Glenn Greenwald Stands by the Official Narrative

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Re: Glenn Greenwald Stands by the Official Narrative

Postby guruilla » Mon Nov 30, 2015 2:37 pm

I think this sort of metaphysical/extremist viewpoint (that some people are just evil) is the consequence (one of countless) of the widespread lack of awareness about the predominance and nature of trauma, starting with our own.

There's a disturbingly common belief, regarding past trauma as well as present "evil," that what we don't know (remember) can't hurt us.

Yet the reverse is frequently the case: what we don't know is that much more likely to hurt us; and what hurt us the most, we don't know of (having suppressed into the unconscious).

Identifying others as "just plain evil" is very basic to the disowning the shadow process; and of course (because of that) is the primary justification for evil.

Not meaning to philosophize; I'm sure it relates to the OP somehow!
It is a lot easier to fool people than show them how they have been fooled.
User avatar
guruilla
 
Posts: 1470
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2010 3:13 am
Location: Canada
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Glenn Greenwald Stands by the Official Narrative

Postby elfismiles » Mon Nov 30, 2015 2:44 pm

guruilla » 30 Nov 2015 18:37 wrote:I think this sort of metaphysical/extremist viewpoint (that some people are just evil) is the consequence (one of countless) of the widespread lack of awareness about the predominance and nature of trauma, starting with our own.

There's a disturbingly common belief, regarding past trauma as well as present "evil," that what we don't know (remember) can't hurt us.

Yet the reverse is frequently the case: what we don't know is that much more likely to hurt us; and what hurt us the most, we don't know of (having suppressed into the unconscious).

Image

Identifying others as "just plain evil" is very basic to the disowning the shadow process; and of course (because of that) is the primary justification for evil.

Not meaning to philosophize; I'm sure it relates to the OP somehow!
User avatar
elfismiles
 
Posts: 8512
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:46 pm
Blog: View Blog (4)

Re: Glenn Greenwald Stands by the Official Narrative

Postby slimmouse » Mon Nov 30, 2015 2:47 pm

seemslikeadream wrote:maybe it's not that someone is born evil it maybe that a person is born with the lack of empathy


:thumbsup

Its a duality. Everything is up for grabs.
slimmouse
 
Posts: 6129
Joined: Fri May 20, 2005 7:41 am
Location: Just outside of you.
Blog: View Blog (3)

Re: Glenn Greenwald Stands by the Official Narrative

Postby Wombaticus Rex » Mon Nov 30, 2015 2:50 pm

I don't think Glenn believes a lot of what he writes; it's rhetoric. He's appealing to the prejudices of his readership, which would ideally be about seven billion people, given his druthers.

Dude went to George Washington to study philosophy. Then got a law degree. "I decided voluntarily to wind down my practice in 2005 because I could, and because, after ten years, I was bored with litigating full-time and wanted to do other things which I thought were more engaging and could make more of an impact, including political writing."

So the notion that the NSA is engaged in protection, that's just an instrument to support his thesis. Just like the notion that Silicon Valley has an adversarial relationship with USGOV. It's going to probably be another 10-20 years before Glenn realizes how often his ego gets the better of his intelligence. I get the impression he barely realizes what he's really doing on the geopolitical level, probably because he spends all fucking day arguing with every single person on the internet.
User avatar
Wombaticus Rex
 
Posts: 10896
Joined: Wed Nov 08, 2006 6:33 pm
Location: Vermontistan
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Glenn Greenwald Stands by the Official Narrative

Postby guruilla » Mon Nov 30, 2015 3:22 pm

Wombaticus Rex » Mon Nov 30, 2015 2:50 pm wrote: It's going to probably be another 10-20 years before Glenn realizes how often his ego gets the better of his intelligence. I get the impression he barely realizes what he's really doing on the geopolitical level, probably because he spends all fucking day arguing with every single person on the internet.

:lol:

Don't you hate it when that happens!
It is a lot easier to fool people than show them how they have been fooled.
User avatar
guruilla
 
Posts: 1470
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2010 3:13 am
Location: Canada
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Glenn Greenwald Stands by the Official Narrative

Postby Nordic » Mon Nov 30, 2015 5:35 pm

guruilla » Mon Nov 30, 2015 1:11 pm wrote:
Nordic » Mon Nov 30, 2015 1:43 pm wrote:The biggest mistake you can make in life is assuming that all people are born good, and are just damaged or misguided. I once thought this way. A lot of "good" people think this way.

But no, evil is real. Some people are just plain evil and they get off on it.

And as I've said before, they get away with so much because they are willing to do what is literally unthinkable to non-evil people. How do you defend against that which you cannot even imagine?

You've met these people, born evil?




