Lying US into Iran

US Officials edited video and flat out lied in an effort to make Iran appear to be a danger to us.  Via Johnathen Schwarz at TMW:

Are you the kind of weirdo who thinks Congress should investigate when the Pentagon essentially fabricates a video of U.S. ships being “threatened” by Iran? Just because it could, you know, lead to a massive war based on lies? (Gareth Porter has an excellent run down of how things happened, here.)

If you are such a weirdo, you can contact Congress via Just Foreign Policy.

From the article (emphasis mine):

The new information that appears to contradict the original version of the incident includes the revelation that U.S. officials spliced the audio recording of an alleged Iranian threat onto to a videotape of the incident.

Also unraveling the story is testimony from a former U.S. naval officer that non-official chatter is common on the channel used to communicate with the Iranian boats and testimony from the commander of the U.S. 5th fleet that the commanding officers of the U.S. warships involved in the incident never felt the need to warn the Iranians of a possible use of force against them.

Further undermining the U.S. version of the incident is a video released by Iran Thursday showing an Iranian naval officer on a small boat hailing one of three ships. 

That didn’t stop US Officials from presenting a very different story:

The dramatic version of the incident reported by U.S. news media throughout Tuesday and Wednesday suggested that Iranian speedboats, apparently belonging to the Iranian Revolutionary Guard navy, had made moves to attack three U.S. warships entering the Strait and that the U.S. commander had been on the verge of firing at them when they broke off.

Typical of the network coverage was a story by ABC’s Jonathan Karl quoting a Pentagon official as saying the Iranian boats “were a heartbeat from being blown up”. 

The rest of the article goes into even more detail, how parts of the messages received might not have even come from the Iranian patrol ships.

This hollow manipulation of the public trust to push us into another war, when we are already short troops for our side adventure in Iraq and are unable to contribute needed troops to Afghanistan, shows how purely incompetent the Republican approach to security is.  An approach, I might add, that every Republican save for the only isolationist in the race has endorsed, and the presumed front runner in the Democratic race, Hillary Clinton, has helped enable.

This story may or may not catch fire in the press, but there is something deeply wrong with any candidate who does not seize it and make a relevant message of truth and trust a part of their campaign.

Advertisements

7 Responses

  1. Listen dopey, it’s non interventionist, not isolationist, get a clue. It would also appear that Ron Paul called it correctly way before any of this and he did it on the debate stage.
    You still choose Hitlery over RP even though she’s liar. Sad sad sad.

  2. Ron Paul is a liar, but it no longer amazes me how easily he dupes some people.

    A bit of advice: If you want to convince people to take a stronger stance against Hillary, then stop with the childish hitlery comments. Look at my site. Look at who I’ve endorsed. I am no fan of Hillary Clinton. Yet when wingnuts start into their irrational hatred of the woman, and when someone applies the horrors of nazi germany to a woman who’s worst crime was supporting a war, then on her behalf I get a might offended.

    So if you want to criticize Hillary, go right ahead. But be effective. Look at brian’s rhetoric when he does so. His comment about her support for the war has given me serious pause.

  3. Dont forget a lot of the germans worst crimes during ww2 were just supporting a war.

    Basically the only democrats you should be supporting are kunich and gravel. And ron paul for the non socialist types. Those are the only anti war candidates.

  4. ok here goes..

    Do you know who Peter Paul is?

    Some of this is info of course “alleged” only because the Clintons know how to cover their tracks well. Vince Foster should be so lucky.

    I will say this as well, you are quite the hypocrite as you demand certain courtesies but do not extend the same. No need to provide examples as the history of your site provides ample evidence.

    “Ron Paul is a liar, racist, xenophobe, anti-semite, manipulative, homophobic, crazy fool”

    If by being duped you mean I see through all the Hitlery’s running for president then yes I am duped. McCain duped a lot of people with the savings and loan debacle and profited, Romney duped a lot of people with the big dig and profited, Edwards duped a lot of people with raising fees and costs for insurances by being a parasitic trial court lawyer and profited, the list goes on and on about people being duped by the candidates and the candidates profiting from the deception but how does the suffering at the hands of the other candidates compare to the suffering that Ron Paul has caused? hmmm? What suffering are you talking about that Ron Paul has caused?

    Tell me Dan, is freedom important to you?
    If so, what is your definition of freedom Dan? (Can’t wait to see the answer to this).

  5. brian,
    No, the crimes of civilian Germans were supporting the systematic torture and murder of millions of civilians. Enthusiastically. Not all Germans, to be sure, but enough. Enough to stand and spit at the trains. Enough to run the courts, to inform on neighbors.

    The war in Iraq is brutal, and I oppose it utterly, but stop comparing bombs to spitballs.

    Its rich seeing a Ron Paul fan tell Democrats who to support. Edwards is an authentic anti-war candidate, and while Obama is not the best, he too is worth supporting.

    Michael D,
    I won’t bother sorting through most of your mess. Why don’t you quit with your conspiracy crap, I don’t feel like responding to it anymore. “is freedom important to you?” What kind of an asshole question is that? Of course it is.

    The suffering you list for Edwards is a sad little joke. You wonder what suffering Ron Paul caused? What he would cause as president? His opposition to universal health care is a start. As is his opposition to hate crimes legislation and the civil rights act. These positions will hurt people. But you will never let yourself see that.

    No, you’ll keep banging on Edwards for fighting for the little guy, all while claiming Ron Paul is some kind of savior. He isn’t, and we aren’t falling for it. I’d have mentioned him in my post about White Supremacists and the Republican candidates, except at this point, he isn’t a candidate anymore.

  6. I asked and you can’t deliver. I asked what has he done not what your narrow little mind thinks he will do. And what is your definition of freedom?

  7. Again you avoid the points you aren’t mentally prepared to answer.
    “Responding to it anymore” would infer that you have responded to it before and that hasn’t happened.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: