Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: The real reason a very loud few are posting hostility toward Glenn Greenwald at DU: [View all]mia
(8,360 posts)461. I agree.
It's obvious that there is a cadre of posters who refer to a set of talking points. I guess that a few of these do it for a living. Others fawn over their posts as if they were some kind of authority deserving respect and agreement without further thought.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
479 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
The real reason a very loud few are posting hostility toward Glenn Greenwald at DU: [View all]
woo me with science
Jun 2014
OP
So how is it possible for us to identify the government operatives here? nt
Cali_Democrat
Jun 2014
#139
People who use talking points. Those who are exressing their own thoughts, do not use
sabrina 1
Jun 2014
#170
You know it! I have talk about this with a couple of RW friends, but their hate of Democrats keeps
Dustlawyer
Jun 2014
#439
Thank you. A sick, authoritarian focus on message control/propagandizing rather then representing
woo me with science
Jun 2014
#421
How about his statement that those worried about the double fast, double secret TPP are
merrily
Jun 2014
#454
There was a faction on the 'left' several years ago, bloggers mostly, who publicly discussed using
sabrina 1
Jun 2014
#384
You would think when they see it doesn't work, they would try something a bit more effective. But
sabrina 1
Jun 2014
#388
My basic question is how can we have a group of posters here that claim they are politically liberal
rhett o rick
Jun 2014
#214
I tried to give them some credit, but you make a great case. They literally have nothing to
rhett o rick
Jun 2014
#420
Read the OP and the links before trying to summarize the vast amount of info provided as to how
sabrina 1
Jun 2014
#122
They can do that now. Deep brainwashing controlled by your cell phone and computer!
flamingdem
Jun 2014
#172
Not to worry, they got him. He got a hide for saying some here are authoritarians.
rhett o rick
Jun 2014
#331
I think his post should be considered on it's content. But then I am not trying to use
rhett o rick
Jun 2014
#338
That's what I thought you'd say. Are you seriously trying to save DU from evil? I dont
rhett o rick
Jun 2014
#345
Nice try, but I am not "defending it's use." We dont have a banned site list that I know of
rhett o rick
Jun 2014
#352
I am not the one trying to mold DU into a site that excludes intellectual discussions. A site where
rhett o rick
Jun 2014
#358
But you never post in discussion threads. You seem obsessed with policing DU and locking and hiding
rhett o rick
Jun 2014
#417
I think its admirable, the work you are doing to erode the stereotype of Canadians
bobduca
Jun 2014
#431
Those that post only adulation for the President and disparage those that dont, are
rhett o rick
Jun 2014
#463
Comparing pocoloco's post with the postthat was hidden shows the inconsistencies of the jury system.
merrily
Jun 2014
#459
The alert, hide and lock team has power thru persistence and organization.
rhett o rick
Jun 2014
#462
They act as a "Team". They all post in the Snowden hate threads and none post in fracking, TPP
rhett o rick
Jun 2014
#467
Someone posted that he or she stumbled on the "place" where the coordination happens.
merrily
Jun 2014
#468
DUers have never been "allowed" to use material from right-wing sources to criticize Democrats...
SidDithers
Jun 2014
#425
The link was to an article that denigrated the Right Wing. But you got the hide. nm
rhett o rick
Jun 2014
#447
Locking and hiding seems to be very important to some here that apparently dont understand
rhett o rick
Jun 2014
#449
You are correct, I as a host think that the lock should be rarely used and the onus
rhett o rick
Jun 2014
#451
Most Hosts are able to independently evaluate an alerted thread and decide if it's on or off topic..
SidDithers
Jun 2014
#455
Great post. Those that disparage whistle-blowers, investigative journalists, OWS, Code Pink,
rhett o rick
Jun 2014
#445
Almost all posts that begin with "So" and is followed by something NOBODY had said...
bvar22
Jun 2014
#300
'So' is generally followed by 'what you are saying is' followed by a total misinterpretation of
sabrina 1
Jun 2014
#319
My browser shows all text in purple. Clicked on links turn green. Don't like black and blue...
freshwest
Jun 2014
#276
Not the original versions that were meant to shame and belittle Obama supporters
Whisp
Jun 2014
#274
I'm glad to have seen that. It CONFIRMS that the talking points are being distributed
sabrina 1
Jun 2014
#418
Lol, I know, Tiger Beat, that's what I was thinking. I think that is for preteen fans of
sabrina 1
Jun 2014
#317
Well, when you can get self-styled "Undergrounders" championing the surveillance state...
