General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Is Glenn Greenwald trying to save face? [View all]sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)Last edited Sun Jun 10, 2012, 05:17 PM - Edit history (2)
War AFTER having written extensively about all the reasons why he opposed it. He did the opposite of Greenwald, he supported something he knew was most likely a crime.
His claim to fame is that he is an expert on the ME and Islam, he knew Saddam Hussein would never have been associated with terrorists. He wrote brilliantly and courageously about the reasons for terrorism, stating that it was a result of Colonial Interference, but then he flipped on Iraq and supported it. A completely incomprehensible position to take by someone who knew the lies they were telling. Then flip flopped again, and opposed it later. It's hard to know where he stands on anything.
And then, the 'anti-colonialist' flip flopped once again on Libya, and supported the very symbol of Colonialism to African nations, NATO, invading, bombing, killing, and making Libya's oil available to the old Colonialists. A complete betrayal of his very own 'beliefs'.
I fully stand by that comment. And I'm flattered you go so much trouble on my behalf.
And those are some if the reasons I do not link to him, on Iran eg. Yes, his position right now on Iran is 'no war with Iran'. But, his record shows he cannot be trusted to maintain that position should the US decide to go to Iran, does it? Seems he doesn't want to go against the tide when it really matters.
Cole is a good writer, he sounds good, sounds 'liberal' but when the Imperial states go to war, they can count on him for his support. Until later .... maybe .... who knows.
Sorry to spoil your 'gotcha' moment.
Edited to add, Democrats had those facts you listed, yet they supported that war. Greenwald was not involved in politics at that time, like so many other Americans so you have zero idea of what he knew. Yet you post your certainty without a shred of evidence. But we do have evidence about what our elected officials knew. And we know that their support had actual consequences. A private citizen's reluctant support had no influence at all. At that time, no one had ever heard of Greenwald. Try posting facts from now on, I have little interest in biased opinion.
Edited to say that this comment was meant for joshcryer. Not for Inna.