Judging from feedback we receive, many of you enjoy our reading suggestions before the shows. We’ve heard that it’s like a homework assignment, but not the kind you hated in school. So keeping with that theme we have a new “assignment” for you prior to this weekend’s show. It’s about Iran and the finding similarities between the arguments for war there and the arguments that were made for war with Iraq.
The Iraq war was sold to us on fear more than fact. There were officials and pundits who encouraged us to buy into a new war under the assumption that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. Now some of the exact same people are creating a similar threatening storyline with Iran and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
For example, in a recent segment on CNN Erin Burnett told viewers Iran had the capability of building a missile with a 6,000 mile range. “Enough to hit the United States of America,” she said. Glenn Greenwald called Burnett’s coverage a “parody” and “too extreme to be believable.” It was this type of coverage that influenced opinion and led to the Iraq war.
Our team here at “Up” has begun researching examples of subtle and overt supporters for war with Iran, and similar examples ten years ago by the same people. And we want to open the door to your ideas as well.
So if you have suggestions we’d like to hear from you. Who was advocating for war with Iraq and is now advocating for war with Iran? Leave a comment below and be sure to link to the source. Or email us at upwithchris@msnbc.com with the subject line Iran/Iraq. Then watch “Up w/ Chris Hayes” on MSNBC this weekend for more. Of course, if we use your suggestion we’ll be sure to credit you.
We look forward to hearing from you.
-Brett Brownell (@brettbrownell) is video and web producer for Up with Chris Hayes which airs on MSNBC Saturday and Sunday morning.
Leave a Comment:
I think a good exercise would be to think of ways in which they are different. We know that the Iraq war was a debacle (to put it kindly.) Are there ways in which Iran is a greater threat? Are there reasons we should go to war with Iran that didn't exist in the Iraq situation? Are these reasons significant? Are they significant enough to go to war? And, of course, is there an alternative course of action that would accomplish similar goals?
A final note: Sadly, the fact that the same cheerleaders are pumping their pom poms is quite disconcerting and itself an argument against the war.. :-(
CNN, watched by many, powers the narrative. Erin Burnett's war-mongering was described as follows by the eminent Glenn Greenwald:
"It's the sort of thing you would produce if you set out to create a mean-spirited parody of mindless, war-hungry, fear-mongering media stars, but you wouldn't dare go this far because you'd want the parody to have a feel of realism to it, and this would be way too extreme to be believable. She really hauled it all out: WMDs! Terrorist sleeper cells in the U.S. controlled by Tehran! Iran's long-range nuclear missiles reaching our homeland!!!! She almost made the anti-Muslim war-mongering fanatic she brought on to interview, Rep. Peter King, appear sober and reasonable by comparison."
And of course, in the proverbial bushes, are the John Boltons of the world. And the panel led by Fox News' Bret Bair also would figure largely in disseminating the rhetoric and the drum beat of war.
And the hapless, irrational republican presidential candidates with everything to lose, when they take time from trying to legislate our sexual behavior and deny our biological evolution. You know, junk science and all.... those who think religion equals governance. Figures don't lie but liars figure. And might I say that Israel told our Leon Panetta, I believe, that they would not necessarily be letting the white house know if they strike Iran--so it's Israel too.
Hmm, links to sources, for everyone who did it then _and— is doing it now? Bit of a tall order Chris et al, ain't it! And you post this 3 days before your show!
Never the less, here are a few droplets for you to decide if you need an umbrella for the torrent outside!
Name (in no particular order), Iran link, Iraq link:
- John Bolton (esp. see )
#complete_timeline_of_the_2003_invasion_of_iraq_3175
- Bill Krystol
or pretty much everywhere!
- Richard Perle
- ... This is taking too long! Why don't you just turn on your TV, or read some headlines! There's little point in documenting and notarizing proofs of rain's existence when you're soaking wet! Even if I were to do this, I can just imagine you guys putting it all up on some chart or graph, as if that means anything to either the populace or the think-tanks who pay ideological mercenaries to push wars!
Start with AIPAC/WINEP/FPI/AEI or any other witches' cauldron, and go from there!
Great! Serves me right to think that, because you asked for links, you have taken the time to get your spam filter *not* to strip out links!
