pragueBlog

2004-02-18  

What Joshua Marshall would have some difficulty accepting: Saddam's overthrow correct, but badly performed, Havel says:
Basing the reason for the attack on reports that the regime had weapons of mass destruction, Havel said, was nonsense, and the allies are now paying the price for it.

"Moreover, they are only some tiny ampoules, which, when matters come down to it, no one will ever find. And moreover, this was not the main reason," Havel said, adding that the goal of the allied armies should have been "to aid those in suffering."

That's the kind of irresponsible statement that makes important, leading citizens like Noam Chomsky call Havel a blowhard.

I like the term "blowhard". So useful for either side. Just like "agenda". If you're a conservative, you are concerned about the liberal media agenda. If you're a lefty, the right obviously is manipulating our quality news product. This allows each side to recommend that the other "wake up!" and recognize how completely they are being fooled.

If anyone ever sees one of these agendas, could you let me know.

Steve | 21:01 |
links
archives