One More Example Of Glenn Greenwald On The Fringe!

Whenever I go over to Salon and read Glenn Greenwald, it seems like what jumps out at me is his naiveté about so many things. He is a very good writer in some ways, but if you really look at his words critically, it is quite amazing how shallow his arguments are. He uses innuendo, hyperbole and you might notice, has to update his posts several times to correct himself, or to defend his flimsy arguments or simply to berate critics of his shallowness. I went over this morning and found a post that I won’t link to, about Wikileaks and the big dump they did of working documents from the Bush administration. We all remember that, right. What sticks out to me as naive is the idea that Pentagon is in the propaganda business….NO SHIT GREENWALD. Did you just fall off the turnip wagon and it backed up over your head?

When all those 70,000 documents were released by Wikileaks, most every expert on these matters said it wasn’t anything new. The information within the documents were well known by anyone who was paying attention during those years. The difference was that within those documents were all sorts of details that really didn’t serve any purpose except to confirm what we already knew, but according to the defense department also contained details that could hurt current operations in the middle east. Whether it is true or not, who knows, but the idea that the Pentagon would want their working documents kept under wraps isn’t exactly some massive conspiracy.

Greenwald is also very good at convoluting things into one big pile of hyperbole. In the post I’m writing about now, he makes no distinction between actions during the Bush years and those since President Obama took office and more importantly, since President Obama changed the mission in Afghanistan. The only acceptable solution in Greenwald and Hamsher’s minds regarding Afghanistan would have been to do exactly what they wanted, black and white, no greys buddy. They frequently try to say that the President went back on his word about Afghanistan, which only proves they didn’t hear a word he said during the campaign or they are just flat out lying. They were the ones with their hands covering their ears going “nah, nah, nah, nah”. President Obama was quite clear during the campaign about his intentions to go back into Afghanistan and try to clean up the mess that Bush left behind when they shifted to the stupid war in Iraq. Greenwald sets up his list of propaganda with this “and now we find a quite vivid illustration of this deceitful process in the context of WikiLeaks’ release of Afghanistan war documents:” and proceeds to list several blurbs including these, the bold text is his…

CNN, July 29, 2010:

Top military official: WikiLeaks founder may have ‘blood’ on his hands

The top U.S. military officer said Thursday that Julian Assange, founder of WikiLeaks, was risking lives to make a political point by publishing thousands of military reports from Afghanistan.

“Mr. Assange can say whatever he likes about the greater good he thinks he and his source are doing, but the truth is they might already have on their hands the blood of some young soldier or that of an Afghan family,” Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, said at a news conference at the Pentagon. . . .

In equally stern comments and at the same session, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates said the massive leak will have significant impact on troops and allies, giving away techniques and procedures.

“The battlefield consequences of the release of these documents are potentially severe and dangerous for our troops, our allies and Afghan partners, and may well damage our relationships and reputation in that key part of the world,” Gates said. “Intelligence sources and methods, as well as military tactics, techniques and procedures will become known to our adversaries.”

Now I guess in Glenn Greenwald’s angry mind, none of that could possibly be true. It is all propaganda I guess, pure lies…all of them. If it is propaganda, it is weak propaganda. Example, they “might already have blood…”. If it were good propaganda, would he have used the word “might” or maybe something a little stronger? Or how about “potentially severe and dangerous for our troops”, those are fighting words, huh..”potentially”.  He then goes on to post several other examples of this horrible propaganda campaign.

LEVIN: Not yet. I think that’s being assessed right now as to how many sources of information that gave us information that was useful to us are now in jeopardy. That — that determination and damage assessment is being made right now by the Pentagon.But there quite clearly was damage.

Again, Carl Levin was pushing that strong propaganda when he said the damage assessment is being made right now, those are some tough words. Greenwald bolds the last sentence that says “But there quite clearly was damage”. If Greenwald thinks that releasing 70,000 plus internal, working documents of our military somehow didn’t cause any damage, he really needs a reality check. I really wonder if Glenn thinks we should run the Pentagon completely transparent. Similar to his arguments about a lot of things, he never says how it should be done, just criticizes everything with no solutions to propose.

