[Previous] Deal and no deal...

 [Next] Kick the United Nations out of the United States...

Some related posts from Technorati and Google.

Grasping Reality with Every Limb: Brad DeLong's Semi-Daily Journal: What We Wanted to Tell You About Iran - New York Times: Flynt Leverett and Hillary Mann: HERE is the redacted version of a draft Op-Ed article we wrote for The Times, as blacked out by the Central Intelligence Agency's Publication Review Board after the White House intervened in the normal prepublication review process and demanded substantial deletions. Agency officials told us that they had concluded on their own that the original draft included no classified material, but that they had to bow to the White House. (via Cosmos)

  Why Are We Back In Iraq?: In the aftermath of 9/11, the cooperative spirit around the world sparked by America's victimhood encouraged Iran to collaborate with the United States in its effort to topple the Taliban in Afghanistan. But the goodwill that might have been sustained by those early negotiations was undermined by a series of disputes between the US and Iran. (via Cosmos)

  MediaChannel: According to Leverett the op-ed was “all based on stuff that Secretary Powell, Secretary Rice, Deputy Secretary Armitage have talked about publicly. It’s been extensively reported in the media.” Leverett says the incident shows “just how low people like Elliot Abrams at the NSC [National Security Council] will stoop to try and limit the dissemination of arguments critical of the administration’s policy.” (via Cosmos)

CRIMES AND CORRUPTIONS OF THE NEW WORLD ORDER NEWS: In a piece that ran above the redacted article in Friday's New York Times, Leverett and Mann said the information that was withheld - at the White House's request - has already appeared in a dozen news articles and official government press briefings. (via Cosmos)

  Three Wise Men: The Bush administration will refuse (to imagine them switching to a new policy, however sensible, is at this point unimaginable.) But Congress is now occupied by those who think rapprochment is the key to our future in the Middle East, though they only whisper it for now, I'm sure mostly out of fear of being branded as traitors or appeasors by the war-bloggers and hawks whose wise recommendations have produced the catastrophe that is Iraq. But that will change with time, and with the advocacy of those like Leverett and the other truly "wise men" of foreign policy who have been spurned by this administration. (via Cosmos)

  Tailrank - Top News for Today: Redacted version of Op-Ed on Iran (via Cosmos)

rc3.org: Of Interest: 18 Movie Musicals You Can Actually Sing Along With ”” The Onion AV Club runs down the essentials. New York Times runs op-ed with sections redacted for reasons of "national security" blacked out ”” Everyone thinks the editorial was censored for political reasons. (via Cosmos)

  Drinking Liberally in New Milford: It should be interesting to see if some of the brighter bulbs in the Blogosphere can piece some of the edited material together. To make the game easier and more fun for all of us: Leverett has provided his original citations “to demonstrate that all of the material the White House objected to is already in the public domain.” (via Cosmos)

  Tailrank - Top News for Today: (via Cosmos)

It Shines For All: Iran will only cooperate with the United States, whether in Iraq or on the nuclear issue, as part of a broader rapprochement addressing its core security concerns. This requires extension of a United States security guarantee -- effectively, an American commitment not to use force to change the borders or form of government of the Islamic Republic -- bolstered by the prospect of lifting United States unilateral sanctions and normalizing bilateral relations. (via Cosmos)

  Gjoblaag: Here's the op-ed piece, complete with blacked out lines. May require login. (via Cosmos)

  Pajamas Media: Speaking of disasters and battered institutions, Lou Dolinar at Real Clear Politics takes down Big Media’s coverage of the Bane of New Orleans using hard facts: Remember the dozens, maybe hundreds, of rapes, murders, stabbings and deaths resulting from official neglect at the Superdome after Hurricane Katrina? The ones that never happened, as even the national media later admitted? (via Cosmos)

  ArmsControlWonk: I’m surprised they would be so heavy-handed with the NYTimes like this, especially in relation to a topic which doesn’t seem to have any real security implications except in that it would be somewhat embarassing to the government (it seemed fairly clear to me, at least on a first pass, that the redacted information was mostly about the US reneging on various cooperations and agreements with Iran). (via Cosmos)

  Media | News.blog | CNET News.com: The Times says this Board found nothing wrong with the article, co-authored by a former employee of the National Security Council. However, the Board apparently made the deletions from the original article on orders from the White House. (via Cosmos)

Buckdog: A editorial opinion by Flynt Leverett was published in the New York Times today and in a bold move was published complete with the White House censored portions blacked out. The censored essay is what remains of an essay criticizing Bush's policies toward Iran. (via Cosmos)

CRIMES AND CORRUPTION OF THE NEW WORLD ORDER NEWS: HERE is the redacted version of a draft Op-Ed article we wrote for The Times, as blacked out by the Central Intelligence Agency’s Publication Review Board after the White House intervened in the normal prepublication review process and demanded substantial deletions. Agency officials told us that they had concluded on their own that the original draft included no classified material, but that they had to bow to the White House. (via Cosmos)

  Prometheus 6 | All respect and no restraint: HERE is the redacted version of a draft Op-Ed article we wrote for The Times, as blacked out by the Central Intelligence Agency’s Publication Review Board after the White House intervened in the normal prepublication review process and demanded substantial deletions. Agency officials told us that they had concluded on their own that the original draft included no classified material, but that they had to bow to the White House. (via Cosmos)

The Democratic Daily: Of course, it’s politically expedient for Hillary to evolve now, the sooner the better, if she expects to woo any serious liberals to her corner if she declares that she will run in ‘08. Personally, I think she’s got a long way to go to play catch up with other potenial ‘08 candidates who have far more vocal about the issue for a very long time now, and have also “publicly declared regret for their votes.” (via Cosmos)

  Poetry Hut Blog: Western poets seem to be obsessively and endlessly interested in arguing about the differences between haiku and senryu — (via Cosmos)

 [Tpmmuckraker.com] TPMmuckraker December 21, 2006 03:58 PM: Now Steve Clemons, a friend of Leverett's, reports on his blog (ed.: see editorial note below) that tomorrow the Times will run the op-ed "with redacted lines 'blacked out.'" Clemons told me by phone that the Times will instruct readers where they can find the omitted information in other (unclassified) publications -- like, for instance, in Leverett's paper on the same topic called "Dealing with Tehran," published through the Century Foundation.

 [Ndnblog.org] NDN Blog | NDN Blog: Intellectually exhausted, politically defeated and personally repudiated, President Bush and his Administraton are desperately trying to figure out what to do in Iraq.  As time goes on it is growing more likely that what they will settle on will be more prayer than policy.  They are going to put a series of things in motion that may work, but will not have a high or even probable likelihood of success, and then essentially just wish for the best.  They simply are no longer in control of what is happening in Iraq and the region, and have made it clear in recent weeks that they don't have the imagination, the humility and the strength to find not just a new path forward but a better one (see my most recent post for more).  

[Profcutler.com] Cutler: Numerous analyses have raised serious doubts that U.S. military strikes against Iran’s nuclear infrastructure would delay significantly its nuclear development, because of profound uncertainty about the reliability and comprehensiveness of target selection, the possibility that “unknown” facilities are at least as close to producing weapons-grade fissile material as “known” facilities, and the prospect that Tehran could reconstitute its nuclear program relatively rapidly.  At the same time, U.S. military action against Iran almost certainly would have profoundly negative consequences for a range of other U.S. interests.

 [Boston.com] Brainiac - The Boston Globe: I'm not a scientist, but I would guess that Expedia and Travelocity's carbon-offset charge of $16.99 might in fact represent a low-ball estimate, rather than the work of "the most frenzied environmentalist." Have a look at climatecrisis.net, the Web site of the Al Gore film, "An Inconvenient Truth." If you click on "Calculate your personal impact" and enter the number of flights you took in a given year -- even, say, three round trips -- you'll be amazed as to how much your carbon report card plummets. Due to the massive amounts of fuel burnt by a commercial jet in a given flight, each passenger is responsible for more carbon output than if she drove the same distance.

Reflected tags on Technorati: Blog, Iran, Iran Reviews