Who's Perl & Krystol?

[NewHopeR]

Context:

Bush, Chaney, Wolfowitz, Perl & Krystol are not human, they are just animals whose predominant instinct is greed and I am sure their sub-human twisted sense of values allows them to sleep soundly.

More:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/15/wo...mentsContainer

[BobK]

Don't you have an Internet connection? They're obviously people involved in US politics or finance or both.

b

[riquecohen]

Richard Perle and William Kristol. You can Google them.

Note that your title should read "Who are...?"

[NewHopeR]

I've before posting googled Perl & Krystol and it offered no clue or offered so vague a clue in a mess of information.

Thank you.

[emsr2d2]

I've before posting googled Perl & Krystol and it offered no clue or offered so vague a clue in a mess of information.

Thank you.

I'm sure it would have helped if the original article had spelt their names correctly (Perle and Kristol). You would have had more success with Google!

[Barb_D]

I really feel I need to say this.

Do NOT try to learn English from the COMMENTS posted to news articles. As I said in another of these threads, the grammar is usually atrocious, the ignorance of fact astonishing, and the thoughts rambling if not incoherent.

I really, REALLY urge you to read the articles themselves and ask questions about the English usage you find there.

Then ignore the user-posted comments for puposes of grammar. They are no better than song lyrics, and often worse, because at least the grammar in song lyrics is usually influenced by a desire for rhythm and rhyme, instead of the profound ignorance and laziness that sets the style of the comments.

Questions about the usage in the articles? I'll be happy to address them.
Questions about the comments? Forgive me, but I'll ignore any of those posts from now on.

[emsr2d2]

That's a very good point, BarbD. I hadn't been able to get the link to open until just a few minutes ago, so I assumed that the spelling came from the article itself, not from the comments section.

The comments on many websites are not only written by a whole selection of people: non-native speakers, illiterates, and people who are so irate that they can't see straight, let alone type straight, that they should certainly not be assumed to be grammatical in any way.

[NewHopeR]

I really feel I need to say this.

Do NOT try to learn English from the COMMENTS posted to news articles. As I said in another of these threads, the grammar is usually atrocious, the ignorance of fact astonishing, and the thoughts rambling if not incoherent.

I really, REALLY urge you to read the articles themselves and ask questions about the English usage you find there.

Then ignore the user-posted comments for puposes of grammar. They are no better than song lyrics, and often worse, because at least the grammar in song lyrics is usually influenced by a desire for rhythm and rhyme, instead of the profound ignorance and laziness that sets the style of the comments.

Questions about the usage in the articles? I'll be happy to address them.
Questions about the comments? Forgive me, but I'll ignore any of those posts from now on.

Goo point!

I've indeed read through articles before reading those comments.

Yes, I basically learn English from the former, not the latter. The latter, however, offers the information on how readers think. So it is a necessity to fully understand both contents of article and comment.

Thank you for your kind suggestion.

[Tdol]

The latter, however, offers the information on how readers think.

In very many cases, they don't.

[BobK]

More than that, they frequently show how readers fail to think!

b