Part of being a journalist–the most important part, perhaps–is deciding which information is most relevant to readers.
So take a look at today’s New York Times piece (9/14/12) on Iran’s nuclear program. The focus is on Israeli threats and where it says it is drawing its “red line” for military action. But this focus is distorting one of the most important facts about the conflict.
Mark Landler and Helene Cooper explain that Israeli leaders are unhappy with the White House position:
Israeli officials, however, say this guarantee may not be enough for Israel, which Iranian leaders have repeatedly threatened with annihilation.
Have Iranians “repeatedly threatened” to annihilate Israel? There are a few incidents that are usually presented to make this case, but there remains considerable skepticism over the meaning of some of these statements. And it’s important to remember that the current threats are going in other direction, as Israeli and U.S. officials describe in public when and if they might start bombing Iran.
The best way to read the New York Times.
On the key matter of whether Iran is pursuing a bomb, the Times also reports:
The source of the conflict is the belief by Mr. Netanyahu that Iran, having continued to stockpile uranium enriched to 20 percent, is nearing the point at which Israel will no longer be able to prevent it from making a bomb.
The Times later notes that the Iranians claim they have no intention to develop a nuclear weapon. There’s no reason to take them at their word, of course–but there’s similarly no reason to treat Benjamin Netanyahu like he’s a nuclear weapons inspector.
The Times adds to the case:
People with close ties to Israel say Mr. Netanyahu and other Israeli officials are also frustrated because the Americans do not appear sufficiently concerned about Iran’s growing stockpile of medium-enriched uranium. In its latest report, the International Atomic Energy Agency says the Iranians have amassed enough low- and medium-enriched uranium that, with further enrichment, could fuel as many as six nuclear weapons.
Well, that sounds as if Iran is getting closer to a bomb. That is, until you get to the next paragraph:
Basing a military judgment on Iran’s stockpile of medium-enriched uranium could be tricky, however, because while the overall amount of this material has increased, the amount that can be readily used to fuel a bomb has declined since Iran converted some of it into plates to be used in a research reactor in Tehran.
Now wait a second. A 14-paragraph piece devoted to the urgency of the Iranian nuclear threat waits until the 12th paragraph to tell readers that, by the way, the IAEA says Iran’s stockpile of uranium that could even be converted for use in a weapon has declined.
You know this fact about the IAEA’s latest report if you’ve been reading Gareth Porter’s reporting. But if you’re counting on the so-called Paper of Record, you have to turn the stories upside down to find what should be the most important news.
Make that “the Paper of Reeking”.
It seems a bit odd that there’s any controversy over Iran’s intentions toward Israel, doesn’t it?
If the Iranian government has such intent, don’t you imagine that declarations to that effect would be standard fare in their pronouncements?
Yet the Times and the rest of the corpress have to engage in pretzel logic to make the case for Iran’s bloodlust.
It’s enough to make Spock raise both eyebrows.
How about the sentence which begins “The source of the conflict is the belief by Mr. Netanyahu that Iran….”?
How do these 2 reporters know what Mr. Netanyahu believes about that? They know what he says, but what he says could be what he believes or it could be something calculated to achieve some purpose (like shifting attention away from the fact that he’s doing practically nothing to advance a peace process with the neighboring Palestinians, for example).
The murder of Stevens should not be an excuse for this country to attack others preemptively without evaluating our own violent foreign policy and how it only begets violence. As Barbara Lee said on this day eleven years ago, “let us not become the evil we deplore.” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mvnLtMKzX6Y
I noticed the same biased reporting and called Landler and Cooper on it. They did not respond.
Israel made so much out of the “we will wipe Israel off the map” comment from Ahmadinejad (quite a while ago now!) and keeps repeating it even though it was debunked quite a while ago. For one thing, Ahmadinejad was QUOTING something said by Ayatollah Khomeini (long dead by then), and that quote never once mentioned “Israel”, “wipe off”, or “map”. It wasn’t a threat against Isreal but a criticism of the extremist (and abusive) ideology of Zionism. The gist was that great world powers (which tend to believe they are eternal) eventually fade from history. Big promoters of this “threat” want us to think Israel is constantly being hounded by enemies, but that may not be the reality.
NYT is america’s Pravda, most people expect nothing more of it than pro-USA spin, or even jingoism
It’s also interesting to reflect on what the NYT piece, along with practically all mainstream media reports on the Iran-Israel nuclear issue, fails to say.
It does not inform readers that Iran is a signatory of the UN Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty but that Israel is not.
Above all, it does not say that Israel itself has nuclear weapons, the possession of which is the main reason why Israel’s enemies could want to also obtain them.
The failure of the mainstream media to provide these two essential pieces of background information should be a major scandal.
David Sharp: The NYT piece also doesn’t provide the pieces of background information:
(1) The US and Israel routinely threaten Iran with bombing (including with nuclear bombs) in light of which Iran would be crazy NOT to have nuclear weapons.
(2) Iran has not attacked another country for centuries (even under its current despotic regime) while Israel is a rogue nation that has bombed the hell out of its (illegally) occupied territories as well as its neighboring countries.
