|
he is extremely lovely to trans people, including his noted 'transmen are actually just masculine lesbians who are forced to call themselves trans' recent twitter thread
|
#
¿
Mar 18, 2021 00:01
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 9, 2024 22:21 |
|
|
quote:Following the protest, Greenwald published a column that very pointedly criticized “the growing so-called ‘online call-out culture’ in which people who express controversial political views are not merely critiqued but demonized online and then formally and institutionally punished after a mob consolidates in outrage, often targeting their employers with demands that they be terminated.” hmmmmmm also a useful racist is still a racist, and we can do better
|
|
#
¿
Mar 18, 2021 00:05
|
|
|
PhazonLink posted:im not sure how accurate this is, but seem his rapid fall from "grace" started with this recentish (2020?) anti trans stuff. the people who militantly defend green greenwald are unperturbed by the anti trans stuff, arguing 'well look, everyone has a bad day', and everyone else got turned off by him years ago. a lot of people who defend him also do it reflexively in the sense of 'well if all these liberals think he's bad, he must be doing something right!'
|
|
#
¿
Mar 18, 2021 01:03
|
|
|
like, the most charitable interpretation of someone defending glenn - even a few years ago - is that they wern't aware of who he actually was, but considering his record of racism, sexism, etc. goes back more than a decade, even at his best he was a 'racist who says the right things about foreign policy'... but still a racist. there are enough other voices out there that you don't need to wish he just wouldn't share his most toxic thoughts and stick to being critical of foreign policy. also people like that he embodies a level of terminal onlineness that you rarely see in anyone who has a wikipedia page, but who the gently caress cares.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 18, 2021 01:05
|
|
|
Biffmotron posted:Can't let this thread go this far without noting that before he was Too Online, Greenwald was an actual lawyer, where he took up important free speech cases like the rights of Matthew Hale, just some dude who rebranded his National Socialist White Americans Party as the World Church of the Creator, and then was linked to a bunch of hate crimes. Greenwald's attitude was that a racist spree shooting by WCOC second-in-command Ben Smith was just some random crime, and linking Hale's dedicated rhetoric and organization for white supremacy to these murders by one of his underlings was guilt by association. this article is unreal. greenwald is a monstrous piece of poo poo.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 18, 2021 01:43
|
|
|
its not great when your defense of greenwald is 'well if only he stuck to talking about the things i agree with him about'
|
|
#
¿
Mar 18, 2021 14:37
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:It's not really a defence; he has trash opinions and he has good opinions, and it's incredibly easy to ignore his trash opinions & contrarianisms, especially with his self-imposed exile to Substack & Twitter. Same way people can post Matthew Yglesias in USPOL while ignoring his book urging america to breed faster to stave off the perfidious chinese. Or defend Jon Ralston's reporting as he's mid-meltdown over leftists winning in Nevada. glenn greenwald has a record of vehemently defending nazis for 20 years on top of all the other abhorrent opinions he holds (and has held for over a decade). you're missing the point - he's not a magic eight ball where you're just hoping you get a good opinion when you shake him, he's a bad person who has bad beliefs who despite that will sometimes have a good opinion. but because he is not the only person criticizing US foreign policy, for example, you don't need to give him any airtime. a useful fascist is still a fascist.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 18, 2021 14:54
|
|
|
V. Illych L. posted:i personally don't think assange should be tortured to death in prison for exposing the crimes of the american empire even if he is credibly accused of being a big ole creep rape. the word you're looking for is "rape". V. Illych L. posted:also it does bear noting that assange has not actually been convicted of anything and his stated reason for not wanting to face the charges seems to have been vindicated by subsequent events so ymmv on that point as well loving yikes, what is this? "he's never been convicted, AND he was right never to even stand trial!" Fart Amplifier posted:He should have faced trial for rape. If you flee trial for rape, you're a piece of garbage well if you pretend that assange was charged with "being a big ole creep" it makes justifying him fleeing from justice a lot easier.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 18, 2021 16:58
|
|
|
i, and i think everyone here, would agree that the us should not extradite assange and charge him for publishing things on wikileaks - or, for that matter charge any independent journalist for publishing things critical of the us. that is entirely distinct from the fact that assange refused to stand trial for the unrelated crimes he was credibly accused for in another country. you can defend the principle of independent journalism without specifically endorsing assange fleeing rom justice (while at the same time using the fact that he has fled for justice as evidence of him not being a rapist!)
