The sky is blue, time is still moving forward one second at a time . . . and Glenn Greenwald is still being dishonest.
Regarding Dave Gaubatz, who claims that Saddam really did have WMD, Greenwald says:
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.
Let’s look at the evidence Greenwald cites to prove the assertion that these individuals are swooning over Gaubatz’s claim.
First, here is Glenn Reynolds:
“I FOUND SADDAM’S WMD BUNKERS:” Er, wouldn’t this be news if it were true? Maybe not, these days. . . .”
Here is “Michelle Malkin’s blog” (actually Allah at Hot Air):
Melanie Phillips’s new piece in the Spectator is making the rounds so I might as well toss up a link. This story isn’t new — FrontPage was writing about Gaubatz last April and the Times featured him in a story about diehard WMD believers in June. He seems credible, but I must say, stories about the continuing hunt for WMDs at this point seem to me like a right-wing version of Trutherism. Besides, even if Gaubatz is right about the weapons having been moved to Syria, we’ll simply never know unless Assad ups and admits that they’re there. And if he was going to do that, odds are he’d already have offered to do it in exchange for whatever concessions he might want from the Bush administration.
Still an interesting read, though.
Maybe somebody needs to explain to Greenwald what “Trutherism” means. Hint: it ain’t a compliment.
Greenwald quotes the part about how we’ll never know unless Assad admits it — but doesn’t quote the part about how he probably would have admitted it already, if it were true. Greenwald thus implies Allah believes Assad has the WMDs, when Allah was actually arguing the opposite.
Allah is so interested in “promoting” this story that he titles the post:
The obligatory “Dave Gaubatz found Saddam’s WMDs” post
If you read Allah, you know that this approach (“The obligatory ______ post”) is the one he takes when he doesn’t really believe something, but is linking it because everyone is talking about it. (By the way, that is a perfectly legitimate thing for a blogger to do — as long as they offer an honest and reasonable opinion about it . . . which Allah does.)
Finally, we have Power Line’s Scott Johnson, who merely says that the article is very interesting.
So, to recap, as Rick Ellensburg might say:
One of the three bloggers says the article is very interesting. The other two, Glenn Reynolds and Allah, actually cast doubt on Gaubatz’s claims.
Yet, despite the clear evidence that Allah and Reynolds don’t buy the theory, Greenwald nevertheless claims that Allah (and Reynolds) are both pointing at Gaubatz as the “Iraqi Weapons Expert who knows the Real Truth behind Saddam’s Missing WMDs.”
This is who Greenwald is. And this is what he does.
P.S. Greenwald also accuses Pajamas Media of proclaiming the truth of Gaubatz’s claims:
Scores of other right-wing blogs — including right-wing “news site” Pajamas Media — have excitedly linked to the article in order to suggest or even proclaim to their readers that Saddam really did have WMDs all along but that fact has been covered up by a vast conspiracy.
Let’s look at the entire Pajamas Media post, to see how they “suggest[ed] or even proclaim[ed] to their readers that Saddam really did have WMDs all along but that fact has been covered up by a vast conspiracy”:
‘I found Saddam’s WMD Bunkers’ — Dave Gaubatz
April 20, 2007 9:58 AM
Yup, that’s it.
But we already know that, when you actually follow one of Greenwald’s links, the link most likely will not support his premise.
P.P.S. Last night a friend of mine (who is not one of the people Greenwald criticizes in his post, by the way) asked me:
Do you think he’s dense or just a hack who doesn’t care if he’s right?
What do you think my answer was?