Article

2006-08-25 Fifth Column

NYT: Don't Worry, Be Happy Intel Wanted For Nov

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Shung Phinetle2153 2006-08-25 07:21|| || Front Page|| [1 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Keep up the good work, Pinch! I'm proud of you and the staff!

Posted by The Ghost of Walter Duranty 2006-08-25 09:08|| ]">[ ] 2006-08-25 09:08|| Front Page Top

#2 WTF is wrong wqith these people. Hezbollah has long been known as Iran's proxie since 1982

Even the major networks since that time has said and it has never been disproven that Iran is Hezbollah's sugar tit.

It is incredible that anyone would try to press the contention that Iran being identified as a strategic threat as overblown.

Iran started the whole Islam thing during the Crater years, has not backed off of it even once and is now on the verge of a using nukes and has said that it will nuke Israeli and anyone who gets in its way.

NY Times is engaging in willful ignorance. And this is a dangerous path to take in the face of an armed and hostile enemy.

Posted by badanov 2006-08-25 10:22|| http://www.freefirezone.org]">[http://www.freefirezone.org] 2006-08-25 10:22|| Front Page Top

#3 I don't think the Times is willfully ignorant. I think they are working for the enemy.

Posted by SR-71 2006-08-25 11:41|| 2006-08-25 11:41|| Front Page Top

#4 This is a really queer editorial. (Love the in-line commentary - no question at all what Shung Phinetle2153 thinks!)

The writer says things like Irans fundamentalist regime and its nuclear ambitions pose a strategic threat to the United States. ...Its hard to imagine that Hoekstra believes there is someone left in this country who does not already know that. In other words, Iran is a strategic nuclear threat.

And then he says dire-sounding innuendo, mostly to leave the impression that Iran is developing nuclear weapons a lot faster than intelligence agencies have the guts to admit. But by definition anything the intelligence people are aware of is less than the reality; opening the files in Eastern Europe, and in Iraq post-invasion, demonstrated conclusively that the bad guys are much further along than suspected... but that the only way to be certain is to win the war so that the analysts have all the files to examine at their leisure. Spy agencies produce probabilities, not trial-usable proof.

The subtext here is that we all (including the writer) know that Iran has the ambition and enough of the stuff to be a real threat, but we absolutely mustn't do anything about it.

Posted by trailing wife 2006-08-25 14:38|| 2006-08-25 14:38|| Front Page Top

#5 And then he says dire-sounding innuendo, mostly to leave the impression that Iran is developing nuclear weapons a lot faster than intelligence agencies have the guts to admit.

Given the history of sanguine intel assesments versus scary reality, I think it's only proper for Hoekstra to have this attitude.

Posted by charger 2006-08-25 14:48|| 2006-08-25 14:48|| Front Page Top

#6 First the shoddy analysis piece yesterday followed by this adolescent opinion piece today. Sheezusthe NYT doesnt even pretend to be impartial anymore.

Posted by DepotGuy 2006-08-25 15:25|| 2006-08-25 15:25|| Front Page Top

#7 Die, NYT, die.

Posted by newc">newc 2006-08-25 18:09|| 2006-08-25 18:09|| Front Page Top

23:58 Fordesque
23:52 phil_b
23:39 wxjames
23:32 trailing wife
23:23 phil_b
23:04 Old Patriot
23:01 Phegum Spins7297
22:58 trailing wife
22:56 trailing wife
22:51 Old Patriot
22:40 Swamp Blondie
22:37 trailing wife
22:34 Swamp Blondie
22:06 SteveS
22:04 DMFD
21:56 Rd
21:55 flyover
21:51 RWV
21:50 mac
21:45 flyover
21:42 flyover
21:40 Poison Reverse
21:37 flyover
21:36 flyover