Wash Post Provides Discredited Neoconservative Pundits A Platform To Advocate For Iran War
Wash Post Provides Discredited Neoconservative Pundits A Platform To Advocate For Iran War
In today’s Washington Post, reporter Robin Wright gives neoconservative pundits like the Weekly Standard’s Bill Kristol and AEI’s Michael Rubin a platform to advocate for military action against Iran. Wright suggests these calls are part of “a new drumbeat for bolder action.” Without offering opposing viewpoints, Wright recycles the preemptive strike theories of her sources — all prior advocates of preemptive military action against Iraq.
Like the NYT’s Michael Gordon before her, Wright uncritically reports the Bush administration’s claim that “since May, the first formal talks between U.S. and Iranian envoys in 28 years have not deterred Iranian support for Iraqi Shiite militias targeting U.S. troops and the Green Zone,” a claim that has become media conventional wisdom.
Yet the contention that Iran is formally undermining efforts in Iraq has little grounding in reality:
– Gen. Peter Pace told reporters he has no evidence of any links between the explosives killing Americans and the Iranian government.
– A National Intelligence Estimate released in February concluded that Iranian involvement was “not likely” to be a major driver of violence.
– A recent McClatchy analysis of U.S. casualties in Iraq confirms earlier reports that the great majority of foreign fighters in Iraq are Sunni Saudis, not Iranians.
The Washington Post acknowledged that its pre-Iraq failures resulted in part because it did not seek alternative sources of information.
Reviewing the paper’s coverage in the lead-up to the invasion of Iraq, Washington Post editor Bob Woodward admitted that “we should have warned readers we had information that the basis for this was shakier” than widely believed. Media reporter Howard Kurtz characterized the paper’s reporting as “strikingly one-sided at times.”
But if Wright’s most recent report is any indication, then the Post is in danger of replicating its past mistakes.
UPDATE: Robin Wright writes in to take issue with the post:
This article totally misrepresents what I wrote and the intent, and I consider it intellectually dishonest to attack me or The Post for merely trying to identify the people, institutions and arguments for more aggression action against Iran. In three references, I pointed out that the people cited were either advocates of war in Iraq or echoed arguments to justify war in Iraq.
Second, the press is constantly coming under attack for not identifying early enough the arguments made for going to war with Iraq. I am trying to make sure that the press is devoting attention to what is beginning to be a critical mass for this argument on Iran. This was meant to be a benchmark piece in covering the emerging debate, which is no longer focused just on Iran’s alleged nuclear program but is also now tied to Tehran’s role in Iraq.
Third, the context for this article was also misunderstood and misrepresented. I was contrasting what this group of people think with what the administration has been trying to do with carrot-and-stick diplomacy with Iran over the past 14 months–as the lead sentence notes.
Finally, I am not an editorial writer. I am merely presenting the news–and this development. It is up the reader to determine how they feel about the people who make this case or the case itself.
I was surprised that the writer of this comment also did not go to the trouble of doing any research on my own writing on Iran (including several books dating back to 1973) or even looking at the piece I wrote in The Washington Post’s Outlook section two weeks ago about Iran. He might have developed a more realistic assessment of the context of both this piece and my work.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
138 Responses to “Wash Post Provides Discredited Neoconservative Pundits A Platform To Advocate For Iran War”
Topic Cloud
Iran is an enemy of America.
August 9th, 2007 at 3:28 pmWashington Post is bi-polar.
August 9th, 2007 at 3:28 pmGood one, Dr. Dog!
August 9th, 2007 at 3:28 pmWashington Post is bi-polar.
Comment by Namtillaku — August 9, 2007 @ 3:28 pm
–
You mean “Fair and Balanced,” like Bill O’Reilly.
August 9th, 2007 at 3:29 pmThe enemies of America sit in the Whitehouse.
August 9th, 2007 at 3:29 pmThere is no such thing as a discredited NeoCon pundit evidently.
August 9th, 2007 at 3:29 pmFred Hiatt and his wife are Neocons on the same order as Kristol, Pearle, Feith, …
August 9th, 2007 at 3:31 pmHow dare the Post encourage free speech?
Oh, I forgot. The NAZI foot soldiers at TP are only for free speech if it smears the work our soldiers do in Iraq or wishes death on them. Anything positive about the war must be shut down.
My god, Hitler would be proud of you people. At least he was a nationalist.
August 9th, 2007 at 3:33 pmGood one, Dr. Dog!
Comment by Peter Abelard
Thanks!
But it seems my post got eaten up some how.
I was endorsing a particular conservative candidate for president from Tennessee. He’s about 6′6”.
August 9th, 2007 at 3:33 pmThe problem is that journalists can lie and there is no consequence.
The bottom line of the paper is not hurt.
The salaries of the journalists do not go down.
There is no censure by the journalistic community.
As long as there are no consequences for journalistic liars we are just whining.
So if this pisses you off, figure out what you can do to punish the Washington Post and Robin Wright financially.
August 9th, 2007 at 3:34 pmso what is the answer? The man was bitten by a tick and has Lyme disease. One of the symptoms of the disease in mental disorientation, behavorial disturbances…..
August 9th, 2007 at 3:34 pmso we have a sicko in the white house. and who is waiting in the wings?
The enemies of America sit in the Whitehouse.
Comment by Namtillaku
Look at this troll everybody! He just wants some attention. He’s a baby.
August 9th, 2007 at 3:34 pmLet he who hath understanding consult the Pundit of the Beast. For it shall always be wrong but it shall be greeted as a source of great wisdom.
August 9th, 2007 at 3:34 pmWhy does TP censor factual posts?
August 9th, 2007 at 3:35 pmIt’s called free speech you morons. No one is muzzling the lying Democrats who voted for the war only to stab the troops in the back the second the polls said it was ok.
TP = HATE. You hate America, Israel and christianity.
