Watch Me Decimate Glenn Greenwald’s Transparent “antiwar” Spin on Obama and ISIS™

by Scott Creighton

Full disclosure: my feelings on the subject of Glenn Greenwald are well established, well founded and already well understood by most readers on this site.

Like every other self-absorbed phony opposition leader, Glenn is nothing more than a #BillionairesBitch trying to pass as a hero of the people. He makes me sick.

You see, in order to present one’s self as a champion of those of us who stand opposed to neoliberal globalization and the endless imperialism it desperately needs to survive, one has to first understand that the program is rooted in and dependent upon moral depravity and abject indifference to human suffering.

In cases of the fake opposition opinion makers like Greenwald, Klein and Maddow, they can empathize with the moral imperative we all feel to do something to stop this, so they play up to it in order to gain credibility, then slightly twist their leadership in ways that ultimately serve the very masters of the universe they pretend to oppose. That’s why the masters of the universe scout and cultivate opposition leaders and lefties right alongside far-right gung-ho near neo-Nazis. And In many ways the sellout Left is of far greater value.

To a man the sell-outs do this for their own self interests. They may be tempted to “BELIEVE” they can “CHANGE” more from the inside, but that old cliche only really works on college sophomores these days. You aren’t going to change the system from within. It’s going to change you and anyone with any real education who is halfway grounded in reality already knows this long before the masters of the universe come a calling. So to me, when they indulge in the cognitive dissonance which allows them to go into the service of those they once opposed, this makes them even more vile than the monsters they pretend to expose.

That’s why I call them the Vichy Left and there’s no Vichy Party member more disgustingly blatant than Glenn Greenwald, Mr. Snowden Psyop himself.

Just to give you another example before we delve into Glenn’s short controlled opposition propaganda piece on Obama and ISIS™, his internet “alternative news and information” site, the Intercept, recently published what can only be described as a white washing of the CIA’s involvement in the birth of the crack epidemic here in the states and the subsequent murder of Gary Webb when he successfully exposed it.

The Intercept article by Ryan Devereaux, Managing a Nightmare: How the CIA Watched Over the Destruction of Gary Webb, would more accurately be described with the title “Managing a Nightmare: How to Spin Up the Crack/CIA Story Before the Gary Webb Movie Hits the Theaters Nex Month

.

.

The hypocrisy of the Devereaux piece is breathtakingly astounding and that is not hyperbole.

While posing as an expose on the inner workings of the CIA, the article suggests that not only did the CIA not bring crack into the country in order to fund the brutal Contra destabilization death squads BUT it goes even further to suggest the CIA had nothing more to do with Gary Webb’s death other than as that of a passive observer. Ryan (and the Intercept) claim that the vicious “media” was at fault for driving Gary to shoot himself TWICE in the head and the CIA either just sat back and watched or instigated the process a bit by fueling the press’ feeding frenzy.

Yes, that’s the level of exposure over at the Intercept. The CIA may or may not have looked the other way when a mistaken journalist whacked himself because he couldn’t handle getting it wrong.

The article actually ends with this inane drivel that more than suggests, it actually concludes the CIA isn’t guilty of these crimes because… as a general rule, they’re better than us:

“Once you take away a journalist’s credibility, that’s all they have,” Schou says. “He was never able to recover from that.”

In “Managing a Nightmare,” Dujmovic attributed the initial outcry over the “Dark Alliance” series to “societal shortcomings” that are not present in the spy agency.

“As a personal post-script, I would submit that ultimately the CIA-drug story says a lot more about American society on the eve of the millennium that [sic] it does about either the CIA or the media,” he wrote. “We live in somewhat coarse and emotional times–when large numbers of Americans do not adhere to the same standards of logic, evidence, or even civil discourse as those practiced by members of the CIA community.” Ryan Devereaux

You know those brave kids protesting in Jefferson County because their school board wants to teach nothing other than revisionist history in Colorado from now on? Ryan Devereaux is like the sycophantic below average overachiever kids in those schools who are standing with the fascists cus they know they can’t compete with the other kids on merit and talent alone. And that’s about as straight forward as I can put it.

The hypocrisy is obvious: Devereaux, and by extension the Intercept,  is in effect doing the exact same thing to the memory and credibility of Gary Webb right now in order to protect the “national interests” the CIA serves.

Like “they attacked us for our freedom”, this propaganda is about as subtle as a double-tap suicide.

But Ryan Devereaux will probably get his own show on MSNBC right after Rachel Maddow for this ham-handed effort.

With that in mind, let’s take a peek at the recent effort by #BillionairesBitch Greenwald to promote the ISIS™ Crisis while pretending to expose it.

Glenn starts off as most Sunsteinesque controlled op influence peddlers do by stating an obvious and already well understood truth in order to pander to his audience for credibility:

Empires bomb who they want, when they want, for whatever reason (indeed, recall that Obama bombed Libya even after Congress explicitly voted against authorization to use force, and very few people seemed to mind that abject act of lawlessness; constitutional constraints are not for warriors and emperors). Glenn Greenwald

How cutting edge. How insightful. Hell, even the war-backing far-right already accept this given fact, but, there’s his credibility. See? he’s really “going after” Obama, right? But wait… THERE’S MORE!

It was just over a year ago that Obama officials were insisting that bombing and attacking Assad was a moral and strategic imperative. Instead, Obama is now bombing Assad’s enemies while politely informing his regime of its targets in advance. It seems irrelevant on whom the U.S. wages war; what matters it that it will be at war, always and forever.

Six weeks of bombing hasn’t budged ISIS in Iraq, but it has caused ISIS recruitment to soar. That’s all predictable: the U.S. has known for years that what fuels and strengthens anti-American sentiment (and thus anti-American extremism) is exactly what they keep doing: aggression in that region. If you know that, then they know that. At this point, it’s more rational to say they do all of this not despite triggering those outcomes, but because of it. Continuously creating and strengthening enemies is a feature, not a bug. It is what justifies the ongoing greasing of the profitable and power-vesting machine of Endless War. Glenn Greenwald

Ah, wow, so insightful again. We bomb the “turrurrururrrurists” because we know it will make more “turrrurrurruists” and help continue the endless war on terror because the MIC will make some money.

Wow. That’s real deep state level shit there, right? Can’t get that level of “truth” from anyone but Glenn Greenwald and the Intercept.

Uh. Not really.

“Instead, Obama is now bombing Assad’s enemies”

Actually, Obama is now bombing the civilian and state infrastructure we usually target in unconventional warfare ops (look it up Greenwald) because Assad’s enemies (the ones Obama and company sent in there) have been loosing to the legitimate and popularly supported government of Syria. In short, we are having to take on a more “hands on” role in the regime change operation taking place in Syria right now.

“while politely informing his regime of its targets in advance”

Having a puppet from Iraq’s UN delegation deliver a letter to the Syrian rep hours before the illegal bombing campaign begins does not constitute “politely informing” anyone of anything. “Politely informing” also doesn’t constitute getting approval from said targeted nation. What it is, is political and legal cover to be used by sycophantic influence peddlers in order to create the appearance of legitimacy. Actually, to be factually correct, they warned ISIS of the pending airstrikes, not Assad.

“It seems irrelevant on whom the U.S. wages war”

Oh it’s very relevant. Relevant enough for Glenn #BillionairesBitch Greenwald to lie and mislead his readers about. So I guess that is relevant, isn’t it. It certainly mattered to Glenn’s billionaire sugar daddy when it came to the color revolution and regime change he backed financially in Ukraine. Mattered a whole bunch to him back then. I wonder if Glenn’s billionaire has seen a payday since then. After all, that IMF/World Bank money is flowing in. For that matter, I wonder if Glenn has seen his cut yet. [edit: Yep. payday is Reich around the corner Third Reich that is!]

