Why Are We Back In Iraq?

Yesterday, at Slate, David Wallace-Wells wrote about the blogosphere's reaction to the Newsweek Koran Retraction story (Flushing Newsweek).

Or I should say the right leaning blogoshere's reaction.

Because that's all David Wallace-Wells wrote. There aren't any links to Susan Hu's diaries or the multiple posts at Atrios or this excellent post by the farmer at corrente: "Sunday Night" at CNN: the Clowntown Noise Network".

Only one "liberal" is quoted:

"People have died because of your shoddy work," scolds liberal and self-described autodidact Dean Esmay."

I never visited Dean's Blog before. I'm not sure I ever will again. Because it's crap.

Dean Esmay is an idiot and it's a joke that he considers himself a liberal.

Check out this crap Dean wrote the other day:

"Most sickening to read was the always-vile, always hate-mongering Daily Kos reaction. White Supremacists, Holocaust Denialists, Michael Moore apologists, Daily Kos fans: is there any moral difference between any of these people? If so I can't think of one."

You fucking moron. There's quite a bit of moral difference between Holocaust Denialists and people like me. I'm not a fan of the Anti-Defamation League's Abraham Foxman but perhaps he needs to send a letter to Dean Esmay to inform him of the moral difference.

Check out the way Dean Esmay slants on his crap blog (from the same post that attacked Daily Kossers):

"On a far more rational note, John Henke wonders if the story of the flushed Koran isn't part of a pattern of abuse by U.S. service members."

"Jon, I'm sorry, but when you bring in stories of how a detainee had his crotch grabbed, or had lotion rubbed on him, and juxtapose that with stories of what may be very real and upsetting abuses like putting someone in solitary confinement with a light burning 24 hours a day, you weaken your argument considerably."

"That said: Rubbing lotion on a guy? Rubbing lotion on a guy? Dude, give me the freaking bottle of Jergen's and I'll do it myself. Or I'll have my wife do it. I don't care how offensive it is to the prisoner's sensibilities."

"I know you're a good guy, Jon Henke. I know you are. But rubbing lotion on a guy? Dude, where did your common sense disappear to?"

What a pile of crap.

This is the entire post by Jon Henke that Dean Esmay has parsed his crap-filled post from (I don't normally put up full posts but I have to in this case to show that Dean Esmay is full of crap):

Newsweek: False but Plausible (no, really) Posted by: Jon Henke on Monday, May 16, 2005 "Andrew Sullivan is taking some heat for this...

Even if this incident [the Koran desecration] turns out to be false, our previous policies have made it perfectly plausible.

Well. He's right. Put aside the defensiveness, and think about this very seriously for a moment. Without pretending that it absolves Newsweek of culpability for improperly corroborating a story, can you honestly tell me that it's "implausible" that a Koran could have been desecrated at Guantanamo Bay? That interrogators could not have "flushed a Qur'an down a toilet in an attempt to rattle detainees" at the facility at which...

• ..."a female interrogator grabbed a detainee's genitals" [according to FBI observers]
• ...MPs beat a US Soldier they mistook for a detainee to the point of "traumatic brain injury", and then destroyed the videotape of the training incident.
• ...one detainee was subjected "to 'intense isolation' for more than three months and that his cell was constantly flooded with light", causing him to evidence "behavior consistent with extreme psychological trauma" [according to an FBI agent]
• ..."a female interrogator [rubbed] lotion on a prisoner during Ramadan—a highly offensive tactic to an observant Muslim man" [per FBI personnel]

Yes, the Koran desecration story may be incorrect. Yes, Newsweek should have checked the story more carefully. Yes, Newsweek should reevaluate their procedures. But anybody who claims it is "implausible" just hasn't been paying attention to US treatment of detainees."

As you can see, Dean Esmay left out the fact that the rubbing of lotion was performed during Ramadam and that it was done by a female interrogator. Dean Esmay also didn't mention the "traumatic brain injury."

Fuck Dean's World.

And fuck Dean Esmay's pile of crap explanation of what makes him a liberal. Dean Esmay uses the dictionary definition for liberal to "expose" that - along with other liberal principles - "[i]t says nothing of your views on homosexuality."

In response to a reader named Avram who disagreed ("Hm. I'd say that thinking homosexuality is sinful is a form of bigotry, so that would be incompatible with liberalism by the definition you gave."), Dean Esmay assured his readers: "I don't think homosexuality is particularly sinful..."

Particulary is defined as "to a distinctly greater extent or degree than is common" (Dictionary.com).

Fuck you, Dean Esmay.

Homosexuality is not commonly considered "sinful." And you're not even close to being a fucking liberal.

You're nothing but a right-leaning wingnut.

Check out this post that Dean Esmay wrote today with a link to Powerline (The Phony Iraqi "Insurgency"):

"Daffyd Ab Hugh knocks it out of the park: there is no Iraqi insurgency, just a horrifying death-cult terrorizing and murdering innocent people."

"And yes, the New York Times is utterly clueless as usual."

Powerline didn't knock shit out of the park. There is a fucking Iraqi insurgency, Dean Esmay. Even the Bush Administration has spoken of it on many occasions.

Please, Slate - in the future - don't link to idiots like Dean Esmay and refer to them as liberals. If you must link to Dean's crap blog then call him what he is: a wingnut.

|