the islam-fearmongering has been noted

Philip Giraldi is a fucking warmonger

On May 20, 6:48 am, "M. Johnson" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Shaping the Story on IranbyPhilip Giraldi, May 20, 2010
> There have been recent reports that Iran has enabled the travel of al-Qaeda 
> leaders to Afghanistan and Pakistan where they will be able to confront and 
> kill American soldiers.  If you think you have heard the story before, you 
> have, in another context.  In the earlier rendition it was Saddam Hussein who 
> was hand-in-glove with al-Qaeda, helping the group in its nefarious planning 
> to attack the United States and kill Americans.  Saddam, who was in reality 
> only a threat to his own people, was on the receiving end of a barrage of 
> fabricated information claiming that he was secretly developing weapons of 
> mass destruction and clandestinely dealing with the terrorists who were 
> responsible for 9/11.  Or so the story goes.  And now it is Iran’s turn and 
> the story and the storytellers are exactly the same.
> Even when everything changes, nothing changes for the American mainstream 
> media (MSM), which continues to be wedded to a policy of all war all the 
> time. There is a long history of media lies. William Randolph Hearst’sNew 
> York Morning Journalused deliberately sensationalized news reports to stir up 
> hysteria in 1897 that led to war with Spain, a war that he later boasted had 
> been enabled by his newspaper.  But other leading American newspapers of that 
> era were a lot more cautious in their reporting and some even lampooned 
> Hearst’s hysterics in the lead-up to the conflict.  Today it is different as 
> newspapers rarely compete for market share and have no interest in exposing 
> the half-truths of their peers.  The unanimity of view is particularly 
> evident on the editorial pages where the neocons and the groupthink that they 
> have fostered have become deeply embedded.  Everyone in the MSM agrees that 
> Iran either already has nukes or is about to go nuclear and that the country 
> shelters terrorists on every block, all colluding to attack a completely 
> innocent and guileless United States.  Saturated with the propaganda, the 
> American public more or less accepts that narrative.
> How we Americans have arrived at this sorry point is somewhat difficult to 
> explain.  That most media outlets have become parts of much larger 
> corporations that are uninterested in challenging authority, making their 
> news coverage a large dose of pablum, is clearly part of the problem.  The 
> closure of most overseas newspaper bureaus hasn’t helped either as it has 
> reduced the number of local reporters who might have applied their own 
> insider knowledge to developing stories.  Also the use of embedded 
> journalists in war coverage has meant that only reporters writing stories 
> favorable to the Pentagon spin are given access to the "hot information."  
> But the biggest factor has been the de facto takeover of many editorial pages 
> by hardliners who perversely believe that the United States can resolve its 
> problems by continuing with the so-called "long war," a conflict in which 
> Washington is fated to engage in never ending struggles against an enemy that 
> is increasingly being seen around the world as all Muslims.
> The media hypes the threat and keeps the story going so the public is 
> acquiescent as more Americans die and countless billions of dollars are 
> thrown down a money pit.  This is frequently accomplished by redirecting the 
> narrative when the truth is somehow unpalatable.  If, for example, Israel’s 
> bestiality towards the Palestinians is creating danger for American soldiers 
> deployed overseas it is far better to write instead about how deeply 
> concerned Israelis are about the "existential" threat coming from Iran.  That 
> ignores the actual clear and present danger to Americans and moves the 
> discussion to the completely theoretical threat experienced by Israelis, 
> reinforcing along the way the old narrative about Jews as victims, not as 
> persecutors.
> How this process works in practice with Iran is not too dissimilar to the way 
> it worked with Saddam.  Make up a bunch of garbage and let it fly, hoping 
> that some of it might stick.  Readers of Antiwar.com might recall the phony 
> Iranian nuclear triggersallegationsthat Gareth Porter and I put to rest back 
> in January.  TheSunday Timesof London, which is owned by Zionist stalwart 
> Rupert Murdoch, has an astonishing track record for floating stories that in 
> all likelihood come from Israel’s intelligence service Mossad.  
> TheTimesstory, which claimed that Iran was developing an electronic trigger 
> for a nuclear weapon in 2007, was important because if it had been true it 
> would have meant that the December 2007 CIA National Intelligence Estimate 
> (NIE) was flawed.  The NIE had maintained (and the intelligence community 
> still maintains) that Iran abandoned its nuclear weapons program in 2003.  
> Undermining that judgment has been a key objective of the various neocon 
> talking heads, all claiming that Iran has a secret program that the CIA does 
> not know about.  The nuclear trigger story would have challenged the main 
> conclusion of the NIE while also serving as confirmation of the allegations 
> about the hidden nuclear laboratory, so it would have been a two-for-one if 
