The Annotated New York Times

From Saturday’s New York Times:

Some other analysts do not object to Mr. McCain’s portraying the insurgency (or multiple insurgencies) in Iraq as that of Al Qaeda. They say he is using a “perfectly reasonable catchall phrase” that, although it may be out of place in an academic setting, is acceptable on the campaign trail, a place that “does not lend itself to long-winded explanations of what we really are facing,” said Kenneth M. Pollack, research director at the Saban Center for Middle East Policy at the Brookings Institution.

...and author of a 2002 book entitled The Threatening Storm: The Case for Invading Iraq, which played a major role in causing this goddamn catastrophe. Funny how the Times forgot to mention that, since they do mention the title of Juan Cole’s book in the next paragraph and Ira Lapidus’s book a few paragraphs later.

What would it take for someone like Kenneth Pollack to stop being treated respectfully as a wise expert on Iraq by the press corps? How much blood does someone have to have on his hands before the Times refuses to quote his opinion that a simplistic and misleading justification for prolonging the war is “perfectly reasonable”?

Advertisements

3 responses to “The Annotated New York Times

  1. How much blood does the New York Times have to have on ITS hands…

  2. Come on. The Times did do a great job of telling the tragic story of the Ivy League graduates who tragically lost their Bear Stearns jobs in the recent tragic massacre.

  3. The piece today about military analysts was good, if 5 years too late.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s