Now when the Wikileaks release first happened, the White House made it clear that they were all from a time prior to the change of strategy in Afghanistan and that most of the information was already known. But of course Greenwald and Hamsher did their best to try to muddy the waters and put the blame on Obama, he isn’t Hillary, you know. That process continues with Greenwald’s latest post. Instead of criticizing the Bush administration for what is actually in the documents, he wants to paint the Obama defense department as the culprit. If he did actually dive into the documents, he wouldn’t be able to take aim at President Obama, his real target. I am a dove as much as anyone when it comes to wars, I don’t want any of them, ever. Just a reminder to Glenn, President Obama didn’t start either one of those wars, he was handed them on a silver platter. Thanks for nothin, Bushie Boy. The tactic of Greenwald to lay blame for everything that has happened in the last 10 years at the feet of President Obama is motivated by his hatred, pure and simple. Glenn and Jane may have a loyal following of haters that they feed red meat to on a daily basis, but the general population doesn’t know who the fuck either of them are….Glenn who, Jane who?

4 thoughts on “One More Example Of Glenn Greenwald On The Fringe!

  1. I think you’re missing an important part of PsyOps. The idea is to Move the Overton Window of what seems reasonable by changing the frame of reference.
    Greenwald is not missing the boat. It’s much different to know what is going on ‘if you are paying attention’ ( a disputable proposition in many cases, including mine ) and to have access to journals detailing incidents which have not been ‘massaged’ to carry the proper referents to ‘propel the propaganda.’
    Many are not ‘paying attention’ because The Onion is an apt representation about the way people feel about being stripped of their illusions. They ‘don’t have time for it.’
    Success !

  2. By your logic one could argue Bush went into Iraq to “clean up” the mess Clinton created with the sanctions, which killed hundreds of thousands (a price which was “worth it”, according to Albright). Or praise Bush from not trying to “clean up” the mess the bombing of Serbia created (i.e., destruction of infrastructure, schools, hospitals, Serb National TV and “accidentally”–shit happens–the Chinese embassy).

    And, re:

    If Greenwald thinks that releasing 70,000 plus internal, working documents of our military somehow didn’t cause any damage, he really needs a reality check.

    If releasing the documents really did damage the Pentagon, the heart of US military imperialism, isn’t this an event to be welcomed?

    (I not a huge fan of Greenwald, but if he pisses off libgressives there’s something to be said.)

  3. By “paying attention” I mean actually watching and reading the news. During Bush’s castastrophic invasion of Iraq and occupation, most of this information was in the news. Maybe not the actual documents that the stories were written from, but I remember reading about most of what was supposed “news” when the first round of wikileaks documents came out.

    It is just naive to think that the Pentagon is best run with complete transparency. This mentality from Greenwald shows that he is living in his own ideological fantasyland where reality has not place.

  4. Funny you should even use the word logic…because what follows has no basis in it.

    You make the false equivalency of “Bush went into Iraq to “clean up” the mess Clinton created…”

    In making that reference, you are implying that Obama “went in” to Afghanistan to clean up Bush’s mess….Uh, we were already in Afghanistan, Obama didn’t invade a sovereign country with scant, manufactured evidence like Bush. Trying to equate the two shows just how deluded you are in your thinking. We were already in Afghanistan, with a big mess, partially created by our abandoning the country to go and finish Bush Sr.’s war in Iraq.

    Another example of your warped view is this…
    “If releasing the documents really did damage the Pentagon, the heart of US military imperialism, isn’t this an event to be welcomed?”

    That implies that the US military operates independent of the government that deploys them, funds them and abuses them. Funny how Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Feith, Armitage and Wolfowitz conveniently dodge blame in your scenario…the Pentagon made me do it.

    I’m no hawk at all, believe me. And I know that our intelligence community and military have a lot of crazy people doing all sorts of terrible stuff, and you might have noticed that Obama is trying to bring accountability back to the military. But most people who spend so much time hating Obama never bother to see or believe anything that runs counter to their hatred, so I wouldn’t expect you or Greenwald to even know about it. Nah, nah, nah, nah….

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s