« Mr. President - Tell Bibi No! - Publicly | Main | The Newshour sides with Israel concerning Iran »

03 February 2012

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

r whitman

Please remember that MSNBC is an entertainment channel not a news channel.

J

Colonel, TTG, Phil,

So those MSNBC b*strds have no shame, and don't care how many innocents they cause to be killed in the process, so long as they accede to their Israeli (deep-pockets) daddy war-bucks propaganda whims. After WWII, those who did what Israel and its stick-figure puppets (i.e. MSNBC, etc.) are doing today, were tried under war crimes propaganda. Some of the propagandist found the war crimes tribunal noose at the end of a rope, while others found prison cells to sit out their remaining time on earth.

Israel is the monster in this macabre movie that is unfolding, too bad that nobody (D.C. power structure) has enough balls to take them to the wall and put them in the war crimes box for their current/future crimes against humanity and their war crimes propaganda.

Sidney,

One has to wonder what the Creator of the Universe is thinking as Heaven witnesses Israel's crimes.

The beaver

Colonel

Do you know about" the 76-page report released under the auspices of the Bipartisan Policy Center (BPC)" as mentioned in this article:
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/NB03Ak01.html

The report notes that an Israeli attack on Iran "would pose serious risks". But Washington "could not remain neutral in an Israeli-Iran conflict.

"If Israel attacked and Iran retaliated strongly, the United States would have to respond, meaning that we could be dragged into a conflict at a time not of our choosing. We are not encouraging Israel to attack, but the United States must make clear that our country will never abandon Israel," it said.

Hard Hearted Empath


Hard Hearted Empath
CBS News has been pretty bad as well. In fact, I would posit that this "War Week" media spectacular officially kicked off with CBS Sixty Minutes on Sunday Night, huge puff piece on Panetta -- the puffiest piece I have ever seen on a member of government by the mainstream media. You would have thought this was an official DoD Public Affairs segment on George Marshall, not reporting from the nation's self-styled "top investigative team." There’s Panetta balancing the budget for the first and only time since the 1950s. There’s Panetta killing bin Laden with his bare hands – although apparently there may have been some SEALs, there, too. There’s Leon Panetta walking through the California walnut groves planted by his immigrant father. There was more gauze over the lens than for a Barbara Walters special with Liz Taylor. I felt like I was watching one of those “personal story” segments they show during the Olympics, over piano sonata music, so that women will watch. They “humanize” the person in the arena so that you are “emotionally invested” in the outcome.

Very invested. The “pregame” for this whole thing actually began with the New York Times giving free publicity to CBS by running front page article, effectively a press release, on the 60 Minutes segment a few days before, carrying a "revelation" from the CBS Panetta interview about the Pakistani doctor who helped pinpoint bin Laden. I watched the piece, and unless it was in the 1st 20 seconds and I missed it, they did not mention this revelation in the broadcast itself. But as Roseanne Roseanna-danna would have said, "Never Mind."

Then we had the annual threat testimony from DIA, CIA, and DNI. Then last night, an amazing barrage with more CBS exclusive footage of Panetta flying around the world and the top story -- David Martin on Panetta's leak to David Ignatius -- Israel will supposedly attack Iran this spring, before Iran can bury its research so deeply we will never be able to get at it. Then a close up on our new bunker busting missiles which we are trying to make go even deeper. Subtext: Let's not cut Defense too much. But it's better when we just show you this bomb in this context than to make Panetta come right out and say, in an election year, that we are going to have to go much, much further into debt to "deal with" Iran. Then, much as CBS News always used to follow a story about Reaganomics with one the homeless, so they now followed with a story about how Iran will do terrorism in the U.S. Lest we fail to make the connection, or something.

I have never before seen such an orchestrated campaign of scaremongering in the mainstream media. All the liberals who complained about how Bush and the neo-cons “played” Fox News should be ashamed. At least there were some dissenting opinions then.

steve

The media propaganda is bad now, but one can only imagine the war hysteria for US involvement should Iran retaliate against Israeli territory in the event of an Israeli attack.

