Email
Password
Remember meForgot password?
    Log in with Twitter

article imageOp-Ed: War with Iran, led by headlines of the week

By Lynn Herrmann     Feb 19, 2012 in Politics
Washington - Running neck and neck in their race to initiate war with Iran, America’s two leading dailies continue churning out propagandistic headlines designed to dupe, once again, citizens into supporting the waste of their own taxpayer dollars.
With Americans continuing to ignore our erosion of civil liberties, with Americans continuing to ignore the realities of extinction connected to the still unaddressed issue of global warming, with Americans oblivious to the certainty of austerity coming soon to their “Homeland,” and with Americans swallowing, whole, the hysteria of a mainstream media - in pursuit of ever-higher ratings - now reaching screaming levels on a daily basis for war with Iran, it really should come as no surprise in seeing America’s first black president presenting a personae of sitting idly by, watching all these events unfold. Talk about leadership. We only thought George Junior was bad.
After shoddy bombing attempts in India and Georgia last week, the Washington Post - quite likely America’s leading shill for Israel - and New York Times continue doing everything but declare war on Iran, with their headlines of shamelessness working the American populace into a blood-curdling chant for such war.
WaPo’s headline, “Israel blames Iran for India and Georgia bombing attempts; Tehran denies role,” was almost as sensational as Israel’s accusation, an accusation which came almost simultaneously with the bomb explosions. Almost. For good measure, throw in WaPo’s earlier sensational headline, a twin to be sure, “Iran, perceiving threat from West, willing to attack on U.S. soil, U.S. intelligence report finds.” Let’s save the oxymoron of U.S. intelligence discussion for another time.
For the New York Times, it was “Aggressive Acts by Iran Signal Pressure on Its Leadership.” Aggression. By Iran.
Not to be outdone by the dailies, network television has taken the roll of mop-up crew. Head cleaning lady in that department would clearly be CNN’s Erin Burnett, the network’s “house blockhead” and it should be noted, a former member of America’s white collar criminal network, the finance industry.
All of these outlets have, as Rolling Stone’s Matt Taibbi so succinctly notes, “gone back to the attic and are dusting off their war pom-poms.”
As government sources, always speaking on the condition of anonymity, continue feeding the administration’s signal to the media, the question is never asked, who is responsible for parading this endless list of anonymous sources, basically leaking government information? And why aren’t they held accountable in the same fashion as has been Bradley Manning? These anonymous sources are, after all, government employees, in the same fashion as Bradley Manning.
A likely scenario would be this. Barackstar, ever the manipulator - case in point: those great oratory speeches on hope and change, just for starters - is now taking a low-key approach in the government’s belligerent attitude toward Middle countries rich in oil or geographically vital to the transport of such oil.
Having seen his unqualified predecessor’s bombastic approach, - with us or against us, shock and awe, flight suit and all - toward the occupation of Iraq, this currently unqualified president parrots forth anonymous government mouthpieces, allowing the media to control a dialogue of war, rallying non-thinkers of the country.
For instance, Pentagon correspondent Jim Miklaszewski reported on NBC News with Brian Williams the U.S. Navy “would be the world’s first line of defense” in a war with Iran. You see, it’s not just a war between the U.S., Israel and Iran, now it’s the entire goddam world. The Pentagon reporter wasn’t finished however, as his one-minute report added Iran has a “massive stockpile of ballistic missiles” which are a “more serious threat.” By this time, with a standing ovation from his viewing audience and the crowd roaring its approval, they fail to hear the reporter, as he approaches the end of his 60 seconds of fame, say Iran “if attacked..would launch those missiles at U.S. targets.”
If attacked. But wait, we need a war. We want to support the killing of innocent people in foreign lands. We want our soldiers - many young and inexperienced and looking for a way out of poverty in their motherland - to give their blood. It’s the American way.
Is it any wonder we foment hatred across the globe? Is it any wonder a country would say, if attacked, it would then retaliate against the entire world’s most well-funded military, thanks to those non-thinking Americans and their taxpaying dollars?
Let’s see. Vietnam? Yes, let’s support the war. No, it was a mistake, bring ‘em home. Iraq? Oh, yeah, let’s bomb those brown skins back to the stone age. Nope. Mistake. Please come home. Afghanistan? Yes. No.
After U.S.-led NATO forces bombed and killed more than two dozen Pakistani soldiers last November, it should come as no surprise, then, to see Pakistan voice its support for Iran should Washington institute acts of aggression toward Iran.
At the end of their third trilateral summit in Islamabad this past week, Pakistan, Iran and Afghanistan’s presidents denounced “foreign pressure” on the three countries, noting the very foundation of their relationships is one of humanity and common cultural values, and as such, Pakistan stands with Iran.
To paraphrase W, that icon of the English language, is we learning yet?
This opinion article was written by an independent writer. The opinions and views expressed herein are those of the author and are not necessarily intended to reflect those of DigitalJournal.com
More about pakistan stands, with iran, foreign pressure, war with Iran, neck and neck
More news from