A snippet of an old op-ed turned up in my inbox today. The email contained no link to the original piece so I tracked it down to the source. I must admit that the source of this op-ed shocked the heck out of me! It turns out that the piece in question ("End of an Affair") was published in September 2006 in the Washington Post! It slipped past my radar back then but it couldn't possibly be more pertinent than it is now.
Trying to make sense of a piece like this having been published by the Left-leaning Post, I figure there must be at least three possibilities: (1) either the Washington Post's website was hacked by someone who wanted to write a thoughtful piece that might not otherwise have been posted there; (2) they've mistakenly posted an op-ed that was meant for the Wall Street Journal; or (3) they intentionally posted a piece written by someone who has been paying attention to the facts in the whole "Plame affair."
Gee, what happened at the Post? My vote is for possibility #3 because I'm an optimist.
Nice job, WaPo (gee, did I just type that?!). Sorry for the delayed kudos... maybe I'll check in more often now that I know what I've been missing!
Trying to make sense of a piece like this having been published by the Left-leaning Post, I figure there must be at least three possibilities: (1) either the Washington Post's website was hacked by someone who wanted to write a thoughtful piece that might not otherwise have been posted there; (2) they've mistakenly posted an op-ed that was meant for the Wall Street Journal; or (3) they intentionally posted a piece written by someone who has been paying attention to the facts in the whole "Plame affair."
..."Nevertheless, it now appears that the person most responsible for the end of Ms. Plame's CIA career is Mr. Wilson. Mr. Wilson chose to go public with an explosive charge, claiming -- falsely, as it turned out -- that he had debunked reports of Iraqi uranium-shopping in Niger and that his report had circulated to senior administration officials. He ought to have expected that both those officials and journalists such as Mr. Novak would ask why a retired ambassador would have been sent on such a mission and that the answer would point to his wife. He diverted responsibility from himself and his false charges by claiming that President Bush's closest aides had engaged in an illegal conspiracy. It's unfortunate that so many people took him seriously." ...
Gee, what happened at the Post? My vote is for possibility #3 because I'm an optimist.
Nice job, WaPo (gee, did I just type that?!). Sorry for the delayed kudos... maybe I'll check in more often now that I know what I've been missing!
Comments