A few missiles falling on Israeli military installations, and the full force of the Israel-first media and political establishment would demand that the US "save" Israel. And the issue would be framed in terms of Israel's imminent demise. Not sure Obama could resist that, though I would hope so.

Morocco Bama

Yes, it all seems very familiar, doesn't it? If it walks and talks like a.......you know the rest. So, why go to all the trouble if war isn't the end result? All this military equipment is going somewhere. We wouldn't want it to just sit around and rot.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=trAHpeIDL18&feature=player_embedded

turcopolier

Morocco Bama

Just some mechanised infantry unit going to Hunter Liggett or Ft. Irwin in the desert for training. The Army trains all the time. pl

walrus

The Murdoch press is banging the war drums as well with this islam hate piece:

"......And then there's Iran. Ever since the Islamic revolution in 1979, when the ayatollahs declared war on the West, Iran has been involved in many acts of terrorism against the US and Western interests. Tehran regularly threatens to wipe Israel off the map, and is now racing to develop nuclear weapons to realise its infernal goals.

Yet despite all this, the West has refused to fight back or even to acknowledge the Iranian war against the West, with President Barack Obama advertising US weakness by extending his hand in friendship to the regime.

Obama's catastrophic strategy has given Iran the one thing it needed above all else: time to bring its nuclear weapons program to fruition.

Only now, with the hands on the doomsday clock pointing to midnight, have Britain, the US and Europe finally imposed tough sanctions against Iran. But what use are these when they will almost certainly be busted by Russia and China?

Sanctions are supposed to force Iran to ‘come to its senses’ and stop its nuclear energy program from producing weapons. But the Tehran regime is dominated by fanatics who believe the Shia messiah, the Mahdi, will return to earth either as result of or to bring about the apocalyptic end of days.

That is why the argument that "They wouldn't dare launch a nuclear attack because they know half of Iran would be obliterated as a result" is fatuous. They would be happy if this were to occur."


http://www.melaniephillips.com/why-does-the-ailing-west-aid-its-islamist-enemies

walrus

War drums even beating in the Cambridge student union. We are going to war.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3dBzslDdQ_g

zanzibar

"Iran’s supreme leader lashed out at the United States in a defiant speech on Friday, vowing to retaliate against oil sanctions and threats of war over Iran’s nuclear program, and asserting that any attack “would be ten times worse for the interests of the United States” than it would be for Iran."

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/04/world/middleeast/irans-supreme-leader-threatens-retaliation-against-attack.html?_r=1&hp

What is the probability that the train has left the station for an Israeli attack as Panetta claims? Also, what is the probability that any Iranian response will be deemed against the interests of the US, drawing us into another military conflagration in the Middle East?

Morocco Bama

Yeah PL, I figured that. I thought the title given by the goof that posted it to Youtube was hilarious.

Thomas

"If Israel attacked and Iran retaliated strongly, the United States would have to respond,…”

And what if Iran did not retaliate?

It would be in their strategic interests not to retaliate, just defend the initial air assault by using close in aerial combat and standard AA to enforce maneuvers by the attacking planes using up their precious fuel reserves. There would only be one attack without follow up and Iran would gain worldwide sympathy for enduring an unprovoked attack. Sanctions would crumble as Asia turns its back on the US-Israeli policy and resumes following their own interests. Israel would become a pariah state and the Likud party would be blamed for incompetence leading to new elections.

The problem is the IRI has its share of ideological idiots like Israel and probably wouldn’t choose the wise way out.

I can empathize with that generation of 1914, one could sense war was coming and were only waiting for when and how it would start. I suppose the cheering of the crowds was more psychological relief than joy after being wound tight by the propaganda beat, thinking “Finally let us get this over with”.

