Site Information
About Us
- RonPaulForums.com is an independent grassroots outfit not officially connected to Ron Paul but dedicated to his mission. For more information see our Mission Statement.
Glenn is a gem. Him and grand wizard of Wikileaks should team up.
I just want objectivity on this forum and will point out flawed sources or points of view at my leisure.
Originally Posted by spudea on 01/15/24Originally Posted by spudea on 04/20/16Originally Posted by spudea on 05/30/17
I was thinking the same thing.
Greenwald and Assange (if he ever becomes a free man again) would be a scary duo that the elites would do everything in their power to destroy. There is only going to be increased calls for fighting spirit, no $#@!s given, journalists like them to get out there and do what they can as information becomes more and more censored each day. That's what the Intercept was supposed to be and never was, because Greenwald was the only one who actually signed up for that reason.
Time to do what he originally set out to do. Form a team with other whistleblowers and truth tellers that have already proven themselves to being real fighters unafraid of the consequences. Bring in conservatives, libertarians, and classic liberals that you may disagree with but have proven the willingness to sacrifice everything in their life in order to spread the truth. Anyone carrying even a small amount of water for the msm should be immediately disqualified from such a list.
T.S. Eliot's The Hollow Men
"One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors." - Plato
We Are Running Out of Time - Mini Me
Originally Posted by Philhelm
"Foreign aid is taking money from the poor people of a rich country, and giving it to the rich people of a poor country." - Ron Paul
"Beware the Military-Industrial-Financial-Pharma-Corporate-Internet-Media-Government Complex." - B4L update of General Dwight D. Eisenhower
"Debt is the drug, Wall St. Banksters are the dealers, and politicians are the addicts." - B4L
"Totally free immigration? I've never taken that position. I believe in national sovereignty." - Ron Paul
Proponent of real science.
The views and opinions expressed here are solely my own, and do not represent this forum or any other entities or persons.
THE SQUAD of RPF
1. enhanced_deficit - Paid Troll / John Bolton book promoter
2. Devil21 - LARPing Wizard, fake magical script reader
3. Firestarter - Tax Troll; anti-tax = "criminal behavior"
4. TheCount - Comet Pizza Pedo Denier <-- sick
@Ehanced_Deficit's real agenda on RPF =troll:
Who spends this much time copy/pasting the same recycled links, photos/talking points.
7 yrs/25k posts later RPF'ers still respond to this troll
Was trying to watch Greenwald’s interview with Joe Rogan on youtube yesterday, after reading the Daily Caller’s account of it (below). Watched a while, but suddenly, youtube reported some kind of “error” - the video went black and it caused my lap top to totally freeze up - something which has hasn’t happened to me in years! (Courser wouldn’t move, escape function didn’t work, had to shut down.) Now I’m afraid to try watching it again.
https://dailycaller.com/2020/10/29/h...-rogan-podcast
Here's a 4 minute clip:‘Disgusted’: Want To Know Why Media Isn’t Covering Hunter Biden? Glenn Greenwald Has A Theory
PHILLIP NIETO - CONTRIBUTOR
October 29, 2020 - 11:30 AM ET
Award-winning journalist Glenn Greenwald joined the “Joe Rogan Experience” to explain why he thinks most American media institutions will not cover the Hunter Biden scandal.
“I don’t think I’ve ever been disgusted with my colleagues in my profession as I have been in the last three weeks because of this story,” Greenwald told Rogan in the episode released Wednesday. “In general, journalists do not care about where material comes from if it’s A, authentic, and B, newsworthy.”
The Intercept co-founder went on to cite an incident in 2016 where the New York Times received a copy of then-candidate Donald Trump’s tax returns in the mail from an unknown source. Greenwald noted that to this day the Times is unaware of the identity, or motives, of the source.
“And when asked when their lead reporter who has won two Pulitzers was asked by NPR, how can you report on a document when you don’t even know who gave it to you or what their motives were? He said what I would say and what all journalists should say, which is I don’t give a $#@! about the source’s motives,” Greenwald said.
“Sometimes you get great documents from sources who have terrible motives,” He continued. “Like Deep Throat leaked about the Nixon administration to The Washington Post, not because he was a Snowden, not because he was noble, but because he was resentful that Nixon passed him over to be the director of the FBI.”
He claimed the argument that the revelations from Hunter Biden’s laptop “might have come from Russia” was a “complete corruption of the journalistic function.” Greenwald added the real reason most news outlets won’t cover the story is because “they’re all desperate for Trump to lose.”
