FRANK RICH: Shuffling Off to Crawford, 2007 Edition
New York Times
via Pottersville
The cases of Pat Tillman and Jessica Lynch were ugly enough. So surely someone in the White House might have the good taste to draw the line at exploiting the murdered Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl. But nothing is out of bounds for a government that puts the darkest arts of politics and public relations above even the exigencies of war.
As Jane Mayer told the story in last week’s New Yorker, Mariane Pearl was called by Alberto Gonzales with some good news in March: the Justice Department was releasing a transcript in which the long-incarcerated Qaeda thug Khalid Sheikh Mohammed confessed to the beheading of her husband. But there was something off about Mr. Gonzales’s news. It was almost four years old.
Condoleezza Rice had called Ms. Pearl to tell her in confidence about the very same confession back in 2003; it was also reported that year in The Journal and elsewhere. What’s more, the confession was suspect; another terrorist had been convicted in the Pearl case in Pakistan in 2002. There is no known corroborating evidence that Mohammed, the 9/11 ringleader who has taken credit for many horrific crimes while in American custody, was responsible for this particular murder. None of his claims, particularly those possibly coerced by torture, can be taken as gospel solely on our truth-challenged attorney general’s say-so.
Ms. Pearl recognized a publicity ploy when she saw it. And this one wasn’t subtle. Mr. Gonzales released the Mohammed transcript just as the latest Justice Department scandal was catching fire, with newly disclosed e-mail exchanges revealing the extent of White House collaboration in the United States attorney firings. Had the attorney general succeeded in enlisting Daniel Pearl’s widow as a player in his stunt, it might have diverted attention from a fracas then engulfing President Bush on his Latin American tour.
Though he failed this time, Mr. Gonzales’s P.R. manipulation of the war on terror hasn’t always been so fruitless. To upstage increasingly contentious Congressional restlessness about Iraq in 2006, he put on a widely viewed show to announce an alleged plot by men in Miami to blow up the Sears Tower in Chicago and conduct a “full ground war.” He said at the time the men “swore allegiance to Al Qaeda” but, funnily enough, last week this case was conspicuously missing from a long new White House “fact sheet” listing all the terrorist plots it had foiled.
(Continued here.)
via Pottersville
The cases of Pat Tillman and Jessica Lynch were ugly enough. So surely someone in the White House might have the good taste to draw the line at exploiting the murdered Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl. But nothing is out of bounds for a government that puts the darkest arts of politics and public relations above even the exigencies of war.
As Jane Mayer told the story in last week’s New Yorker, Mariane Pearl was called by Alberto Gonzales with some good news in March: the Justice Department was releasing a transcript in which the long-incarcerated Qaeda thug Khalid Sheikh Mohammed confessed to the beheading of her husband. But there was something off about Mr. Gonzales’s news. It was almost four years old.
Condoleezza Rice had called Ms. Pearl to tell her in confidence about the very same confession back in 2003; it was also reported that year in The Journal and elsewhere. What’s more, the confession was suspect; another terrorist had been convicted in the Pearl case in Pakistan in 2002. There is no known corroborating evidence that Mohammed, the 9/11 ringleader who has taken credit for many horrific crimes while in American custody, was responsible for this particular murder. None of his claims, particularly those possibly coerced by torture, can be taken as gospel solely on our truth-challenged attorney general’s say-so.
Ms. Pearl recognized a publicity ploy when she saw it. And this one wasn’t subtle. Mr. Gonzales released the Mohammed transcript just as the latest Justice Department scandal was catching fire, with newly disclosed e-mail exchanges revealing the extent of White House collaboration in the United States attorney firings. Had the attorney general succeeded in enlisting Daniel Pearl’s widow as a player in his stunt, it might have diverted attention from a fracas then engulfing President Bush on his Latin American tour.
Though he failed this time, Mr. Gonzales’s P.R. manipulation of the war on terror hasn’t always been so fruitless. To upstage increasingly contentious Congressional restlessness about Iraq in 2006, he put on a widely viewed show to announce an alleged plot by men in Miami to blow up the Sears Tower in Chicago and conduct a “full ground war.” He said at the time the men “swore allegiance to Al Qaeda” but, funnily enough, last week this case was conspicuously missing from a long new White House “fact sheet” listing all the terrorist plots it had foiled.
(Continued here.)
Powered by Blogger
2 Comments:
Since it happened yesterday, Rich did not know that the Governor and Police Chief Qadisiya province were killed. These were members of the Badr Corps, the paramilitary of the Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council. The SIIC and Badr Corps are rivals of Muqtada al-Sadr and his Al-Mahdi Army … both Shiite groups are involved in a power struggle for who will lead Iraq … so do you suppose that al Qaeda or Iran is behind these assassinations ... or Al-Mahdi ? ? ? Iran definately not since they were protectors of the SIIC and al-Maliki's DAWA party when Saddam was in power. al-Qaeda ... doubtful since we've heard that "they're on the run" ... Al-Mahdi ... that's where my money is ... Rich is right - it's a civil war !
Rich discusses how the Bush Administration may have manipulated the media (and obviously, the public) in how it Reacted to the Jessica Lynch and Pat Tillman situations. Those acts are outrageous, yet show how a good PR department can maximize the image they want presented. But in both cases, it was a Reaction and good storytelling. We wanted to believe that Lynch was rescued and if Tillman was killed it would be in a battle. The Bush Administration could not plan these situations, only react to what happened.
However, those types of instances are Reactive. Let’s remember the Pentagon’s Office of Strategic Influence whose objective was "to provide news items, possibly even false ones, to foreign media organizations as part of a new effort to influence public sentiment and policy makers in both friendly and unfriendly countries". And, remember also the GAO determined that paying Armstrong Williams to write columns supporting the “No Child Left Behind” program was deemed to be propaganda. And last we mustn’t forget Jeff Gannon a.k.a. James D. Guckert of the Talon News Service.
These are all examples of the Bush Administration being Proactive.
Yet, the Proactive examples cited above pale in my reaction to David Gregory interviewing Tony Snow about his battle with colon cancer. It has been reported that NBC approached Snow about doing the story, but somehow it rang out as Snow being the sin eater for the Bush Administration. Cancer is a horrible disease … both my parents had cancer. But this story has been done before … for example, by MSNBC with Curtis Pesmen who wrote about his personal experiences in "The Colon Cancer Survivor's Guide." Obviously, we all support Mr. Snow in his battle, but without anyone saying it, it hit me as trying to keep the important news of the day from being discussed. The story should have been presented on Dateline or the Today Show as a “human interest story” and not as part of NBC Nightly News. If they had done that I would not be thinking that the Bush Administration was being Proactive in managing the news.
Post a Comment
<< Home