I think Greenwald comes across as he does (your shot at him is fair, I'm just playing explainer/devil's advocate) because- like a few other people like Vinay Prasad and sometimes Berenson- he's a devout Democrat apologist that can't completely condemn his "side," which leads to framing things with both-sidesism and cherry-picking of cont…
I think Greenwald comes across as he does (your shot at him is fair, I'm just playing explainer/devil's advocate) because- like a few other people like Vinay Prasad and sometimes Berenson- he's a devout Democrat apologist that can't completely condemn his "side," which leads to framing things with both-sidesism and cherry-picking of context. Or it may just be that he/they are afraid of scaring off employers/money by going all-in on anything.
I have a ton of respect for Glenn Greenwald, actually, but no one is off-limits to criticism ... and Glenn has been relentlessly brutal to the Democrats and liberals recently, and deservedly so.
I have respect for Glenn but he will not call BS on some topics. I am not at all surprised he doesn't frame covid in the proper context - could be blindness or it could be that he expects he needs his bread buttered in the future and won't cross certain lines for fear of no employment.
Absolutely. No one is off-limits to criticism. And the people that are your ostensible allies should be willing to hold themselves to a high standard of scrutiny.
A lot of harm is being done lately by assuming things without proof. Someone not being worth listening to or worthy of greater skepticism isn't automatically a chaos actor.
"There are no innocents in the TV press. Every single one of them is a controlled government agent (CIA)." I'm not sure if this is intended as hyperbole, but if it's a serious statement, it's honestly crazy. Literally every single one of them? My neighbor who reports about overturned chicken trailers for the local affiliate? The weather girl? All on the CIA payroll? And this has never leaked out, ever, ever, ever?
A tremendous amount of effective division is being achieved with this narrative of "controlled opposition." I'll wait for explicit proof before I make a final decision about who or what someone is, and I'll recognize that not everyone who is on my side in this struggle is going to look or sound like me.
This makes certain assumptions about the nature of the universe that I'm not prepared to use as a basis for my reasoning, but in that context, I can understand your position.
You can make assumptions on Press journalists based on their employers. Let's say you own CNN. Along I come for a job : I am woke , I am vaccinated to the hilt, and I know that the Russians are evil, and that Fauci was just doing his job >> You're going to hire me ?? No you're not. You are going to subject me to a cognitive analysis test, to see that I can be relied on to be a parrot, and a committed stupid, arrogant parrot .
Agreed, but .. I have only come across Greenwald via Hopkins >> The Greenwald take on the installation of the Nazi Ukraine Government and proxy war and the history is very good.
I could name one, but why get bogged down in the specifics of a particular scenario? It's perfectly obvious that some events can remain secret and not be public knowledge for a period, and then later be exposed by documents or other primary evidence that was, for example, released by a whistle-blower. Giving an example of this to demonstrate it is absurd.
Lots of people have been on Tucker Carlson, for a hundred reasons - people he agrees with, does not agree with, argues with or likes, boring or interesting, Left or Right, one time guests or regular guests. The range is huge and framing his appearance on there as a "reward" and as evidence for his treachery is weak to the point of irrelevancy.
As said to you above, throwing around controlled opposition-like accusations is not helpful.
I think Greenwald comes across as he does (your shot at him is fair, I'm just playing explainer/devil's advocate) because- like a few other people like Vinay Prasad and sometimes Berenson- he's a devout Democrat apologist that can't completely condemn his "side," which leads to framing things with both-sidesism and cherry-picking of context. Or it may just be that he/they are afraid of scaring off employers/money by going all-in on anything.
I have a ton of respect for Glenn Greenwald, actually, but no one is off-limits to criticism ... and Glenn has been relentlessly brutal to the Democrats and liberals recently, and deservedly so.
I have respect for Glenn but he will not call BS on some topics. I am not at all surprised he doesn't frame covid in the proper context - could be blindness or it could be that he expects he needs his bread buttered in the future and won't cross certain lines for fear of no employment.
This is exactly what I meant.
Absolutely. No one is off-limits to criticism. And the people that are your ostensible allies should be willing to hold themselves to a high standard of scrutiny.
A lot of harm is being done lately by assuming things without proof. Someone not being worth listening to or worthy of greater skepticism isn't automatically a chaos actor.
"There are no innocents in the TV press. Every single one of them is a controlled government agent (CIA)." I'm not sure if this is intended as hyperbole, but if it's a serious statement, it's honestly crazy. Literally every single one of them? My neighbor who reports about overturned chicken trailers for the local affiliate? The weather girl? All on the CIA payroll? And this has never leaked out, ever, ever, ever?
A tremendous amount of effective division is being achieved with this narrative of "controlled opposition." I'll wait for explicit proof before I make a final decision about who or what someone is, and I'll recognize that not everyone who is on my side in this struggle is going to look or sound like me.
This makes certain assumptions about the nature of the universe that I'm not prepared to use as a basis for my reasoning, but in that context, I can understand your position.
You can make assumptions on Press journalists based on their employers. Let's say you own CNN. Along I come for a job : I am woke , I am vaccinated to the hilt, and I know that the Russians are evil, and that Fauci was just doing his job >> You're going to hire me ?? No you're not. You are going to subject me to a cognitive analysis test, to see that I can be relied on to be a parrot, and a committed stupid, arrogant parrot .
Agreed, but .. I have only come across Greenwald via Hopkins >> The Greenwald take on the installation of the Nazi Ukraine Government and proxy war and the history is very good.
I don't know if I'm ready to jump to calling Greenwald (or anyone for that matter) controlled opposition without specific evidence.
Lots of things come out eventually, and some presumptions are more harmful than baseline skepticism.
So do you have any "direct evidence of covert action" from Greenwald then, beyond that he was chosen for the Snowden reveal?
"Direct evidence of covert action" is an oxymoron
No it isn't. What was covert in the past could obviously be exposed after the fact with direct evidence.
I see your circumstantial evidence. I don't buy it as at all conclusive (and especially not 2) but if you do, ok.
He seems to have been ostracized plenty. I've seen Greenwald called a traitor and "lost to the right" plenty of times.
I could name one, but why get bogged down in the specifics of a particular scenario? It's perfectly obvious that some events can remain secret and not be public knowledge for a period, and then later be exposed by documents or other primary evidence that was, for example, released by a whistle-blower. Giving an example of this to demonstrate it is absurd.
Lots of people have been on Tucker Carlson, for a hundred reasons - people he agrees with, does not agree with, argues with or likes, boring or interesting, Left or Right, one time guests or regular guests. The range is huge and framing his appearance on there as a "reward" and as evidence for his treachery is weak to the point of irrelevancy.
As said to you above, throwing around controlled opposition-like accusations is not helpful.
Which I did not do.