Whichever DUer finds the most lies in this article...(money involved)

[WilliamPitt]

...gets to tell me which DUer gets a $100 contribution in their name.

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/11/03/opinion/03SAFI.html

I am the final judge. Go.

(Why am I the final judge? Because I'm putting up the money. Why are you asking? Find the lies! Go!)

[Khephra]

1. Instead of giving an exact count...

I'll offer this formula:

Each "We" + each comma + each period = the total number of lies

:evilgrin:

[lazarus]

2. do we need to list each lie?

Because that would likely violate DU copyright rules. :D

I'm 5 paragraphs in, and I'm over 12 lies already. Gods, this is horrid.

[La_Serpiente]

3. Howbout this one

Our dovish left will say, with Oliver Hardy, "a fine mess you've got us into" — as if we created Saddam's threat, or made our C.I.A. dance to some oily imperialist tune, or would have been better off with our head in the sand.

We contributed to Sadaam being a bully and tyrant.

There is also this.

Most television sets in the triangle depend for reception on the old rabbit ears, not satellite dishes; the Iraqi Media Network we set up is now operational but runs mainly old movies and canned messages from our Paul Bremer with an Arabic translation.

From what I heard, Iraquis starve for news. If Rupert Murdoch got a hold of their networks, that would be very scary.

I heard Sattilite Dishes were the hottest thing on the market there.

[DeepModem Mom]

4. "Sunni triangle" was Fox's mantra after the copter went down....

Safire, I think, once did his own thinking, without faxes blasted from Rove.

I haven't researched, so not going for the money, but, here are some problems --
1. "Substantial progress" is a fiction; 2. we don't know who shot down the copter; 3. it's too late for effective "media message"; 4. especially from an American general; 5. and 6. I fear Safire's last two lines are not reality-based.

(On edit: Now that I've reached 100 posts, it's time I donated myself!)

[Bundbuster]

5. 28 lies (after Safire-induced nausea)

William Safire is an Allstar Manifest Destiny scumbag. On key geopolitical issues such as the Iraq invasion, basically every argument or thought coming from his mouth/pen is a falsehood.

I counted 28 lies or mis-representations, and am surprised "Satire" didn't get at least an Ambassadorship from BushCorp.

[charlie]

6. How about the lie

that this is a fresh column? It reads like he plagiarized his 1983 scribblings on Beirut. Stay the course. We're liberating, not invading. We (Israelis) were received with celebration and flowers, we have solid popular support. A westernized Lebanon will be the lynchpin for a democratic renaissance in the mideast. Nevermind the embassy bombing, the 241 dead Marines, failure cannot be countenanced, Beirut would become sanctuary for Arafat ("the Chief of Terrorism") to export terror to Israel and the world. It only looks like ad-hoc-ery, we have a plan. We don't need an exit strategy, success is the exit strategy.

I'll bet Safire was using the same erase-and-replace template for his writings during Vietnam.

[annagull]

7. Are you serious? SafLiar?

I agree with the previous poster-everytime the word "we" is used just consider it a license to lie outright. It's the same as "We will hand over documents in the spirit of cooperation." Notice that doesn't say actual cooperation.

[Laughing Mirror]

8. Gen Abizaid "speaks fluent Arabic"?

and so his daily briefings from the war department will fall on rabbit-eared Iraqis like so many lilting lies falling off the lips of of our own media star staeside, Donald Rumsfeld

Abizaid learned however much Arabic he knows during two years at the University of Amman back in the 1970s

West Point and Harvard degrees aside, how does William Safire know that Abizaid speaks "fluent Arabic"

Has anyone here heard Abizaid speak it and can vouch for his fluency?

[gottaB]

9. here goes

"We (1) thought (2) we (3) won the first (4) Iraq war (5)...."

(4). The relationship between "first" and any implied subsequent wars is unclear. Also, from the Iraqi perspective, which is valid even though it is not "ours," the dispute over Kuwait involved many battles with imperial powers. It was not the first.