Darn Brett just saw this. Before the invasion of Iraq I was glued to the MSM, Democracy Now, Diane Rehm, Talk of the Nation as well as Cspan. Listened and watched closely. In
Aug of 2002 Jason Vest of the Nation wrote one of the early articles about who was stovepiping the false intelligence into the White House. The article "The Men from Jinsa and the CSP " is a great piece to read.
The Men From JINSA and CSP | The Nation
The Men From JINSA and CSP | The Nation ... Jason Vest writes on national security affairs for The Nation.
www.thenation.com/article/men-jinsa-and-csp?page=0,1 Now there are many other articles that helped the public understand what was going on including most of Seymour Hersh articles about Iraq and Iran. All at the New Yorker including "the StovePipe" Lt Col karen Kwiatowski's article "The New Pentagon Papers " is another must read. Having a hard time linking from this computer at the nursing home my father is in.
Many of us who marched against the invasion in New York in Feb of 2003 and numerous marches in DC during the fall of 2002 had heard former weapons inspector Scott Ritter on Democracy Now and where ever he could get on (not MSNBC that was for sure) and gave very logical reasons for questioning the validity of the intelligence. As well as Dr. Bryzinski, former Cia analyst Ray McGovern, Kathleen and Bill Christison where also out there warning about the validity of the intelligence. When head of the IAEA El Baradei came out in early march of 2003 and said the Niger Documents were forgeries and bad ones at that. Many of use thought the march to invade would stop. But it did not. In fact El Baradei's announcement made page 8 of the New York Times or something like that.
Many of us also went to the Project for a New American Century's website, read the letters sent to Clinton in the 90's pusing for military action against Iraq and who they were signed by. Wolfowitz, Feith, Perle, Bolton, Woolsey, Wurmser etc etc. The blue print for the invasion and almost everything since is there.
Soon after the invasion of Iraq (really soon) Cheney was on Tim Russerts Meet the Press repeating unsubstantiated claims about Iran. Russert did not challenge. Since then I have heard George Stephanopolous allow then candidtes Clinton, Obama, McCain repeat unsubstantiated claims about Iran. Have heard Face the Nations Bob Schiefer allow then candidates to do the same. Reuel Marc Gerecht who was out pushing the war with Iraq was on NPR's Talk of the Nation with Neal Conan several times over the last seven years repeating inflammatory rhetoric about Iran. You can go to Talk of the Nations websites and find those interviews. Gerecht has also been on the Diane Rehm show doing the same. Wolfowitz and Addington appeared at I believe the CNN's Republican debate and just somehow were able to ask questions about Iran that were based on false claims. Wolfowitz has been on Fareed Zakarias. Gaffney was on Hardball numerous times repeating false claims about Iran. Wurmsers, David "axis of evil" Frum have been on numerous outlets repeating false claims about Iran including the Diane Rehm show While many of the same individuals who lied the nation into Iraq have been out building the lets go get Iran stage and basically have gone unchallenged by MSM host there has also been a newer group out pushing. Just in the 2 months Barbara Slavin and Anne Marie Slaughter while more subtle their claim is that negotiation with Iran have been exhausted. Mr. Singh and Mr Jain from WINEP as well as Yoghi Dreazen were on clearly pushing the unsubstantiated claims on Washington Journal this month. I could go on. Here are the three claims that are repeated
1. Iran wants to wipe Israel off the map. Debunked by Professor Juan Cole over at Informed Comment several years ago.
2. Guest often are tricky with how they refer to Irans nuclear program. Often inserting "weapon". And never ever have I heard one host of an MSM show challenge the way guest refer to the Iranian nuclear program. And I never ever hear any host of any MSM show state the fact...THAT IRAN HAS THE RIGHT TO ENRICH URANIUM UP TO 20% UNDER THE NPT THAT THEY SIGNED AND ISRAEL CONTINUES TO REFUSE TO SIGN. NEVER EVER do we hear a host state that fact.
3. The new song and dance is that negotiations with Iran have been exhausted which according to Iranian experts Flynt and Hillary Mann Leverett (you should have them on your program that is if Comcast owners will allow you ) or you folks are brave enough to challenge unlike other MSNBC host. Negotiation have not been exhausted. The other really new song and dance is that Iran poses a direct threat to the US. Senator Lieberman, Senator McCain, Graham, Gillibrand and others have been repeating this one. On Friday I called into Washington Journal (have done so a great deal) when former Senator Feingold repeated this falsehood "iran poses a direct threat to the US. My comment and question are from Mary from Bellbrook at around 30 minutes.
