Denying the Truth: Petraeus, Iraq, and Our Pontius Pilate Press

I was in Miami last night for the Univision-hosted Democratic debate. Listening to their responses on Iraq left no doubt that the candidates have gotten the message that, no matter what Gen. Petraeus says during his testimony, the American people -- including the Hispanic community -- are done with this war.

"We need to quit refereeing their civil war and bring our troops home as soon as possible," said Hillary Clinton.

"I believe no political progress [in Iraq] means no funding without a timetable for withdrawal," said John Edwards.

"I'm calling on Republican congressmen and legislators to overturn the president's veto of a timetable," said Barack Obama.

Later, after the debate, Chris Dodd told me he had made it clear to Harry Reid: "As you are trying to get Republican votes for a compromise bill, don't count on my vote on any legislation that doesn't include a clear withdrawal date."

I asked freshman Sen. Bob Menendez of New Jersey if he felt the same way. "I voted against the war as a Congressman," he told me. "I've been in favor of a definite withdrawal date for a long time. I don't close the door on a bill that, like the Webb amendment, would achieve the same results by making troops unavailable. But it's time for America to stop enabling Iraqis' refusal to come to terms with what they need to do."

So the American people get it, and the Democrats running for president and trying to win their votes get it. Then why do so many in the media still not get it?

In Sunday's New York Times, Michael Gordon, Judy Miller's former partner in the Ahmed Chalabi vaudeville production of "Saddam's Got WMD," served up a fact-challenged piece of administration propaganda in which he asserted, "The most comprehensive and up-to-date military statistics show that American forces have made some headway toward a crucial goal of protecting the Iraqi population."

Talk about drinking the Kool-Aid. Nowhere does Gordon point out that the methodology the Pentagon uses to arrive at the comprehensive stats he cites has been thoroughly discredited, as shown by the Washington Post. Instead he asserts:

"Data on car bombs, suicide attacks, civilian casualties and other measures of the bloodshed in Iraq indicate that violence has been on the decline, though the levels generally remain higher than in 2004 and 2005."

Apparently, this means there was some period in 2006 in which attacks, as measured in some particular way, were higher than now. Thanks, Michael Gordon. Your White House thank-you note is no doubt in the mail.

Gordon ends his muddled piece by adopting the pseudo-objective "on the one hand... but on the other" stance favored by so many in his profession: "The figures that have emerged in recent government reports have seemingly provided something for everyone."

I guess we just can't know anything, can we?

Like Pontius Pilate washing his hands of responsibility, too many in the Washington press corps want to pretend they are leaving the question of "what is truth" to their readers -- refusing to admit that there is even such a thing as truth. It is particularly troubling that so many in a profession dedicated to the idea that there is a truth to be ferreted out -- and that the public has a right to know it -- remain so resolutely committed to presenting two sides to every story -- even when the facts are solidly on one side.

Progress in Iraq is actually something that can be measured. Last week's report from the Government Accountability Office did such measuring. That's why it was immediately attacked by Republicans -- because it pointed out that Iraq was failing to meet 11 of 18 benchmarks.

But the administration has faith that, because of the way too many in the press operate, all it has to do is sow doubt. The GAO puts out one set of facts, the administration puts out an opposing set of "facts" -- and counts on reporters to refuse to see the difference between facts and "facts."

Case in point: Sunday's AP story about how Petraeus and Ambassador Crocker wouldn't be meeting with "Mr. Bush or their immediate bosses" in order to protect the "independence and the integrity of their testimony." This is a claim that is beneath contempt. It is hard to fathom how a journalistic operation could write something so blatantly untrue when there have been numerous stories about how the Petraeus report has already been discussed and thoroughly vetted by the White House and how Ed Gillespie has set up a war room between the Pentagon, the State Department, and the White House to coordinate the Petraeus PR campaign.

The stated purpose of the surge was to provide the stability and security necessary for political progress to be made by the Iraqi government. Progress that, as the GAO report made clear, is unequivocally not happening.

So the White House focuses on small improvements in cherry-picked data. But it surely isn't surprising that in the immediate vicinity of the 30,000 troops involved in the surge, attacks might temporarily decrease. Just as it's not surprising, for instance, that the crime
rate inside the gates of the White House is lower than the rate in NE Washington. The point of the surge was that it would have a political spillover effect. But since that hasn't happened, the White House is once again attempting to move the goalposts, and the Michael Gordons of the press corps are there to help with the heavy lifting.