It will take some unpacking of "we" to get through (5). The coalition against Iraq's occupation of Kuwait was broad and operated under a UN mandate that bears little resemblence to the current "coalition." Total war against Iraq was not part of the deal. There was only support for ousting Iraq from Kuwait. Therefore, the idea of winning the war must be qualified: We achieved our military objectives, but that did not involve the destruction of Saddam Hussein's government or the nation of Iraq. Therefore the statement is potentially misleading. That potential is realized in the next phrase, "but lost the peace (6)."

"to Saddam (7) and his Baathist followers (8, 9)" (7) That's just hokey propaganda. The problem at hand was the invasion of Kuwait, not the person of Saddam Hussein. (8) The Baath party has adherents in several countries. Was there ever a war declared against the Baath party? A war of ideas perhaps, but that's not what Saffire intended. (9) Indeed, the use of the word "followers" is more demonization. If you're talking about political philosophies, adherents is the more accurate term. If you're talking about soldiers or citizens, i.e., those who follow a leader, then it's no more reasonable to call them Baathists than it is to call US soldiers "Republican followers of Bush." Perhaps Saffire wants to remind us of the thuggishness of the Baathists in Iraq, but that was never a causus belli so he can go get stuffed. It's moot, and misleading to mention it in this context.

"We (10) thought (11) we (12) won (13) the second (14, see 4) Iraq war decisively (15, howler) in one week (16, blatant lie), but (17) Saddam's murdering class (18)...." I'm going to allow "murdering class" for a moment but call "but" a lie because it doesn't actually qualify anything yet.... "and (19) his (20) imported (21) terrorists (22)..."

God, I can't even though a sentence. Saffire is falsely linking terrorists to Iraq's former governmnet (19). Actually, we don't know what relationships exist between various groups opposing the US occupation. There have been foreigners coming into Iraq, not imported (21) like inanimate things, but like people do, coming of their own accord. I don't believe they're Saddam's (20). If anybody deserves credit for them, it's Bush, whom Mubarek warned would create 1000 Osamas by his reckless war. (22) I called "terrorists" a lie because although there have been terrorist attacks, there has also been an unending barrage of straight up military attacks, some of which have for sure been instigated and/or carried out by foreigners.

"chose (23)..." Just to remember who chose to fight this war in the first place.

"to run (24, 25)..." (24) The Iraqis by and large didn't flee Iraq. (25) The foreign fighters are running in the opposite direction, towards the conflict, not away from it.

"and fight from underground (26)." Duh. Like how many historical precedents are there for an imperialist power crushing a government, the people rejecting occupation, and organizing an armed resistence "underground," as in not sanctioned by the occupation government. It's hardly a choice, in that they didn't choose to replace one government with another, but have a totally different idea. Certainly it's not a choice motivated out of cowardice as Saffire suggests by linking it to "run."

And with that last sentence, the lie of "but" is confirmed. The resistence to occupation *is* the war. Oh, and that brings up and implied lie (27) about "winning the peace," as if resistence to occupation couldn't be predicted and understood as a logical response to launching an invasion.

This is asinine. Sorry, Will, I'm going to have to quit reading this for reasons of mental and coronary health.

(On Edit: Typos; Took away a mulligan--Saffire doesn't deserve it; Added an explanation about chosing to be underground.)

[OldSoldier]

10. I say 24 lies

Most of the sentences in this piece are lies, but I only count 24 bona fide lies.

[economic justice]

11. Why are you offering money?

What's in it for you? Fair question?

[July]

12. Can we paraphrase the Mary McCarthy quote?

How does it go? Something like "Everything writes is a lie, including 'and' and 'the'." (she was talking about Lillian Hellman, I believe. Always loved that remark.

[Junkdrawer]

13. I'm focused on the BIG LIE: "Get Saddam and our troubles are over"...

Because THAT lie will be used to continue the occupation for the next several years -OR- until BushCo finds it politically expedient to trot Saddam (or his corpse) in front of the cameras - say next fall.

BTW: Oh the Irony: We put the Baathists in power...