Der Spiegel, the New York Times and other reliable media organizations, having reviewed the tapes of PM Nouri al-Maliki’s interview with Spiegel, have confirmed that he said what Spiegel reported him as having said about his preference for Obama’s 16-month exit plan, or something even shorter than that.
(Obama is actually in Iraq now, I see.)
The US military subsequently ascribed to Ali al-Dabbagh, described as a Maliki aide, the view that Maliki had been misquoted. How much did they pay Dabbagh to have his name used thus, I wonder?
Juan Cole’s comment on the whole business is absolutely spot-on.
He writes:
- you see, it does not matter that al-Maliki actually said what he said. It does not matter that Der Spiegel can prove it. All that matters is that the Goebbelses around Bush and Cheney have managed to muddy the waters and produce doubt, taking the hard edge off the interview. Even AFP, the usually skeptical French wire service, asserted that al-Maliki had “denied” the accuracy of the Der Spiegel interview! Of course, al-Maliki has done no such thing. CENTCOM ventriloquising al-Dabbagh engaged in the denial, and a very vague one at that.
That is the way propaganda works, to obscure the truth and ensure it can be denied. Some wingnut even tried to pressure me to retract the little sentence I had written on the affair yesterday, on the grounds of “al-Dabbagh’s” mendacious and ridiculous assertions. Our information system is so corrupt and easily manipulated that even a clumsy ploy can obscure the truth and bully the journalists.
The entire Bushist project is on its last legs. Almost sad to see the ridiculous contortions they’re engaging in to try to save their position.
Hey, I have an idea. How about, instead of trying to lie and bribe their way out of the sinkhole the President’s decisions over the past six years have created in Iraq, they ‘fess up to their own limitations and call for the United Nations to convene the multiple negotiations that are needed to bring about a US withdrawal from the country that is swift, total, orderly– and generous to the Iraqis?
What a novel idea, eh? (Irony alert.)
Actually, the longer the Bushists hang on in Iraq, the worse the terms of their departure. Maybe someone should point this out to them?
Entirely right. It is very hard to know whether Maliki ever really did issue the retraction he is supposed to have. It only came from CENTCOM and RadioSawa, the American station in Iraq (the latter according to Badger).
There is a widening gap between what the US says Maliki said, and what we know from other sources. There have been many reports recently where US officials have told us what Maliki is thinking, and this is dutifully parroted by the MSM as real reporting. But it is not. It is what the White House hopes Maliki is thinking.
The Spiegel interview shows that his thoughts are actually different.
I have thought for some time that the White House is living in fantasy land over the SOF agreement, and this affair simply demonstrates the point.
Nonlocal Native Meets The Messiah
“For his part, Obama congratulated al-Maliki on the achievements made by his government, hailing the U.S.-Iraqi relations and the developments in the country…. The U.S. senator told al-Maliki that the American people seek to have strategic relations with Iraq, asserting the U.S. commitment to maintain Iraq’s security and stability….”
It ain’t much, but it compares favourably with what the New York Times Company wishes to disclose about the Clash of Titans.
___
Now that Cook County and the International Zone are good buddies at last, we may turn to the National Dialogue front, a front upon which one does not need to be a nation to engage in hostile confrontation:
“The National Dialogue Front (NDF) on Monday held a conference in Basra, [saying] ‘Many Iraqis know that Iran has the biggest role in destroying Iraq, by supporting militias and intervening in Iraq’s local issues. Due to those parameters, we addressed an invitation to the Iranian government last June to put an end to those acts and to employ dialogue and consensus to solve problems. We were surprised that the Iranian government disregarded and ignored the invitation. We renew our invitation to the Iranian government to stop those acts, to respond to Iraqis demands, to apologize for what it has done to innocents who were targeted by militias supported by Iran, and to compensate those who fell or were injured in sabotage, kidnapping, killing, and detonation operations. The ultimatum will last until September 1; otherwise, we in cooperation with many sides that support these demands will employ legal measures to restore the Iraqi rights, and will conduct a campaign to boycott the Iranian products. We demand to stop supporting the political sides that work for Iran’s interest and supported by Iran, and to end the Iranian influence through parties and figures in Iraq ….’ “
What with one thing and another, I somehow managed to miss the June ultimatum. How about you?
It is not amazing that the evil Qommies should have disdained to reply. First off, it’s a Sovereign Immunity thing, don’t you know? And then, purely practically, if real grown-up countries are to be called out to the Field of Honour by any little band of foreign factionalists that happens to be feelin’ its oats … well, where will it all end? I ask you!
Happy days.
(( “Pssst! Would you be interested in having some strategic relations, ma’am?” ))