Comments on: Reading the WaPo on Iran http://pajamasmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2007/08/14/reading-the-wapo-on-iran/ Just another Pajamasmedia.com weblog Mon, 23 Nov 2009 02:00:43 -0800 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Gary Rosen http://pajamasmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2007/08/14/reading-the-wapo-on-iran/#comment-89192 Gary Rosen Fri, 17 Aug 2007 08:10:47 +0000 http://pajamasmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2007/08/14/reading-the-wapo-on-iran/#comment-89192 "This article strikes me as informative and objective. I particularly appreciate the anonymous quotes" ... that agree with markus' preconceived opinions. Just the sort of dishonest comment you'd expect from this creep. And it's hardly surprising that this vicious Jew-baiter is opposed to any action against the virulently antisemitic, Holocaust-denying Iranian regime. “This article strikes me as informative and objective. I particularly appreciate the anonymous quotes”

… that agree with markus’ preconceived opinions. Just the sort of dishonest comment you’d expect from this creep. And it’s hardly surprising that this vicious Jew-baiter is opposed to any action against the virulently antisemitic, Holocaust-denying Iranian regime.

]]> By: Barbara Skolaut http://pajamasmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2007/08/14/reading-the-wapo-on-iran/#comment-89191 Barbara Skolaut Wed, 15 Aug 2007 23:47:23 +0000 http://pajamasmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2007/08/14/reading-the-wapo-on-iran/#comment-89191 "The administration's move could hurt diplomatic efforts, some analysts said." Oh, ferchrissakes - we've had what, 30 <i>years</i> of "diplomacy" with these nutcases to absolutely NO avail (except the entertainment of Iran's mullahs). I know it will come as a shock to the idiots at Foggy Bottem, but the only "diplomacy" <i>some</i> people/countries understand and respond to is overwhelming force. They don't respect anyone who can't - or won't - kick their collective asses. “The administration’s move could hurt diplomatic efforts, some analysts said.”

Oh, ferchrissakes – we’ve had what, 30 years of “diplomacy” with these nutcases to absolutely NO avail (except the entertainment of Iran’s mullahs).

I know it will come as a shock to the idiots at Foggy Bottem, but the only “diplomacy” some people/countries understand and respond to is overwhelming force. They don’t respect anyone who can’t – or won’t – kick their collective asses.

]]> By: markus http://pajamasmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2007/08/14/reading-the-wapo-on-iran/#comment-89190 markus Wed, 15 Aug 2007 17:54:30 +0000 http://pajamasmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2007/08/14/reading-the-wapo-on-iran/#comment-89190 Larry D -- This article strikes me as informative and objective. I particularly appreciate the anonymous quotes, all of which are from Bush administration officials in support of the policy shift. Their anonymity encourages them to speak much more candidly about the need for this change. I would be interested in knowing just what would make this a better article. Removing Cirincione's comments? Removing the unattributed comments in support of designating the Council as a terrorist outfit? Interesting, how Roger rails one day about myopeia of ideologues, while the next day criticizing a reporter for being insufficiently IDEOLOGICAL. Larry D — This article strikes me as informative and objective. I particularly appreciate the anonymous quotes, all of which are from Bush administration officials in support of the policy shift. Their anonymity encourages them to speak much more candidly about the need for this change.

I would be interested in knowing just what would make this a better article. Removing Cirincione’s comments? Removing the unattributed comments in support of designating the Council as a terrorist outfit?

Interesting, how Roger rails one day about myopeia of ideologues, while the next day criticizing a reporter for being insufficiently IDEOLOGICAL.

]]> By: soccerdad http://pajamasmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2007/08/14/reading-the-wapo-on-iran/#comment-89189 soccerdad Wed, 15 Aug 2007 14:25:43 +0000 http://pajamasmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2007/08/14/reading-the-wapo-on-iran/#comment-89189 The headline to the article "Iranian Unit to Be Labeled 'Terrorist'" tells you all you need to know about the Post and Wright. Pay attention to MSM and you'll often see this sort of thing. "Hamas, considered a terrorist organization by the Bush administration ..." It's never "Hamas which fits the legal definition of terrorist organization." The passive voice and the use of verbs like "considered" or "labeled" effectively passes judgment on the considerer or the labeler while remaining neutral about the organization. The headline to the article “Iranian Unit to Be Labeled ‘Terrorist’” tells you all you need to know about the Post and Wright. Pay attention to MSM and you’ll often see this sort of thing. “Hamas, considered a terrorist organization by the Bush administration …” It’s never “Hamas which fits the legal definition of terrorist organization.” The passive voice and the use of verbs like “considered” or “labeled” effectively passes judgment on the considerer or the labeler while remaining neutral about the organization.

