zlacker

Critical thinking would make one far more skeptical of a government that has lied repeatedly to its own people about every armed conflict, foreign policy intrigue, etc., rather than doubt a legendary journalist who has repeatedly exposed that government’s lies and has provided enough operational detail to make a very convincing case. I don’th think we should accept anything at face value, but weighing the credibility of the two parties and the evidence provided, it’s pretty easy to determine which story is closest to the truth.

>>miguel+(OP)
I don’t think we should take anything at face value either. Especially when the story is at a level that could create or expand a military conflict.

The importance of this story is at Bay of Tonkin or WMD levels. At that level, credibility is not sufficient without sufficient evidence.

>>bernie+K8
Funny you should cite those two examples, both notorious for being faked by the US government to justify military action. It’s amazing how many times some people can be convinced “this time is different” in one lifetime.

>>miguel+ap
I only point them out to say that nobody should be trusted when the stakes are so high. Not the government nor the press. It always ends poorly.

>>bernie+xw
And yet the default reaction of the "rational" chattering class has been to defer to the government. Over and over, no many how many times they're lied to. Brilliant.