‘That’s the reality. They all want Biden to win,” he told Rogan. “They don’t want to be scorned in their social circles. And so they’re willing to abdicate their journalistic function, which is reporting on one of the most powerful people in the world, and Joe Biden in part because they want to manipulate and tinker with the election using journalism, but a much bigger part because they’re scared of being yelled at on Twitter.
“It’s f*cking pathetic,” he concluded. “And it’s going to ruin people’s faith in journalism for a long time, even more so than it already is ruined for good reason.”
Rogan’s episode with Greenwald released on Spotify, and YouTube with over 800,000 views in under 24 hours. The Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist has appeared on “Tucker Carlson Tonight,” often to critique media institutions.
https://dailycaller.com/2020/10/29/h...-rogan-podcast
https://www.air.tv/watch?v=qFIY8gT2RaeGtpbWRx24jA
UPDATE:
Here's the 3 hour show:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t0rc...ture=emb_title
‘People Are Going To Cancel Their Subscriptions’: If Biden Wins, Greenwald Says, Expect Media To Target Trump Supporters
SHELBY TALCOTT - MEDIA REPORTER
October 29, 2020 - 4:35 PM ET
Journalist Glen Greenwald predicts that media will target people who support President Donald Trump even if Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden wins the upcoming election.
Greenwald spoke to podcast host Joe Rogan Wednesday and the two touched on the world of media in a post-Trump era. Greenwald challenged the idea that if Biden wins the 2020 election, as many polls indicate, much of the current “insanity” going on will “disappear.”
“So many institutions are profiting – I don’t just mean financially – in terms of power and control from elevating fear levels over right-wing fascism, over white supremacists, domestic terrorism, whatever you want to call it,” Greenwald said before diving into historic examples of people using fear to profit.
“The same exact thing is happening now, which is: People in media have had their careers saved – I know cable hosts who were on the verge of being fired because nobody was $#@!ing listening to their dumb shows in 2007 and 2008, when all they were doing was talking about how great Obama was, because who wants to listen to that?” he continued on “The Joe Rogan Experience.”...
MORE: https://dailycaller.com/2020/10/29/g...nt-supporters/
Last edited by Valli6; 10-30-2020 at 07:31 AM.
9/11 Thermate experiments
Winston Churchhill on why the U.S. should have stayed OUT of World War I
"I am so %^&*^ sick of this cult of Ron Paul. The Paulites. What is with these %^&*^ people? Why are there so many of them?" YouTube rant by "TheAmazingAtheist"
"We as a country have lost faith and confidence in freedom." -- Ron Paul
"It can be a challenge to follow the pronouncements of President Trump, as he often seems to change his position on any number of items from week to week, or from day to day, or even from minute to minute." -- Ron Paul
Glenn is getting a headstart on his next Pulitzer Prize.
The Intercept's response
GLENN GREENWALD’S DECISION to resign from The Intercept stems from a fundamental disagreement over the role of editors in the production of journalism and the nature of censorship. Glenn demands the absolute right to determine what he will publish. He believes that anyone who disagrees with him is corrupt, and anyone who presumes to edit his words is a censor. Thus, the preposterous charge that The Intercept’s editors and reporters, with the lone, noble exception of Glenn Greenwald, have betrayed our mission to engage in fearless investigative journalism because we have been seduced by the lure of a Joe Biden presidency. A brief glance at the stories The Intercept has published on Biden will suffice to refute those claims.
The narrative Glenn presents about his departure is teeming with distortions and inaccuracies — all of them designed to make him appear as a victim, rather than a grown person throwing a tantrum. It would take too long to point them all out here, but we intend to correct the record in time. For now, it is important to make clear that our goal in editing his work was to ensure that it would be accurate and fair. While he accuses us of political bias, it was he who was attempting to recycle the dubious claims of a political campaign — the Trump campaign — and launder them as journalism.
We have the greatest respect for the journalist Glenn Greenwald used to be, and we remain proud of much of the work we did with him over the past six years. It is Glenn who has strayed from his original journalistic roots, not The Intercept.
The defining feature of The Intercept’s work in recent years has been the investigative journalism that came out of painstaking work by our staffers in Washington, D.C., New York, and across the rest of the country. It is the staff of The Intercept that has been carrying out our investigative mission — a mission that has involved a collaborative editing process.