August 9th, 2007 at 3:35 pmSimilarly, do not use words like think tank. It is meaningless and not descriptive, as well as probably misleading. Is it a tank that thinks? No, a think tank is really
A PROFESSIONAL PROPAGANDA ORGANIZATION
The aim of this PROFESSIONAL PROPAGANDA ORGANIZATION is to actively work towards its founders (and/or its sponsors) political and/or economic and/or religious agenda.
For example, the American Enterprise Institute is a PROFESSIONAL PROPAGANDA ORGANIZATION whose purpose is support US globalization efforts, international corporations, lower taxes for the richest citizens in the US.
AIPAC, the American Israeli Political Action Committee is a PROFESSIONAL PROPAGANDA ORGANIZATION that is involved in steering the USA policy towards maxium benefit to Israel.
August 9th, 2007 at 3:37 pmHere we go again. But this time, I don’t think the American People will be so gullible. Its for damm sure the Congress won’t be. What I don’t understand is why is the press carrying water for these people yet again.
August 9th, 2007 at 3:37 pm#10 - my god, you are a fascist. Why don’t you gas Robin Wright while you are at it.
Does TP hear themselves? You are ready to attack Robin Wright for having a debate.
YOU HATE DEBATE.
August 9th, 2007 at 3:37 pm#17 - yes, and we can only pray your town gets nuked first. A*shole liberal.
August 9th, 2007 at 3:37 pmTrolls need to hold their breath for a VERY LONG time…Maybe 25-30 minutes. After you get a clear head, then maybe - just maybe you can put some words together which make sense. Robin Wright was WRONG about the Iraq war, she was WRONG about WMD, she was WRONG about ‘after invasion’ security, she was WRONG about EVERYTHING she has advocated. Is it so difficult to stay in the ‘reality based world’? If someone who has a platform uses that platform to constantly display their inability to tell the truth, then they should not be listened to. Only the pathetically desperate last 29% of you who wish for a king would consider Ms Wright right. That makes you either stupid or foolish - or both.
August 9th, 2007 at 3:39 pmYup. It isn’t enough that Condi’s pegging me right and left. I have to hire others to write this bulls**t all the time so I can do the same thing to the rest of America.
August 9th, 2007 at 3:40 pmBeware the beast, man, for he is the Devil’s pawn. Alone among God’s primates, he kills for sport or lust or greed. Yea, he will murder his brother to possess his brother’s land. Let him not breed in great numbers, for he will make a desert of his home and yours.
August 9th, 2007 at 3:40 pmYOU HATE DEBATE.
Comment by Namejacker/changer— August 9, 2007 @ 3:37 pm
Really? How so?
August 9th, 2007 at 3:40 pmI agree Tom, and thats why it won’t work this time.
August 9th, 2007 at 3:40 pmDoes TP hear themselves? You are ready to attack Robin Wright for having a debate.
YOU HATE DEBATE.
Comment by Hitler Hearts Hil
Only a freaking idiot would consider this water carrier for the assministration able to debate anything. Talking points from the WH does not make for a debate. What a tool…
August 9th, 2007 at 3:41 pmI’m not surprised. Why do these feeble people hate America so that they’d drag us inot another misbegotton war in order to protect the ego’s of pinheads?
That goes for the trolls here too.
August 9th, 2007 at 3:42 pmWhat stooge station is next to let the VP quote from a story he just had printed?
August 9th, 2007 at 3:42 pmFor a debate, by definition, two or more sides of an argument need to be present.
When there is only one point of view, it is not a debate.
August 9th, 2007 at 3:43 pmComment by Democrats are LIARS — August 9, 2007 @ 3:33 pm
Free speech?? In this country we cannot even debate the influence that neocon Jews and AIPAC have on our foreign policy. Don’t talk to me about free speech! All discussion/debate on this issue is squelched…period…case closed.
August 9th, 2007 at 3:43 pm“When there is only one point of view, it is not a debate.” - timotheus
Spot on. There’s no debate in Robin’s article, only lies and propaganda.
August 9th, 2007 at 3:46 pmSunni Saudis in Iraqi uniforms….hmmmm..15 of 19 hijackers were Saudis but we invaded Afganistan and Iraq….so maybe we should invade, oh I don’t know, Italy this time?
August 9th, 2007 at 3:47 pmIf you look at what is going on with Iran vis-a-vis the standoff with the US and the Russia, you have to wonder why we are going this route.
August 9th, 2007 at 3:50 pmThe threat of sanctions is working. Russia has refused to send Iran anymore Nuke Fuel until they loosen up on the Inspections. Internally, Ahmajdinijad is in a load of trouble with his own people and the ruling Clerics. He ran and won on the promise of improving peoples lives economically (sound familiar).
That has not happened. By picking a fight with the US, Russia, and the EU, he has tried to divert attention away from the fact that the Iranian Economy is in the toilet. They have to ration gasoline. GASOLINE! This, in a Country that is second only to Saudi Arabia in Petroleum Exports.
The ruling Clerics may be rigid and hateful by our standards of decency and tolerance but they are not stupid. They are very pragmatic about policy towards the US. A confrontation with the US is the last thing they want.
Comment by timotheus — August 9, 2007 @ 3:37 pm
Thank you for that post. Tonight on the sci-fi channel is a new show called Mind Control. The show highlights how easily people can be manipulated without having the slightest clue.
August 9th, 2007 at 3:51 pmThe WaPo is an enema of rational thought.
August 9th, 2007 at 3:51 pmThe neocons are very good at forgetting the past (remember that successful British occupation of Iraq in the 20s); so they condemned to repeat it (iraq today).
August 9th, 2007 at 3:52 pmYOU HATE DEBATE.
Comment by Hitler Hearts Hil
You mean CAPITAL HIL? Because Bush’s Grandpa, and much of the GOP did HEART HITLER. What a nasty piece of history. And the modern NeoCon children of Hitler inherited their values directly from a Nazi strategist named Leo Strauss.
How does it make you feel to know that you’re propagating the legacy of Nazi Values? Waterboarding was even their favorite form of Torture - why does that sound familiar?