|
|
#
¿
Mar 18, 2021 17:30
|
|
|
a Loving Dog posted:Are the mods going to change the thread title or get the thread back on track at all? temporary glenn greenwald + assange thread
|
|
#
¿
Mar 18, 2021 17:47
|
|
|
a Loving Dog posted:That's all I'm asking! move both glenn greenwald threads into a temporary subforum "the green zone"
|
|
#
¿
Mar 18, 2021 17:50
|
|
|
paul_soccer12 posted:holy poo poo how are you this misinformed he was arrested when ecuador invited the british police in to the embassy to arrest him after suspending his citizenship because they were tired of him continuing to publish things on wikileaks/making GBS threads all over his toilet seat. it was unclear if he would've been arrested even if he had left the embassy otherwise. in early january a british judge ruled that he cannot be extradited to the us because he is too mentally unwell.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 18, 2021 19:00
|
|
|
also he only fled to the ecuadorian embassy orignially after sweden asked the uk to extradite him so he could stand trial for rape. he wasn't indicted by the us until 2018.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 18, 2021 19:05
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:he would definitely have been arrested because the UK was not really pleased that someone who was let out on bail decided not to show up for their extradition hearing based on flimflam nonsense, as they should be yep, he was originally charged in 2010 by sweden and sweden issued an international arrest warrant for him, the uk arrested him and then let him out on bail while he appealed the extradition request to sweden, and after losing that appeal he fled to the ecuadorian embassy, arguing that the only reason he was ever charged in the first place was because of a plot by the us (and not because, you know, he committed rape). the us only indicted him in 2018. after being arrested in the uk in 2019 he was tried and convicted of jumping bail and sentenced to prison. he is currently being held pending appeal of the recent uk ruling that he should not be extradited to stand trial in the US. he has asked to be released pending this appeal, but that request was denied. Owlspiracy fucked around with this message at 19:12 on Mar 18, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Mar 18, 2021 19:09
|
|
|
paul_soccer12 posted:ok i misspoke. im well aware he was not sent to the US, because i was aware of the UK ruling that denied the extradition i feel like if theres any place where we understand and forgive the perils of  its in the glenn thread
Owlspiracy fucked around with this message at 19:59 on Mar 18, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Mar 18, 2021 19:56
|
|
|
Quotey posted:This is your issue? That there wasn't a laptop? People publish things acquired through criminal means all the time. In fact, I can think of one large cache of documents shared illegally by an Edward Snowden that was pretty significant. the reason that people are skeptical about the emails is nobody has seen the emails, they've just seen pictures of an "email." many news agencies asked for copies of the actual emails so they could verify that they are real (which is trivially easy to do) and the trump campaign has refused. in snowden's case, for example, you could verify the legitimacy of the NSA files both from the source (someone who worked for the NSA) and the files themselves. personally, and this is just me, but i don't really place a lot of value in what steve bannon and rudy guilliani claim.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 18, 2021 23:25
|
|
|
Crosby B. Alfred posted:From the very first few posts, he thinks Democrats are the real racists and the GOP socialists. lets talk specifics: - his horrible comments about transmen - his recent interview in which he claimed tucker and donald trump were the real socialists - two days ago when he claimed that a mass shooting that targeted asians actually wasn't about racism - the fact that keeps appearing on tucker carlson to yell about cancel culture - the fact that twenty years ago he virulently defended a literal nazi and smeared his accusers (who were upset that said nazi was inspiring murderers) - etc. etc.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 18, 2021 23:29
|
|
|
lol, there you go
|
|
#
¿
Mar 18, 2021 23:32
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/1372310893552369669 here's our friend glenn fervently agreeing that black people are the REAL racists
|
|
#
¿
Mar 18, 2021 23:35
|
|
|
i really encourage everyone to watch the 2016 assange documentary 'risk' and read the controversy surrounding the different versions, where the initially very pro-assange filmmaker changed her focus after interacting with him and realizing how much of a gross creep he was, then re-edited the film to be more sympathetic to him, and then re-edited it again after more information came out about assange and his followers and assange attacked her for including scenes where he describes his accusers as part of a feminist conspiracy out to get him.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2021 03:38
|
|
|
Sodomy Hussein posted:It definitely rules that one of the big lefty idols in D&D/C-SPAM is a fascist-repping transphobic libertarian. to be fair the only people left in greg gregwald's corner these days are people who are terminally online reactionaries who judge value by ability to rile up people they dislike, and on that front ol' greg is quite good at posting offensive dribble that gets on people's skin (because its gross as hell)
