[Oldeconomybuyer]

Imagine that. The NY Times let their bias seep so deeply into a story about Kissinger's view on pre-emptive strikes against islamist terrorists that their article was completly false.

"All the News That's Fit to Slant".

[Arthur Wildfire! March]

I have a sad feeling inside. Here we have Kissinger, waking up the next morning after he spent hour upon hour formulating his opinion, only to read in the NYT that his conclusions were opposite what they are. And all kinds of media parrots that. What thoughts must have been going through his mind!

[LiberalBassTurds]

Mr. Kissinger called for "bringing matters to a head with Iraq" and for showing that "a terrorist challenge or a systematic attack on the international order produces catastrophic consequences."

This is a great line. In spite of all the hand wringing and angst from the weak there are clearly some who 'get it.' This is a message terrorists and their supporters will clearly understand. Afghanistan falls, followed by Iraq, followed by whomever. Iran is surrounded by Western backed regimes, the Isrealis have some breathing room, and the Saudis have little choice but to clean house. This is a must do action for us.

[tomkat]

hope there's a good reason the administration is remaining relatively mum;
it's easy to imagine this having a negative effect for us come november ...