August 9th, 2007 at 3:52 pmGood one, Dr. Dog!
Comment by Peter Abelard — August 9, 2007 @ 3:28 pm
Posted prior to Dr Dog posting.
August 9th, 2007 at 3:52 pmBoy! These jerkweeds never learn and never quit. Do they REALLY think everyone just fell off the turnip truck? I can’t believe that people will fall for this same garbage yet again.
August 9th, 2007 at 3:53 pmThe military-industrial complex can see that the war will only last as long as GW is in office. They are preparing the country for the next war so their profits will continue. Wouldn’t want to convert those swords into plowshares and rebuild bridges and highways, and god forbid we spend it on health insurance instead of their nice fat subsidies.
ITMFA
August 9th, 2007 at 3:54 pmPosted prior to Dr Dog posting.
Comment by RUCerious — August 9, 2007 @ 3:52 pm
So it would seem.
But are sure that you are being told the whole story?
August 9th, 2007 at 3:55 pmThink Communist Provides Discredited Ultraliberal Pundits A Platform To Defeat America In Iran War
August 9th, 2007 at 3:55 pmoops..
Make that: “But are you sure that you are being told the whole story?”
August 9th, 2007 at 3:55 pmHere, believe this new pack of BS. It’s not exactly like the previous pack of BS that was proven to be complete BS, it’s somewhat different.
August 9th, 2007 at 3:55 pmWell, not too different, but it’s aimed at a country in the same part of the world! That must make up for something! Believe ME! I can’t be wrong again, could I? What are the chances?
“41, There is no Iran War and God Willing, there won’t be.
August 9th, 2007 at 3:58 pmDr Dogbreath: Like Iraq was a threat to America? You are a f@cking moron. Quick look under your bed, there’s islamofascists.
August 9th, 2007 at 4:01 pmGood to see Iraq and Iran getting along so well. Makes since that Bush now wants to illegally invade Iran as Maliki is vacationing in Iran and having friendly meeting with the Iran President. Looks like Maliki will be on Iran’s side if the US invades Iran.
August 9th, 2007 at 4:03 pmBut it would be good for Republicans to get elected by starting a new war this time with Iran vs USA (only)
I wonder how we will get the troops for this invasion at lease 5 young men are available they are Mitt’s sons.
Oh yes Rudy’s son will not go he’s playing golf. Cheney will be happy to bomb Iran but then the UN vote will come in as naming the United States of American as criminals and murders who bomb countries at will. Thanks to Bush all the Middle East will have their own bombs just in case the US wants to bomb them they can protect themselves.
Done way back in the 80’s but yet still seems relevant!
http://www.azlyrics.com/ lyrics/ deadkennedys/ kinkysexmakestheworldgoround.html
August 9th, 2007 at 4:04 pmI don’t think the public will be as easily manipulated this time. The lying f*cks can try to scare us again, and obviously the 21%ers who are afraid of their own shadow will support sending someone else’s kids to die for Bush’s lies, but the other 81% will steamroll over the curs.
It must be hell to go through life clueless, fearful, and always needing a Daddy to tell you what to think.
When the adults are back in power in 2009, we will straighten this ship and clean up the wreckage of the neocon experiment. And if there is a silver lining to this evil cabal’s horrific 8 years in office, it’s that they pissed away their last chance to be treated as a force to be concerned about.
Leave the freaks to scream their rants from the street corner and drive on down the road.
August 9th, 2007 at 4:05 pmI don’t know if Iran is undermining efforts in Iraq or not, but thats still no reason to go to war with them.
WE’RE the invaders, on THEIR turf.
Of COURSE when given the choice between self righteous aryan storm troopers and their almighty will, or to help their fellow arabs, of COURSE they’re going to help their fellow Arabs.
But that does not give us the right to invade their country.
We’re not supposed to be in Iraq, and we should leave. Until we do, we’ll get exactly what we deserve.
It never fails to amaze me how big bad generals and politicians cry about being shot at by people who we’re shooting at.
If you don’t want trouble, don’t go looking for it.
August 9th, 2007 at 4:10 pmSomething else to think about which the Wing Nuts haven’t. Going to war with Iran means we piss off about 1 billion (at least) Arabs. Now, the Idea of doing that is so laughable that I can’t believe these people would actually want that. And yet, that is what would happen.
August 9th, 2007 at 4:11 pmI don’t think the public will be as easily manipulated this time.
Comment by nanlichi — August 9, 2007 @ 4:05 pm
I hope you’re right, but I think this all has something to do with Executive Order 13303. (I think thats the right number). The order Bush signed last month giving him power to seize the assests of any institution or individual he deems is working in any way against the invasion of Iraq.
Check it out, I think you’ll find I’m onto something here. I imagine Bush has threatened owners of news stations and new papers already, and they are all starting to toe his line.
August 9th, 2007 at 4:13 pmSeems to me that if we go to war with Iran we’ll turn Iraq’s Shites away from us completely, which would leave who to work with in Iraq? The Sunnis. You know, the ones we went in there to overthrow.
They seem hell-bent on making the situation they’ve created even worse.
August 9th, 2007 at 4:13 pmThe “they” being the neocons of course. Bastards all of them.
August 9th, 2007 at 4:15 pmYou know, the ones we went in there to overthrow.
No, we overthrew Saddam who happened to favor the Sunnis over the Shiites. Wait, maybe youre trying to group all the Iraqi Sunnis into one big lump.
August 9th, 2007 at 4:18 pmInteresting concept. The big question is does your ass hurt afterward?
August 9th, 2007 at 4:19 pmI imagine Bush has threatened owners of news stations and new papers already, and they are all starting to toe his line.
I would believe you imagine all sorts of things, most of them psychologically unhealthy.
August 9th, 2007 at 4:19 pmThe romantic game Tell Me More involves taking turns expressing your tender love and devotion to one another. The key to the game is to share from the heart and be completely authentic. You don’t need to exaggerate anything, just tell your sweetheart what you truly love about them.