We have no doubt that Glenn will go on to launch a new media venture where he will face no collaboration with editors — such is the era of Substack and Patreon. In that context, it makes good business sense for Glenn to position himself as the last true guardian of investigative journalism and to smear his longtime colleagues and friends as partisan hacks. We get it. But facts are facts, and The Intercept’s record of fearless, rigorous, independent journalism speaks for itself.
https://theintercept.com/2020/10/29/...the-intercept/
Fail. They just admitted censoring him on the basis of politics.While he accuses us of political bias, it was he who was attempting to recycle the dubious claims of a political campaign — the Trump campaign — and launder them as journalism.
Last edited by Brian4Liberty; 10-30-2020 at 10:27 AM.
"Foreign aid is taking money from the poor people of a rich country, and giving it to the rich people of a poor country." - Ron Paul
"Beware the Military-Industrial-Financial-Pharma-Corporate-Internet-Media-Government Complex." - B4L update of General Dwight D. Eisenhower
"Debt is the drug, Wall St. Banksters are the dealers, and politicians are the addicts." - B4L
"Totally free immigration? I've never taken that position. I believe in national sovereignty." - Ron Paul
Proponent of real science.
The views and opinions expressed here are solely my own, and do not represent this forum or any other entities or persons.
I hope what is left of the Intercept keeps trying to justify their actions. It makes them look more foolish each time they do it and more apparent to the average person that even outfits that claim to be anti-establishment truth tellers are actually easily infiltrated, corrupted, then removed from any threat to the establishment.
The best truth telling we are getting now is from tiny or solo crews, most often setting up their own podcast or youtube channel. You don't need an entire staff and administrative office anymore to get the word out on information you have been studying. This is the real threat to the establishment and hopefully Glenn has now learned that this will be the way to go, to do it his way with zero interference from anyone else.
The Aftermath Of My Move Back To Independent Journalism
https://greenwald.substack.com/p/the...y-move-back-to
Glenn Greenwald (30 October 2020)
Interviews Discussing My Departure, Media Culture, the Need For Trans-Ideological Dialogue, and Intelligence Community Propaganda
The last twenty-hours] have been exhilarating. I had no idea what to expect when I decided to leave The Intercept and move my journalism here, but the outpouring of support — both words of encouragement from readers and those subscribing and supporting my work here — has been beyond what I can describe and it is incredibly gratifying and appreciated. Thank you to everyone who has subscribed and reached out.
This morning I discussed various aspects of my resignation from The Intercept on the outstanding YouTube program Rising with Krystal Ball and Saagar Enjeti. We discussed more in-depth my rationale for leaving, my response to various criticism and accusations from former colleagues and other assorted journalists, why I speak to both conservative and liberal media outlets, and what this episode reflects about broader media pathologies:
Glenn Greenwald RESPONDS: Why I Left The Intercept Over Censorship
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CYyn_XGAsCs
Last night, I was on with Tucker Carlson to discuss not only the reporting of mine that was censored, but also the severe acceleration of intelligence community propaganda and interference in our domestic politics and the increasingly restrictive media and political climate:
Glenn Greenwald on resigning from his own publication due to censorship
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l8pkCZBjgrk
My appearances on Tucker Carlson’s programs typically provoke some controversy and even consternation among some of my long-term readers on the left. In addition to discussing my rationale for doing so in that above Rising interview, I also explained my reasoning on the Rolling Stone podcast “Useful Idiots” with Matt Taibbi and Katie Halper. Those interested can hear part of my answer in these two short clips:
https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/statu...86409944088577
The mental state of some liberals on twitter is truly showing. Those who don't believe it are your usual ones who support the peaceful protestors.
"Foreign aid is taking money from the poor people of a rich country, and giving it to the rich people of a poor country." - Ron Paul
"Beware the Military-Industrial-Financial-Pharma-Corporate-Internet-Media-Government Complex." - B4L update of General Dwight D. Eisenhower
"Debt is the drug, Wall St. Banksters are the dealers, and politicians are the addicts." - B4L
"Totally free immigration? I've never taken that position. I believe in national sovereignty." - Ron Paul
Proponent of real science.
The views and opinions expressed here are solely my own, and do not represent this forum or any other entities or persons.
