation, not based on theft at all. What about the theft of the entire continent . That was a theft. That doesnt mean [cheers and applause] 90 of the residents who lived here were murdered. And that was a part of it too. Bill ayer and anesh desouza debate whats to so great about america. Friday night at 8 00 on cspan. Last month, the Columbia University Journalist School began a yearlong project titled journalism after snowden. This 90minute forum talks about how they broke the Edward Snowden story. Also on the panel is executive editor of New York Times and members of the president s
I think thats a really important point. Its not the sexiest opponent but you were asking janine about the process by which they verified the story. I would say the process by which the guardian sort of schooled us in exactly how we needed to handle the documents, safe keep them, communicate in a very secure manner, that that is probably, you know, took up days of janine and me talking before we got a lick of actual work done. I just think that that point is somewhat lost on the public. Sometimes they think, oh, a leak, its just a bunch of stuff thats thrown at us and we just rush to publish it. And that is never the case and could be the least true in this situation. This touches on something that i want to come back to just before i move on. The two of you, the surprise of these stories, the unknowable end, you know, even with the pentagon papers, you could fit them into a shopping cart. And wheel them across the news room. And part of that was actually, you know, ellsberg had to make
Something that i think is an issue for journalists and citizens for the next 20 years, which is theres been a distinction in law and more generally between metadata and content, so some people have a thought that if government has access to your phone calls, thats really troubling. If they have access to metadata, meaning what numbers are calling what numbers, thats a completely different problem. We in the review group are uneasy with that distinction. That if the government has access to knowledge about whom you are calling and when and where, meaning the numbers, and it can figure out who those people are, thats a privacy problem. And that needs to be that distinction between metadata and data needs to be rethought. Certainly for policy purposes, the idea that government has, you know, your metadata, it can tell a ton about you. Whether its going to be used illicitly or, you know, to target people on the basis of illegitimate grounds, probably thats a risk and not a high one under c
The clerk will please call the roll. [roll call] [roll call] [roll call] [roll call] [roll call] [roll call] [roll call] [roll call] [roll call] [roll call] [roll call] [roll call] the answer is yes. [inaudible conversations] the clerk will report the telly. Mr. Chairman they were 23 aye votes, 38 nay votes. The amendment does not agree to. Mr. Chairman . Mr. Smith. On the next boat ms. Lemperts amendment that i had asked for a recorded vote i will withdraw that requested except the voice passage to move us along here. So we will move then to the next one a recorded vote for mr. Johnson. On 187r1. Is that correct . You want the recorded vote . The question now curse on the amendment offered by mr. Johnson number 187r1. The clerk will call the roll. [roll call] [roll call] [roll call] [roll call] [roll call] [roll call] [roll call] [roll call] [roll call] [roll call] [roll call] [roll call] [roll call] [roll call] [roll call] [roll call] [inaudible conversations] the clerk will report t
This information. And the government as tempt to gag them from sharing even this most basic data or even to admit that they have received foreign intelligence demands at all is clearly unconstitutional. Indeed youll see this prior restraint at work in the room. Even though everyone in this room knows and understands that google has received Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act process, googles representative is the one person in the room who cannot admit it. Third, Greater Transparency is urgently necessary to restore the international communitys trust in the u. S. Government and in our u. S. Internet industry, which is projected to lose tens ifll hundreds of billions of dollars in the face of widespread concern from foreign governments and international users. We must take this opportunity to demonstrate that our surveillance practices are necessary and proportionate and respectful of constitutional and human rights. And if the numbers show otherwise we must take this opportunity to