Hey Richard Perle, how's the view from under the sofa? - Macleans.ca

Hey Richard Perle, how’s the view from under the sofa?


Have you ever seen these two men in the same room?













Yeah, me neither. Here’s why.

Filed under:

Hey Richard Perle, how’s the view from under the sofa?

  1. My god Richard and Bert (at least I think Bert Lahr was his name) are the same people – who would have thought!

    • Ironically, Bert Lahr would have caused much less damage to the world had the Cheney administration used him rather than Perle.

  2. I think Perle is right. If hew were the architect, they would have installed one of the exiled Iraqi conmen soon after Saddam’s overthrow, taken a hard left turn to Syria, and then back down again into Iran.

    But, rewriting history never works except in the short term. After Vietnam, many tried to rewrite history and failed. I’m not sure the Iraqi story is closed yet — we’ll see where we are after the US army de-surges.

  3. It’s gratifying to see that the majority of neoconservatives never change their tune. I’m expecting Perle shortly to claim he never co-wrote “An End to Evil.” I have noticed his telltale neocon “smirk* (only neocons can smirk while discussing grave, serious issues) isn’t as fulsome as it used to be, however.

  4. America’s national bird, the ChickenHawk coming home to roost.

  5. I have no problem believing the neocons had a major role in Bush admin. It would go a long to explaining why Bush claimed to be Repub but governed remarkably like a lefty/liberal/progressive.

    As far as Perle claiming he had nothing to do with Iraq, the expression “victory has a thousand fathers, but defeat is an orphan” comes to mind.

    While we are doing separated at birth, I think the woman in Ford ad on this site looks like a younger version of CJ Cregg.

  6. He’s also saying he knows no one going by the name of “David Frum”.

  7. Mr. Wells — don’t know what mental machinery led you to create the visual comparison (and ludic fallacy as moral relativism), yet you have created in me a profound respect for your subtlety. It’s funny in a queer sort of way — like the coyote pausing in mid-air.

  8. Odd.

    Harry (we’re doomed to lose the war, so lets get out now) Reid,

    is now publicly attempting to get credit for the overwhelming successes in Iraq over the past year. Not sure why Perl would attempt to disavow now.

    [note: you’ll need to trust me on that one, as now that the murder rate in Iraq has fallen below levels in the U.S. you won’t see a media report in site…only the purported century long “quagmire” was news, now that the “quagmire” is no more, the media has fled].


    You know how I just hate to point the finger of blame back at the media,

    but prey tell,

    why the massive reconciliation, drastic drop in violence, large swaths of Iraq being handed over back to the Iraqi authorities without incident, the increase in oil production, the massive renaissance, particularly in Kurdistand but now elsewhere, the tolerance and celebration [rather than destruction of – see Marsh Arabs and Shias] of other cultures [Christmas recognized as a national holiday for first time in country’s history], etc, etc, etc,

    isn’t occupying headline after headline (like the ‘quagmire’ was), but rather is virtually nowhere to be found (other than on alternate media sites)?

    If I was skeptical, I would think that the media is trying to avoid obscuring the narrative it spent so much time developing.

    Say it ain’t so Paul.

    Say it ain’t so.

  9. Sort of like getting the heart of a headline-grabbing story wildly wrong – a story which has a huge impact on the “agenda”,

    and then issuing a tiny retraction on page A 26 which no on will read in any event, and which is terse and technically correct but fails to link the impact to the original full, rich [yet misleading] story,

    on a grand scale.

    (BTW, have I mentioned my views on the reasons for the downfall of the mainstream media lately? Here’s a hint, it’s not the packaging (paper v. print) it’s the product – that being reliability to provide just the straight facts, with no “angle”/agenda/making a difference[the correct kind of ‘difference’ that alianates the majority of your customers).

  10. Here’s the thing.

    Analogies can be true in some ways but not in others.

    “Architect” is an analogy. I think of an architect as someone who draws up detailed plans for a project. Maybe you have an different idea of what an architect does?

    So Perle points out that while he was a proponent of removing Saddam by force, he didn’t actually draw up the detailed battle plans for the invasion and occupation.

    He says quite plainly, “I certainly supported and argued publicly for the decision to remove Saddam”

    I don’t get it. This is a gaffe? It makes him a coward?

    • I don’t much are whether he’s a coward or a bully. What Perle is, most assuredly, is a pathological liar.

  11. Ah, the ignominy of Hollinger International, and now this. Too bad, so sad.