Glenn Greenwald: Nothing Trump Did Compares to the 'Moral Evil' of Bush's and Obama's Wars
In unrelated news:
mediaite.com/crime/glenn-greenwald-bound-and-robbed-at-gunpoint-in-terrifying-violent-home-invasion/?utm_source=mostpopularGlenn Greenwald Bound and Robbed at Gunpoint in Terrifying, Violent Home Invasion
By Aidan McLaughlinApr 4th, 2021, 7:50 pm
2595 Comments
Journalist Glenn Greenwald revealed that he was robbed at gunpoint by a group of five men in a terrifying home invasion last month.
Greenwald told the story in an essay that addressed news of another home invasion in Oakland, in which a family was tied up, beaten, threatened with death, and robbed by a group of armed men.
He revealed that he faced a similar attack on March 5, at a house on a farm near Rio de Janeiro that his family has been renting during the pandemic. At the time of the invasion, Greenwald was at the farm, which he described as “isolated,” along with an off-duty cop hired to provide security. His family — a husband and two kids — was in Rio.
At around 9:30 p.m., Greenwald heard his dogs barking more than usual. When he went outside to see why, “three men wearing full black face masks descended on me, all pointing guns at me.”
The robbers pushed him into the house, where two other men had his security guard face-down on the floor at gunpoint.
The thieves demanded money, Greenwald said, and were angered to find that there wasn’t much, aside from “a couple hundred dollars, some kitchen appliances, and clothes for ourselves and our kids.”
“They did not believe that, which drove them to a considerable amount of anger,” he wrote.
“They repeatedly threatened to shoot the police officer in the head, repeatedly kicked him so hard that they cracked several of his ribs, ordered me to open my mouth, and stuck a gun in it as they demanded to know where the rest of the money was, smashed my phone and tablet against a wall when they could not figure out how to erase the hard-drive, and just generally tried to create a climate of extreme fear,” he wrote.
Greenwald said he and the security guard had their arms and legs bound with cords as the criminals ultimately fled in his car after an hour of ransacking the home.
MAGA Allies: 'Bully Israel with undeclared nukes steals land'
Dangerous conspiracy theories on Right claim MAGA fake frontgroup
Poll: Should US apologize for financing radicalization of Afghan children in 80s?
Obama-Clinton Years: A Violent Chapter in World History
Trump: If (Neocon) Adelson Backs Rubio "He'll Have Total Control" Over Him
Delta variant, death of 9 Chinese engineers in terror attack led to airport chaos & quick Kabul fall?
I'm still waiting for him to report on more Snowden material he received. Anybody remember that? Greenwald himself said he would only publicize 5% of the Snowden/NSA material he received and suppress the rest for "national security" because the info was a "time bomb". While some of his work is pretty good he has a lot of nerve talking about journalistic integrity and censorship now. He didn't mind serving the interests of the state not very long ago. Seems like these days he focuses on the politics-as-usual charade instead of any real kind of deep journalism.
Last edited by devil21; 05-21-2021 at 05:33 PM.
"Let it not be said that we did nothing."-Ron Paul
"We have set them on the hobby-horse of an idea about the absorption of individuality by the symbolic unit of COLLECTIVISM. They have never yet and they never will have the sense to reflect that this hobby-horse is a manifest violation of the most important law of nature, which has established from the very creation of the world one unit unlike another and precisely for the purpose of instituting individuality."- A Quote From Some Old Book
Globalist Agenda Playbook 101:
1) If the opposition starts a movement/organization critical of the Agenda, buy it up, rebrand it, and convert it into a "critical" movement/organization
2) If the founder will not sell out, buy up the underlings
3) If neither the founder nor the underlyings will sell out, then send in loyalists to integrate into the movement/organization and move them, inch-by-inch, into the decision-making positions within the movement/organization. When critical mass is reached, effect a hostile takeover of the movement/organization and convert it into a "critical" movement or flip it outright since you already have the decision-making levers in hand...
Jer. 11:18-20. "The Kingdom of God has come upon you." -- Matthew 12:28
But you're shooting the messenger, and not only that, you're proposing to punish him for a good deed. That's crazy. If he does a good deed, that creates no obligation on his part to perform another like it. He did a good deed, that stands on its own merits. If he had not done that good deed (instead telling Snowden to take a hike), would you be protesting "Glenn Greenwald never exposed the national security state! He must do an expose on the national security state!" No, because there would be no reason to set up such a protest.
