Stenographic Reporting
Well the pre-war stenographic reporting of White House talking points that characterized the run up to the Iraq war just reared it's ugly head again on the front page of the New York Times this morning. The headline of Michael R. Gordon's piece, which clearly originates from a dark, smelly place, blares out "Deadliest Bomb in Iraq is Made by Iran, U.S. Says." The article is then replete with inflamatory claims by anonymous intelligence officials about Iranian involvement in bomb production in Iraq, the veracity of which it is clear Gordon did not independently confirm. Or even try to confirm. Or even care to confirm. A bit of elementary logic may have helped our intrepid reporter, such as asking himself the simple question, "Is it really believable that Shiite Iran would be supplying Iraqi Sunnis with IED parts?" Somewhere today Judy Miller is smiling.
Labels: White House Iran Propaganda Poodle Michael R. Gordon
posted by Paul @ 8:32 AM
4 Comments:
Good post, Paul!
Did you see this?
Juan Cole on Gordon's stenography:
Contra Gordon's unnamed government sources, "25 percent of US troops were not killed fighting Shiites in those three months. Day after day, the casualty reports specify al-Anbar Province or Diyala or Salahuddin or Babil, or Baghdad districts such as al-Dura, Ghaziliyah, Amiriyah, etc.--and the enemy fighting is clearly Sunni Arab guerrillas. And, Iran is not giving high tech weapons to Baathists and Salafi Shiite-killers. . . .
Moreover, there is no evidence of Iranian intentions to kill US troops. If Iran was giving EFPs to anyone, it was to the Supreme Council for Islamic Revolution in Iraq and its Badr Corps paramilitary, for future use. SCIRI is the main US ally in Iraq aside from the Kurds. I don't know of US troops killed by Badr, certainly not any time recently.
It is far more likely that corrupt arms merchants are selling and smuggling these things than that there is direct government- to- militia transfer. It is possible that small Badr Corps stockpiles were shared or sold. That wouldn't have been Iran's fault.
Some large proportion of US troops being killed in Iraq are being killed with bullets and weapons supplied by Washington to the Iraqi army, which are then sold by desperate or greedy Iraqi soldiers on the black market. This problem of US/Iraqi government arms getting into the hands of the Sunni Arab guerrillas is far more significant and pressing than whatever arms smugglers bring in from Iran.
We now know that Iran came to the US early in 2003 with a proposal to cooperate with Washington in overthrowing Saddam Hussein, and that VP Richard Bruce Cheney rebuffed it. The US could have had Iran on its side in Iraq!
The attempt to blame these US deaths on Iran is in my view a black psy-ops operation. The claim is framed as though this was a matter of direct Iranian government transfer to the deadliest guerrillas. In fact, the most fractious Shiites are the ones who hate Iran the most. If 25 percent of US troops are being killed and wounded by explosively formed projectiles, then someone should look into who is giving those EFPs to Sunni Arab guerrillas. It isn't Iran."
The first link was hilarious. I didn't even know that Gordon worked with Miller on the yellowcake uranium story, but it figures.
I was thinking that the term stenographic is just so yesterday, so I need something more with it. How's about "PowerPoint Reporting", or better yet "Instant-Whitehouse-Text-Messaging Reporting"?
Now today with the news out of Baghdad that a senior unidentified intelligence officer is claiming that, "high-tech roadside bombs that have proved particularly deadly to American soldiers are manufactured in Iran and delivered to on orders from the "highest levels" of the Iranian government...", it is even more clear that a full-court "press" is on to justify bombing Iran.
An article somewhere (I can't remember where) a few days ago reported that some analysts were saying the bombing is more likely next year, but that makes no sense to me for the following reasons: The claim that the Iranian government is, at the "highest levels", supplying Iraqis with bombs to kill Americans is false and this time around the Whitehouse won't be able to intimidate everyone in the press to uncritically report it (or rather people just no longer believe the MSM), so they need to move quickly before these claims are debunked; the longer Bush waits, the longer he gives the new Democratic Congress time to act to cut him off at the pass (although so many Dems are so timid maybe this is just my own fantasy); I would think Bush would want to get it done sooner so that he can control events longer after the bombing; Bush would want to do the initial onslaught before Blair steps down given that British troops are still in Basra and Bush could count on Tony's support more than his successor's.
As for the repercussions of such a strike on Iran, I can think of the following:
1. Lots of Iranian civilians are killed or maimed.
2. The Iranians actually do begin attacking Americans in Iraq and around the globe, thus resulting in many American deaths, casualties and much financial loss.
3. Jihadis of all stripes all step up activities, and the entire ME implodes with American allies such as Israel and Saudi Arabia coming under direct attack.
4. Persian Gulf comes under siege, and each side strikes the others' production capabilities. Oil prices go through the roof.
5. There are mass demonstrations against US military bases around the globe, with the result that many come under siege or even must close, especially in Western Europe and ME. By the way, some American cultural institutions will probably also come under siege and have to be closed.
6. NATO splinters. Many former US allies pull their troops out of Afghanistan.
7. The UN and IAEA are viewed as completely worthless institutions to reign in American imperialism and thus disintegrate.
8. Some OPEC members switch to demanding payment in Euros rather than US Dollars.
9. China and Japan come under pressure to no longer finance our spending.
10. The value of the US Dollar dives and inflation runs rampant.
11. Individuals and some governments take money out of US stocks not only in protest, but also because the US Dollar is losing value.
12. Don Rumsfeld's "Long War" becomes a reality with a Judeo-Christian vs. Muslim war lasting at least a generation.
Now Newsweek is reporting that there's talk of adding a third aircraft carrier group to the Persian Gulf (first page of article). There can be only one reason for adding a third carrier group, and the huge cost of maintaining three there strongly argues against any long delay in their being put to use.
Post a Comment
<< Home