How Is the World Ruled and Led to War?
Naturally the imagery of a mushroom cloud found a place in the article. Americans all understand and many react viscerally to the image of a mushroom cloud. Hardly anything serves more effectively to marshal public fear and thus to cause people to clamor for the protection their government purports to provide.
The rest of the story is described as follows in James Bamford's excellent book A Pretext for War: 9/11, Iraq, and the Abuse of America's Intelligence Agencies (New York: Doubleday, 2004), pp. 324-25.
As if the entire event had been scripted, administration officials had all agreed days earlier to appear on the Sunday talk shows that same morning. Once the cameras clicked on, they made generous use of the allegations contained in the article, now free from worries about releasing classified information. It was a perfect scheme—leak the secrets the night before so you can talk about them the next morning.
In separate appearances on Meet the Press, CNN's Late Edition, Fox News, and CBS's Face the Nation, Dick Cheney, Condoleezza Rice, Colin Powell, and Donald Rumsfeld each played essentially the same role in this made-for-TV farce.
The series of events produced exactly the sort of propaganda coup that the White House Iraq Group [WHIG] had been set up to stage-manage. First OSP [the Pentagon's Office of Special Plans] supplies false or exaggerated intelligence; then members of the WHIG leak it to friendly reporters, complete with prepackaged vivid imagery; finally, when the story breaks, senior officials point to it as proof and parrot the unnamed quotes they or their colleagues previously supplied.
It now seems clear that the administration's allegations of Iraq's growing nuclear threat helped substantially in bringing many in Congress and among the general public to support the"preventive" U.S. attack on Iraq.
As I read Bamford's account of these events, I could not help recalling Karl Kraus's immortal quip:"How is the world ruled and led to war? Diplomats lie to journalists and believe those lies when they see them in print."
comments powered by Disqus
William Marina - 7/5/2005
As Rothkopf demonstrates, there is an awful lot of incest among the policy makers of over the last half century. They may disagree over tactics, but not on the larger aspects of strategy. Hence, there is no real thinking in a dramtically different paradigm.
Kenneth R Gregg - 7/4/2005
I was watching Bamford on BookTV over the weekend (probably the same interview you were mentioning, Bill), asking myself, "Why are there people who don't listen to this and learn?"
Is this a fault of media suckling on the teats of power? Are reporters now blinded by Washington or are their eyelids sewn together and they can't see? Is there an on-off switch in the reporters' brains and no one knows how to turn their minds to the "on" position? Are there corks stuck in both major orifices and they are unable to unplug themselves? All of the above?
Just an afterthought.
William Marina - 7/4/2005
Some excellent observations, Bob. I am just now reading Bamford's book along with David Rothkopf, Running the World, an inside history of the NSC.
I bought both after seeing Bamford interview Rothkopf on C-Span. If there was a problem, it was only that the two agreed upon so much; but on the other hand no time was wasted trying to make debating points
- Did a historian who said he’s a victim of McCarthyism get the story wrong?
- Stephanie Coontz’s work on the history of marriage cited by the Supreme Court.
- How Does It Feel To Have One’s Work as a Historian Cited by the Supreme Court? Cool. Very Cool. Thank You Very Much.
- NYT History Book Reviews: Who Got Noticed this Week?
- David Hackett Fischer wins $100,000 prize for lifetime achievement in military writing