Yes. I'm actually kind of surprised this is even up for discussion here.

And It's more than a lack of empathy. That certainly is one of the characteristics. But they actively go out of their way, even make it their life's mission, to fuck people over. Because they believe that everybody else is just like them, and anyone with, say, empathy, is just faking it. They fuck people over so their victims don't fuck them over first.

It's really a horrible existence for them, but you can't afford to have empathy for them. Their victims have it worse than they do. These people simply need to be removed from the population, by whatever means we deem right. In whatever fashion keeps us from being monsters as well. Personally I would have no problem putting them to death because they're not redeemable. The problem, of course, is being 100% sure of the diagnosis, and who is going to do the act of removing them.
"He who wounds the ecosphere literally wounds God" -- Philip K. Dick
Nordic
 
Posts: 14230
Joined: Fri Nov 10, 2006 3:36 am
Location: California USA
Blog: View Blog (6)

Re: Glenn Greenwald Stands by the Official Narrative

Postby guruilla » Mon Nov 30, 2015 5:52 pm

Honestly I have no response to that; you might want to look at John Lash and the Red Ice thread if you are curious what I think of this solution, which, I am sure you don't need me to point out, matches every genocidal policy ever implemented to a "T".

Simply put, it can only stem from a total rejection of psychology in favor of, uh, demonology?
It is a lot easier to fool people than show them how they have been fooled.
User avatar
guruilla
 
Posts: 1470
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2010 3:13 am
Location: Canada
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Glenn Greenwald Stands by the Official Narrative

Postby Grizzly » Mon Nov 30, 2015 6:24 pm

Most people do want to do good.


'The average man is a conformist, accepting miseries and disasters with the stoicism of a cow standing in the rain.' ~Colin Wilson
“The more we do to you, the less you seem to believe we are doing it.”

― Joseph mengele
User avatar
Grizzly
 
Posts: 4913
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2011 4:15 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Glenn Greenwald Stands by the Official Narrative

Postby seemslikeadream » Tue Dec 01, 2015 12:59 pm

:shrug:


Image

Zero Degrees of Empathy: A New Theory of Human Cruelty and Kindness

In "Zero Degrees of Empathy: A New Theory of Human Cruelty and Kindness" Simon Baron-Cohen takes fascinating and challenging new look at what exactly makes our behaviour uniquely human. How can we ever explain human cruelty? We have always struggled to understand why some people behave in the most evil way imaginable, while others are completely self-sacrificing. Is it possible that - rather than thinking in terms of 'good' and 'evil' - all of us instead lie somewhere on the empathy spectrum, and our position on that spectrum can be affected by both genes and our environments? Why do some people treat others as objects? Why is empathy our most precious resource? And does a lack of it always mean a negative outcome? From the Nazi concentration camps of World War Two to the playgrounds of today, Simon Baron-Cohen examines empathy, cruelty and understanding in a groundbreaking study of what it means to be human. "Fascinating ...dazzling ...a full-scale assault on what we think it is to be human". ("Sunday Telegraph"). "Highly readable ...this is a valuable book". (Charlotte Moore, "Spectator"). "Important ...humane and immensely sympathetic". (Richard Holloway, "Literary Review"). Simon Baron-Cohen is Professor at Cambridge University in the fields of psychology and psychiatry. He is also the Director of the Autism Research Centre there. He has carried out research into social neuroscience over a 20 year career. His popular science book entitled "The Essential Difference" has been translated in over a dozen languages, and has been widely reviewed.
Mazars and Deutsche Bank could have ended this nightmare before it started.
They could still get him out of office.
But instead, they want mass death.
Don’t forget that.
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 32090
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: Glenn Greenwald Stands by the Official Narrative

Postby bks » Thu Dec 03, 2015 1:00 am

Greenwald's hostility to those on his left stems from the fact that critics like Tarzie and Chris Floyd and Walter Glass and Mark Ames, and others, all have him absolutely dead to rights.

At heart, he's an entrepreneur, and everyone knows it. There were many defining moments for him, but none bigger than what he did upon receiving the Snowden trove. He had enough social capital at that point to crowdfund millions of dollars (prob btw 5-10) to start an entirely independent news organization if that is what he wanted to do. He could have created a system for trove-sharing with partner news agencies from around the world, and the stories would still be coming at the state from every direction.

Instead, he chose to drink from the poisoned chalice of a "civic minded billionaire" who funded the rise of a fascist murderer in India and who helped destabilized Ukraine. It's funny how having $50M dangled in front of you can quite conveniently make you forget everything you know about the influence of money and power on the production of news.

