Monday, November 13, 2006
The One That Got Away
It was really sad to hear Andrea Seabrook interviewing Richard Perle yesterday on Weekend Edition Sunday. Has Seabrook ever heard of doing one's homework before interviewing a guest? A great place to start would have been Source Watch. Perle is one of the big fish behind the mess in Iraq, but Seabrook doesn't know enough to hold him to account.
At one point she mentions the discredited linking of the Saddam Hussein regime to terrorists and Perle responds, "I don’t believe it’s correct to say his ties to terrorists have been discredited. There were numerous links between Iraqi inteligence and various terrorist organizations including al-Qaeda; those have been documented. And I frequently hear people say that there’s no evidence. It’s simply wrong; I’ve seen the evidence." That would be easy enough to counter. She might have said, "Well, I'd challenge you to produce any such documentation, since no ties to al-Qaeda have ever been proved."
Instead Seabrook responds in the most haltering, timid manner that this quote does little to convey, "But much of that evidence that I’ve heard other analysts say on both sides of the aisle and from several different policy points of view has in fact been discredited. Most people it seems now are saying Saddam Hussein didn’t have any serious connection with terrorists." To which Perle simply says, "that’s wrong. I’ve looked at the evidence."
Seabrook then comes out with this: "Going into Iraq was part of a larger plan for the Middle East, part of a large picture of spreading democracy in the Middle East… is that still viable?"
Unbelievable. Even Perle has to remind her that spreading democracy had nothing to do with toppling Saddam.
If Seabrook had done her work she might have challenged Perle on his reasons for pushing for the Iraq War-- his Likuud/Israel connections, his championing of the corrupt Chalabi and Iraqi National Congress, and his own corrupt history.