I shouldn’t even comment about this, but there’s another dismally partisan article about Iran by the perpetually depressed Glen Greenwald. What is Greenwald upset about? Well, I guess it’s now a crime to be pulling for the everyday Iranian if you have in the past supported bombing Iran to keep them from getting nuclear weapons.
Much of the same faction now claiming such concern for the welfare of The Iranian People are the same people who have long been advocating a military attack on Iran and the dropping of large numbers of bombs on their country — actions which would result in the slaughter of many of those very same Iranian People.
Does this mean that Americans were not allowed to pull for civilian uprisings in Japan and Germany during World War II? Someone should have told Tom Cruise about the Greenwald rule before he starred in the movie Valkyrie. According the Greenwald Rule, Americans (and other Allied nations) were not allowed to pull for the German civilians because we firebombed Dresden.
There’s no grey area with Greenwald… sorry Claus Schenk Graf von Stauffenberg
Greenwald’s column comes off as a bitter piece of partisan drivel. He has even updated his own piece twice to revel in his self-importance. People like Greenwald are unable to see events from a non-partisan point of view. If he was writing satire I could respect that, but he’s not.
[...] The big news today is that President Obama has selected his nominee for the Supreme Court. Elena Kagan doesn’t have much of a record and would be the first justice without prior judicial experience in forty years. Not that there’s anything wrong with that. Supposedly we’re supposed to believe Kagan might not be liberal enough, but I’m starting to suspect that Greenwald is just giving his side cover. There’s nothing to suggest that Kagan isn’t as liberal as Justice Stevens and it’s likely she’s further to the left. Why anyone takes Greenwald seriously is another story. [...]