For my own part, I think he's a vitally important figure, but not for any of the stories he helped break. He represents the next stage in the evolution of the responsible journalist in the digital age. He tried to build a counterbrand to the "irresponsible" Wikileaks approach of actually letting the public see everything. And during Chelsea Manning's trial, he repeated Snowden's false characterizations of her actions to corporate news organizations disposed to view her actions unfavorably without correcting Snowden's errors, and did so in a way that had the effect of casting Snowden as more responsible than Manning was. Which was rank bullshit.

In its timidity and willingness to dialogue with the criminal agencies inside the security state about what to disclose of their crimes (remember his bragging about having Eric Holder's cell phone number, and his willingness to sit on a stage with Michael Hayden and debate mas surveillance) Greenwald’s model of leak-keeping performed a valuable service to the state - all the while Greenwald got to cut and adversarial stance toward the state for public consumption. Walter Glass dubbed Greenwald’s strategy the “DrippyLeaks” model. I think that's about right. The journalistic insistence that all the day’s intelligence be shared with the public is completely absent in his organization.

Fuck him.
bks
 
Posts: 1093
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 2:44 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Glenn Greenwald Stands by the Official Narrative

Postby Nordic » Thu Dec 03, 2015 3:20 am

Pretty much the very definition of "gate keeper".
"He who wounds the ecosphere literally wounds God" -- Philip K. Dick
Nordic
 
Posts: 14230
Joined: Fri Nov 10, 2006 3:36 am
Location: California USA
Blog: View Blog (6)

Re: Glenn Greenwald Stands by the Official Narrative

Postby seemslikeadream » Tue Jan 22, 2019 6:41 pm

from Fox News

CONTROVERSIES
Published 18 hours ago
Glenn Greenwald slams rush to judgment about Kentucky student in viral confrontation with Native American
https://www.foxnews.com/us/glenn-greenw ... witter-mob


Glenn again on Fox News

Why was the Covington students video a tempting narrative for the media?

https://www.yahoo.com/news/why-covingto ... 01568.html



Greenwald frequently appears on Fox News and in the past few years has often slammed Democrats for aggressively pursuing the Russia investigation in association with President Donald Trump. In Greenwald's most recent interview with Carlson, he explicitly denies political support for Gabbard, while going on to to suggest a deeper conspiracy behind the criticism of her.
https://www.businessinsider.com/tulsi-g ... ald-2019-1


Glenn Greenwald and Tucker Carlson Go on the Attack Against Tulsi Gabbard’s Critics: ‘Democrats Hate Her’
by Aidan McLaughlin | Jan 15th, 2019, 8:27 am 192
submit to reddit



“I’m not a supporter of Congresswoman Gabbard’s candidacy,” Glenn Greenwald declared at the start of his Fox News interview with Tucker Carlson on whether the Hawaii congresswoman and 2020 candidate is being “unfairly attacked.”

“There are some really legitimate and serious concerns that I have that have been raised by the real left, not the Democratic Party liberals,” Greenwald said of Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI). He listed them: “her support for the war on terror, her affinity for Hindu nationalism in India, her affection for some really terrible dictators.”


Those do seem bad! Praising the “courage” of dictators like Sisi certainly raises a few red flags. But while those are apparently serious concerns for Greenwald, he continued that they are not the reasons why Gabbard is being unfairly smeared by the Democratic apparatus.

“What’s really going on,” Greenwald told the Fox News audience, is that “Democrats hate her” for two other reasons. (1) She supported Bernie Sanders over Hillary Clinton in 2016 and (2) “She’s been questioning a lot of Washington orthodoxy,” including the impulse for regime change.

SPONSORED CONTENT
How One Haircare Brand Is Solving an Unseen Challenge: Learn More
BY HERBAL ESSENCES
“She deviates from a lot of the Washington consensus, she’s hard to put into a liberal or a conservative, a right wing or a left wing box, and that’s what Washington really hates the most are people who are kind of independent minded and critical thinkers,” he explained.

Greenwald’s contention that Washington hates Gabbard because she’s a critical thinker is interesting, but that’s not usually what her detractors point to when they criticize her.

Mostly, they mention other more substantive issues: the problems Greenwald noted at the start of the segment, for one. But also her views on same sex marriage, which Tucker Carlson very charitably compared to the former views of Barack Obama.

It’s worth noting that Gabbard did not just oppose same sex marriage. While serving as a state legislator in the early 2000s, Gabbard boasted of her work for her father’s anti-gay organization — one that promoted conversion therapy for homosexuals — and railed against “homosexual extremists” trying to push marriage equality. She now says she regrets those views.

Greenwald is also upset with “one particular smear” on Gabbard: allegations she’s a supporter of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

This is inaccurate, Greenwald said, pointing out that Gabbard has called Assad a “brutal dictator.” He told Carlson the reason she’s being smeared in this way is because she opposes the United States arming rebels in Syria and attempting to overthrow the Assad regime.