Charles I

Canada, no longer a Dominion, but er, run, by Dominionists of the most vilely adept sort chimes in:

Iran is an ‘urgent’ nuclear threat: CSIS

http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/02/03/iran-is-an-urgent-nuclear-threat-csis/

Its Prime minister Harper's greatest fear, as noted here a while back after his recent CBC National News sit down.

Charles I

likely at best, certain if you're a pessimist, guaranteed if you're any member of Congress save Ron Paul.

fanto

The IAEA people just arrived in Iran within last few days, why does the "international community" (the war drum beating one) not wait for their report?

j, lower case

Ratchet, ratchet. This in my inbox yesterday from CFR, the subject line "Al Qaeda in Iran", already on Fox Noise and likely soon pulled out of the 60 Minutes archives and run on Sunday night.

http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/137061/seth-g-jones/al-qaeda-in-iran?cid=nlc-this_week_on_foreignaffairs_co-020212-al_qaeda_in_iran_3-020212

Jake

MSM has embedding on the mind... Its all about ratings. They could care less about death as long as its not one of them...

J

The CFR author on the article in question is a Seth Jones and who appears to be just one more 'shielded academic' who has never ventured outside his mommy & daddy's little picket fences. Born in 72 with a PHD from Chicago, does not an 'expert' make, which is what is alluded to regarding Mr. Jones credos or lack thereof.

I would love to attach all these pro-war wags to the tail fins of the bombs they want to drop on innocents, and see their sphincter factor shrink real quick from fear. Doubt that Jones and those like him have any inkling regarding the Fatwa that Iran's Supreme issued regarding nukes weapons. Course the Israeli wags don't want the rest of the world knowing that little gem, then they'd see Israel's black propaganda for what it is.


graywolf

Peaceful people don't bury nuclear facilities in bomb-proof mountain sides; don't seize embassies;don't threaten to close international waterways;don't play dangerous games with foreign naval vessels;don't arm terrorists.

The so-called "professionals" (diplomats, IC, FBI, etc.) gave us 9/11.
Why would I listen to them about ANYTHING, especially Iran?

Fred

The Iranian regime is violating the rights of 'your counterparts' 'your fellow students' in Iran? Maybe the Iranians will greet DM as a liberator, except he'll be back home rattling the saber. No wonder my forefathers threw the British out of North America.

Fred

At least you're predicable, unlike the probable war. Who was it that knocked off Mossadegh?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammad_Mosaddegh

Who was it that invaded Iran in '41?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Soviet_invasion_of_Iran

Might this have just a bit of influence of the current government of Iran? Maybe we should just ignore it, since we need a little vengeance for 1979, even though most Iranians weren't even born then. How much blood will slake your thirst for vengance?

Oh, 9-11, Still not Iran (or Iraq).

graywolf

What does Mossadegh or a 1941 invasion have to do with the current outlaw state run by sociopaths?

jr786

Pretty soon they'll bombard us with images of Israeli schoolchildren practicing gas mask drills, or elderly Jewish American expatriates saying all they want is peace, etc., etc., etc.

The Israel First press know where all the buttons are they have not yet begun to push. By the time they finish, we'll be printing out decks of playing cards and talking about the need this time for a clear post war exit strategy.

The buck stops with the President. As Col. Lang wrote recently, he has to be the one to say No!

The beaver

Don't know whether you saw this on Richard Silverstein blog:

http://www.richardsilverstein.com/tikun_olam/2012/01/31/israeli-film-depicts-iranian-first-strike-nuke-attack-on-israel/

HankP

With all due respect, I have to disagree. MSNBC doesn't have the brains to do propaganda, at least intentionally. IMO this is just the result of reporters who don't actually know anything. They talk a lot to US and Israeli sources (and rarely if at all with Iranians or anyone else) and then turn around and regurgitate it on the air. So much easier than research or actually determining the facts. Also, that way the US and Israeli sources will keep talking to them.

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

July 2020

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
      1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31  
Blog powered by Typepad