The problem for the White House, and General Petraeus, and the go-along members of the press, is that the public isn't buying it anymore. According to a Washington Post-ABC News poll, only 40 percent of Americans expect General Petraeus to give an accurate picture of Iraq. Fifty-three percent believe he'll give an overly optimistic presentation. And a whopping two-thirds say it doesn't matter what Petraeus says because Bush will hold to his Iraq policy no matter what.

Today, we've been told by the White House and by the press, is The Big Day. Petraeus has come down from the mountaintop with his 10 Commandments and all of humanity now knows the way forward in Iraq. Except, unlike the original, Petraeus' message is not divinely inspired. Indeed, having watched his opening salvo -- which he delivered while barely looking up from his script -- it's not even grounded in reality.

The driving force of the White House's approach to this war has been the belief that saying something is so makes it so. That truly is the first commandment of the Bush administration. But it wasn't true when the war started and it's not true now.

The time has come for the media to stop acting as if there are two sides to the story of what's happening in Iraq when there is only one.

Comments

[UADave]

This is the war that never ends; Yes, it goes on and on my friends; Some people started fighting it not knowing what it was: And they'll continue fighting it forever just because"
This is the war that never ends; Yes, it goes on and on my friends; Some people started fighting it not knowing what it was: And they'll continue fighting it forever just because"
This is the war that never ends; Yes, it goes on and on my friends; Some people started fighting it not knowing what it was: And they'll continue fighting it forever just because"

[mirza]

boycott the NYT

"Nowhere does Gordon point out that the methodology the Pentagon uses to arrive at the comprehensive stats he cites has been thoroughly discredited, as shown by the Washington Post".

[grandmotherlight]

I am sitting her watching "Lifting the Veil" on CNN. The reporter asks a woman why she is still wearing a Burkha when their new consititution guarantees women the right to be free. The Afgani woman's answer sent a chill through me. She said that a constituion means nothing if the person in charge does not follow it. This is the sum of our problem in a proverbial nutshell. Bush cares nothing about our constituion so it means nothing. We are in more serious trouble than many of us suspect.

[mostlybluedot]

I so much agree. It seems the media insists on having two sides to everything even if only one side is the right one. We also insist on installing our military leaders with infallibility even after they have proven they are wrong as often as they are right, and in the case of Iraq, are almost totally wrong- - because they allow themselves to be used as pawns for Bush. And the media allows their "guests" more than equal time to spew the lies. They do not have the courage to say even the most basic truths in the face of bald face lies.

[rezoom1]

The "truth" is, Arianna, that we don't know who or what our enemy is. We blame humans. The blame should be directed at the process of belief. It is the process...the system...itself that we must attack with vigor.
That process is the means by which gullible humans become immersed in beliefs which lead them to suicide terrorism for false reasons. Simply put, they believe in an Allah and a Paradise which do not exist. They accept the traditional lies and fantasies offere them. They are victims of centuries of distorted fiction offered as fact. Were terrorists to know that their God and their Hereafter are lies, they would prize life over fruitless death. Once they die, they are done. Were they to be educated in logic, history, mathmatics, science, and culture they would arrive at different solutions to human problems.

Yet...we in America also are blind to truth and rational thought. We pursue this war with our endless attacks on windmills. And, worst of all, our supreme leader, President Bush, is himself as ignorant as the terrorists, as he sends our youth into battles for which there is no beginning nor any end.

Our leadership must begin to look at the real truths of the development of religion, and how it is used against mankind. Name one atheist in Washington DC. I venture to say the number of atheists can only be found by looking in the closet at midnight. They will be in there with the intellectuals who are capable of rational thought. The closet is a lonely place indeed.

[fred]

great new today !
the UNCCD program got no funds during last meeting, thanks to Japan and USA (according to the press I read). The plan is there, ready, but will probably not be applied.
WHAT THE HELL ARE THEY WAITING FOR ?
ISN'T IT THE TOP PRIORITY ?
WHAT KIND OF SHIT FILLS THEIR SKULLS ?

[kart0624]

If this country needs to stop the current war and help not start future wars, we have to stop the Arms Manufacturers & Oil lobby from assuming more power .Obviously it won't possible until the people of the United States elect a President and Congress that will shut the doors on corruption through lobbying efforts.

I know most of the readers here are aware of dubious/murderous connections between Congress-White House and lobbying firms for various defense manufacturers, but here is a link for an article that shows how things are done

http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=14307

When the next Demcratic Congress/White House gets elected, people should put an end to this once and for all. It's the greatest threat to world peace, so shameful that few in a powerful country can hurt millions around the world.

