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.

Follow Arianna Huffington on Twitter: www.twitter.com/ariannahuff

Comments

[paulmorris]

I'm waiting for the inevitable remake of
'Lawrence of Arabia" which will be retitled
"David of Mesopotamia"

[gems]

Hi Arianna,
I'm glad all is well. This war is like the energizer bunny. It just keeps going, and going and going.....­(Too tired to be serious today)
Later
Gemma

[Polichick]

I couldn't agree with you more, Arianna. People are so sick of this war and of being lied to. The greatest activists in my community are tired. Nobody wants to call our [Republican] Congressmen anymore because, quite frankly, they don't give a damn about our phone calls. People are depressed. Places are going out of business. Folks are foreclosing on their homes, and one of the worst casualties of this administration in my opinion, is that Cheney, Bush, Rove, and the rest of 'em, have taught our country's citizens just how NOT to give a damn about your neighbor. It's all about selfishness and greed and survival of the fittest, and lying is par for the course in life. You can't be friendly with your neighbors these days; for all you know they are the ones who keyed your car because of your Presidential Candidate's bumper sticker last night. Or, you think you know them when one day you realize they haven't paid a dime for cable because they have tapped into yours since the day they moved in! Has American politics gone so far that we can't even retrieve what might be left of our lost character? Will we ever return to the day when parents actually teach their children the fundamentals of living in a civilized community like looking behind you when you pass through a public doorway in case someone is behind you so that you can hold the door for them? Or handing a clerk the money instead of dropping it beside her outstretched hand so that she then has to pick it up coin by coin? Our next President has so much cleaning up to do. It stretches far beyond the War. Trust has been lost on so many levels. Rebuilding that may be the most daunting task of all.

[Mauimom]

Arianna, your original point was about the "Pontius Pilate press." Where are the editors of these reporters [Michael Gordon in particular]? They should be asking LOTS of questions before they commit their reporters' words to print.

I'd love to hear more from you on this subject.

[researcher]

time to impeach nancy and reid.

traitors to this country for power.

americans are dumb enough to buy their excuses as to why they cannot stop this war. even the corporate media buys it.

politics only. put all the fox and cnn journalists in humvees and make them ride around in humvees until war is over.

only jack cafferty can stay and report on war. he is the only one that understands that bush and generals and administration are war criminals.

that commerical on tv that states "people are smart" has not met many americans.

we americans are naive in world affairs, arrogant: we believe that might makes right, and incompetent (all about me and my family) voters.

funny our politicans are naive, arrogant, and incompetent. humm. could it be we americans are getting exactly what we deserve.

[Ryter]

The "big miss" by most of the media and bloggers is the question that all but one of Democratic candidates will not answer: how many troops will you leave behind in Iraq? Governor Richardson is the only one with an answer: none, he says. And why? Because he's the only one with the experience and expertise to follow up a full-withdrawal with sanctions and negotiation that the rest of the candidates lack. There will be a process, some of it unpleasant. There is no avoiding that. None of the other candidates are clear on their process. Richardson can negotiate this out. None of the others can do that.

With all due respect, the time has come for the media and bloggers to stop acting as if there are only three candidates in the race for the democratic nomination. Bill Richardson is due a closer look and serious consideration.

[lastams]

Regardless of the abilities of General Peatraus, Iraq is and will continue to be a failure because the basic concept of reconstruction is flawed. Trying to turn an extremely divisive culture into a Western Style Democracy is simply not going to work...Whe­n are they going to get that through their heads? Every plan laid down by this administration over the past four years has relied upon the Iraqi “government” to act in a manner which WE consider responsible governance.
There never is a plan B … So they scratch their heads and go looking for a new best friend in Baghdad.
There are so many divisions in this society that even the ambassador can hardly keep them straight without a scorecard.
We simply do not have the military resources to pacify the entire Middle East, and one thing is for certain,
pumping hundreds of thousands of new and improved weapons into the mix, is NOT going to solve the problem.

[msfiskvletterman]

9/11/07
4:53pm
Burlington, VT

Arianna--the "Pontius Pilate press" is a good one.

[standbycats]

I just love you and your blogs.

Anything that even resembles the truth is on auto pilot to be put in a lock box. Never to be seen or heard from again. The facts, logic , common sense are a figment of our imagination. It is against everything Democracy is based on.

I was listening to a conservative on the air america today. He said "generals never lie"

Here is the living example of BUSHWACKED !!!!

[sugarmoes]

"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"

couldn't disagree more. the most and biggest crimes in d.c. are happening within the white house gates.

the rest was spot-on though.

[NormBlon]

I was impressed (not) with the number of medals and other decorations festooning the Petraeus chest. Like all of his fellow generals, if he were to wear the original medals he'd have to go around on crutches. He looks like he fell upside down in a bowl of fruit cocktail.

[pmau06]

Arianna,

I am a fan.

Do object to the statement that "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." I believe that is a incorrect. With this White House I remain unconvinced that the crime rate within the gates of the White House is lower than that of NE Washington. Please clarify this. Everything else is outstanding.

[realitytrumpsbull]

I think the way to end the Iraq war is to just give voice to two words:"End it". Everything said before or after that is filler and false advertising, as far as I'm concerned.­..

[robertlockwoodmills]

Reasoned argument by Bush administration critic

vs.

Demonstrable lie by administration official

=

Journalistic balance

[josieb]

Bush will continue to roll over the Democrats ecaue they don't have the votes to force an end to this occupation--rather than a war. The moderate Repugs, who might have voted with the Dems have gotten just enough optimism from Petraeus and Crocker to hang with Bush. There's nothing original about this comment, but at some point it's hard to know what else to say. This site and a few others are the only ones where a person can vent even though no one that can do anything about this is doing it.