August 9th, 2007 at 4:21 pmIt takes a hard man to make a chicken aroused.
August 9th, 2007 at 4:22 pmYou’d probably like it better if you used some industrial grade lubricants first.
August 9th, 2007 at 4:24 pmWe’re not supposed to be in Iraq, and we should leave. Until we do, we’ll get exactly what we deserve.
Did we deserve 911, bart?
August 9th, 2007 at 4:25 pmThere were no opposing viewpoints. BTW: those pants make you ass look fat.
August 9th, 2007 at 4:25 pmIf you drink the beer out of its bottle and then fill it with water, is the bottle still a “beer bottle”?
August 9th, 2007 at 4:27 pmThat’s what my aunt Gertie, who lived in Hiroshima said. Wonder whatever happened to her. She had a radiant personality, like you.
August 9th, 2007 at 4:27 pmParaguay!
August 9th, 2007 at 4:29 pm“Did we deserve 911, bart?
Comment by Crawford, Texas = Paradise — August 9, 2007 @ 4:25 pm”
In a way, yes…..
We have been telling other countries for years how to live and overthrowing their governments. We put Sadam in charge!
Besides, what does 911 have to do with Iraq????? It was 15 Saudi’s out of 19 of the hijackers on those planes…..
Should we not be attacking Saudi Arabia???
August 9th, 2007 at 4:30 pmGertie in the often flowery Japanese language means “adenoid”.
Example: Karabasai, uno KO suroku-chi gertie desu ka?
August 9th, 2007 at 4:30 pmDon’t worry, son - someday you’ll get hair “down there”.
August 9th, 2007 at 4:31 pmWhole story: Peter Abelard is a dick.
August 9th, 2007 at 4:32 pm“Did we deserve 911, bart?
Comment by Crawford, Texas = Paradise — August 9, 2007 @ 4:25 pmâ€
In a way, yes…..
Comment by RemoveBush — August 9, 2007 @ 4:30 pm
RemoveBush says that we deserved the 911 attacks in a way.
Is this how all TPers feel?
August 9th, 2007 at 4:32 pmWe already know any invasion or bombing will go very badly and retaliation will be fierce. Many American soldiers will lose their lives again, for a lie. We all know the Sunni Arabs are funding the majority of insurgents in Iraq.
August 9th, 2007 at 4:32 pmIf Bush bombs Iran, he will be impeached. And Americans will be happy to hand him over to the International Court of Justice.
In a way, yes…..
Thats all I needed to know about you, and all that America needs to know about those who constitute the base of today’s DFL.
Should we not be attacking Saudi Arabia???
Im not sure, maybe we should ask your liberal brethren who seem to wholeheartedly advocate that Afghanistan is a “righteous” war.
Then we can compare notes with Barack who wants to invade Pakistan to pursue a saudi terrorist.
Seems like the left cant quite keep it logic train on track.
August 9th, 2007 at 4:35 pmIt’s so surreal, this Iran adventure. We neocons first ginned up a case against Iraq and took you guys in there. That went soooo well that now we think it’ll be keen to attack another muslim country, only this time let’s go after one with a fully functioning military and three times the land area and population of the last poor schmuck victim. Sound good?
What? How is the last war going…? Never mind, this one will be GREAT! GUARANTEED!
“How is the last war going”? Again with that? Why do you keep bringing up the LAST war we dragged you into? Why do you hate America?
August 9th, 2007 at 4:36 pmLimitation
August 9th, 2007 at 4:37 pmThe amount deductible under subsection (a) for any taxable year shall not exceed 25 percent of the gross income derived from farming during the taxable year. If for any taxable year the total of the expenditures treated as expenses which are not chargeable to capital account exceeds 25 percent of the gross income derived from farming during the taxable year, such excess shall be deductible for succeeding taxable years in order of time; but the amount deductible under this section for any one such succeeding taxable year (including the expenditures actually paid or incurred during the taxable year) shall not exceed 25 percent of the gross income derived from farming during the taxable year.
#71-Speak for youself. you wouldn’t a logic train if you stood in front of it and got hit by it.
August 9th, 2007 at 4:38 pmThe left has always kept on point. You neocons are too dense to follow along.
“Should we not be attacking Saudi Arabia???” Is a rhetorical question which points out the stupidity of the logic of bombing Iran.
Try to keep up Crawford, TX. I know it’s hard for you.
August 9th, 2007 at 4:40 pmAnd Americans will be happy to hand him over to the International Court of Justice.
You are a Class-A dolt.
The ICJ is used to settle state disputes, not to adjudicate over supposedly criminal matters. On all other matters they only give opinion and advice but have no real jurisdiction.
Besides, the U.S. withdrew in the 1980’s, we dont recognize the court in most cases.
You are thinking of the International Criminal Court.
Now get back to your broom and leave critical thinking to your betters.
August 9th, 2007 at 4:41 pmThe left has always kept on point. You neocons are too dense to follow along.
Alright professor, explain why we invaded Afghanistan?
August 9th, 2007 at 4:43 pmYou neocons are too dense to follow along.
The relative density of turkey gravy is smaller than that of saltwater, but only if you remove all the magnesium from said water.
August 9th, 2007 at 4:45 pmWe deserved a President who could read an Intelligence report titled “Bin Laden determined to strike in US”
August 6th, 2001 - We TPers will never forget or forgive that idiot in the White House for what he did to us - Bush could have stopped the attack but chose to ignore it.
August 9th, 2007 at 4:48 pm#71-Speak for youself. you wouldn’t a logic train if you stood in front of it and got hit by it.
Speaking of trains, why dont you lay on some tracks and wait.
August 9th, 2007 at 4:48 pmAfraid to answer the question, gurl? Why are you obfuscating? What justification did we have to invade and occupy Afghanistan?
BTW, Bin Laden(D-SA) didnt appear on the scene the moment Bush took the oath of office; he was around for quite a while during the tenure of a certain democrat president.
August 9th, 2007 at 4:50 pm#
Good one, Dr. Dog!