“Six weeks of bombing hasn’t budged ISIS in Iraq, but it has caused ISIS recruitment to soar.”

Oh Glenn. Your readers are probably old enough to have given up belief in Santa so they may even be smart enough to have seen through ISIS™ as well don’t you think (yeah, that’s why you’re writing this shit, right? kinda like the preemptive strike on the Gary Webb movie?)

We aren’t fighting ISIS™ in Iraq. We are fighting a legitimate uprising of several tribes from the north who oppose our neoliberal puppet regime because the austerity measures and brutal repression have ruined their country, their lives and the futures of their children. And the reason numbers of opposition ranks are swelling is because our brutal dictator in Iraq has unleashed Shite death squads on his own population and President Peace Prize has renewed 2003 Shock and Awe tactics in support of him.

Seems pretty simple to understand, doesn’t it.

We are Not Fighting ISIS™ in Iraq. We are Bombing The General Military Council for Iraqi Revolutionaries

Today, the Tribal Revolutionaries have lit a flame for a Revolution that will never be put out; this Revolution began since our people asked for legitimate rights and they asked for them through their constitutional sit-inswe have been able to control Mosul, Sallahudeen, Falluja, Garma, Beiji and most of the northern area and now we are close to Baghdad’s parameters and at its external limits in areas of Baghdad’s Belt as well as the fact that we have been able to expel the government army from Diyala – large parts of the areas in Diyala, and parts of Kirkuk province

The person who started it is Maliki – Maliki forced us to behave in this manner.   For when (army) divisions are sent to our areas and checkpoints and inspection points are set-up in our areas the intention is to degrade and subjugate people and this is what we will not accept and this is what we mentioned in our first statements when we stated and defined the enemy as whoever hurts the Iraqi people and insults their dignity as well as attacks them and their possessions...

but this revolution is that of Tribes and this is what we want to get to the whole worldthat this Revolution is a new Iraqi Spring and that it is an armed Revolution to end repression and injustice.   It has no connection with any other agendas.   And it has no relationship to any terrorism or any other parties.Maj. General Mizher Al Qaissi, Official Spokesman for The General Military Council for Iraqi Revolutionaries

That’s who Obama is targeting in Iraq, Glenn. Not hard to figure out, but someone like yourself with so much exposure, I can see why you chose not to address it. Wouldn’t want the CIA to “look the other way” when you get depressed, right?

“anti-American sentiment (and thus anti-American extremism)”

Is that anti-establishment Glenn Greenwald equating anti-American sentiment with “extremism”? Sound like Cheney and Rumsfeld to anyone else?

Is it really extremism to oppose illegal wars of aggression and bombing campaigns and terrorist regime change operations and neoliberal austerity packages being forced on the people of your nation? Is it extremism to oppose illegal renditions and torture and wholesale looting of nations via privatization? Is it really extremism to oppose “free market” reforms which brings in Monsanto GMOs and land snatching on behalf of Big Agra which decimates entire communities and destroys local ecosystems?

Is that really the definition of “extremist”… or… perhaps… is SUPPORTING all of that shit a BETTER definition of the term?

hmmm… food for thought.

Anyhow… there you have Glenn Greenwald’s latest efforts to bring multiple “truths” to his alternative audience.

How do I sum this up?

I know… I would much rather read news reports from those kids standing up for their futures in Jefferson County than I would from someone like Ryan Devereaux or Glenn Greenwald  because obviously, not only are those kids smarter and better educated than either of those two Vichy sell-outs, they still have souls they haven’t traded to a billionaire for a few magic beans as of yet. And there’s a lot to be said about that.

You go kids.

You go to hell Glenn.

And that is the name of that tune. hee hee hee

30 Responses

  1. Define : “Jew”….

    http://archive.adl.org/presrele/mise_00/5368_00.html

    “we” have to move beyond STOCKHOLM SYNDROME like
    PATTY HEARST….and stop using the language of the enemies
    of all mankind…& “Humanity” too !

    http://archive.adl.org/presrele/mise_00/4643_00.html#.VCamb1f4Jmg

    all FAUX-INTELLIGENCE “agencies” work for the
    {SAME} insane psychopaths
    who print the currency & Own the Media…who call themselves

    http://www.smoking-mirrors.com/2014/09/the-hot-pursuit-of-hamster-swine-with.html

    “JEWS”…and have a “Jewish” ZIONIST TERRORIST so-called
    STATE called “Israel”…full of Gog & Magog …”Proselytes”…

    http://www.jonathanpollard.org/1999/041999.htm

    Gog & Magog “Proselytes” to Talmudic Judaism are not “SEMITIC”

    http://www.sc-democrat.com/news/10October/07/adl.htm

    curiously the word “Jew” didn’t exist until shortly before the word
    ANTI-SEMITE…

    http://buelahman.wordpress.com/2014/09/25/holder-quits-to-pursue-his-political-aspirations/

    VOTE : WEINER – HOLDER 2016

  2. What Greenwald has been hired to contribute to, and what Sunstein refers to as “cognitive infiltration” (or some such thing), and what Alex Jones participates in while serving up load of disinformation sprinkled with bits of truth, is a form of what, in more engineering terms, is described in the linked paper “Decoy based information security”:

    http://cryptome.org/2014/09/decoy-infosec.pdf

    This paper describes the concept in terms of encryption for normal information sharing, and some evil entity is the “adversary”. For Sunstein, Greenwald and Jones, you (a normal decent citizen) are the adversary. The secrets of those who wish to dominate you are the protected, encrypted information. I think much of the nonsense inflicted upon us in the desperate quest for power, money and global domination is based upon concepts modeled after formal and sound mathematical, informational and physical theory. People like Greenwald and Sunstein are simply hired as tools to “bring it to the people”. Did you ever read Bill Cooper’s “Behold a Pale Horse”?:

    https://ephraiyim.files.wordpress.com/2010/10/william_cooper-behold_a_pale_horse1991_copy.pdf

    Particularly, the section dealing with modeling economic systems after an electromagnetic power system that can be tested and modified through economic “shock testing”. In my opinion, what’s important is not how accurate or applicable any of these types of models turns out to be when tested on societies, but the mere notion that our illustrious leaders turn to pseudoscientific ideas to experiment upon whole societies to find out what works and what doesn’t for influence and control with the world’s populations being the test subjects, often to their detriment.

  3. The problem is, Iran has had the dominant influence in the government of Iraq under Maliki. Do you have any evidence Iran has been dissatisfied with him until,, perhaps, very recently?
    Greenwald is never, probably to be sympathetic to the Moscow-Damascus-Tehran axis against the Amer-Israeli Empire.
    I’m not sure the Syrian or Iranian government has ever criticised the Iraqi government under Maliki as “neo-liberal.”
    Better to use him when he hits the Empire on his own terms than to
    treat him as if he is an Empire defender.
    But in this particular case, the Iranian Rouhani’s terms of engagement, announced at the UN–that the US should not be bombing anything in Iraq or in Syria without the explicit agreement of the Syrian government–can you deduce from anything Greenwald has written that he disagrees with this?

  4. Suggestion: make your case without snark. Snark leaves thoughtful readers cold and less inclined to respect the source. Facts only please.

    • that’s kind of a snarky thing for you to say isn’t it? I wonder if someone like Hunter Thompson would have agreed with your “just the facts ma’am” suggestion. Or Poe for that matter.

