How come nobody on your side of the aisle seems interested in the false sources story raised by the "burning six" story?You've a fine question there, Yankee. It deserves some response. Briefly.
Yes, if the AP are using questionable sources then that's reprehensible and should be condemned. I have no problem with that. But let's get some perspective here. AP may well be the biggest but it is hardly the only culprit. Can we also heap scorn on any news service or outlet still using Amin Taheri's material or associating with Taheri after the infamous "Iranian yellow stars" fiasco? That includes the whole Benador stable of writers (Krauthammer, Ledeen and all).
Can we do likewise with Ken Timmerman after his egregious lie that Jane's had reported that Iran had already bought nukes? They had done no such thing. That means every blogger with one of those "democracy in Iran" buttons.
And can we also condemn anyone who used questionable sources to claim that Iraq had WMD? Those sources said they were in a position to know - but it turned out they simply weren't. That hasn't stopped a whole host of media outlets continuing to use them. (Sada and the NY Sun, anyone?) The same holds true for claims by the likes of the terrorist MeK, ex-Saddam henchmen, which get turned into "anonymous intelligence officials" leaks to the media about iran's nuclear program.
The simple truth is that those of the Right, just like those of the Left you castigate, ignore exposures of lies and propoganda when it suits their "narrative" to do so. Arguably, it happens more often on the Right. I think the Left would be more interested in joining a bipartisan call for the truth if we felt the extreme Right was remotely interested in the truth rather than simple points scoring. You'll notice, please, that more moderate rightwing bloggers have hardly given the matter page-space either. I think that's because they know that it is all about points-scoring for the uber-right, too.
(And oh, yes, I did post condemning Frisch at the time, Yankee.)