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
Editorials & Other Articles
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: It's Getting Close Folks... Greenwald, Naming Names.... [View all]Dragonfli
(10,622 posts)157. People make mistakes, I bet even you do at times (maybe not)
I just think that if one is to accuse somebody of being a "right winger trying to take down Obama" it would take more than one post made in error of a cartoon that appears to be about Chinese hacking to convince me of the accusation, you may require little to no evidence to convince you of whatever a person tells you, but I happen to expect more.
If you read what I posted all this should be rather clear already, if you have a chip on your shoulder and want to start a fight with me over it fine, but I am not required to take the bait.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
261 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

How can you "learn" with your fingers in your ears and your eyes shut? You seem to want so
rhett o rick
Jun 2014
#36
That's a bunch of crap and you know it. The NSA/CIA grabbed unbelievable power during the Bush
rhett o rick
Jun 2014
#47
"Anyone who says this was all known during the Bush years is spinning wildly."
greiner3
Jun 2014
#222
Nice! The "old news" defense with a "because we have a black president" finish.
hughee99
Jun 2014
#155
36 post before someone played you are not a liberal if you dont bow down to GG/Snowden card
itsrobert
Jun 2014
#235
Post #34 was self hidden, did Cali_Democrat really say to "bow down before GG/Snowden?"
Dragonfli
Jun 2014
#245
I really was just curious because I had never seen such a thing and wanted to see for myself
Dragonfli
Jun 2014
#248
What we "learned" in the Bush years was vague. Now we have the documents to clarify
JDPriestly
Jun 2014
#223
... not weird, glad Obama started the conversation months before SnowGlens releases
uponit7771
Jun 2014
#150
Some people see everything through a prism of how it will effect people in office.
Dragonfli
Jun 2014
#23
You mean only those of us who are informed, know a little history and care about our
JDPriestly
Jun 2014
#231
But How Does One Get To The Truth When Eveything Is Classified ???- This One Always Bothered Me...
WillyT
Jun 2014
#78
And what legitimate reason is there for collecting mass data on Americans' communications
mindwalker_i
Jun 2014
#134
And Maybe, THAT Is The Biggest Scandal Of All... What Was Once Unthinkable, Has Quietly Been...
WillyT
Jun 2014
#111
...only to conservatives who think everything started under Bush makes Obama look bad no? tia
uponit7771
Jun 2014
#149
It's the same reaction you might expect if you told a 6 year old there is no Santa Claus.
GoneFishin
Jun 2014
#136
or someone who sees SnowGlen for what they are and doesn't like what the Spy agencies are doing?
uponit7771
Jun 2014
#144
Greenwald never said he has info that would bring the US to its knees. Unbelievable that you put it
Luminous Animal
Jun 2014
#169
Cali, you do realize that you're making a conditional statement, don't you?...
truth2power
Jun 2014
#142
What do we know about the author of he comic artist? Who does he/she vote for?
Dragonfli
Jun 2014
#247
If You Don't Want To Get Hurt... Do Not Engage In The Game... Or At The Very Least... End The Game..
WillyT
Jun 2014
#15
How Many Years Have We Been On This Board Together... And THAT Is What You Got ???
WillyT
Jun 2014
#21
To some it's about Obama. To others, like you and me, it's about un-Constitutional spying by
neverforget
Jun 2014
#26
I Know That... But Every Now And Then... Their Anger Reveals The Truth... And It Is Sad...
WillyT
Jun 2014
#30
Um... Presidents Are Afforded Two Terms... He's Been Elected Twice... Math Says You Are Wrong...
WillyT
Jun 2014
#31
???? just how did you get that? I am reading this thread and I am also familiar
Dragonfli
Jun 2014
#35
A Toon That I Found On The WaPo Editorial Page, And Did Not Bother To Investigate... Nice Smear...
WillyT
Jun 2014
#49
Posted All Sorts Of Toons And Graphics Here... Did Not Know If This One Was RW Or Not... Didn't Care
WillyT
Jun 2014
#57
the editorial page is political opinions which include conservatives like George Will
JI7
Jun 2014
#56
Oh, I remember that and that had more to do with not knowing the right wing was behind it
Dragonfli
Jun 2014
#51
I would think he/she would ignore you over me as I don't recall that we have engaged much
Dragonfli
Jun 2014
#68
He/She doesn't ignore you because you post a lot and he/she wants to smear you.
LuvNewcastle
Jun 2014
#80
Well, it was kinda' bizarre, the poster was calling out Willy as a right winger trying to bring down
Dragonfli
Jun 2014
#96
I guess not, all your time is for right wing policies on DU as long as the delusional
TheKentuckian
Jun 2014
#205
Oh... so the political aware isn't aware and that's excuse enough to post RW attacks on Obama? ok...
uponit7771
Jun 2014
#151
The "I'm done with you" retort is so common here... it's about the 16th time I've seen this in weeks
uponit7771
Jun 2014
#187
Yes, that these Snowden\GW reflexive defenses aren't very well thought through? regards
uponit7771
Jun 2014
#195
There is nothing religious or demagogic about Greenwald or Snowden's message.
Uncle Joe
Jun 2014
#146
Why don't you tell me what your name is and I'll shoot Greenwald an email.
Luminous Animal
Jun 2014
#185
What people should take away is - THIS is the way you report this magnitude of information...
MrMickeysMom
Jun 2014
#55
NSA profiles domestic US enemy groups. One of them is below, scrambled for security purposes.
blkmusclmachine
Jun 2014
#110
Greenwald is right to play this out slowly. The Abu Ghraib revelations were gone in one news cycle.
RufusTFirefly
Jun 2014
#114
Interesting that he is going to use a different channel to publish this material.
NCTraveler
Jun 2014
#121
I don't understand either, and why would he be writing for the New York Times?
Dragonfli
Jun 2014
#178
He hasn't shared one byline with the Times. I don't see why he'd start now.
Luminous Animal
Jun 2014
#180
I think it is time to consider whether the confusion is genuine or feigned for some purpose
Dragonfli
Jun 2014
#183
Not a Greenwald fan and especially after seeing him ON Bill Mahrer. He comes across as
mfcorey1
Jun 2014
#124
I am more interested in the information he will release in the forthcoming article
Dragonfli
Jun 2014
#132
When did you post something to expose crimes of the national security state, zappaman?
Octafish
Jun 2014
#208
No, not a thing. Just trying to inject some levity into the oh-so-serious brigade.
randome
Jun 2014
#224
wait... we're supposed to just believe Snowden (a damn liar) without proof...............AGAIN?! tia
uponit7771
Jun 2014
#141
No, we are supposed to examine leaked documents and that's about it, they actually do exist. /nt
Dragonfli
Jun 2014
#170
This isn't about leaked docs and they're not posting any docs with names of spied on US
uponit7771
Jun 2014
#171
I'm not going to take Snowdens word for it doesn't make sense to you?!!? REALLY?! That's interesting
uponit7771
Jun 2014
#188
There wont be any "leaked documents" in this context there will be "stories". I've already quoted
uponit7771
Jun 2014
#193
From the OP... Snowden wont be giving "documents" he'll be giving "stories" quote inside
uponit7771
Jun 2014
#190
Snowden doesn't have any documents to give and Greenwald has posted supporting documents with
Luminous Animal
Jun 2014
#201
a lot of the craziness we took as reactive was really preemptive I suspect
carolinayellowdog
Jun 2014
#218