Monday, August 28, 2006

Dr. Horsepuckey

What Michelle Malkin likes to call the Distributed Intelligence Network—a.k.a. the right side of the blogosphere—ought to have a field day with this:

An economics professor at Drake University (Des Moines) has published a scathing article, “Behind the Plan to Bomb Iran,” which purports to reveal the real reason behind the U.S.-Iran War. OK, so it hasn’t happened—yet. Picky, picky. You know it will. So there.

And no, it has nothing to do with any of that rascal George Bush’s lies about wanting to protect Americans from terror attacks or to promote democracy in the Middle East. Nah. None of that stuff. You ready for the real reason?

Money. Yep. Halliburton. Lockheed-Martin. Neo-fascist think tanks like the American Enterprise Institute. And, oh yes—the military-industrial-Zionist complex. You know, the defense industry and the Jews.

This remarkable, if not entirely original, piece of, uh, thinking was written by Dr. Ismael Hossein-Zadeh, or Dr. Horsepuckey for short. Of course, being a professor of economics and all, you’d expect him to have sources—you know, footnotes and things like that. Well, he does. Ten of them. Well, technically three, with a lot of ibids:

1. That great investigative reporter Seymour Hersh, who wrote the wildly hilarious "The military's problem with the President's Iran policy," published recently by The New Yorker. The only thing is, since Hersh performed this feat with virtually no named sources, we still can’t tell whether there really are plans to attack Iran—let alone whether the brass really do want to oust Bush and install a military junta.

2. William D. Hartung, an anti-war wonk and critic of Israel who published the 2003 classic, How Much Are You Making on the War, Daddy? (We think Reese Witherspoon starred in the movie version.) Surprise: Hartung agrees with Dr. Horsepuckey. On lots of stuff.

3. Dr. Horsepuckey himself. As he says in Footnote Ten: “I have provided a longer discussion of the role of the Zionist lobby in the configuration of the U.S. policy in the Middle East in Chapter 6 of my recently published book, The Political Economy of U.S. Militarism (Palgrave-Macmillan 2006).” (Which we suspect he doesn’t consider a good thing.)

So, there you have it. The academic Left in all its glory. Anti-semitism and all. Does it raise as many questions for you as it does for us? For starters, what the h*** is a guy like this doing, poisoning the minds of our young people at a place of higher learning?

Come on, Distributed Intelligence Network. Go run with it.


Blogger QuestRepublic said...

So the article you refer to by Prof Hossein-zadeh looks to be anything but a well-researched and reasoned summary of the problems between the US and Iran.

On the other hand, dismissing Seymour Hersh because he (as usual) he does not state his sources for his own article, does not seem valid. This reporter has been right about a surprising number of controversial issues in the past.

Our foray into Iraq was characterized by a lack of careful planning and a marginalization of debate about rational options. When we consider who our adversary is this time, I hope we do a better job of listening to more than one option for the US-Iran challenge. Not much debate going on in COngress, so even if Seymour Hersh sets some folk's teeth on edge, I for one will still listen to him and SOME others, as long as there is a sincere attempt to make a rational arguement.


1:18 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home