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2021 03:52
|
|
|
yes sometimes Glenn does good things which unfortunately are drowned out by him screaming about trans people or defending mass shootings
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2021 14:51
|
|
|
Slanderer posted:No it's not lol, that's just you not liking Glenn and his writing. You can't just saying "it's disinformation" because you think the conclusions are weak, because by that dumbshit logic your post would be disinformation for not presenting any evidence to back up its conclusion lol hi if it helps i don't like glenn because he's a huge transphobe and bigot who also defends mass shooters by perpetuating right wing talking points about how they're just troubled young men who had a bad day instead of acknowledging that this country has a real problem with fascist violence. i don't think his occasional good tweet highlighting hypocrisy amongst liberals when it comes to foreign policy justifies giving him a platform to spew bigotry about how transmen are just confused lesbians. if you need help finding other journalists happy to criticize the us foreign policy who also don't tweet bigotry, i am sure this thread can help you out, because otherwise i am not sure why you find it necessary to defend a noted transphobe like glenn greenwald. Owlspiracy fucked around with this message at 20:33 on Mar 24, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2021 20:25
|
|
|
also just to add nobody really cares that he acts like a dipshit libertarian about free speech - whatever, there are a lot of free speech absolutists who are also wrong in pretending that there are no consequences to letting everyone spew hate and leaving the marketplace of ideas to figure it out in 2021 - the issue many people have (including myself) is his very clear record of saying awful things about immigrants, about muslims, about transmen, and his apparent willingness to defend white supremacists (in and out of the courtroom!) and spread their agenda. if you choose to believe he does these things because he just can't help having outdated conceptions of gender and sexuality because he's old, or that he's aware of what tucker carlson is and he's just trying to use his platform for good, then i think you're painfully naive, but you should at least acknowledge the many very clear bad things glenn has done and said. or you can just admit that you accept his bigotry because you think his critiques of the us are so valuable that they outweigh his terrible opinions, or - like many others - that you're willing to look past his terrible record because he does a good job making people you don't like mad online.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2021 20:32
|
|
|
Slanderer posted:You could simply block him on twitter, if you like defending US wars and the erosion of free speech this much. Personally I think it's good to have a single voice on the biggest cable network occasionally doing this things, since no one else is (or at least not when their party is in power). It is incredibly unhealthy to have this kind of weird parasocial relationship with a blogger where you actively hate someone you follow by your own choice i don't use twitter and i don't follow glenngarry glenn greenwald. i - like many other people in d&d apparently, which is why this thread was created - do not like when people copy and paste his tweets because he's a transphobe and a bigot, even if he sometimes says good things about foreign policy. i do not think his critiques of us foreign policy justify giving him attention to also share his disgusting views on transmen because his critiques are not novel. objecting to him calling transmen confused lesbians does not mean i "defend US wars and the erosion of free speech", but thank you for making it clear you aren't actually interesting in engaging in a conversation about why some people have issues with greg gregwald.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2021 20:40
|
|
|
so actually lets make this thread useful: everyone share your favorite journalists who are critical of us foreign policy but also aren't transphobes
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2021 20:43
|
|
|
Beelzebufo posted:Why is the erosion of free speech always about the right to defend phrenology again and never about why someone like Richard Wolff would never appear on Fox or MSNBC? because when most people talk about free speech they're talking about their personal ability to say whatever they want - not yours. at least glenn is more consistent than most on arguing for entirely unrestricted speech (including defending his critiques from twitter bans), so his issue is being hopelessly naive about how speech, even fringe speech, translates to actions in 2021.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2021 20:48
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:Literally the only time I see Maddow mentioned is by hey to be fair there was that one time when she claimed she had trump's tax records and everyone made fun of her
|
|
#
¿
Mar 25, 2021 18:17
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:Who the gently caress is tom kite
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2021 18:04
|
|
|
