{"id":379714,"date":"2018-10-05T04:04:15","date_gmt":"2018-10-05T03:04:15","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/newswire\/trump-admin-follows-corporate-media-playbook-for-war-with-iran\/"},"modified":"2018-10-05T04:04:15","modified_gmt":"2018-10-05T03:04:15","slug":"trump-admin-follows-corporate-media-playbook-for-war-with-iran","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/newswire\/trump-admin-follows-corporate-media-playbook-for-war-with-iran\/","title":{"rendered":"Trump Admin Follows Corporate Media Playbook for War With Iran"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"\"<\/p>\n

John Bolton (BBC<\/b>, 9\/26\/18<\/a>): “Let my message today be clear: We are watching, and we will come after you.”<\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

Three years ago, as Americans debated the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) agreement with the Islamic Republic of Iran\u2014popularly known as \u201cthe Iran deal\u201d\u2014I highlighted a troubling media trend on FAIR.org<\/b> (8\/20\/15<\/a>): \u201cFor nearly all commentators, regardless of their position, war is the only alternative to that position.\u201d<\/p>\n

In the months since US President Donald Trump tore up the JCPOA agreement, his administration has been trying to make good on corporate media\u2019s collective prediction. Last week, John Bolton (BBC<\/b>, 9\/26\/18<\/a>), Trump\u2019s national security advisor and chief warmonger, told Iran\u2019s leaders and the world that there would be \u201chell to pay\u201d if they dare to \u201ccross us.\u201d<\/p>\n

That Bolton\u2019s bellicose statements do not send shockwaves of pure horror across a debt-strapped<\/a> and war-weary<\/a> United States is thanks in large part to incessant priming for war, facilitated by corporate media across the entire political spectrum, with a particular focus on Iran.<\/p>\n

Back in 2015, while current \u201cresistance\u201d stalwarts like the Washington Post<\/b> (4\/2\/15<\/a>) and Politico<\/b> (8\/11\/15<\/a>) warned us that war with Iran was the most likely alternative to the JCPOA, conservative standard-bearers such as Fox News <\/b>(7\/14\/15<\/a>) and the Washington Times<\/b> (8\/10\/15<\/a>) foretold that war with Iran was the agreement\u2019s most likely outcome. Three years hence, this dynamic has not changed.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Cartoonist Patrick Chappatte (New York Times<\/b>, 5\/10\/18<\/a>) presents Trump and Bolton’s “deal” for Iran.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

To experience the full menu of US media\u2019s single-mindedness about Iran, one need only buy a subscription to the New York Times<\/b>. After Trump withdrew from the JCPOA, the Times<\/b>\u2019 editorial board (5\/8\/18<\/a>) wrote that his move would \u201clay conditions for a possible wider war in the Middle East.\u201d Susan Rice (New York Times<\/b>, 5\/8\/18<\/a>), President Barack Obama\u2019s national security advisor, agreed: \u201cWe could face the choice of going to war or acquiescing to a nuclear-armed Iran,\u201d she warned. Cartoonist Patrick Chappatte (New York Times<\/b>, 5\/10\/18<\/a>) was characteristically more direct, penning an image of Trump alongside Bolton, holding a fictitious new agreement featuring the singular, ultimate word: \u201cWAR.\u201d<\/p>\n

On the other hand, calling Trump\u2019s turn against JCPOA a \u201ccourageous decision,\u201d Times<\/b> columnist Bret Stephens (5\/8\/18<\/a>) explained that the move was meant to force the Iranian government to make a choice: Either accede to US demands or \u201cpursue their nuclear ambitions at the cost of economic ruin and possible war.\u201d (Hardly courageous, when we all know there is no chance that Trump or Stephens would enlist should war materialize.)<\/p>\n

Trump\u2019s latest antics<\/a> at the United Nations have spurred a wave of similar reaction across corporate media. Describing his threat to \u201ctotally destroy North Korea\u201d at the UN General Assembly last year as \u201cpointed and sharp,\u201d Fox News<\/b> anchor Eric Shawn (9\/23\/18<\/a>) asked Bill Richardson, an Obama ally and President Bill Clinton\u2019s ambassador to the UN, whether Trump would take the same approach toward Iran. \u201cThat aggressive policy we have with Iran is going to continue,\u201d Richardson reassured the audience, \u201cand I don\u2019t think Iran is helping themselves.\u201d In other words, if the United States starts a war with Iran, it\u2019s totally Iran\u2019s fault.<\/p>\n

Politico<\/b> (9\/23\/18<\/a>), meanwhile, reported that Trump \u201cis risking a potential war with Iran unless he engages the Islamist-led country using diplomacy.\u201d In other words, if the United States starts a war with Iran, it\u2019s totally Trump\u2019s fault. Rice (New York Times<\/b>, 9\/26\/18<\/a>) reiterated her view that Trump\u2019s rhetoric \u201cpresages the prospect of war in the Persian Gulf.\u201d Whoever would be the responsible party is up for debate, but that war is in our future is apparently all but certain.<\/p>\n