      • No, I don’t snark at people, and I’m not saying snark is unacceptable to most readers; it’s just unacceptable as credible to this reader. Thompson and Poe were fiction writers. Non-fiction must have standards of provable facts. To the other commenter: Facts ARE exciting. Here’s a couple off the top of my head: Israeli leadership is committed to exterminating Palestinians. (provable) The US has over a thousand bases around the world, now hemming in anyone it wants to conquer, such as China and Russia. (provable) The coup in Ukraine was instigated and backed by the U.S. in order to install a fascist regime, which is a fait accompli; the neocon Nuland was overheard choosing the new ruler. (provable) NATO lied to Russia when it said it wouldn’t move closer to Russia after the German reunification; then it moved into Hungary, Poland, Czechoslovakia; then Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia, and now is chopping at the bit to take Ukraine. (provable). I can’t understand how anyone can understand anything without facts. Snark is not fact; it’s language created to make those on the same attitude page laugh together derisively at whoever is the target, in this case Glenn Greenwald.

        • You just stated a bunch of “facts” without references. That’s kind of funny (not saying that your “facts” aren’t true – just find it funny that you assume they will be taken at face value when nobody else’s “facts” should be). Opinions and humor have value too. Try not worrying about whether a message is “snarky” or not. Try just reading what’s in the message.

          • Hi, I can supply all necessary reference and prove what I said; however, that wasn’t the point of my comment which was I love facts and they are what I find persuasive. However, I take your point about humor which I love in satire (read Andy Borowitz at the New Yorker). Peace. Rob

        • Hunter S. Thompson was a journalist.

          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunter_S._Thompson#Early_journalism_career

          fresh out of the school he attended for a year, Poe supported himself briefly, as a reporter for a newspaper. He would also make extra money writing literary criticisms for a newspaper. He was very snarky from what I understand. And he was factual. Kinda like me. you can have both you know.

          You don’t think it’s a fact that Greenwald is a controlled opposition asset spinning lies about “ISIS” in Iraq? What part didn’t you understand? The part where Glenn is supported by a man who helped finance that Ukrainian color revolution and regime change (“provable”) or the part where Glenn says Obama is attacking “ISIS” in Iraq when we are actually attacking a legitimate uprising against our brutal dictator (also “provable”)? Because I thought I laid it pretty plainly.

        • Maybe you thought I was out of line when I said the Intercept was running preemptive damage control on the Gary Webb movie before it comes out. But when they conclude the CIA didn’t run drugs back then and had nothing to do with Webb’s death, I figured that was pretty obvious to most folks. Not you I guess.

          Did you think this was “snarky”? Cus it was… but you know what? it’s pretty fucking true as well.

          In other words:

          Military spokesman: “We’re saving the world by bombing the extremists in Syria and while we’re at it, we’ll go ahead and shoot down Syrian planes that are trying to protect their country from the extremists that we trained, equipped and sent over there to destabilize the country and force a regime change. Pretty straight forward. Any questions?”

          Glenn Greenwald: “Yes. Glenn Greenwald from the alternative cutting edge and in no way a CIA Mockingbird op… the Intercept”

          Military Spokesman: “yes Glenn?”

          Glenn Greenwald: “On a scale from one to ten, how heroic are the people working at the CIA?”

          Military Spokesman: “That’s a fair and cutting edge question Glenn. 10″

          Glenn Greenwald: “Thank you for your honesty and integrity sir. May I ask a follow up question?”

          Military Spokesman: “of course”

          Glenn Greenwald: “I’ve finished an article and have yet to hear back from my handler. I think he’s on a meth binge somewhere in Spokane. Is there anyone here from the CIA who can proof-read it for me since…”

          Military Spokesman: “uh, thank you Glenn. You should get back to me in private AFTER the press conference (wink wink)”

          Glenn Greenwald: ‘huh?… oh… riiight… after the presser (wink wink). Got it. (wink wink wink)”

        • You ever hear of Bill Hicks/ George Carlin? Are they snarky? Is what they say… factual? Are they credible and factual and snarky all at the same time?

    • Being critical is called for when talking about Greemwald…. he is enough to make anyone ‘snarky’ but Scott does it so fine! Love to read his snarky comments.
      and speaking of ‘facts’…. facts are so dull by themselves… no life in them!

