Liberal journalist Glenn Greenwald chose the wrong day to write a scathing article accusing the Canadian government of “fear-mongering” over terrorism, accusing Canada of being a war-loving country, and saying that terrorist attacks on it were “not the slightest bit surprising.”
Less than an hour after Greenwald’s piece, “Canada, At War For 13 Years, Shocked That ‘A Terrorist’ Attacked Its Soldiers,” was posted on The Intercept, the Canadian Parliament and National War Memorial were attacked by gunmen, leaving at least one soldier dead. The piece was written in response to the murder of a Canadian soldier at the hands of a radical Muslim on Monday. (RELATED: Footage Of Shots Fired In Canadian Parliament [VIDEO])
Greenwald mocks the Canadian “shock and bewilderment that someone would want to bring violence to such a good and innocent country.” Oh no, he points out, “Canada has spent the last 13 years proclaiming itself a nation at war… Regardless of one’s views on the justifiability of Canada’s lengthy military actions, it’s not the slightest bit surprising or difficult to understand why people who identify with those on the other end of Canadian bombs and bullets would decide to attack the military responsible for that violence.”
The fact that ‘terrorist’ is in quotes in the headline is intentional. Greenwald also mocks Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper for calling the killing of the soldier an act of terrorism. “[I]n what conceivable sense can this incident be called a ‘terrorist’ attack?” he complains, saying that, “terrorism is a word utterly devoid of objective or consistent meaning… The term “terrorism” has become nothing more than a rhetorical weapon for legitimizing all violence by Western countries, and delegitimizing all violence against them, even when the violence called ‘terrorism’ is clearly intended as retaliation for Western violence.”
Greenwald updated the piece after it was widely circulated following the Parliament shooting. He clarified that he wasn’t talking about the shooting, and claimed he wasn’t “justifying” anything. “I know from prior experience in discussing these questions that no matter how clear you make it that you are writing about causation and not justification, many will still distort what you write to claim you’ve justified the attack.”
Gee, why would calling Canada is a war-loving nation with blood on its hands and refusing to call obvious terrorism “terrorism” come across as justifying said terrorist attack?