Politico<\/b>\u2019s article cited a statement<\/a> signed by such esteemed US experts on war-making as Madeleine Albright, who presided over Clinton\u2019s inhuman sanctions<\/a> against Iraq in the \u201990s, and Ryan Crocker, former ambassador for presidents George W. Bush and Obama to some of America\u2019s favorite killing fields: Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Syria. \u00a0James Clapper, Obama\u2019s National Intelligence Director, who also signed the letter, played an important role<\/a> in trumping up WMD evidence against Saddam Hussein before the United States invaded Iraq in 2003. When it comes to US aggression, they\u2019re the experts.<\/p>\n

Vanity Fair<\/b> (9\/26\/18<\/a>) interviewed John Glaser of the Cato Institute, who called Trump\u2019s strategy \u201cpathetic,\u201d and also warned that it forebodes war. In an effort to \u201cone-up Obama,\u201d Glaser explained, Trump\u2019s plan is \u201cto apply extreme economic pressure and explicit threats of war in order to get Iran to capitulate.\u201d Sound familiar? As Glaser implies, this was exactly Obama\u2019s strategy<\/a>, only then it wasn\u2019t seen as \u201cpathetic,\u201d but rather reasonable, and the sole means for preventing the war that every US pundit and politician saw around the corner (The Hill<\/b>, 8\/9\/15<\/a>).<\/p>\n

When everyone decides that war is the only other possibility, it starts to look like an inevitability. But even when they aren\u2019t overtly stoking war fever against Iran, corporate media prime the militaristic pump in more subtle yet equally disturbing ways.<\/p>\n

\"Benjamin<\/p>\n

Benjamin Netanyahu speaks for the Iranian people on CNN<\/b> (9\/29\/18<\/a>).<\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

First among these is the near-complete erasure of Iranian voices from US airwaves (FAIR.org<\/b>, 7\/24\/15<\/a>). Rather than ask Iranians directly, national outlets like CNN<\/b> (9\/29\/18<\/a>) prefer to invite the prime minister of Israel, serial Iran alarmist<\/a> and regional pariah Benjamin Netanyahu, to speak for them. During a jovial discussion this weekend over whether regime change and\/or economic collapse is Iran\u2019s most likely fate, Netanyahu explained to the audience that, either way, \u201cThe ones who will be happiest if that happens are the people of Iran.\u201d No people of Iran were on hand to confirm or deny this assessment.<\/p>\n

Bloomberg<\/b> (9\/30\/18<\/a>) similarly wanted to know, \u201cWhat\u2019s not to like about Trump\u2019s Iran oil sanctions?\u201d Julian Lee gleefully reported that \u201cthey are crippling exports from the Islamic Republic, at minimal cost to the US.\u201d One might think the toll sanctions take<\/a> on innocent Iranians would be something not to like, but Bloomberg<\/b> merely worried that, notwithstanding the windfall for US refineries, \u201coil at $100 a barrel would be bad news for drivers everywhere\u2014including those in the US.\u201d<\/p>\n

Another prized tactic is to whitewash Saudi Arabia<\/a>, Iran\u2019s chief geopolitical rival, whose genocidal destruction of Yemen is made possible by the United States, about which corporate media remain overwhelmingly silent (FAIR.org<\/b>, 7\/23\/18<\/a>). Iran\u2019s involvement in Yemen, which both Trump and the New York Times<\/b> (9\/12\/18<\/a>) describe as \u201cmalign behavior,\u201d is a principal justification for US support of Saudi Arabia, including the US-supplied bombs<\/a> that recently ended the brief lives of over 40 Yemeni schoolchildren. Lockheed Martin\u2019s stock is up 34 percent<\/a> from Trump\u2019s inauguration day.<\/p>\n

Corporate media go beyond a simple coverup of Saudi crimes to evangelize their leadership as the liberal antidote to Iran\u2019s \u201ctheocracy.\u201d Who can forget Thomas Friedman\u2019s revolting puff piece for the Saudi crown prince Mohammad bin Salman? Extensively quoting Salman (New York Times<\/b>, 11\/23\/17<\/a>), who refers to Iranian Ayatollah Ali Khamenei as \u201cthe new Hitler of the Middle East,\u201d Friedman nevertheless remains pessimistic about whether \u201cMBS and his team\u201d can see their stand against Iran through, as \u201cdysfunction and rivalries within the Sunni Arab world generally have prevented forming a unified front.\u201d Oh well, every team needs cheerleaders, and Friedman isn\u2019t just a fair-weather fan.<\/p>\n

