In the Name of Objectivity, the Media Clouds the Reality of Terror Report

By Arianna Huffington, Huffington Post. Posted July 21, 2007.

Here we go again. Another devastating report being spun as a mixed bag -- with the spin dutifully echoed by the media. Another administration brain tumor being "offset" by shiny hair.

This time it's the new National Intelligence Estimate report on the threat of terrorist violence against America that is being given the utterly ludicrous "on the one hand... and on the other hand" treatment.

A prime example of this came on AC 360, where Anderson Cooper reported that "both sides in the Iraq debate are spinning [the NIE] to support their case." To prove his point, he rolled a video clip of Bush making the case for staying the course in Iraq. Back on camera, he said, "The Democrats, of course, see it differently."

"Of course" they do. Not because there are always two sides to every issue, but because the facts are different than Bush claims they are.

Cooper then turned to a trio of experts whose goal was "keeping them honest."

Up first was the always bracing Michael Ware, beamed in via satellite from Iraq, where he has spent most of the war. Ware took a cudgel to the White House spin machine, beating down the administration's attempt to portray the war as a fight between America and al-Qaeda by reporting that "al-Qaeda would be lucky to make up 3 percent of the insurgency." Ware's verdict on the White House: "They're trying to play the American public."

Next up was CNN terrorism analyst Peter Bergen who agreed with Ware that al-Qaeda in Iraq is a "relatively small group" but was quick to add: "On the other hand, the largest number of suicide attackers in Iraq are foreigners ... few Iraqis are involved in the suicide attacks. And it's the suicide attacks, of course, that sparked the civil war, that got the United Nations to withdraw, and that made Iraq a much more dangerous place. So, despite their small number, they have had a disproportionate strategic effect on the ground."

So for those keeping score, that's one "the administration is not being honest" and one "the administration is partially honest and partially dishonest." Hmm ... I wonder what could be next? Perhaps someone to defend the administration as "totally honest"?

Enter CNN military analyst, retired U.S. General David Grange. Like the White House, Grange sees a silver lining in the fact that the war in Iraq has "multiplied" the number of terrorists: "I kind of like the idea [terrorists] assemble in Iraq, because there's more of them there to take down, instead of hunting them around the world of global operations, which are very difficult. Here, we have a license to kill or capture. Many other places, we do not. And, so, I don't think it's a bad thing that they're assembling in Iraq."

Find more Arianna at the Huffington Post.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »