The National Review has published an editorial by Clive Davis on the BBC's paradigm-busting "Power of Nightmares" documentary, and it's exactly what you would expect. The names Chomsky and Moore continue their evolution from proper nouns to catch-all pejoratives. Sober, even-handed criticism of the half-baked conspiracy theories of Team B and The Committee for the Present Danger (among others) are portrayed as half-baked conspiracy theories, themselves. Etc, ad nauseum.
You can read it here, in all its pathetic glory:
http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/davis200410211043.aspAlso, here is my letter to Davis on one particularly embarrassing point of error. Thought I'd share it with you folks because I don't expect to hear anything back from him on this, much less a retraction or apology.
And why waste five minutes of typing on nobody?
"Dear sir;
In your sad and desperate-sounding diatribe against the BBC's excellent The Power of Nightmares documentary, you claim that the film-makers accuse (the quite insane) Michael Ledeen of being hoodwinked by CIA black propaganda and "using the dubious material in a bestselling book which subsequently convinced CIA director William Casey to over-rule his more cautious analysts and instigate a tougher line against Moscow."
You then make great hay over the fact that Ledeen didn't author the book in question, and that the "real" Terror Network author (Claire Sterling) being one of Daniel Patrick Moynihan's drinking buddies. "GUFFAW!" you implied, "Lookit da stoopid liberal media again! STOOPID!!!"
Upon reading your words, I thought your recollection might be off a bit. A quick review of the video and transcript proved my hunch correct. It turns out the film-makers make no such claim. From the transcript:
"The main proponent of this theory was a leading neoconservative who was the special adviser to the Secretary of State. His name was Michael Ledeen, and he HAD BEEN INFLUENCED BY a best-selling book called The Terror Network."
See that? "...had been influenced by..." Hardly the sloppy journalistic goof you publicly chortled over, is it?
In fact, it seems that YOU are the one who has problems keeping his lunatic, right-wing authors straight.
Perhaps if you'd actually watched the program (instead of simply glancing at the talking points provided by whoever signs your paychecks), you wouldn't have made such an ironic mistake.
Cheers,
YOPJ"