lil poopendorfer posted:how does this latest tweet fit into the 'glenn is a transphobe' narrative glenn is inconsistent but occasionally veering in the right direction in one of his 1,000 daily tweets doesn't excuse the other 999 times he's said stupid poo poo, including all the other clear times when he has been a transphobe. like, whats so bizarre to me is what value does glenn provide that leads to so many people defending the objectively dogshit things he says, where in the case of anyone else there would be no question of saying "gently caress this guy". if you care so much about owning libs or whatever just read trump jr. or something.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2021 14:26
|
|
|
Beelzebufo posted:I mean, this is the core of the reason this thread exists. It's not like Glenn's been cancelled or anything. He's still spewing his opinions all over the internet and his break with the Intercept was not based on some sort of mass public outcry against him. The real question is why when people quote him on something, the response of "he is allied with white supremacists like Tucker Carlson, he holds contradictory/transphobic opinions on things, etc." is supposed to be invalid. His tweets/opinions are only used based on his "credentials" from his earlier reporting anyway, so why are rebuttals using his past statements and activities invalid? its because gren grenwald makes liberals angry and for some people thats all that matters, and if thats your criteria you can just pretend all the bad things don't exist while constructing elaborate justifications because you don't want to admit to yourself that you care more about making people angry than legitimate social change or supporting outsider voices who are doing good things. if you strip enough layers of self-justification ("glenn is a hedge on american foreign policy!" "glenn is only appearing on tucker because he's reaching out to our worker brethren!" "glenn is helping in brazil!") what you'll reveal is the same brokebrained nihilism you see elsewhere on the worst parts of the internet: we might both end up against the wall, but at least its funny because you cared more than i did.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2021 18:04
|
|
|
hbag posted:i have no loving clue who this guy is and i cant tell is the cspam thread is loving with me or not he's not literally hitler but he sucks pretty bad. you could just read his tweets and judge for yourself.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2021 19:26
|
|
|
Sharks Eat Bear posted:I'm not a GG stan, but I do find his Posting Energy entertaining in a sort of trashy way. I think his comments on trans issues and racism in the US have been ~problematic~ or alarmingly naive at best... i think the problem with this is that when you study the totality of what he says and does - and not his angriest tweets - it turns out he isn't actually principled in a "classic liberal" (really libertarian) way, because he only believes about things like "free speech" when it applies to angry white men who like to shoot up synagogues, and not women or minorities. i think there are many other people who make the same criticisms of us foreign policy - the only place where you could argue that glenn is useful - without everything else (and selling his statements as transgender people as "problematic" is really short selling it). like, look at his recent focus on the dangers of tech censorship - which really only started when technology companies started censoring people on the right - and its like, no loving poo poo? that's been happening to leftists for literally decades (if not centuries). if your introduction to the idea of "its bad when large oligopolies control communication channels and can effectively censor groups with ideas they don't like" is from glenn, then i would encourage you to read like... any us history. like, glenn is not the ACLU who are defending everyone because free speech is a sacred principle that should be defended regardless of how objectionable content is - he only speaks up about censorship when it targets right wing ideologies. and if you study everything else he does, you start to see a pattern: he has an affinity for defending right wing white men and attacking minority groups. you could argue that's just a crazy coincidence, but i think its reflective that the core of his belief isn't "classic liberalism" its "right wing populism". like, if he legitimately is outraged by the idea of a corporate controlled press and his meltdown about his editors at the intercept wasn't just him being a giant manchild, then why the gently caress is he appearing on fox news? rupert murdoch is the ultimate symbol of the dangers of corporate controlled media in stifling viewpoints. why is he shouting out tucker carlson on twitter? he's either disingenuous (and doesn't really care about media censorship as long as he's - or other white men - are not being censored) or he's the worlds most naive moron. Owlspiracy fucked around with this message at 20:04 on Mar 31, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2021 20:00
|
|
|
Quotey posted:I was responding to its fair - when i made the post i almost went backed and edited to say 'almost always' - but my main point, that glenn is most concerned about protecting the rights of people like him - white men - stands. but yes, as people posted, he's not talking about this incident, he's talking about this incident as part of a larger narrative about the PERILS OF CANCEL CULTURE.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2021 22:55
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 9, 2024 22:21 |
|
|
Somfin posted:But remember it's important to give voice to people who disagree with you, as long as the people disagreeing with you agree with Glenn Greenwald! free speech applies to everyone, even people you disagree with* * female journalists excluded
|
|
#
¿
Mar 31, 2021 23:05
|
|