Comment by Peter Abelard — August 9, 2007 @ 3:28 pm
Gittin’ yer fake names confused, Pete?
August 9th, 2007 at 4:53 pmThe left believes in fighting against terrorism, not wasting money and sending soldiers to die in Iraq. Again, you haven’t been following the logic, you’ve been blindly going where you are led by your neocon heros.
Think for yourself.
You’re drinking the Koolaid in Crawford, TX
August 9th, 2007 at 4:53 pmRemember there were TONS and TONS of high explosives left unguarded and then stolen by locals, many in trucks, as the “mission accomplished” army rushed on to Baghdad.
A friend who is a combat veteran went ballistic when reports of this incredibly stupid thing came in.
THATS where the explosives are coming from.
PS: I’m a Vietnam veteran too.
August 9th, 2007 at 4:54 pmOh, I forgot. The NAZI foot soldiers at TP are only for free speech if it smears the work our soldiers do in Iraq or wishes death on them. Anything positive about the war must be shut down.
My god, Hitler would be proud of you people. At least he was a nationalist.
Comment by Democrats are LIARS — August 9, 2007 @ 3:33 pm
Dishonest statement. Ignore this!
August 9th, 2007 at 4:54 pmI was endorsing a particular conservative candidate for president from Tennessee. He’s about 6′6â€.
Comment by Dr. Dog
Oh, you mean that lazy bad B movie and tv actor who thinks he is the next coming of Ronnie Raygunz?
Good Luck with that one!
August 9th, 2007 at 4:55 pm#
#10 - my god, you are a fascist. Why don’t you gas Robin Wright while you are at it.
Does TP hear themselves? You are ready to attack Robin Wright for having a debate.
YOU HATE DEBATE.
Comment by Hitler Hearts Hillary — August 9, 2007 @ 3:37 pm
What an utterly disingenuous post.
August 9th, 2007 at 4:57 pmSorry Crawford - we all know Bush was briefed on Osama, so your lies don’t work ’round here.
August 9th, 2007 at 4:57 pmYou guys get what you deserve when you let the trolls come here and take over. You let them sucker you over and over again w/ false arguments and meaningless comments. Too many of you would rather spout endless obscenities than make sense. The trolls can’t make you look bad if you don’t let them. Apparently you want to look bad.
August 9th, 2007 at 5:00 pmYou’re drinking the Koolaid in Crawford, TX
So you dont want to answer?
Its a simple question, especially considering the dem politicians are almost united in their support for the military mission in Afghanistan.
One last time: justify our invasion and occupation of Afghanistan. I would sincerely like to hear it.
August 9th, 2007 at 5:03 pmOh, you mean that lazy bad B movie and tv actor who thinks he is the next coming of Ronnie Raygunz?
Good Luck with that one!
Comment by upside00 — August 9, 2007 @ 4:55 pm
I think he was referring to the lightweight lying hypocrite that lobbied for abortion groups while pretending to be pro-life…
August 9th, 2007 at 5:03 pmI have never, as a liberal, felt the need to go over to a conservative website and disrupt their comment thread or insult their commentors.
August 9th, 2007 at 5:04 pmAnd I’ve noticed that there are more nasty neocons around here than ever before.
Do they sense their movement is at an end, and feel they must lash out at us?
Sorry Crawford - we all know Bush was briefed on Osama, so your lies don’t work ’round here.
You mean the briefing he received from the outgoing adminstration? That briefing? If it was so serious and so much was known, you would think the leader of that previous administration would have tried harder to eradicate Bin Laden(D-SA), considering they had eight years to do it.
Choo choo come off track. Bad choo choo.
August 9th, 2007 at 5:06 pmAhhh, the sound of Trolls pissing and moaning. Hooting and screeching and flinging scat to attract a lover. They know KKKarl is aroused by inane ramblings and they are trying to outdumb one another.
Tough contest though, there are some real idiots vying for his pudgy love.
August 9th, 2007 at 5:06 pmCrawford - What don’t you understand about going into Afghanistan to find bin Laden?
August 9th, 2007 at 5:07 pmHow are you confused by this?
Forget it Crawford, ragequeen isnt going to answer because she cant, not without implicating herself as a liar and hypocrite about the left’s “The Iraq war is illegal” talking points.
August 9th, 2007 at 5:09 pmClinton was not President when the intelligence report was presented to Bush. Why is that so difficult for neocons to grasp?
August 9th, 2007 at 5:12 pmBush was briefed, you can’t change this fact, no matter how much it hurts your feelings.
Bush was well aware that bin Laden was determined to attack the US - Bush chose to do nothing.
No Crawford. the one he recieved a MONTH before the attack. The one called “Bin Laden Determined to Strike US”. Have much of a prblem with Selective Amnesia?
August 9th, 2007 at 5:13 pmCrawford - What don’t you understand about going into Afghanistan to find bin Laden?
How are you confused by this?
You mean to say we invaded, occupied and overthrew the government of a sovereign nation just to find one man?
August 9th, 2007 at 5:15 pmI see Crawford likes to contradict His/Her/Its self.
August 9th, 2007 at 5:17 pmPost number 95:
Crawford - What don’t you understand about going into Afghanistan to find bin Laden?
How are you confused by this?
Comment by RagingGurrl — August 9, 2007 @ 5:07 pm
Post number 96:
Forget it Crawford, ragequeen isnt going to answer because she cant, not without implicating herself as a liar and hypocrite about the left’s “The Iraq war is illegal†talking points.
Comment by Pretty Pretty Bird — August 9, 2007 @ 5:09 pm
poor Pretty Pretty Bird. Undone by the curse of bad timing.
So sad to see so much potential go to waste.
August 9th, 2007 at 5:17 pmCrawford - What don’t you understand about going into Afghanistan to find bin Laden?
How are you confused by this?
You mean to say we invaded, occupied and overthrew the government of a sovereign nation just to find one man?