Greenwald made it absolutely clear that his hands were tied by the agreement he entered into with Snowden upon receiving the materials. Some of it was released under his journalistic review (as agreed). Some of it was deemed too sensitive to be released at that time or the near future (his call, after speaking with the US government, and as agreed with Snowden). Some of it was withheld on Snowden's request as insurance. And some of it is withheld on his own behalf, once again, as insurance. Absolutely none of that counts as lack of journalistic integrity or censorship. The point that needed to be made by the Snowden disclosures was made. Nobody in government or corporate American or any other decision-making body can go on pretending "Yeah, but they don't actually spy on us." I work in tech and I could list many of the specific effects this has had in detail -- ever heard of memory encryption? Pre-2013, this was regularly pooh-poohed as "silly paranoia". Not anymore. Everybody in the tech/security domain takes this stuff very, very seriously now.
Is there more to be done? Perhaps, but there's no way a second drop would have anything like the impact of the first drop, unless it was one of the "insurance" packages. Let's just hope for the sake of everybody involved that we never have to see one of those packages released....
Jer. 11:18-20. "The Kingdom of God has come upon you." -- Matthew 12:28
Actually, all it really did was condition people to accept the 24/7/365 360degree surveilliance state as normal operation. Some think Snowden was a limited hang-out for exactly that purpose and Greenwald was his media conduit. I tend to agree.
I disagree. He helped normalize mass surveillance as common knowledge instead of pulling back the veil, when (if) he really had the opportunity to. Journalistic integrity isn't about protecting the state, which is what he apparently did. It is about analyzing and exposing what info you have that is in the best interests of the consumer of the work, the reader. He has no problem serving the state. Why is he acting offended now? Your assertions about what happened may or may not be accurate but some of it doesn't even make sense. Why would Snowden give him so much material but tell him not to publicize it? Why steal it in the first place if exposing it isn't the goal?Greenwald made it absolutely clear that his hands were tied by the agreement he entered into with Snowden upon receiving the materials. Some of it was released under his journalistic review (as agreed). Some of it was deemed too sensitive to be released at that time or the near future (his call, after speaking with the US government, and as agreed with Snowden). Some of it was withheld on Snowden's request as insurance. And some of it is withheld on his own behalf, once again, as insurance. Absolutely none of that counts as lack of journalistic integrity or censorship.
Yes and that point was that the NSA spies on everyone but here's only a tiny bit of the info to let us know just enough to act surprised and then accept it. Just enough to normalize/desensitize it but not enough info for everyone to see how pervasive it really is, start to understand who the NSA really works for (British), how and why. Definitely not enough info to get people to band together to oppose it en masse.The point that needed to be made by the Snowden disclosures was made.
And yet it still continues and has since then become much, much worse, even to the point that people joke about it. Thanks Glenn! You really headed that off when you had the chance! I'll certainly feel so, so sorry for your fate now, since you helped things get to this point instead of ripping back the veil when you had (AND STILL DO) the chance.Nobody in government or corporate American or any other decision-making body can go on pretending "Yeah, but they don't actually spy on us." I work in tech and I could list many of the specific effects this has had in detail -- ever heard of memory encryption? Pre-2013, this was regularly pooh-poohed as "silly paranoia". Not anymore. Everybody in the tech/security domain takes this stuff very, very seriously now.
5%. That was it. 5%. Barely worth even mentioning unless conditioning/desensitization was the goal.Is there more to be done? Perhaps, but there's no way a second drop would have anything like the impact of the first drop, unless it was one of the "insurance" packages. Let's just hope for the sake of everybody involved that we never have to see one of those packages released....
Last edited by devil21; 05-21-2021 at 09:02 PM.
"Let it not be said that we did nothing."-Ron Paul
"We have set them on the hobby-horse of an idea about the absorption of individuality by the symbolic unit of COLLECTIVISM. They have never yet and they never will have the sense to reflect that this hobby-horse is a manifest violation of the most important law of nature, which has established from the very creation of the world one unit unlike another and precisely for the purpose of instituting individuality."- A Quote From Some Old Book
Well you tend to be wrong in this case.