So yes many of the same individuals who lied the US into Iraq have been building the lets go get Iran stage for a solid 9 years. Also at the Aipac website you could go to the action alert section before the invasion of Iraq and they were pushing for that war. And have been pushing hard for military action against Iran in their action alert page.
Guest for your show on Iran...Flynt and Hillary Mann Leverett. Professor Juan Cole, Seymour Hersh, former weapons inspector Robert Kelly (go listen to his take on the latest IAEA report at REal News) Get on it. Educate the public about Iran based on facts now what the war pushers repeat. The rest of the MSNBC host are too chicken @!$%#. Comcast owns them.
Oh by the way one of the worst offenders who not only has allowed guest to repeat unsubstantiated claims about Iran but has endlessly repeated them herself is NPR's host of Fresh Air Terri Gross
Reading Phase I and Phase II of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence about pre war intelligence is a must. Keep in mind that that report was held up from coming out by Republican Senator Pat Roberts before the 2004 election and then Phase II was held up until after the 2006 midterm election. Think Progress did a nice spread on that fact. In that report you can read a great deal about Micheal Ledeen, Rhode, Luti , Feith and other blood covered WMD liars.
I believe this is the transcript for the Cheney Russert Interview where Cheney pounds on Iran and Russert never challenges
Transcript for Sept. 14 - Meet the Press - msnbc.com
One of Boltons visits on Talk of the Nation
John Bolton on America's Course of Action : NPR
"
Mr. BOLTON: May I ask you a question?
JOHN: …make sure that never happened again?
Mr. BOLTON: May I ask you a question? Do you think countries that undertake treaty obligations should abide by them?
JOHN: You mean, like, countries who swear they're not going to develop missile defense shield or who are going to reduce their atomic or nuclear arsenals? Yeah.
Mr. BOLTON: I'll be happy to address both those. Iran is a signatory to the nuclear non-proliferation treaty as a non-nuclear weapon state, and it undertook that obligation voluntarily. So if it's seeking nuclear weapons -which I think it is - then it's doing so in violation of its treaty obligations that it undertook.
In the case of missile defense, which you mentioned, the United States did exactly the right thing. We didn't want to develop a limited national missile defense capability, so we exercised the plain option available under the 1972 ABM Treaty and gave notice of withdrawal. We didn't do anything in violation of our treaty obligations unlike the Iranians.
WISH I HAD MORE TIME. but if you google my name Kathleen..mondoweiss.. Firedoglake...Diane Rehm..Talk of the nation you will find lots of times where I object to guest saying that Iran has nuclear weapons or when the host do not challenge guest. I have been tracking this bull@!$%# for over 10 years
Oh yeah on only one occasion have I heard guest actually challenge the host of a show when they repeated that the Iranian leader said 'wipe Israel off the map" hooey. Flynt Leverett corrected Charlie Rose when Leverett was more recently on his program. Not sure which interview it was where Flynt nails Charlie for repeating this lie
Charlie Rose - Flynt and Hillary Mann Leverett on Iran
Flynt and Hillary Mann Leverett on Iran ... What’s on Charlie Rose: Tomorrow: Michael Beschloss, Robert A. Caro, Jon Meacham and more 2/17: Anthony …
www.charlierose.com/view/interview/10936
Not sure which interview that objection was in
Charlie Rose - Flynt Leverett
Flynt Leverett directs the Iran Project at the New America Foundation, teaches at Pennsylvania State University's School of International Affairs, and co-publishes ...
www.charlierose.com/guest/view/6680
Here is where Professor Juan Cole debunks the "wipe Israel off the map" hooey
Hitchens Hacker And Hitchens | Informed Comment
... to wipe Israel off the map ... Hitchens alleges that I said that Khomeini never called for wiping Israel from the face of the map. ... Juan Cole Informed Comment …
www.juancole.com/2006/05/hitchens-hacker-and-
Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2006 15:34:18 -0400 From: “Cole, Juan”
The speech in Persian is here:
Sorry that I misremembered the exact phrase Ahmadinejad had used. He made an analogy to Khomeini’s determination and success in getting rid of the Shah’s government, which Khomeini had said “must go” (az bain bayad berad). Then Ahmadinejad defined Zionism not as an Arabi-Israeli national struggle but as a Western plot to divide the world of Islam with Israel as the pivot of this plan.