Comment by Crawford, Texas = Paradise — August 9, 2007 @ 5:15 pm
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! They don’t even believe their own crap anymore!!!!
Come on, admit it, Crawford — you hate your job, don’t you? Having to type stupid crap like that on a progressive forum just to earn beer money?
August 9th, 2007 at 5:19 pmBush was well aware that bin Laden was determined to attack the US - Bush chose to do nothing.
Ohhhhh, that report. The one which said some guy named Bin Laden(D-SA) may try to attack the United States at some unknown time in some unknown manner and should be considered a threat.
Fortunately Bush could combine that report with the hundreds of other reports which discussed various terrorist groups and individuals who also “may try to attack the United States at some unknown time in some unknown manner and should be considered a threat.”
Nice light reading.
August 9th, 2007 at 5:19 pmHey Pretty, Crawford - keep up.
So, you are now arguing that we shouldn’t have gone into Afghanistan as your retort to the left’s position on Iraq?
Ah, so now the neocons are arguing that we shouldn’t have gone into Afghanistan to capture a known terrorist, just Iraq to fight the imaginary ones.
August 9th, 2007 at 5:20 pmThat report which you dismiss so lightly was unequivocal in its assesment of OBLs intent. Bush, Rice, and Rumsfeld willfully ignored it and are thus, in my opinion complicit in the murders of 3,000 innocent American and Foreign Nationals.
August 9th, 2007 at 5:22 pmBTW, Bin Laden(D-SA) didnt appear on the scene the moment Bush took the oath of office; he was around for quite a while during the tenure of a certain democrat president.
Comment by Crawford, Texas = Paradise — August 9, 2007 @ 4:50 pm
And he was funded by the CIA for a while during the tenure of a certain republic president.
August 9th, 2007 at 5:22 pmCome on, admit it, Crawford — you hate your job, don’t you? Having to type stupid crap like that on a progressive forum just to earn beer money?
No, youre just stupid and cant keep up.
Dont get me wrong, Im a full supporter of the Afghan war, Im just trying to figure out why the liberals are too, considering we invaded a country on the other side of the world which was no threat to us, and still fighting a war which has lasted two years longer than the one in Iraq.
Sound familiar or do you need a government-paid aid to assist you in understanding?
August 9th, 2007 at 5:23 pmAnd he was funded by the CIA for a while during the tenure of a certain republic president.
You agree with me, I agree with you. Detente.
But it doesnt detract from the fact that the man was hitting us all over the world during the 90’s and we didnt take the steps to hunt him down.
August 9th, 2007 at 5:26 pmAs to the story that spawned this post;
August 9th, 2007 at 5:26 pmUnfortunately, the American people as a whole are still being manipulated through fear. As are the politicians. We have to call bullshit when they do this, like we do on this site. How to reach more people?
As for posting on conservative sites; they will revoke your posting privileges on many of these sites if you show progressive tendencies, but there are exceptions. Townhall.com allows you to register and post (shorter posts). I have gotten into a couple of discussions there, and it’s kind of funny; they were calling me a troll.
Cool!
The Taliban led Government harbored Bin Laden. I supported Bush going after them to get him. But, of course that was never his intent. Like I said in another thread, Bin Laden was a god send for Bush. He could you him as cover for what he really wanted to do. Go after Saddam in Iraq.
August 9th, 2007 at 5:28 pmComment by Jim Wolf359
And Bush is a god send for you. You can use him as a cover for what you really want to do… destroy America!
August 9th, 2007 at 5:29 pmSo, you are now arguing that we shouldn’t have gone into Afghanistan as your retort to the left’s position on Iraq?
Newp, just joining Mr. Crawford in showcasing your hypocrisy. I too stand solidly behind the war in Afghanistan and I too wonder why the lefties have joined me.
August 9th, 2007 at 5:29 pmYeah - Bush was warned about bin Laden, many times. Bush trying to read, I can imagine that it’s a very hard for him to do and a painful thing to witness.
August 9th, 2007 at 5:30 pmNot as hard as it was for Americans to witness the people jumping out of the twin towers that day.
The Taliban led Government harbored Bin Laden. I supported Bush going after them to get him.
Would you support going after the Iranian government for harboring Nasrallah, the leader of Hezbollah?
August 9th, 2007 at 5:31 pmU.S. Ambassador Glaspie - We have no opinion on your Arab - Arab conflicts, such as your dispute with Kuwait. Secretary (of State James) Baker has directed me to emphasize the instruction, first given to Iraq in the 1960’s, that the Kuwait issue is not associated with America. (Saddam smiles)
A transcript excerpt of a conversation between Saddam Hussein and April Glaspie, U.S. ambassador to Iraq, just prior to Saddam’s invasion of Kuwait, which the GHW Bush administration then used as a pretense to invade Iraq in Gulf War I.
August 9th, 2007 at 5:33 pmUsing a pretense to invade a country; just another Bush family tradition.
Would you support going after the Iranian government for harboring Nasrallah, the leader of Hezbollah?
Comment by Crawford, Texas = Paradise — August 9, 2007 @ 5:31 pm
No. That would be an absolutely idiotic thing to do. Hezbollah does not present a direct threat to the United States, are not universally considered to be a terrorist group, and are a legitimate political party in Lebanon. They may not like us, but they are not a threat to us.
August 9th, 2007 at 5:34 pmBefore we go into Iran we must first get it right in Afghanistan and Iraq. Our military is already stretched too thin. Any military action must come with Congressional authorization. Bush knows he won’t get it from a democratic majority. The doctrine of preemption has failed. It failed in Iraq. The mistakes the MSM made with White House claims about WMDs they are about to make the same mistakes with regard to military action against Iran.
August 9th, 2007 at 5:34 pm“Ohhhhh, that report. The one which said some guy named Bin Laden(D-SA) may try to attack the United States at some unknown time in some unknown manner and should be considered a threat.
Comment by Crawford, Texas = Paradise — August 9, 2007 @ 5:19 pm”
When Clinton left office, his team TRIED to brief Bush’s team on Al Quaeda, but the only thing Bush wanted information on was Iraq!!!!