]]> By: LarryD http://pajamasmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2007/08/14/reading-the-wapo-on-iran/#comment-89188 LarryD Wed, 15 Aug 2007 14:21:19 +0000 http://pajamasmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2007/08/14/reading-the-wapo-on-iran/#comment-89188 markus: <i>why shouldn't reporters function as a "mouthpiece" for rival sides of policy debates?</i> A) Because they do a dammed poor job of it. B) Because they rarely act as the mouthpiece for more than one side (I speak not just of individual reporters, but the MSM generally). C) Because they keep telling us they're just objective reporters. We'd get a much better debate (or discussion) with a forum which cut out the middlemen and had people such as Cirincione directly saying their piece in public. Who knows what the reporters are leaving out; or putting in, for that matter? While debate by leak is legal, it's dammed poor quality. I'd much prefer these "unnamed officials" register with a blog, so they had a consistent id, and argue without reporters filtering them. markus: why shouldn’t reporters function as a “mouthpiece” for rival sides of policy debates?

A) Because they do a dammed poor job of it.

B) Because they rarely act as the mouthpiece for more than one side (I speak not just of individual reporters, but the MSM generally).

C) Because they keep telling us they’re just objective reporters.

We’d get a much better debate (or discussion) with a forum which cut out the middlemen and had people such as Cirincione directly saying their piece in public. Who knows what the reporters are leaving out; or putting in, for that matter?

While debate by leak is legal, it’s dammed poor quality. I’d much prefer these “unnamed officials” register with a blog, so they had a consistent id, and argue without reporters filtering them.

]]> By: Lem http://pajamasmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2007/08/14/reading-the-wapo-on-iran/#comment-89187 Lem Wed, 15 Aug 2007 13:30:18 +0000 http://pajamasmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2007/08/14/reading-the-wapo-on-iran/#comment-89187 State seems to do diplomacy as if they were on a biology expedition. The theory being we shouldn't be afraid because 'in reality' Iran is more afraid of us. But then we must ask if they are 'really' more afraid of us, why is Iran's behavior so erratic and unpredictable? State seems to do diplomacy as if they were on a biology expedition.
The theory being we shouldn’t be afraid because ‘in reality’ Iran is more afraid of us.

But then we must ask if they are ‘really’ more afraid of us, why is Iran’s behavior so erratic and unpredictable?

]]> By: markus http://pajamasmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2007/08/14/reading-the-wapo-on-iran/#comment-89186 markus Wed, 15 Aug 2007 12:46:31 +0000 http://pajamasmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2007/08/14/reading-the-wapo-on-iran/#comment-89186 In quoting the opinion of Cirincione, the paper is not endorsing his views, anymore than quoting Bolton in opposition to current attempt to work w/ North Korea on a nuclear agreement shows evidence of support for the neocon position. Cirincione, or at least the organization he works for, can be said to be a part of the "Democratic Party foreign policy establishment." Since many of these peole may actually be in our next administration, wouldn't it be good for voters to know what they are thinking now? What you really seem to be upset about is a lack of editorializing (in line with your own views) within the article itself. Also, why shouldn't reporters function as a "mouthpiece" for rival sides of pllicy debates? In a democratic society, shouldn't such disputes be argued over openly? In quoting the opinion of Cirincione, the paper is not endorsing his views, anymore than quoting Bolton in opposition to current attempt to work w/ North Korea on a nuclear agreement shows evidence of support for the neocon position. Cirincione, or at least the organization he works for, can be said to be a part of the “Democratic Party foreign policy establishment.” Since many of these peole may actually be in our next administration, wouldn’t it be good for voters to know what they are thinking now? What you really seem to be upset about is a lack of editorializing (in line with your own views) within the article itself.

Also, why shouldn’t reporters function as a “mouthpiece” for rival sides of pllicy debates? In a democratic society, shouldn’t such disputes be argued over openly?

]]> By: NOTEMAN http://pajamasmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2007/08/14/reading-the-wapo-on-iran/#comment-89185 NOTEMAN Wed, 15 Aug 2007 06:38:52 +0000 http://pajamasmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2007/08/14/reading-the-wapo-on-iran/#comment-89185 As an amateur student of the Middle East, I can tell you that Robin Wright, once a noteworthy scholar of the region, went native years ago. Nothing she has written since 9/11 is valid...she is one the side of the terrorists. As an amateur student of the Middle East, I can tell you that Robin Wright, once a noteworthy scholar of the region, went native years ago. Nothing she has written since 9/11 is valid…she is one the side of the terrorists.

]]> By: Barry Dauphin http://pajamasmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2007/08/14/reading-the-wapo-on-iran/#comment-89184 Barry Dauphin Wed, 15 Aug 2007 03:26:39 +0000 http://pajamasmedia.com/rogerlsimon/2007/08/14/reading-the-wapo-on-iran/#comment-89184 Oh why doesn't she just ask what Joe Wilson thinks. Oh why doesn’t she just ask what Joe Wilson thinks.

]]>