As our readers may have noticed, we've done a fair bit of Glenn Greenwald bashing here at The Daily Banter. Our managing editor Bob Cesca has done some excellent work poring through Greenwald's writing on the NSA scandal uncovering error after error in his work, and we've all been pretty critical of his style of 'journalism' (which isn't journalism at all - it's activism).
Personally, I agree with Glenn on a number of topics (even much of what he says about the NSA). I'm also willing to overlook his unashamed bias when he provides conclusive evidence - which he still does some much of the time. I just can't stand his arrogance, disdain for anyone who disagrees with him, and vicious pettiness. I also tend to switch off after reading more than a paragraph of his work these days, because I'm now convinced he has some sort of computer program that churns out random Greenwaldian sentences and turns them into articles. The sentences have to: 1. Be completely devoid of human emotion 2. Have the words 'Drone', 'NSA', 'Detention', 'Civil Liberties' in them, 3. Instill fear and paranoia in the reader.
Then, I saw the headline from Glenn's latest piece in the Guardian:
UK detention of Reprieve activist consistent with NSA's view of drone opponents as 'threats' and 'adversaries'
In one half sentence, Greenwald may have outdone his years of work convincing Americans that their government is planning to drone them in their sleep. The mechanistic, monotone headline is literally dripping with paranoia and fear. It's almost like Greenwald pulled it out of a military operations handbook, then inverted it to cater to his audience.
I couldn't bring myself to read the article, but I presume it went something like this: The UK and NSA are working in tandem to spy on/kill/imprison drone opponents, they are redefining civil liberties, trashing the 1st Amendment, illegally detaining people, killing people with drones etc etc etc.
I'm sure it's important - I really do. But seriously, can't the Guardian find anyone else to report on this stuff? An actual human being would be good for starters.