They did not listen to Clinton when he told Bush that the greatest threat to America was Al Quaeda!!!!
Then comes the August PDB…….
ENOUGH SAID!!!
August 9th, 2007 at 5:38 pmNice try Crawford. No I would not. Nasrallah is not our problem. Try to stay on topic. I know its tough. Especially if you have selectivr amnesia
August 9th, 2007 at 5:38 pmThe mistakes the MSM made with White House claims about WMDs they are about to make the same mistakes with regard to military action against Iran.
August 9th, 2007 at 5:42 pmThose mistakes were deliberate and part of the propaganda campaign. Maybe you still think the MSM is the ‘liberal media’
Right!
These idiots really are pushing for the end of days, aren’t they? Years from now, historians will look back the US press at the turn of the century through the same critical lens with which they view the Weimar press in Germany.
August 9th, 2007 at 5:59 pmF@CK TP!!!
My posts have been getting dumped or just not showing up all friggin’ day and I’m through! You these stupid trolls crap all over the boards and remove others’ substantive posts! Why?? Maybe you just want to encourage trolls because somehow you think the conflict they provide is good for your page hits numbers. But it’s f@cking bullsh!t!
I’m gone!
August 9th, 2007 at 6:00 pmNeocon Punbit, I had problems earlier but they cleared up after a while. Kept getting bumped off but I don’t think it was deliberate.
August 9th, 2007 at 6:03 pmComment by Jim Wolf359 — August 9, 2007 @ 6:03 pm
Comment by Neocon Pundit — August 9, 2007 @ 6:00 pm.
Me too. But not that often. Sometimes they are just slow to post and I hit refresh a few times until it takes. The worst is when you post something, it goes up, and later it’s removed. I cannot determine the removal criteria and I tend to agree with y’all that the trolls can post some pretty nasty stuff and that seems fine?
August 9th, 2007 at 6:10 pmYeah, I know. I’m waiting to see if my last post in the follow-up thread to this one makes it. I might have been over the top in my description of Limbaugh and O’Reilly.
August 9th, 2007 at 6:14 pmBTW, Bin Laden(D-SA) didnt appear on the scene the moment Bush took the oath of office; he was around for quite a while during the tenure of a certain democrat president.
Comment by Crawford, Texas = Paradise — August 9, 2007 @ 4:50 pm
That’s correct. And when Clinton tried to capture him he was accused of “wagging the dog” trying to distract from the great blowjob caper the republicans were so intent on exposing to the American people.
August 9th, 2007 at 6:38 pmFinally, I am not an editorial writer. I am merely presenting the news–and this development. It is up the reader to determine how they feel about the people who make this case or the case itself.
Bullshit.
August 9th, 2007 at 6:46 pm“As tensions increase between the United States and Iran, U.S. intelligence and terrorism experts say they believe Iran would respond to U.S. military strikes on its nuclear sites by deploying its intelligence operatives and Hezbollah teams to carry out terrorist attacks worldwide.”
That was written by Washpo’s Dnana Priest Sunday, April 2, 2006; Page A01.
Kristol has been demanding the US bomb practically everyone since the late 1990s.
So Robin here is reporting “news”? And by quoting every major right-wing think tank who all want to bomb Iran or consider bommbong an option, and no opnions from anyone who thinks bombing might NOT be a good idea, she call that a DEBATE?!
August 9th, 2007 at 7:12 pmTesting
August 9th, 2007 at 7:14 pmrobin wright’s response to think progress is in the model of the white house press spokesmen - deny the facts , misstate critics intentions, attack critics as unfair or unperceptive.
now to wright’s article.
all you need to know to determine her viewpoint (or her intellectual limitations) is this first sentence:
“Fourteen months after sec of state condelezza rice offered to talk to iran, the failure of carrot-and-stick diplomacy to block teheran’s nuclear and regional ambitions is producing a new drumbeat for bolder action, including the possible use of force.”
go that: “carrot-and-stick diplomacy has failed”. really?
how long did it take to work out a deal with the north koreans?
and there’s more: iran has not given up its “regional ambitions”.
my,my. imagine that - a large and reasonably prosperous middle-eastern nation refuses to give up its regional ambitions. what is wrong with those people?
isn’t it convenient that wright’s initial declarative sentence provides the rationale (”failure of diplomacy”) for the assertions of those right-wing political operatives and crackpots wright proceeds to cite.
first wright makes their case for them, then she quotes them supporting that case. sweet.
but wright’s feelings are hurt. criticism of her article by think progress is “intellectually dishonest”.
personally, i think it is wright’s letter to think progress that is highly intellectually dishonest, employing as it does the white-house briefing tactic of accusing your critics of doing what you yourself have done.
August 9th, 2007 at 7:17 pmRobin Wright is the Judith Miller of the Washington Post.
August 9th, 2007 at 8:57 pmBack in May, Wright was obviously trying to re-kindle the anti-Iranian sentiment felt by some Americans in the 1980s when Shia Islamic fundamentalists took hostages and then made demands to secure the release of the Kuwait 17, 12 of whom were Iraqis in the al-Dawa party of Al-Maliki.
In at least two articles, she exploited the horrible and unfortunate capturing of Dr Esfandiari by labelling her as a “hostage†in order to re-kindle the anti-Iranian sentiment from the 1980s.
The problem with Wright’s use of “hostage†is that the Iranian government has never made any demands to secure Dr Esfandiari’s release.
Without making any demands, Dr Esfandiari is NOT a hostage.
Can it be that Wright does not know what a hostage is?
Wright is to Iran what Judith Miller was to Iraq.
Esfandiari is one of three “soft hostages,†all dual U.S.-Iranian nationals, whose passports have been confiscated by the Iranian government, rendering them unable to leave the country.
Esfandiari is a most unlikely hostage.
August 9th, 2007 at 9:58 pmRobin Wright: I am trying to make sure that the press is devoting attention to what is beginning to be a critical mass for this argument on Iran.