  5. Well, they’re out there, those Tribal Revolutionaries. They’ll always be out there, somewhere, in one form or another. Even when they suffer 32 lost uprisings, that spirit will never be defeated. If that’s what the globalists count on in their wars for power and money, that’s what they’ll get.

    Because, what counts most for some is how their life is lived

    • Plus they have little choice. They will be afforded no option to live under imperialistic rule. They know the only option is to eliminate them, so what choice do they have but to resist, when when submission and cooperation is obviously not an option? Remember, “We do not negotiate with terrorists” – only problem, a “terrorist” is anybody who exists and happens to be passively in the way of the latest imperialist acquisition goals.

      • Know what I remember

        The birds and the bees
        and the cigarette trees
        and the soda-water fountains

        Those were the days, my friend
        I thought they’d never end

        Maybe those Revolutionaries didn’t either, or those students protesting out in Colorado

  6. I was just listening to Webster Tarpley’s radio show and he’s making some weird statements. First off, he’s saying Obama doesn’t really want to go on these military campaigns, that he’s stalling and being resistant. Hence the two recent security breeches at the White House. Webster says the “War Party” is sending him a message that he needs to get on board. What stuns me the most is that he also said that the U.S. and its fighting partners are actually bombing ISIS and Syria welcomes the bombing because of that. This is contrary to what I understand the situation to be. He sounds ridiculous, but I once admired him so much. I’ve learned so much about history from him.

    • First off, he’s saying Obama doesn’t really want to go on these military campaigns, that he’s stalling and being resistant

      Oh, I wish that was true.

      Hence the two recent security breeches at the White House.

      Cannot see how that’s connected. Could you elaborate?

      … and Syria welcomes the bombing because of that

      Again, this seems implausible.

    • I used to have a great deal of respect for the man, now I can’t listen to him. He’s turned into the biggest Obama supporter after folks like Maddow and Jon Stewart.

      wow. he really said Syria welcomes Obama’s bombing? wow. I thought he was bad back in 2012 when it seemed he drank the Obama koolaid, but this is just horrible. if you have a link to that i would like to listen to it. jesus.

      • The only way to be a true Obama fan at this point is to subscribe to the motto of “hope”, as in “I hope he really didn’t want to go along with that” and “I hope he was just forced into that” and “I hope he grows a pair if he’s not just lying through his teeth” and “Gee, I hope he’s NOT just lying through his teeth!!”

        • Oh I see, like “Gee, I hope he and everyone in his administration resigns and then are brought up on various charges”? Like that?

          • Kind of like that, yeah, except that it would be nice if some were investigated without the option for resigning first. Would be OK to “hope” that they’d haul in Cheney, Rove and the rest of the previous administration too. Wouldn’t it be fun to see a few justified convictions from the 9/11 crimes?

            • accountability? in this country? for 9/11? hahahahahahahaha (cough) hahahahahahaha (wheeze)

              • Hey, don’t burst my bubble. I’m holding out hope for change. Hope keeps me pacified so I won’t feel like <doing anything that might prove to be inconvenient to the power structure.

                • LOL Americans are so optimistic……! 🙂
                  yeah, let’s hope the next President is actually elected by the people and not by controlled voting programs… do we have anyone running that isn’t one of ‘their’ future puppets? ohhhh, I hope….

      • http://tarpley.net/audio/WCR-20140927.mp3. Here’s the link, Scott. And to answer Engelbert, he was saying that the “rouge” elements that want war likely staged the security breeches to spook Obama in doing their bidding. Crazy, huh?

        • Thanks Breeze. It sounds crazy, yes. However I can see Obama being a scared chicken doing the bidding of his masters (Tarpley’s version, apparently), or, alternatively, a willing participant in an ongoing conspiracy against the majority population of the world. I can’t actually decipher between them, because the end result is the same — he is doing us no apparent good.

        • thank you. I’ll force myself to listen to it tomorrow but unfortunately I can’t say I’m surprised. I’ve written about Webster’s blind support of everything Obama before. Check my archives on the subject.

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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 )

w

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: