Perle's response to VF's pre-publishing release tells me all I need to know about the supposed mass neocon epiphany, even discounting from Ledeen's intellectual, mental and moral vacuity.well said.
If you believe what you say, and it needs to be said, you say it. Facts are facts and the truth is the truth, period. In this case, his is the opinion of one of the architects of the current US foreign policy. If, if, it is in genuine dissent with the policy's current execution, then it is an opinion that needed to be shared with the electorate on the eve of an election whose single biggest issue is the war that policy birthed.
In setting a precondition on his comments, Perle says loudly that the truth, if you're going to bother to speak it, is still only to be spoken when it's convenient, or when it's no longer inconvenient, in this case politically to the GOP, the WH, and the neocon agenda. If he intended its dissemination only after the electorate could no longer benefit from that kernel of truth, it suggests its telling was only for the convenience of covering his own ass and salvaging some shread of his reputation. In other words, his epiphany, and likely those of the other neocon prodigals, are as worthless as an Enron stock certificate.
Whether they're covering their own asses, playing a game to throw dirt on VF, or jumping on the RNC's 'deny the WH' bandwagon to salvage what they can from their project, they're still amoral, lying bastards devoid of any sense of responsibility for what they've wrought, deserving of no absolution for their sins.
incidentally. it just occured to me (d'oh) that we should be using David Rose's newfound fame to promote the fact that he wrote the VF article on Sibel and also appears in the movie, and that he knows that Hastert took heroin cash. How do we do that?