Um, Robin, that’s the F’in problem. Please do show me a poll where any but the lunatic fringe (read: same neocon A-holes who cheerleaded us into Iraq) advocate attacking Iran, and any so-called journalist that would publish those yokels opinions today ought to be ostracized from the profession.
Seriously.
August 9th, 2007 at 10:02 pmI agree with Robin Wright that Igor Volsky’s comment misrepresents her article. No one is as dumb as Volsky assumes Washington Post readers are.
August 10th, 2007 at 1:33 pmAs long as your soldiers are their unfortunately they will be killed by Iraqis. Put yourself just for one minute in their position. An occupier force is there and it doesn’t mater what’s their goal there.( Even most of American don’t believe their president) The resistance against occupation is the Iraqis’ right and I’m sure that the great American will do same thing against any occupation. Now you want attack Iran. Please think more. I’m sure that most of you even don’t know what’s the meaning of war. Just back in history and review your actions all around the world. You cannot be proud of Hiroshima and Nagasaki….. Just try to build something instead of destroying.
August 10th, 2007 at 10:02 pmif the US does attack iran and/or does use some type of nuclear weapons, not only should the entire cheney administration be charged with war crimes but pro-war propagandists i mean journalists like wright should be indicted for their complicity in promoting this kind of outrage.
August 11th, 2007 at 5:11 amWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWMMMBBBMWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWMWWWMWWWM.
August 12th, 2007 at 1:28 amWWWWWWWWWWWWWWMMWWWWWWWMMWWMWMMMBMWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWMWWW
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWMMWMMWBXVVBVBVtIIVVVItMXVWWWWWWMMMWWWXVIBW
WWWWWWWWMWWWWMMMMVVVItI+:I,+..t=.;+I=BBXVXBMMMMMMWWMBBMM.
WWWWWMWWMMMMWMWMI=I,+,,:.+.:.tII+t+tV;II+IVI+MWWWWWWWWWWW
XMBBMMBBBMBMBBVt+=+,,,V=…..,,,+==II,t:I,t,,:BMMWWMWWWM.
BMMBBBMMBBBBBVIV+=It……,.=.,,..tV+.,.ItIt=;BMMBBMMMMBW
BMMBMMMBBBBBBBBVI+;,………,.,.,t=,,,,++t;:.=tMXBMMMBB.
BMMMMBBVtIVB+IttV+I,,+I+;;,..,.,,,.=.=V+;,.;==.+ItBMMMXI.
MMMBBVII+tMVVttIIMIVBBBBIVV+=,,,,,;::……+,=.++VBMWMBIW
BMMMBMBBBBVB=IIXBV+VIMBBBVBBBXItIII+XV;,,..::VI,ttBMWWBMW
WMWMWWWWWMI+V=VXIVBBBMMMMBMMMMBBBBBBBBVII;:…,,V=WWWWWWW
WWWWWWWWWBVIBBB+tBBBBMBBMMMMWMMBMBMBBBBVV:;,,,,..+MWWWWWW
WWWWWWWWWBtIVItVXXBBBBBWMMMMMMMBMMBBBXBXXII…::;=MMWWWWW
WWWWWWWWBt;=+IIVBBBBBBBBMMMBBWBBBBXBBBVVBVV+….;+BMWWWWW
WWWWWWWWM+++IIBBBBBBBBBBXMMBMMMBMMBBBBXXVVXV;..,=+MWMWMWW
WWWWWWWWMIV+IXBBBBBBBBBXXBBBBBBBXXIVXBBXXVVVt,,.tBWWWWWWW
WWWWWWWWWX,VVVVBVVI.V,IBVtBVMBBVIIVBBVVVtIVVI..::WMWMWWWW
WWWWWWWMMtBVIVBBBVBMMMMBVMVXMMVBIt:,.:=IIVVVVtVtMMMMWMWWB
WWWWWWMMBBVVVIVXBBBBBBBBBBVBBBIVBBVXXXXXtVVIVttIMWMMWMMWB
WWWWMWMMMVVVVVVXVXBBBMBMBBVBBBVVBBBXVVVVBBV+t==MMWMMMMWWB
MBBMMWWMWMWVVVVXVVBBMMBBVVBBVBXIBBBBBBXXBVI+IV+WMWWMMMMMB
==+VIBBMWMBVVVVVVVVVVVVVXVVVBVVIVVBBBVVVVV++IIMMMMMMMMMMB
:..,,,:+BBXVVVVVVVVBIVVVVVIVVtIVVBVXXVVIVIttMMMBBMMMMMMMB
…….,VWVVVVVVVVBXVXXBXBXBXBBBXBBBXVIVI=MMBMBBMBBBMBBB
,…….WWWVVVVVVVXVVV+IMMWWWBVtIVBBBBVVItMBXXVVVBMBBBVVB
……WWWWWXBXVVXXBXBBVVXVIIIVXBBBBXBVIIMMBXVItVXBBXVtIB
,..MWWWWWWWWWBXBVVXBBBBBBXBBBBVBMBXBBXVVBBBXt+:=tBBXV+=+W
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWVVVVVXBBBBMBXBBBBBBXVBVIVMBVVt+,.;tBBXV+=+W
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWVBVIVXBBBMBBBBBVVVIVMWWWWWWMVIIVVBMBBXVBW
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWVBVVXBBBBXXVVVIVBWWWWWWWWWWWWMBBMMBMBBW
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWX+BVVIVIVItVVXWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWBXVXVVW
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWVXVBVVVVVIMWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWMBXVIW
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWVVVIIIVWWWWWWMWWWWWWWWWWWWWB,…W
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWMWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWMB:………W
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW…..IWWWWWWWWWWWW………….W
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW……BWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW……….B
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW..,..WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW……..B
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW.:.BVWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW……B
WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW=.M.=M=WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWB….B
KARL ROVE HAS SENT IN HIS RESIGNATION!
August 13th, 2007 at 5:12 am