|
The Iran Fixation
How the American Media Enables Bush
By Ayesha Ijaz KhanY
16/01/08 "Counterpunch"
-- -- President George Bush has a few months left in office.
Many analysts have believed for some time now that before he
retires from that position, he will have orchestrated an attack
either against Syria or Iran. Increasingly, it seems that his
fixation is with Iran. After much was made by the Bush
administration about Iran's covert nuclear program, recently
there was acknowledgment that many of those fears may have been
over-exaggerated or even misplaced. Yet no one from the
administration was taken to task for spreading such sinister
misinformation. More disturbingly, there was no substantive
criticism from the American media either.
To the contrary, US media has increasingly become a mouthpiece
of the Bush administration, perpetuating and ventilating the
fears which prevent a population from thinking rationally about
important issues. I happened to be in New York a few months ago
when President Ahmedinijad arrived to address the United Nations
General Assembly. The day he landed, local press ran shocking
headlines in the newspapers. "Tehran Thug Comes To Town," read
one; "Terror Has Landed," said another. It was the kind of
diction one expects from a grade school bully, not
intellectually honest analysis of issues with global
ramifications.
Dismissing some of the local papers as tabloids, I picked up a
copy of The New Yorker magazine, only to find on its cover a
demeaning representation of President Ahmedinijad sitting on the
toilet, pants down, playing footsie with the man in the next
stall. Surely, for the American audience, it was a take on the
Republican Senator from Idaho who had recently been caught doing
just that with an undercover cop at an airport bathroom and a
jibe simultaneously at Ahmedinijad, who had denied in his speech
at Columbia University that homosexuality existed in Iran.
But to many American Muslims it was flagrant cultural
insensitivity to caricaturize a head of state in such a way, and
also a reminder that Iran was being demeaned through its
President only so the attack could soon be justified. It
reminded Muslims of the early nineties when Saddam toilet paper
had taken America by storm, only to be followed by operation
Desert Storm. That is how the propaganda machine works. First
you degrade and then you attack. The invitation handed out to
Mr. Ahmedinijad by Columbia University brought matters to a
head. Mr. Bollinger, Columbia's President, made every effort to
insult his guest, which may have been satisfying to some
Americans, but left the rest of the world baffled. One would
invite a speaker, presumably, so one could hear his point of
view with an open mind. Argue with him, debate him, disagree
with him, certainly, but insult him before he even opens his
mouth? Muslim countries pride themselves on their culture of
hospitality and the offensive and aggressive posturing towards
Ahmedinijad only further bolstered his image in the Islamic
world, while tainting America's.
Instead of reporting neutrally on the situation, American
television rallied behind Mr. Bollinger, feeding a clash of
civilizations. From the "No-Spin Zone" on Fox to "Keeping Them
Honest" on CNN, American reporting on international affairs was
devoid of objective analysis, preferring instead to divide the
world into "good and evil" and refusing to see any "good" ever
on the "evil" side of our world. Unlike most countries of the
world today, the overwhelming majority of Americans also did not
have the option to watch television based out of any other
country. So it was either the American version or no version at
all, other than a very sanitized BBC America, which some people
caught on their cable channels.
Perhaps it was this frustration with having to report in such a
biased one-sided manner, a nearly obsessive form of
self-censorship, that led some newscasters to abandon altogether
any seriousness that naturally comes with debating important
global issues, preferring instead to dumb-down news to a level
of flippant comedy. Jon Stewart, Bill Maher, and Keith Oberman
all seemed to disagree with the Bush administration's handling
of foreign policy, yet instead of presenting serious critiques,
pinpointing precise failings, they had resorted to comic relief
at the expense of the establishment. It was better than nothing,
and in my three month summer sojourn in New York, I watched Bill
Maher regularly, but I could not help but feel that slapstick
news was America's way of escaping the real problems rather than
an attempt at solving them.
Come mid-October, I had returned to London, with access to all
variety of news transmitted in English, British, French, Arabic,
Russian, and of course American. The attack on Iran had
thankfully not materialized, but then came the alleged speedboat
incident in the Strait of Hormuz a few days ago. The US Navy
claimed that they had been threatened by Iranian speedboats. It
was not until the Iranians released their version of the events,
also on video, that the US Navy's claims were exposed. It
appears to me that this was nothing more than the excuse Mr.
Bush has been so searching for to wage war against Iran.
Once again, it was extremely disappointing that the American
media did not question or criticize the US Navy and government's
very dubious role in this very serious matter. Even after the
Iranians released their tape and it was plainly clear that the
voice that had threatened an explosion did not come from the
Iranian patrols and most likely had been recorded later on,
American media preferred to hush up the incident by attributing
it to another ship in the area or a transmitter on land.
Had this happened in Pakistan, I could not help but think,
everyone would have been talking about the government duping its
people into a war. So perhaps it is the Pakistani in me that
never rules out a conspiracy theory.
But what would have happened if the Iranians sat tight and did
not offer their version? What will happen in months to come?
Will the Bush administration continue to find excuses to throw
America into another unjustifiable war? Will the American media
just sit on the sidelines and watch while that happens? Is their
obligation to the people of the United States or to the Bush
administration?
Ayesha Ijaz Khan is a London-based lawyer and writer and can be
contacted via her website
www.ayeshaijazkhan.com
Click on "comments" below to read or post comments
Comment Guidelines
Be succinct, constructive and
relevant to the story.
We encourage engaging, diverse
and meaningful commentary. Do not include
personal information such as names, addresses,
phone numbers and emails. Comments falling
outside our guidelines – those including
personal attacks and profanity – are not
permitted.
See our complete
Comment Policy
and
use this link to notify us if you have concerns
about a comment.
We’ll promptly review and remove any
inappropriate postings.
Send Page To a Friend
In accordance
with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material
is distributed without profit to those who have
expressed a prior interest in receiving the
included information for research and educational
purposes. Information Clearing House has no
affiliation whatsoever with the originator of
this article nor is Information ClearingHouse
endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)
|
