[eDebate] The CSIS Debaters Who Blog

Jason Russell jasonlrussell1
Wed Sep 9 23:46:36 CDT 2009

I couldn't disagree with Paul more about the qualifications of the
CSIS interns. And I ironically enough think Josh makes an important
point that helps my argument. I'll say this: they're not automatically
unqualified, BUT citing this evidence as "CSIS Nuclear Topics Blog"
would, in my opinion, overstate the role that either plays in the
CSIS. Effectively, either of these folks is basically a Masters
student without a completed degree, which is better than most
journalists (probably not the NYT, LAT, WP, or major news magazines),
but should not put them on par with true academic experts. This is not
to say that their evidence should be ignored, but it is to say that,
like Josh notes, they're probably not qualified to make the very
specific claims they're making with the very limited warrants they
provide in some places. I don't think that the guys tried to hide
their qualifications, but I do think it would be disingenuous now to
argue that this evidence is of top level quality or that insulating
the evidence from interrogation by refusing to note that it was
written by Warden and Jones is an attempt to hide a relevant fact to
judging these cards' quality.


More information about the Mailman mailing list