While Friedman (New York Times<\/b>, 5\/15\/18<\/a>) believes that Trump has drawn \u201csome needed attention to Iran\u2019s bad behavior,\u201d for him pivotal questions remain unanswered, such as \u201cwho is going to take over in Tehran if the current Islamic regime collapses?\u201d One immediate fix he proposed was to censure Iran\u2019s metaphorical \u201coccupation\u201d of Syria, Iraq and Lebanon. Isn\u2019t this ironic coming from an unapologetic propagandist for Washington\u2019s decades-long, non-metaphorical occupation of the two countries to the east and west of Iran (FAIR.org<\/b>, 12\/9\/15<\/a>)?<\/p>\n

In a surprising break from corporate media convention, USA Today<\/b> (9\/26\/18<\/a>) published a column on US\/Iran relations written by an actual Iranian. Reflecting on the CIA-orchestrated coup<\/a> against Iran\u2019s elected government in 1953, Azadeh Shahshahani, who was born four days after the 1979 revolution there, wrote:<\/p>\n

\n

I often wonder what would have happened if that coup had not worked, if [Prime Minister] Mosaddeq had been allowed to govern, if democracy had been allowed to flourish.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

\u201cIt is time for the US government to stop intervening in Iran and let the Iranian people determine their own destiny,\u201d she beseeched readers.<\/p>\n

\"Medea<\/p>\n

Code Pink’s Medea Benjamin confronts the head of Trump’s “Iran Action Group” (Real News<\/b>, 9\/21\/18<\/a>).<\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

Shahshahani\u2019s call is supported by some who have rejected corporate media\u2019s war propaganda and have gone to extreme lengths to have their perspectives heard. Anti-war activist and Code Pink \u00a0founder Medea Benjamin was recently forcibly removed after she upstaged Brian Hook, leader of Trump\u2019s Iran Action Group, on live TV, calling his press conference \u201cthe most ridiculous thing I have ever seen\u201d (Real News<\/b>, 9\/21\/18<\/a>). Benjamin implored the audience: \u201cLet\u2019s talk about Saudi Arabia. Is that who our allies are?\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cHow dare you bring up the issue of Yemen,\u201d admonished Benjamin as she was dragged from the room. \u201cIt\u2019s the Saudi bombing that is killing most people in Yemen. So let\u2019s get real. No more war! Peace with Iran!\u201d Code Pink is currently petitioning<\/a> the New York Times<\/b> and Washington Post<\/b> to stop propagandizing war.<\/p>\n

Sadly, no matter whom you ask in corporate media, be they spokespeople for \u201cTrump\u2019s America\u201d or \u201cthe resistance,\u201d peace remains an elusive choice in the US political imagination. And while the public was focused last week on Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh\u2019s <\/a>perjurious testimony<\/a>, the Senate finalized a $674 billion \u201cdefense\u201d budget<\/a>. Every single Democrat in the chamber voted in favor of the bill, explicitly naming Iran<\/a> as persona non grata in the United States\u2019 world-leading arms supply network<\/a>, which has seen a 25 percent increase in exports since Obama took office in 2009.<\/p>\n

The US government\u2019s imperial ambitions are perhaps its only truly bipartisan project\u2014what the New York Times<\/b> euphemistically refers to as \u201cglobalism.\u201d Nowhere was this on fuller display than at the funeral for Republican Sen. John McCain (FAIR.org<\/b>, 9\/11\/18<\/a>), where politicians of all stripes were tripping over themselves to produce the best accolades for a man who infamously sang<\/a> \u201cbomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran\u201d to the tune of a Beach Boys song.<\/p>\n

McCain\u2019s bloodlust was nothing new. Nearly a hundred years ago, after the West\u2019s imperial competition culminated in the most destructive war the world had ever seen, the brilliant American sociologist and anti-colonial author WEB Du Bois wrote<\/a>, \u201cThis is not Europe gone mad; this is not aberration nor insanity; this is<\/i> Europe.\u201d<\/p>\n

Iranian leaders have repeatedly said they do not want war with the US (AP<\/b>, 9\/27\/18<\/a>), but US corporate media, despite frequently characterizing Trump as a \u201cmad king\u201d (FAIR.org<\/b>, 6\/13\/18<\/a>), continue to play an instrumental role in rationalizing a future war with Iran. Should such an intentional catastrophe come to pass, we can hardly say that this would be America gone mad; war is not aberration, it is always presented as the next sane choice. This is <\/i>America.<\/p>\n

<\/span>
\nThis piece was reprinted by RINF Alternative News<\/a> with permission from FAIR<\/a>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

John Bolton (BBC, 9\/26\/18): “Let my message today be clear: We are watching, and we will come after you.” Three years ago, as Americans debated the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) agreement with the Islamic Republic of Iran\u2014popularly known as \u201cthe Iran deal\u201d\u2014I highlighted a troubling media trend on FAIR.org (8\/20\/15): \u201cFor nearly all […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2521,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[519],"tags":[],"class_list":{"0":"post-379714","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","6":"category-newswire"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/379714","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2521"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=379714"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/379714\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=379714"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=379714"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/rinf.com\/alt-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=379714"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}