It's the brazen, easily proven, untruth of these statements that's so utterly breathtaking:

"Anyone even vaguely familiar with Michael's work knows that he has opposed military action against Iran." Andrew McCarthy & Mark Levin

"I opposed the military invasion of Iraq before it took place." Michael Ledeen

McCarthy, Levin and Ledeen knew absolutely these statements were untue when they made them. They also knew that their untruth was a matter of very public record. It's this willingness to lie, without fear of consequence, knowing one's lies are easily exposed, that's so emblematic of neo-con arrogance. In this world-view, any lie, repeated often enough, becomes true. Conversely, any revelation of deceit, ignored resolutely enough, becomes inconsequential. That pearl-clutching faux-indignation ("anyone even vaguely familiar with Michael's work knows...") frequently accompanies this arrogant disregard for the truth, elevates this world-view from the merely shameless to the positively pathological. And it's endemic.

Consider Cheney declaring the existence of Iraqi WMDs & links with al Qeda, years after both were utterly disproven. Or McCain saying he never met a lobbyist he'd earlier admitted meeting, under oath. These bald-faced lies, easily exposed, ripple like a toxic leit-motiv through conservative discourse, with an easy reguarity, a breathtaking fearlessness of consequence, that's so deeply corrupt and inherently sociopathic.

If we allow iran to develop its nuclear weapons, won't the nuclear winter that follows the inevitable nuclear exchange with Israel solve our global warming problems?

Hey, NOB, a cyanide pill will cure your BPH. Try it.

Cheers,

Joseph Wilson alleged that Ledeen was involved in the Niger doc forgery, but that too seems to have conveniently disappeared. While still an allegation, it would seem to fit the pattern of Ledeen's previous actions.

but you're going to have to be clearer than that. When did I engage with a troll in such a manner that his trivial comments were encouraged to bloom into a pseudo-debate? Seriously.

I'm not trying to piss on you---I admire your calm attempts to reason with them. But please do consider tactics and strategy---what they are trying to do to us and what the rest of us here are trying to do. Did Knob's joke about nuclear winter really deserve a response?

do NOT start waving Ahmadinejad's bolivations as evidence.

You meant 'bloviations'. It's only 'bolivations' when Hugo Chavez does it. :>

Seriously, it's funny to me how we can examine and understand (well, talk about anyway) the most obscure and minute differentiations in our own politics but when we look at other countries we pretend that they have no politics of their own, no internal disagreements, no legacies, no family interests, nothing. They all wear a political unitard. One size fits all.

Since we're engaging with you, who asked "what to do about Iran? Can you tell us why "we" need to "do" ANYTHING about Iran?

I'm reminded of a Monty Python line about what to call fat Belgian bastards: "Why should we call them anything? Why don't we just ignore them?"

I await your serious answer to this quite serious, if lightly asked, question.

All the more reason to put as much pressure as possible on the next administration to bring these people to account. They will have less time to spread their subterranean poison if they are having to fight a defensive war.

Our thinking is pretty much identical on this, methinks. Some of these creatures will be beyond reach, because they had only their intellectual 'fingers' on any of this (and they'll retire to their sinecures at Hoover, IAS/Princeton, etc). But I think it's very effective to show them the color of their own blood. Bullies don't go on the offensive when someone they've terrorized gives them a nosebleed.

Also, more importantly, if there is even a hope of restoring any integrity to the institutions they've crapped all over, there needs to be a cleansing, using a strong abrasive.

Actually, considering some of your recent exchanges, you are not in a position to judge how others respond.

Talky Tina.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Living_Doll_(The_Twilight_Zone)

"My name is Talky Tina and I'm beginning to hate you."

"My name is Talky Tina and you'll be sorry."

"My name is Talky Tina, and I'm going to kill you."

The neocon vocabulary in a nutshell.

You did not really answer any of the questions. Please consider the actual history. It did not start with the current US invasion of Iraq, but that invasion did reinforce previous actions. Iran has never overthrown the US government; but we did abort their democracy.

"h/t sysporg"?

Poor sysprog.

Glenn: you might want to take a look at TheWashingtonNote (Steve Clemons) which includes a report of some levity during a serious discussion on FP in the residence of the German Ambassador in London. The comments section is interesting. You might then understand why the Neocons feel free to continue with their blather.

Really, the below exchange should demonstrate to everyone how NOT to deal with a troll. People responded to him as though he was serious, when his original comment was plainly as far from serious as anything could be. Now look.

Allow me to summarize Knob's contribution: How many Iranian children are we willing to kill to do Israel's bidding?

I just realized something. If we allow Austrians to have basements, then we are responsible for the welfare of children born of incestuous rape, imprisoned in a basement with their mother, and raised like animals.

Stop the Austrian basements! Inspections have failed! Toothless Austrian laws are not enough!

Knobbery will get you nowhere.

You make a good point, about my previous point. Could it be though that PBS has a certain credability and gravitas that the MSM no longer possesses due to the Bushies and their Rethugs of yore. I don't know. But it seems that we agree on the sanization point.

Thanks for your thoughts.

The neocons are nothing but a bunch of self-serving ego maniacs with unearned superiority complexes. They have no morals or integrity, and will use any means necessary in order to achieve their goals. You can be sure that any initiative they support has nothing to do with benefiting the rest of us. Although the democracy they were brought up in has allowed them to become what they are, they really don't want the rest of us to have a say in anything, but realize that the illusion of a democracy is important to maintain if they are to continue to benefit financially from our labors. After all, they need us to fight their wars and to buy whatever it is they're selling. Other than that, they don't care whether we live or die (or if the planet lives or dies since they already have designs on outer space). I have never seen one scheme they were behind carried out in an efficient way and end in success. They're a bunch of rich, spoiled, grandiose "empire builders" who have a "Pinky and the Brain" mentality (one is an idiot, the other one's insane). They're arrogant enough to want to take over the world, but that same arrogance prevents them from being able to take the advice of experts since they think they're smarter than everyone else. So they fail miserably at everything they do, and unfortunately, drag all the rest of us down with them when they fail. There is nothing they are above doing, and they don't mind having a little (or a lot) of human collateral damage occur in order to achieve their goals. If they have their way, they will be the owners (or patent/copyright holders) of the water, the food and even the air we breath. In other words, they are dangerous and are evil incarnate.