3 ms·
1) the information had already been published. 2) wildly speculative and wildly inconsistent with all of Greenwald's other behavior. 3) I imagine you have som
by grandalf 13y ago
1) the information had already been published.
2) wildly speculative and wildly inconsistent with all of Greenwald's other behavior.
3) I imagine you have some kind of conspiracy theory to justify this one?
In this case, the simplest answer is that a dead man's switch gives Snowden a bit of additional leverage, and that Greenwald mentioned it to help the reporter interviewing him understand the dynamics of the situation.
- tptacek 13y agoNext time read the article you're commenting on.
- grandalf 13y agoI did read it. Did I miss something that invalidates my counter argument?
- tptacek 13y agoYes.
- grandalf 13y agoand what was it?
- tptacek 13y agoRead the article, then reread your comments. You're plenty smart, and it's pretty obvious.
- grandalf 13y agoI just re-read it a third time and do not see what you're referring to. If you'll humor me and paste in the relevant paragraph I'll give it extra attention and (I hope) admit if I was wrong above.