Over here, Marshall Art offers up an article from American Thinker (I do not link to racist, factually-challenged publications, so sorry) and challenges his liberal readers to find fault with it.
It was easy. The author claimed that Sadaam kicked UN weapons inspectors out in 1998, when in fact it was the US did so, ahead of a short but intense bombing campaign given the very-poorly named Operation Desert Fox. They refused to return not because Sadaam was mean to them, but because the United States was attempting to use them as intelligence sources. I linked to the Wikipedia article on Operation Desert Fox, and included a quote from Richard Butler in which he specifically sites US pressure as the reason UN inspectors left ahead of the bombs falling and missiles flying. Marshall's response was, in essence, "So what?"
He asked for evidence there was something wrong with the facts in the article in question, I showed him one instance, indeed one of the first ones used by the author over at AT, and he dismisses it.
There's no pleasing some people.
In order for fairness to reign, I am offering this post by Glenn Greenwald for Marshall to read (yeah, his posts are long, but I figure I read something at American Thinker and that felt long). My challenge to him (and to anyone on the right) is to find a glaring factual error - even a niggling one! - with a link to the source which, in turn, must be fact-based. In other words, I don't want a link to National Review On-Line and an opinion piece by Jonah Goldberg that says "Glenn Greenwald is a silly liberal". The source can be conservative, but the question is not ideological bias, but factual erroneousness.
