"I gather that GG agrees with your positions, if the stars next to your posts are dispensed by him."

The yellow background stars to which you are referring are a mark to show that the poster is a 'Salon Premium Subscriber'. That means they spent 6 bucks or more - depending on how long of a subscription they bought. Glenn has nothing to do with those stars.

Glenn wrote:

This is the individual to whom Glenn Reynolds, Powerline, Michelle Malkin's blog and scores of others are pointing as the Iraqi Weapons Expert who knows the Real Truth behind Saddam's Missing WMDs. How can anyone rational take people like that seriously ? It's hard to even know what to say about it.

It might well be, Glenn, that, unlike you, most of those bloggers and whatnot had and maybe still have failed to do any research on the Gaubaltz character. After all, their track record of doing research has been pathetically abysmal in the past, you know.

Zack said:

This is a “intra-bubble” story meant only for the hardcore Kool-Aid addicts only. I’m sure they’re not pleased at all that Glenn Greenwald brought it into the sunlight for everyone to see. Oh, how embarrassing.

In spite of my last post before this one, I think it is possible that Zack may have a point. These bloggers and whatnot did do enough research on the Gaubatz character to be embarrassed about promoting his and Phillip's insane stories and ideals. but, what the hell, I guess. They must figure it's worth a shot. Or something.

Chase Said:

Look, despite the millions of victims and survivors (and surviving perpetrators), there are still people who believe the Holocost never happened. So it's safe to assume there will always be people who believe virtually any proposition of historical fact, whether it be that Saddam had WMDs when (or just before) the US invaded or whether or not GW Bush (or the Israeli's) really blew up the World Trade Centers. Let's get over it. (The brilliance of conspiracy theories is that any evidence tending to disprove the theory is evidence of the conspiracy, lack of evidence is evidence of the conspiracy, so the theory is like an undead zombie, impossible to kill.)

No thanks for the history lesson and the lecture. This is current. There is little we can do now about what happened 50/60 years ago. There is much we can do about what might happen today, tomorrow and what has happened in the recent past.

Attending to the propaganda - no matter how insane that propaganda is - that scores of blogs, some of them high traffick blogs, and no doubt soon, the MSM, or at least the Rush Limbaughs of the airwaves, will be repeating again and again in order to move their agenda along, that has to be dealt with. They have had a great deal of influence thus far. We are, after all, in Iraq, are we not? So just saying, "Let's get over it", as you did in your post? That will not cut it.

Thomas Hardy

"In Time of "the Breaking of nations"

I

Only a man harrowing clods

In a slow silent walk

With an old horse that stumbles and nods

Half asleep as they stalk.

II

Only thin smoke without flame

From the heaps of couch-grass;

Yet this will go onward the same

Though Dynasties pass.

III

Yonder a maid and her wight

Come whispering by:

War's annals will cloud into night

Ere their story die.

1915.

You're welcome...

Thank you for bringing the poem to our attention.

"Fidel Castro, Hugo Chavez, Robert Mugabe, Kim Jong Il, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Bashir Assad... so many oppressed groups, so little time!"

-- Elephantman

Whatever else you might think of any of those people you listed, Elephantman, they aren't "groups". They are individuals, and, they are anything but oppressed. They are all quite well off, both financially and as to your position in their respective societies.

I know that I'm replying to a bag of rocks, but, I had to try anyway.

...as to their position in their respective societies.

In any event, I have a feeling that the next two years are going to be even more interesting than the last year has been, given that it's become harder and harder for them to wave away the emperor's nakedness, even with tools like Russert at their disposal.

-- William Timberman

Last I heard there are 30 plus pages of posts at the Wapo in reply to Broder's editorial from this morning. Most all of the posters are excoriating Broder. That is one small indication that the emperor's nakedness can not be waved away any longer.

"honestly"

Didn't know that word was part of your vocabulary.

That is why, as I said above, I don't think they're all conscious, knowing wrongdoers -- for some, the role of journalists are simply to pass along what they hear, and as long as they do that, then they are doing their jobs, and doing it well.

-- GlennGreenwald

Most of them can't possibly really believe that though. It's just another form of denial. In fact, judging by how agitated I get when In hear that excuse from "journalists", I think they're lying when they use that excuse. Like, for example, don't you think Maureene Dowd is more concerned with swimming in money and fame than she is in telling the truth and framing the debate in a realistic way rather than a Tonya Harding versus Nancy Carrigan kind of way? It seems that way to me.

Shooter:

The general phobia around FOX news is a good example. People here hate FOX with a passion, yet I hear very few accusations of bad facts.

What is a "bad fact"? I thought there were only facts or just bullshit.

http://antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=10881

This column by Justin Raimondo about the Moyer's program speaks for itself. No commentary by me is necessary,

Generally, your slamming of my comments so soon after I posted them, suggests you did not really devote any time to pondering their merits. Instead, you just zoomed back with a type-as-i-think comment that is not representative of your usual standard of discourse.

-- kingfelix07

I'll speed this up for you, Kingfelix. Go fuck yourself. You're a tool. A really stupid tool.