The phrase he then used as I read it is “The Imam said that this regime occupying Jerusalem (een rezhim-e ishghalgar-e qods) must [vanish from] from the page of time (bayad az safheh-ye ruzgar mahv shavad).”
Ahmadinejad was not making a threat, he was quoting a saying of Khomeini and urging that pro-Palestinian activists in Iran not give up hope– that the occupation of Jerusalem was no more a continued inevitability than had been the hegemony of the Shah’s government.
Whatever this quotation from a decades-old speech of Khomeini may have meant, Ahmadinejad did not say that “Israel must be wiped off the map” with the implication that phrase has of Nazi-style extermination of a people. He said that the occupation regime over Jerusalem must be erased from the page of time.
Again, Ariel Sharon erased the occupation regime over Gaza from the page of time."
HOPE YOU FOLKS HAVE IRANIAN EXPERTS FLYNT AND HILLARY MANN LEVERETT ON. AS WELL AS PROFESSOR JUAN COLE
I think Paul Wolfowitz is going to be on Fareed Zakaria's tomorrow. Recycling Iraq warmongers has been a thing the last 9 years. Instead of these war criminals being tried in front of the Hague they are brought on US MSM outlets to rub the nose of the nation into their death and destruction in Iraq and promote more death and destruction. "no one is above the law" right... Think I must have missed when they held someone accountable for the Niger Documents and the rest of the false intelligence that came out of the Office of Special Plans. No need to wonder why only 9% now 12% of the American public have any faith in our congress etc. No need to wonder. Crumbling and rottting from the inside
Agitating for attacking Iran, with link:
Max Boot
Council on Foreign Relations: Senior Fellow
Weekly Standard: Contributing Editor
Project for the New American Century: Letter Signatory
Max Boot - Profile - Right Web - Institute for Policy
Feb 2, 2012 ... Boot has been a leading agitator for a U.S. attack on Iran, writing op-eds ... [2] In a January 2012 blog post for the neoconservative Commentary ...
rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/boot_max
I believe Max Boot is a foreign policy adviser on Romney's campaign team
The answer to Brett's question would obviously be ALL the right-wingers who advocated war in Iraq will also be advocating it in Iran. I think if there are any exceptions, they'd be a lot more newsworthy and interesting.
The really important advocates for an Iran war would be the centrists, Democratic politicians and liberals. And of course the totally unbiased journalists who are now busy preparing the ground for war.
Kathleen, above, rambles quite a bit, but there's a lot of meat in what she says. I hope Up takes account of some of her central points on tomorrow's show.
From "Stop The Spirit of Zossen "
1 day ago ... A Neocon's Views Of American Power In 2012 ... If the current war with Iran agitation feels familiar, you've got some remaining vestigial long ...
www.stiftungleostrauss.com/bunker/
From the fair blog:
Is Iraq Media Failure 'Coloring' Iran Coverage?
02/17/2012 by Peter Hart
'Huffington Post reporter Michael Calderone (2/17/12) has a fairly comprehensive look at the way media are covering Iran (I wish he'd cited FAIR's long record on this; perhaps next time). The point is that Iran coverage looks a whole lot like Iraq coverage, circa 2002. Really bad, in other words.
Calderone gets a pretty revealing comment from an insider:
One national security reporter, who has covered the intelligence community and Iran but was not authorized to comment, says that pre-Iraq War coverage and recent Iran coverage are "terrifyingly similar."
"I don't think we are falling totally back into where we were before, but I do think you're seeing, in some corners of our profession, we're making the same mistakes we made a decade ago," the reporter said. "We're taking things at face value and we're rushing to get ahead of a story that we don't know where it's going."
Perhaps the similarities between Iraq and Iran in terms how they handled or are handling the "accusations of WMD's" with incessant denials followed by a continuous breakdown in talks. It worked against Iraq and has the potential to work against Iran, which means it has the potential to work for the hawks in this country. By hawks, I mean the people who prey on war and make money. If the economy doesn't pick up, Iran may be seen as a "pick me up."
Bet you're going to be completely prejudiced against Israel. You always are
bet you're gonna be prejudiced against israel. you always are.
Hey I put up the information about Cheney being the first out of the box to start banging on Iran during his interviews with Tim Russert in 2003. Where did all of that info go. Put it up on one of these threads