(3) Iran has as much right to have nuclear weapons as the next country.
(4) US cooperation with Israel in bombing Iran is against the interest of Americans and could potentially destabilize the regions and/or start a regional (if not world) war.
Finally, I’m still waiting for someone to tell me why Iran shouldn’t have nuclear weapons?
Free spirit you just wrote four of the dumbest points,but i cant blame you because you are just vomiting left wings dumb ass talking points .Any thinking knowledgable person knows this is the kind of idiocy you see on liberal shows.Can we please get serious?I am speaking for those on the right AND your president AND your secretary of state.You last question is like saying can anyone tell me why Hitler shouldn’t have nuclear weapons?Honestly why not?He had as much right as anyone else.What is wrong with you people on the left?What don’t you get about the words “DEATH TO ISRAEL>>>DEATH TO THE USA?It is being screamed from the middle east on every channel as we speak..What dont you hear?Obama can’t even mouth the words radical Islam.And you clowns are still countering with facts AGAINST America.Trying to build a case.Go over there to Egypt or Iran if it is such a cuddly loving place you slack jawed morons.Go go go….Go chant death to the USA and burn flags.Good riddence
michael e: I’m certainly glad you don’t have nuclear weapons.
michael e: I don’t recall from any of my three philosophy courses in college how calling someone’s arguments “dumb” makes them dumb. BTW, I don’t need talking points when it comes to Iran. I am from Iran. I grew up under the Shah and I moved here just before the revolution. I am free from religion (that includes the religions of Capitalism, Communism, and all other forms of imperialism). So when I point something out it is based on my knowledge, experience, meditation and observation. But most of YOUR arguments wreak of US imperialist talking points. You are not a free man since a man who doesn’t think for himself and regurgitates other people’s nonsense can never be free.
Free spirit.
When Obama wakes in the morning and kisses his children good morning …. I don’t think his next move is to go to his cabinet to discuss his grand scheme of destroying Iran.Of enslaving them.Nothing he has ever said shows an evil plan ,or a pathology of madness.And guess what …odds are he is gone by November.What ever HE wants will change 180 degrees.We have a free vote here.I can honestly say that listening to Irans leader, and his ruling mullahs is a constant view into a world of madness.Look at them.Listen to them.And there is no getting rid of them.Wanna go home and trumpet the removal of the ruling mullahs?No didnt think so.
Today a good friend, a Dr of orthodontics (jewish)showed me a cartoon of Jesus and Moses partying with Buddha and a blue elephant having sex with a pink donkey.Over it was a caption that read …”.Take a look at this stupid cartoon and notice something….Nobody died” .Do you really want me to give you the same cartoon with Allah having his way with them?Do you really want to prove the point that all is well there- by bringing the cartoon over there?My friend and I laughed.People standing about laughed.It meant NOTHING.Nothing.Not a blip in our day except to show us how fantastic it is to live here.Over there….it may mean your head.Come on you live here…not there.You see the difference every day.
Free spirit….3 classes in philosophy???Good lord…..Is that common for most libs?No wonder no much of your jibber jabber is awash in smoke screens, and ends up just as in the dark as you started.
1rst law of philosophy/////For every philosopher there exists an equal and opposite philosopher.
2nd rule/////They are both wrong :)
Gregory…I forgot about your comment.Yeah Im glad i don’t have a nuke too.I was cutting the grass and got stung by multiple yellow jacks.I swear I would detonate the bomb right on top of them im so mad.Yeah it is stupid.Makes no sense.Kill me too.Hey you dont think Im related to “Ah ma needs a job” do you? :)
michael e: See a therapist and get out of your head so you can feel. Then you will begin to “hear” what most people are saying here. Also take at least one philosophy (or logic) class so you learn how to think logically too. If you hear the (defensive) rhetoric coming out of Iran as mad instead of seeing the world domination by the US as being mad then you are indeed an imperialist. We are talking about innocent people’s lives here. Feel man, feel… Read Buddha, Gandhi, Tich Nhat Hahn, The Peace Pilgrim, Kathy Kelly, MLK, Tolstoy, Marx, and Jesus (I mean his own words not the Christian nut interpretation) and really meditate on what they say. Learn compassion from them. Some have it naturally and some need to cultivate. You fall in the latter category. Become a human being. Become CIVILized. Right now you are a savage…
As a self appointed proofreader, I believe the Times buried the lede, n’est ce pas?
Thanks for all of that, FreeSpirit. Our m.e.? There’s something seriously wrong with him, and you of course noticed this right away–he’s simple-minded, and seems to love violence and lying. I’m afraid that war is coming soon to Iran–Netanyahu is deranged, a lunatic and warmonger. He apparently thinks we’re his pet, (sometimes we are!), and I believe Obama assured him a few months ago that we’d back him up if he’d just let up until after the election. Well, Bibi, being insane, can’t wait. His own people think he’s trying to interfere in the election here; hopefully, once he starts the War of Wars with Iran, they’ll throw him out, or even arrest him and lock him up somewhere.