But is that really the case? It strikes as outlandish that Gabbard has earned such disdain from Democrats simply because she opposes a war. Again, Greenwald is pushing a caricature of Gabbard’s critics.

He downplays her highly controversial trip to Syria, where she took an impromptu meeting with Assad, a mass murderer. He doesn’t mention that when she returned home to the United States, she brought with her pro-regime talking points. He omits that her meeting with Assad has earned her fans from the far right, like renowned racists David Duke and Richard Spencer (she has disavowed their support).

What’s more, attempts to cast Gabbard as a dove are dishonest. She may oppose regime change, but certainly not intervention. She self-identifies as a “hawk” in the war on terror, and once complained that the U.S. wasn’t bombing Syria enough — while criticizing those who questioned Russia’s devastating bombing campaign of the flattened country.

I suspect those reasons are more important to critics of Gabbard 2020 than her “critical thinking.”
https://www.mediaite.com/tv/glenn-green ... l-thinker/




Fox News has done extensive coverage of the incident. It brought on one of the group’s chaperones who claimed the boys were targeted because of “what they stood for” and “partially because of the color of their skin.” Fox News host Tucker Carlson said the response to the incident was “people in power attacking those below them as a group.” Laura Ingraham interviewed Glenn Greenwald, co-founding editor of the Intercept, who said the reaction had been a sort of “trial by Twitter mob.”
https://www.vox.com/2019/1/22/18192908/ ... dmann-maga



Greenwald loves to slam other news outlets but not a bad word to say about the worst purveyor of FAKE NEWS .....Fox News
Mazars and Deutsche Bank could have ended this nightmare before it started.
They could still get him out of office.
But instead, they want mass death.
Don’t forget that.
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 32090
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: Glenn Greenwald Stands by the Official Narrative

Postby Karmamatterz » Tue Jan 22, 2019 6:58 pm

Slad,

I can see how you would put Fox at the top of your list. But since most of the media is a purveyor of fake news it's not easy to establish the "best of" without more quantitative facts. One could say that the NYT and Wapo are just as bad or worse because they are actually more "respected" by the public at large. The publisher with that more people believe to be more truthful can do more damage when their agenda driven fake news is disseminated as "truth" or fact. Taken as a whole the entire mainstream media industry is full of it and a giant echo chamber.
User avatar
Karmamatterz
 
Posts: 828
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2012 10:58 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Glenn Greenwald Stands by the Official Narrative

Postby seemslikeadream » Tue Jan 22, 2019 7:09 pm

you don't see Greewald "investigating" Fox News

why would that be?

why would he go on the racist Tucker Carlson's show?

why would he go on the racist Laura's show?

the biggest purveyor of fake news is trump and his state run tv channel Fox News

but Glen has no problem with them

Greenwald is a bully and a troll feeling right at home on Fox News

Fox News Tucker Carlson Laura Ingram Drudge Report Alex Jones Info Wars ....GREAT COMPANY!


Shortly before Trump’s Inauguration, Greenwald wrote an article for the Intercept titled “The Deep State Goes to War with President-Elect, Using Unverified Claims, as Democrats Cheer.” The Drudge Report promoted the article, and it went viral. This had the effect of offering the phrase “deep state”—which, until then, had been a murmur among political scientists and fringe bloggers—as a gift to Trump defenders. Roger Stone referred to the article in an interview with Alex Jones, on Infowars; Greenwald spoke of “deep-state overlords” on “Tucker Carlson Tonight.” According to data from the gdelt Project, the phrase “deep state” then took off—first on Fox, then on other networks, and then in the tweets of the President and his family.

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018 ... resistance


Fox News is Fake News day in and day out but you will not hear any complaints from Mr. Glenn...truthteller :roll:

they are not on his bad "reporting" list

I suppose he can't bite the racist hand that feeds him


SUCH A FUCKING HYPOCRITE!

The 'exhausting' work of factcheckers who track Trump's barrage of lies
Since taking office, Trump has made 7,645 ‘false or misleading claims’. In October he said 1,200 things that were false or misleading, according to Fact Checker database

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/201 ... ctcheckers


But you won't hear Glenn or Fox News talking about that!


Deripaska gets paid while 800,000 Americans wait




On Laura Ingrahams ...you know the one Glenn Greenwald loves to visit.......show Bill Donahue just compared Nathan Phillips to the Nazis

that would be Nathan Philips a Vietnam vet and a native American
Mazars and Deutsche Bank could have ended this nightmare before it started.
They could still get him out of office.
But instead, they want mass death.
Don’t forget that.
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 32090
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Previous

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 147 guests