<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/1.5.2" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: DSM Register: beneath contempt</title>
	<link>http://iowaunderground.com/blog/2006/09/25/dsm-register-beneath-contempt/</link>
	<description>spelunking the interweb since late 2005</description>
	<pubDate>Mon, 08 Sep 2008 15:46:40 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=1.5.2</generator>

	<item>
 		<title>Comment on DSM Register: beneath contempt by: pdx</title>
		<link>http://iowaunderground.com/blog/2006/09/25/dsm-register-beneath-contempt/#comment-9423</link>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 Sep 2006 03:43:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://iowaunderground.com/blog/2006/09/25/dsm-register-beneath-contempt/#comment-9423</guid>
					<description>Alterman has a related post on this via his new blog on Media Matters &lt;a href=&quot;http://mediamatters.org/altercation/200609250003&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;&lt;b&gt;here&lt;/b&gt;.&lt;/a&gt;

A brief excerpt:
&lt;blockquote&gt;There are too many problems with the mainstream media to say the sentence &quot;The problem with the MSM is...&quot; If you ask me what its biggest problem is, however, I would say it is its ahistoricism. Here we have three stories in which the CIA concludes that the invasion of Iraq has increased the danger to America from terrorism, &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/24/world/middleeast/24terror.html?ex=1316750400&amp;#38;en=2baeda555d1b398a&amp;#38;ei=5090&amp;#38;partner=rssuserland&amp;#38;emc=rss&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;&lt;b&gt;here&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/a&gt;, &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-intel24sep24,0,2161892.story?coll=la-home-headlines&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;&lt;b&gt;here&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/a&gt;, and &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/23/AR2006092301130.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;&lt;b&gt;here&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/a&gt;.

Not one of these articles highlights the key point that the CIA reported to Bush that this would be the case before we went to war. For instance, in the Times story -- which led the pack on this -- you need to wade in pretty deeply to learn that &quot;The estimate's judgments confirm some predictions of a National Intelligence Council report completed in January 2003, two months before the Iraq invasion. That report stated that the approaching war had the potential to increase support for political Islam worldwide and could increase support for some terrorist objectives. In other words, the CIA -- not The Nation, not Media Matters, not George Soros -- warned the president that he would be increasing, not decreasing the threat of terrorism to the United States by invading Iraq. That story appeared above the fold in the right corner of The New York Times as well. Bush ignored the warnings and purposely misled the United States into the most ruinous war in its history. Liberal hawks cheered. And there's no good way out. All of that belongs in the story, too. The degree of both incompetence and dishonesty involved in the selling and conduct of this war is literally criminal. And it's all happening right before our eyes. &lt;/blockquote&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>
<p>Alterman has a related post on this via his new blog on Media Matters <a href="http://mediamatters.org/altercation/200609250003" rel="nofollow"><b>here</b>.</a></p></p>
	<p>
<p>A brief excerpt:</p></p>
	<p>
<blockquote>There are too many problems with the mainstream media to say the sentence &#8220;The problem with the <span class="caps">MSM</span> is&#8230;&#8221; If you ask me what its biggest problem is, however, I would say it is its ahistoricism. Here we have three stories in which the <span class="caps">CIA</span> concludes that the invasion of Iraq has increased the danger to America from terrorism, <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/24/world/middleeast/24terror.html?ex=1316750400&#038;en=2baeda555d1b398a&#038;ei=5090&#038;partner=rssuserland&#038;emc=rss" rel="nofollow"><b>here</b></a>, <a href="http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-intel24sep24,0,2161892.story?coll=la-home-headlines" rel="nofollow"><b>here</b></a>, and <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/23/AR2006092301130.html" rel="nofollow"><b>here</b></a>.</p>
	<p>Not one of these articles highlights the key point that the <span class="caps">CIA</span> reported to Bush that this would be the case before we went to war. For instance, in the Times story&#8212;which led the pack on this&#8212;you need to wade in pretty deeply to learn that &#8220;The estimate&#8217;s judgments confirm some predictions of a National Intelligence Council report completed in January 2003, two months before the Iraq invasion. That report stated that the approaching war had the potential to increase support for political Islam worldwide and could increase support for some terrorist objectives. In other words, the <span class="caps">CIA </span>&#8212;not The Nation, not Media Matters, not George Soros&#8212;warned the president that he would be increasing, not decreasing the threat of terrorism to the United States by invading Iraq. That story appeared above the fold in the right corner of The New York Times as well. Bush ignored the warnings and purposely misled the United States into the most ruinous war in its history. Liberal hawks cheered. And there&#8217;s no good way out. All of that belongs in the story, too. The degree of both incompetence and dishonesty involved in the selling and conduct of this war is literally criminal. And it&#8217;s all happening right before our eyes. </blockquote></p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>
