I tweeted Washington Post foreign affairs columnist David Ignatius (@IgnatiusPost) three times over the weekend with reference to his column “Iran — the next stage.” As I wrote in “Ignatius ignores,” I doubt he read the Joint Plan of Action the United States arrived at with Iran before writing his column saluting it.
The agreement with Iran is a matter of great seriousness, though it is only four pages long. I believe that Ignatius misrepresented it in his November 27 column on it. He did so, I think, because his friends in the Obama administration spun him on its terms. That is a story all by itself, if only Ignatius would own up to it.
Ignatius publicized and disseminated his column via Twitter. My attempts to elicit a response from Ignatius via Twitter are below. I regret the missing word “sure” in the second tweet (“Just wanted to be [sure] I got through to you…”), but I think the context makes it clear.
@Ignatiuspost Did you read the agreement with Iran before you wrote your column about it? | Power Line http://t.co/FH9ULYL8Hr
— Scott Johnson (@scottwjohnson) November 29, 2013
@IgnatiusPost Just wanted to be I got through to you, wondered if you wanted to respond | Power Line http://t.co/FH9ULYL8Hr
— Scott Johnson (@scottwjohnson) November 30, 2013
@IgnatiusPost: If u read JPOA before writing your column, why did u say it gets us into Parchin? | Power Line http://t.co/FH9ULYL8Hr
— Scott Johnson (@scottwjohnson) December 1, 2013
Notice: All comments are subject to moderation. Our comments are intended to be a forum for civil discourse bearing on the subject under discussion. Commenters who stray beyond the bounds of civility or employ what we deem gratuitous vulgarity in a comment — including, but not limited to, “s***,” “f***,” “a*******,” or one of their many variants — will be banned without further notice in the sole discretion of the site moderator.