Antiwar.com Is NOT a Legitimate Source
Much of the debate around here of late has been characterized as being about "conspiracy theories." I've used the term myself, and probably not accurately and precisely enough. Really, what the divide has been over is epistemology: what the Norton Dictionary of Modern Thought describes as "the philosophical theory of knowledge, which seeks to define it, distinguish its principal varieties, identify its sources, and establish its limits." Much of the disagreement between people is about evidence: what constitutes evidence, what's a good and reliable source, what the balance of evidence is for and against a particular belief, etc. So part of the dispute is what is a reliable source.
For anyone who considers themselves liberal or progeressive, Antiwar.com is not a reliable source.
Let's very briefly look at some of what's been published there in recent days.
Antiwar.com ringleader Justin Raimondo is all over his
"the Jews knew about the London Bombings ahead of time, just like they knew about 9-11" bulls***, which conservative blogger
John Cole destroys. Some guy named Alan Bock had
this description of the proposal to relieve African debt:
Leave aside the minor detail that these world leaders were demonstrating their compassion by vowing to take money by force from productive people and distribute it either to those in poor countries who might be useful to them, or to projects that might make them feel good. Their "compassion" at G8 is based on the willingness to undertake forced exactions - theft - from people who are just trying to make it. They exercise their compassion with other peoples' money, never their own. So spare us the self-righteousness on that score.
Another guy named Christopher Deliso claims in
this book review that the Nato coaltion fought the Kosovo war against Serbia for imperialistic reasons, but really doesn't bother to address the fact that Milosevic had already orchestrated a genocide in Bosnia and parts of Croatia, and was starting the same process against the Kosovar Albanians. And
this a****** essentially says the "official story" of Serb executions of thousands of Bosnian Muslims at Srebrenica is a lie.
Folks, antiwar.com is not a legitimate source unless you're a far rightwing nativist inspired by Pat Buchanan and don't have a problem with flirtations or worse with anti-Semitism. Buchanan posts on there all the time, and Raimondo's a acolyte of Buchanan. Another ally of that crew is Jude Wanniski, who was the huckster who sold Ronald Reagan on the idiotic theory of "supply side" economics. Wanniski is a former Wall Street Journal editorial writer who
denies that Saddam ever used gas against the Kurds and made overtures to Lyndon LaRouche, who
defends the Nation of Islam against charges of
anti-Semitism, and who left his role as an advisor to Steve Forbes, according to The Nation's David Corn, because he claimed that Forbes' advisors were white spremacists but then went to work advising that well-known advocate of racial harmony,
Pat Buchanan.
Yes, I know, Juan Cole has articles posted on Antiwar.com. I respect Juan Cole, and have seen nothing to make me think he's an anti-Semite or someone who denies genocide. But I think it's a mark against him that he lends his good name to a site full of a bunch of rightwing loons.
But for the rest of us, we shouldn't be sanguine about relying on these rightwingers as reliable sources on anything, especially when they trade in scummy conspiracy theories suggesting dark plots by Jews, deny the genocide in the Balkans, or espouse bulls*** economic policies predicated on the economics of crass selfishness.