Have you actually read through the source documents that were released? I have. They contain detailed, specific information about many of the most important and most invasive programs that the NSA was running. We had hints and clues from various sources that had allowed us to sketch out bits and pieces of some of these programs pre-2013, but we had no documented proof, and we had no confirmation. After disclosure, we had proof (thus, they no longer had the "conspiracy theory!" card), and we had a lot more specific information about the kinds of operations the NSA was performing abroad and domestically. The disclosure of the tools and methods of the Tailored Access Operations group alone was a move that put the crack in the whip on NSA's back... this was not some kind of fluffy, feel-good disclosure with no teeth, this was an absolute gut-punch and this is why they want Snowden's head on a platter. In the globalist playbook this is out of bounds, this can't happen. And yet it did.I disagree. He helped normalize mass surveillance as common knowledge instead of pulling back the veil, when (if) he really had the opportunity to. Journalistic integrity isn't about protecting the state, which is what he apparently did. It is about analyzing and exposing what info you have that is in the best interests of the consumer of the work, the reader. He has no problem serving the state. Why is he acting offended now? Your assertions about what happened may or may not be accurate but some of it doesn't even make sense. Why would Snowden give him so much material but tell him not to publicize it? Why steal it in the first place if exposing it isn't the goal?
Yes and that point was that the NSA spies on everyone but here's only a tiny bit of the info to let us know just enough to act surprised and then accept it. Just enough to normalize/desensitize it but not enough info for everyone to see how pervasive it really is, start to understand who the NSA really works for (British), how and why. Definitely not enough info to get people to band together to oppose it en masse.
They've been stuck in damage control since 2013. Literally no one in the cryptography community today accepts the old platitude from the 90's and 2000's that "Well, you there's no reason not to trust the NSA on an academic level", meaning, NSA constants, algorithms, and so on, were to be treated as trustworthy just-because. No one buys that line anymore. The same thing has happened in IT, data-center security, and even computer architecture and design (my field).
And you're trying to spin it as some kind of limited-hangout?
Yes, and so this should cause you to stop and reassess your entire theory of how the political world supposedly works. "If only the sheeple knew what the wolves were up to, why, they'd grab their muskets and there'd be a revolution!" No such thing will ever happen. The US public was already domesticated by a century of government schooling, welfare-warfare state, and central bank fueled credit-based consumerism. We're a nation on a morphine drip, and you want us to conclude that Snowden/Greenwald were cooperating with the NSA because there wasn't a national uprising afterwards??And yet it still continues and has since then become much, much worse, even to the point that people joke about it.
Back to shooting the messenger again. Greenwald didn't pacify and domesticate the American populace over the period of a century. The globalists did that. So why are you blaming Greenwald for the work of the globalists??Thanks Glenn! You really headed that off when you had the chance! I'll certainly feel so, so sorry for your fate now, since you helped things get to this point instead of ripping back the veil when you had (AND STILL DO) the chance.
He published source materials. He didn't even have to tell us what percentage it was. But he did. Percentage is like "pounds"... it tells you nothing about the quality of the bulk of the materials that were not published. The quality of the materials that were published was very high. Confirmation of the existence of XKeyScore alone was a major blow to the NSA (and Pentagon) -- this was the reincarnation of the old Total Information Awareness Office that the Bush neocons had tried to create right after 9/11. They got swatted down because Negroponte was way too aggressive and was sliding his hand up America's shirt too quickly. So they slowed it down, renamed it, added some new bells and whistles, and outsourced it to the NSA. Greenwald and Snowden exposed that, it was an absolute political bombshell. When you add in the MUSCULAR program, PRISM, FELLOWTRAVELER program (aka CO-TRAVELER), specific information on TAO methods and tools, and many more, you're talking about a near-nuclear strike to NSA.5%. That was it. 5%. Barely worth even mentioning unless conditioning/desensitization was the goal.
Jer. 11:18-20. "The Kingdom of God has come upon you." -- Matthew 12:28
This just came out today....
Corporate Media's Double Standard: They Attack Whomever They Want, But You Cannot Criticize Them
My responses to The Washington Post's article and Daily Beast's questions about accusations from The Intercept that I have "endangered" their writers.
https://greenwald.substack.com/p/cor...ouble-standard
FJB
None of that matters. He'll continue to whine about being censored and complaining about liberals (blah blah more fake left/right) while allegedly sitting on the largest trove of secret information ever obtained about the ongoing subversion and takeover of this country. His allegiances are not hard to discern. Sounds a bit like GCHQ controlled opposition.
"Let it not be said that we did nothing."-Ron Paul
"We have set them on the hobby-horse of an idea about the absorption of individuality by the symbolic unit of COLLECTIVISM. They have never yet and they never will have the sense to reflect that this hobby-horse is a manifest violation of the most important law of nature, which has established from the very creation of the world one unit unlike another and precisely for the purpose of instituting individuality."- A Quote From Some Old Book
Connect With Us