Wednesday, July 19, 2006

Unimpeachable Sources, Rigorous Standards

It would be pointless to spend a lot of time dissecting the agenda-driven media hysteria surrounding events in the Middle East, so I won't. But on my way to breakfast today, I saw The New York Sun's screaming above-the-fold headline, "Hundreds of Iranian Troops Fighting in Lebanon." The details (my bolds):
Hundreds of Iranian Revolutionary Guard personnel are on the ground in Lebanon fighting Israel, security sources say.

"I have no doubt whatsoever that they are there and operating some of the equipment," an Arab diplomatic source told The New York Sun yesterday.

Another foreign source, based in Washington, said the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps contingent in Lebanon is based in Beirut and in the Bekaa Valley. He said the troops usually number a few dozen, but that the size of the force increased in connection with the hostilities that have broken out between Israel and Iran's proxy, Hezbollah, over the past week.
So for the paper's leading story today---and an obviously important one, if true---we have three anonymous sources. The "Arab diplomatic source" sounds like an unimpeachable heavy, eh? Perhaps from the UAE, Qatar, or Bahrain? Or maybe Iraq? From "another foreign source"---the Israelis?--we get further confirmation. And with a tip from "security sources"---a NYC beat cop? Bernie Kerik?--clearly it's an open-and-shut case. On to Tehran!


Anonymous Mr. Hedley Bowes said...

The warmongering continues apace. I wonder when the 'brilliant' strategists at PNAC will come to realize that drawing Iran and Syria into direct engagement leaves U.S. forces in Iraq in the middle of a deadly vise?

7/19/2006 1:13 PM  
Blogger Grodge said...

Time to buy more Halliburton stock...

7/19/2006 2:12 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Chuck "Strangelove" Krauthammer doesn't need sources of any kind to divine The Right Thing To Do. Sentient beings can pretty much guess what conclusions he comes to without even clicking the link. Yet another example of the quality philosophizing coming out of the "Party of Ideas".
-- sglover

7/19/2006 2:27 PM  
Blogger blogarillo said...

Look for "Hezbollah in Iran" to make an appearance in the marketing of Target Iran.

7/19/2006 5:16 PM  
Blogger copy editor said...

"Another foreign source, based in Washington"... clearly his finger is on the pulse of the conflict.

7/19/2006 5:55 PM  
Anonymous Whammer said...

Now we understand what all the mau-mauing of the NYT was about over the last couple of weeks. To get them to fall in line to support the "gotta go to war in Iran" story. They just need a new stenographer to take the place of Judy Miller.

7/19/2006 6:18 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

While I don't support or advocate going to war with Iran, it seems foolish to imply that they have nothing to do hezbulla in Lebanon.

R. Bettencourt

7/19/2006 6:54 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I have only one question for the idiots that think attacking Syria and Iran is a great idea.

The oil pipeline from the Middle East will not survive long under those circumstances. Then were do they think they are going to get the oil they will need to drive their 18mpg cars? From God? They will certainly NOT get it from the Middle East or Isreal, since they hardly have any.

Will we then invade Venezuala to steal their oil?
Has anybody in the GOP or WH any bairn cells left?

Talking about shooting one's foot, or should I say both feet with a bazooka.

I guess they love God so much they want to kill off everybody, I guess that is what the conservative believe is the protection of human life.

Give me a pagan anytime.

7/19/2006 6:58 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

While I don't support or advocate going to war with Iran, it seems foolish to imply that they have nothing to do hezbulla in Lebanon.

Surely. But this business of conflating Israeli's interests with America's is really drawing us into a minefield. There's no shortage of ugly armed factions in, say, sub-Saharan Africa. But I don't see the Krauthammers of the world urging us to plunge into the jungle because our favored proxy is in trouble.
-- sglover

7/19/2006 7:16 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The New York Sun has a pretty heavily Zionist slant. I must say, I wonder what level of pain it's going to take for Americans to re-evaluate our relationship with Israel. The gas lines of the 70's didn't do it. Iraq hasn't done it. When it costs you $150 to fill up your SUV, will that do it? Probably not. Most people will still fail to make the connection.

7/20/2006 10:39 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

If Iranians are fighting Israelis on the ground in Beirut & in the Bekaa Valley, then Israelis are fighting Iranians on the ground in those places. And there would be evidence. Or are the Iranians on the ground fighting Israel by firing rockets? Do you suppose Israel would suppress such information if it existed?

Does anyone imagine that in one, two, six months this story will have been borne out? Or that the Sun will pay any real price for fomenting war hysteria? That anyone will even remember it?

7/25/2006 1:03 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Wonderful and informative web site. I used information from that site its great. Humidifiers comparison penis Auction and lot of office chairs and ohio Canada divorce Wrestling costume fancy dress uk Ringtones for the motorola v60 new york liposuction

4/23/2007 9:52 PM  
Anonymous tokyo escorts said...

I believe every person ought to browse on it.

5/23/2011 11:39 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home