How reporters trumped up a story about Iranians killing Americans in Iraq

[marmar]

from the American Prospect:


The Iran Attack That Wasn't
How reporters trumped up a story about Iranians killing Americans in Iraq.

Gareth Porter | August 2, 2007 | web only



On July 2 and 3, The New York Times and the Associated Press, among other media outlets, came out with sensational stories saying that either Iranians or Iranian agents had played an important role in planning the operation in Karbala, Iraq last January that resulted in the deaths of five American soldiers. Michael R. Gordon and John F. Burns of The New York Times wrote that "agents of Iran" had been identified by the military spokesman as having "helped plan a January raid in the Shiite holy city of Karbala in Iraq in which five American soldiers were killed by Islamic militants …"
Lee Keath of the Associated Press wrote an even more lurid lead, asserting that U.S. military spokesman Brig. Gen. Kevin Bergner had accused "Iran's elite Quds force" of having "helped militants carry out a January attack in Karbala that killed five Americans."

The story was a big break for the war-with-Iran faction in Washington. Within hours, Sen. Joe Lieberman issued a press release saying that the Iranian government "has declared war on us." That set the stage for the unanimous passage the following week of his amendment stating that "the murder of members of the United States Armed Forces by a foreign government or its agents is an intolerable act of hostility against the United States," and demanding the government of Iran "take immediate action" to end all forms of support it is providing to Iraqi militias and insurgents.

No one questioned the authenticity of the story at the time. But the official source -- Brig. Gen. Bergner -- offered no real evidence of Iranian involvement in planning the January attack in his press briefing on July 2. Even more remarkably, Bergner never even explicitly claimed such direct Iranian involvement in the planning. Instead, he used carefully ambiguous language that implied but did not state such an Iranian role.

It was not Bergner, in fact, but New York Times military reporter Michael Gordon who articulated the narrative of an Iranian-inspired attack on Americans. Gordon, readers may recall, played a key role, along with Judith Miller, in legitimizing a major theme of the Bush administration's Iraq propaganda -- the infamous aluminum tubes argument -- as the White House Iraq Group kicked off its campaign to prepare public opinion for war in September 2002. And in February 2007, Gordon enthusiastically embraced the administration's charge of official Iranian arms exports to Iraq in his coverage of that issue, despite a notable lack of evidence for the charge. .....(more)

The complete piece is at: http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=the_iran_attack_that_wasnt

[acmavm]

1. The NYT must love to help this administration start 'wars'. They have so

much responsibility for the current mess we'er suffering through in Iraq because they supported and covered for the lying bush** administration before the run up to the 'war', during the initial phases of the 'war', and every step of the way since. Their refusal to tell the American people the truth during every minute of this administration's existence proves that they are untrustworthy (to say the least). They don't report, they lie.

Just because they print something once in a while that may reflect the truth about the neocons and their lawlessness DOES NOT make up for their love of kissing the ass of the worst government, a totally corrupt and unelected government, that this country has ever seen.

[alstephenson]

2. So how do these "journalists" get away with this?

They just make shit up as they go and no one seems to call them on it until the sheeple have already accepted it as fact. ENOUGH ALREADY!!!

[zbdent]

3. When it's a columnist/reporter who sometimes sides with a Dem/Lib

it's a federal crime ...

If it's someone sleeping with a Republican and constantly fellates the Repukes ... they get a Faux News show ... and soon, the Editor-In-Chief of the Faux Street Journal ...

[Captain Angry]

4. If you want to get the news first, you have to make the news.

If you want the ability to be the state media, you have to earn it.

The nauseating part is that the NYT still puts "All the news fit to print" on their paper. They should have had that right revoked, since it's clearly false advertising.