He never said the CIA was the ones that blocked him. Or did I misunderstood you?CIA is not supposed to be spying on us and turning on us. Interesting.
The response continues here: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.
Did you expect them to say anything different? Conveniently they will provide corrections in time, meaning after the election when his article isn’t relevantResponse from “The Intercept.”
I did not have any expectation for what their words would be. When looking at a dispute, it is a matter of course to consider the statements from both sides of the conflict.Did you expect them to say anything different?
If I remember correctly, it was in that time that the video game and music industries came up with their own content warnings and ratings. I think there were hearings on the violence of “Mortal Kombat” and an album from NWA.In his defense, in the 80s - 90s it was more of the right that was for censorship of music, art, and video games.
I get the impression that stances on censorship varry with the primary messages that come to mind to which it might be applied. Consider the examples of a social media post being blocked or an athlete being prohibited from signaling support for a social issue before a game. Both might be considered censorship, but one may be in support of censoring one of those things while opposing the other.The left has shifted on the censorship issue but he has remained.
They did not answer him, but willWhen looking at a dispute, it is a matter of course to consider the statements from both sides of the conflict.
Because there is a dramatic difference between liberals and progressives. Liberals believe in liberty, while progressives do not.I sympathize with the guy, but for goodness sake, he’s a liberal. Why did he expect something different?
My comment is probably more philosophical than practical, but someone that identifies as progressive has some views that are not mainstream yet. If one day that progressive wakes up and finds the world has evolved to have the changes they wanted to see, that progressive may want them to stay that way. But if the world continues to change but the progressive does not, would that progressive then be viewed as a conservative?Liberals have basically two choices: be silenced by the authoritarian progressive movement, or side with conservatives to defend liberty and individual rights.
It might be philosophical, but it doesn’t respond to the basic principles of the terms . There are certain sets of principles here. A constitutional conservative believes that individual rights are inherent, that they come from God or Natural Law. Government neither created nor provides for rights. It primary function is to defend rights.My comment is probably more philosophical than practical, but someone that identifies as progressive has some views that are not mainstream yet. If one day that progressive wakes up and finds the world has evolved to have the changes they wanted to see, that progressive may want them to stay that way. But if the world continues to change but the progressive does not, would that progressive then be viewed as a conservative?