> it had been accepted.  Fortunately, the story proved so full of holes that it 
> went nowhere, but not for lack of trying.
> Which brings us to the tale being spun by the Associated Press (AP).  If 
> nukes are number one in the Iran narrative, terrorists are certainly number 
> two.  And if allegations about Hezbollah and Hamas don’t excite you what 
> could be better than producing a link to the ultimate nasties, al-Qaeda?   A 
> week ago aninvestigative storywas featured as an AP Exclusive:  "CIA tracks 
> al-Qaeda moving from Iran."  The account is based on the fact that a handful 
> of al-Qaeda officers, including at least one of Osama bin Laden’s sons, fled 
> to Iran after the US invaded Afghanistan in 2001 and were subsequently placed 
> under house arrest. They have been there ever since.
> The AP story claims that there is intelligence suggesting that some of the 
> detainees have now been released.  The authors of the story opine that the 
> change in policy is so al-Qaeda can "replenish its ranks."  They cite a 
> number of "current and former" intelligence officers as their sources but 
> actually only quote two former CIA officers who apparently claim to have 
> current knowledge about the movement of the terrorists.  The other sources 
> are anonymous and it is not even completely clear if they are all American. 
> One of the cited authorities, Bruce Riedel, has been retired from the Agency 
> since 2006 and now works at the Saban Center for Middle East Policy at the 
> Brookings Institute.  How Riedel would have access to highly sensitive 
> information on the movement of al-Qaeda is by no means evident and the 
> article does not reveal his connection to Haim Saban, a Hollywood billionaire 
> whose deep attachment to Israel is well documented.
> The second CIA officer is Clare Lopez, who is a senior fellow at the Center 
> for Security Policy, which claims to be non-partisan but is basically a 
> pro-Israel Muslim-bashing organization, as revealed by itswebsite.  Leading 
> neocon Frank Gaffney is the founder and president.  Lopez retired from CIA at 
> some point prior to 2005, so she has been out of the loop even longer than 
> Riedel.  Is the AP story being honest about the likely reliability and 
> possible biases of its sources?  Apparently not.
> The AP story’s contention that al-Qaeda is "replenishing its ranks" is 
> nowhere supported by evidence that any of the detainees has shown up in any 
> terrorist operation.  Nor is it clear how a handful of detainees could 
> effectively replenish anything.  The account also ignores one fundamental 
> problem in depicting a pattern of Iranian-al-Qaeda interaction.  Al-Qaeda is 
> a Sunni fundamentalist group that thinks that Shi’ite Muslims are heretics 
> and should be killed.  Iranians are predominantly Shi’ites.  It is hardly a 
> basis for bonhomie.  And the account is sprinkled with questionable 
> commentary, like the assertion that Iran "has historically allowed al-Qaeda 
> members safe passage through the country," which is flat out untrue.  The 
> speculation that the departure of some al-Qaeda from Iran "foreshadows the 
> release of al-Qaeda’s ‘management council,’ including some of al-Qaeda’s most 
> dangerous figures" is also advanced without any evidence, apparently to hype 
> the danger.  Even if it is true that some of the al-Qaeda are being released 
> it is not credible to believe that a handful of men who have been under house 
> arrest for nine years will suddenly appear in Pakistan and make magic, 
> particularly as their prior to 2001 experience would count for little as both 
> al-Qaeda and the American response to it have shifted dramatically since that 
> time. Also, al-Qaeda would not be likely to trust the returnees, suspecting, 
> not unreasonably, that they had been turned by the Iranians and were actually 
> little more than spies for Tehran.
> The AP story received considerable replay in the usual places, including on 
> NPR, increasingly a shameless promoter of neocon foreign policy.  Thoroughly 
> indoctrinated by propaganda, most readers or listeners would not question the 
> fantasy tale of a handful of aging al-Qaeda men appearing from nowhere and 
> using their ancient wisdom to turn the tables on the US Army.  And most would 
> also unthinkingly buy into the explicit linkage of Iran to active support of 
> the most reprehensible type of terrorists.  Ironically, Adolph Hitler’s 
> Minister of Public Enlightenment and Propaganda Joseph Goebbels, responsible 
> for orchestrating the Third Reich’s media, best explained what is happening 
> in today’s America vis-à-vis Iran.  Hewrote, "If you tell a lie big enough 
> and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can 
> be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the 
> political, economic, and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes 
> vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, 
> for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension,the truth 
> is the greatest enemy of the 
> State." http://original.antiwar.com/giraldi/2010/05/19/shaping-the-story-on-iran/
>
>
>
> --
> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>  
> * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/
> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> * Read the latest breaking news, and more.

-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Reply via email to