[dougd]

"Like Pontius Pilate washing his hands of responsibility, too many in the Washington press corps want to pretend they are leaving the question of "what is truth" to their readers -- refusing to admit that there is even such a thing as truth. It is particularly troubling that so many in a profession dedicated to the idea that there is a truth to be ferreted out -- and that the public has a right to know it -- remain so resolutely committed to presenting two sides to every story -- even when the facts are solidly on one side."

But the post-modern idea is that there is no absolute truth.

[Star123]

Out of this mist of crud is slowly coalescing another picture--this was about the oil. that Hunt guy--friend of Junior's--has locked down the oil in the northern, Kurdish regions. Suppposedly he was on the FISA board or something and knew this was going south. Now Junior says we are keeping the big old bases he built and sticking around--that this is now "generational." Oil, oil...

[voxrational]

THE TRUTH - People keep missing Arianna's point. The issue isn't whether Patraeus is good guy or not or whether he is being scripted by the White House or not -d'oh. THE POINT being made is that ever since Rove reaquainted us all with the ultimate power of propaganda, the MSM has abandoned their responsibility for seeking the THE TRUTH (which is their only reason for being).
The MSM (AKA State run news agency) has replaced the TRUTH with a gutless pursuit of symmetry "on one hand but the other", red guest speaks - blue guest speaks, liberal point vs conservative point. Blah blah blah Check the box.
Frankly most of us can accept the truth, good bad whatever.... as long as it is really the truth. But today all political sides get to spin the truth..... before we even hear the truth.
The Conservatives have long decried "moral relativism" yet they eat up a feast of "truth relativism" as long as it supports their POV - geez. The MSM has lost all credibility.
THE TRUTH is rarely balanced and almost never fair. Truth is the opposite of balance - it is an absolute - it is not supposed to be politically or morally correct - it just is what it is.
The truth.

[ddellapiana]

The mainstream media has been emasculated by corporate consolidations and takeovers. Honestly, I wonder if they'll ever be independent thinkers again. They'd rather buy their news packaged from Washington than dig up the real dirt. This is a sad situation for America because it's another lost component in the "checks and balances" equation.

[Mary3]

The "O'Really?" Factor

Did General Petraeus
Try to betray us
As MoveOn dot Org's ad implied?
Did he and did Crocker
Spin? Did they doctor
Their reports? Did Dubya's guys guide
Their answers? I hope not.
We'd all be in some spot
If we can't trust Generals. (But then
Recall late lamented
Powell, who repented
His appearance at the U.N.?)
Lorda mercy, what do we
Do when those in who we
Place all our trust turn out mountebanks?
It makes a poor wretch
Like me wanna kvetch,
And end up in the cynics ranks!

Mary 3

[Nyland8]

The headline should be:

"KUCINICH GETS MASHED UP"

Funny how yet another "headline" story on HuffPo manages to totally overlook Kucinich. I guess nobody wants to know where he stands on any issue.

Is it because everybody already knows where he stands and has for a very long time? Is it because he's been the clearest about all of his views? Is it because his vision for the future of our country is the most crystalized of any of the candidates?

Once again, we don't even have an image of him among the "candidates". You wouldn't even know he was running.

Somebody please ask Arianna why he is being marginalized and censored here on HuffPost, an allegedly progressive website. Did she think we wouldn't notice?

Inquiring minds want to know.

8

[dabronx]

Since it appears that most things in this country are driven by polls why not have a poll
on the perceived credibility of the MSM in this country. Also why not do like arrianna did
with the lying shmuck from the NYT and call
him out on the lies he published. Pull the sheets off the sons& daughters of bitches who
are complicit in regards to the damage that is
being done to this country.

[jbgnyc]

Tuesday I stood on the podium near Ground Zero reading 12 names from the thousands who were murdered by Osama Bin Laden on Sept. 11, 2001. My niece barely excaped from the South Tower with her life. I and my family, living just blocks away, had our world changed FOREVER. What has Bush's horrific war in Iraq got to do with any of this??????NOTHING, YOU FOOLS.

I am OUTRAGED. By my politicians, by my press, by Americans who follow our flag without rhyme or reason as if robotic.

Stop the stupid name calling. Stop the tit for tat.
END THIS STUPID WAR. Give Iraq back to the warring factions that own it. It is not OURS. It is THEIRS.

FIGHT THE REAL TERRORISTS WHO ATTACKED ME AND MINE!!!

I am exhausted reading some of tripe on this post.SHAME ON YOU. SHAME ON US. This was once OUR country. It no longer is and we let it happen.