villager
Jun 2014
#65
Hard to believe you've missed posts by randome, siddithers, msanthrope etc
riderinthestorm
Jun 2014
#142
Have you ever seen the talking points re Greenwald, lol, the ones that get repeated despite how
sabrina 1
Jun 2014
#238
Sabrina, you know that I do not answer your questions. Nor do I read your posts. nt
msanthrope
Jun 2014
#349
That's strange because you always respond to them. There is an ignore feature here, I don't use
sabrina 1
Jun 2014
#381
Oh yes, it absolutely was different during the Bush years and would be again, if a Republican got
sabrina 1
Jun 2014
#469
Better yet, can you post a link to one where you condemned their gross violations of our
sabrina 1
Jun 2014
#321
I don't have a tail, not that I have anything against those who do. And I NEVER 'run away', I just
sabrina 1
Jun 2014
#380
Can you please link to specific posts where these people defended specific NSA surveillance tactics
Cali_Democrat
Jun 2014
#210
Can you post specific links where they have criticized the NSA surveillance tactics?
sabrina 1
Jun 2014
#472
Demonizing them and insulting those who agree with them (to some extent whatever) is...
Armstead
Jun 2014
#278
And there is a perfect example of what the OP is talking about. Greenwald has no 'followers' that I
sabrina 1
Jun 2014
#386
I want a pony that doesn't keep records of every email and call I make or receive
lark
Jun 2014
#236
To be accurate, I called anyone who implies the president has done something wrong
hughee99
Jun 2014
#220
Well it sure seems you are familiar with the PPR process, so I figured you must be back.
Agschmid
Jun 2014
#36
It's like he never existed and all those concerns about the hostility towards GG went up
Cha
Jun 2014
#357
I think they're just the ultimate in "Team players", "Yes Men", and something about nose placement.
Tierra_y_Libertad
Jun 2014
#14
Is this the part where I get labeled as a propagandist shill for the Pentagon again??
Blue_Tires
Jun 2014
#20
Populace. While I do not generally correct other people's posts, I recently corrected
msanthrope
Jun 2014
#140
DU is also better-read and more politically aware than most Americans.
woo me with science
Jun 2014
#39
No.....It's when it becomes the Democratic/Obama Enforcement Squad that hackles get raised
Armstead
Jun 2014
#150
Being against a surveillance state, in the end, has nothing to do with Obama.
paulkienitz
Jun 2014
#351
You GOT me! In fact, Obama hired me for proNSA 2001. Rand Paul wanted me, but, I was already taken
blm
Jun 2014
#69
True--it only helps polarize DU further. And that's a shame, because the main task ahead of
msanthrope
Jun 2014
#178
Totally relevant, a racist Bush backer hates Obama... that's not new... DU expecting people to ...
uponit7771
Jun 2014
#131
" including attacks on the messengers, mocking, swarming, and endless diversion"
loudsue
Jun 2014
#115
the OP specifically says it is a LOUD FEW and not "everyone that has reservations"
carolinayellowdog
Jun 2014
#141
K&R You will know them by their works or in many cases, their silence. nt
raouldukelives
Jun 2014
#126
Complicating things further is the fact that propaganda is self-perpetuating
RufusTFirefly
Jun 2014
#143
just wanted to add..working for free and fair elections gets u targeted
questionseverything
Jun 2014
#146
Propagandists could have also torn down FDR for his actions regarding interning Japanese Americans
cascadiance
Jun 2014
#177
There might be temptations by some to demonize kids of the 60's for their VW bugs...
cascadiance
Jun 2014
#203
I think 99% of DUers know exactly how the Snowden/Greenwald adventure will end.
randome
Jun 2014
#193
If the evidence was clear-cut, and not subject to interpretation, we would already be...
randome
Jun 2014
#217
Pulitzer Prizes are based on the quality of the reporting and the subject matter.
randome
Jun 2014
#255
People have disagreements and can have honest disagreements. I agree that there are some who like to
hrmjustin
Jun 2014
#204
i think divulging the NSA ability to spy on americans is one thing, but divulging to other countries
dionysus
Jun 2014
#221
It'd be nice if we all were here to discuss the issues. But that's not the case.
rhett o rick
Jun 2014
#223
Well, the Best Generally Available Source is Probably the Washington Post Article
On the Road
Jun 2014
#394
I don't really think woo believes everyone that disagrees with him is a government agent.
Rex
Jun 2014
#442
Personally I think Greenwald is a self-righteous, arrogant creep. I don't like him at all.
OregonBlue
Jun 2014
#316
good topic. There are HUGE profits made from OUR Federal/state funds to pay for "surveillance"
Sunlei
Jun 2014
#332
It couldn't possibly be Greenwald's actually as much of a scumbag as we've accused him of being?
Chan790
Jun 2014
#339
How accomodating of your targets to self-identify via outraged responses.
winter is coming
Jun 2014
#354
I saw that copycat thread and couldn't believe how perfectly it illustrated the problem.
woo me with science
Jun 2014
#373
Great Op, full of good info. Thank you. Generated a lot of recs and replies, too.
merrily
Jun 2014
#460