Let's Call It "Media With An Agenda"

We are pondering the absolute silence of the NY Times on the Weekly Standard story (with follow-up) about the links between Osama and Saddam. The story centered on a memo from Undersecretary of Defense Douglas Feith (a noted neocon) to the Senate Intelligence Committee, providing supporting detail to his recent Senate testimony.

But there is no Feith-based reporting at the NY Times! Jack Shafer has a theory, but we have a question: why is the NY Times so down on this story, but so excited about their own secret agent scoop?

Messr. Belgravitas has more (and more), but the soundbite it this - the Ny Times is besotted with the notion that, regardless of whether Tariq Aziz was stiffing Colin Powell, a ludicrous back-channel attempt to (maybe) contact Richard Perle represented our last, best hope for peace. This vision recurs in a Nov. 16 editorial, so they are loving it.

One story up, one story down. Any pattern?

UPDATE: Maybe the WaPo has a story? Happily, yes!

And, in a tribute to the power of the Blogosphere, the NY Times joins in on Nov. 20.

Comments

[Seb]

One story from today's Washington Post.

[TM]

Thanks very much. This concept of actually looking in the damn newspaper, or even trying Google-News, is one I need to master.

Although I was Times-bashing...

And here is their story (in the UPDATE) from Nov. 20. The blogosphere gets results!

[IceCold]

Hey, as I've been saying, and you're now saying, the Tenet letter provides an important reference point in the discussion. Now, even some unnamed officials cited in the NYT article you linked are pointing out the same thing.

But the credulity or plain mediocrity of the typical "elite" reporters and editors shines through in the NYT piece as well:

"Mr. Feith, a chief proponent and architect of the war in Iraq, is among a small group of administration officials who have been accused by Democratic critics of using intelligence selectively to support his views, by drawing on raw reports to reach conclusions that differ from those of the intelligence agencies."

You see, the intelligence agencies aren't staffed by human beings who selectively use information -- much of it raw -- to support their views. Of course, that's exactly what they are, and what they're supposed to do. Teams of people, using their judgement and experience, make the best they can of frequently conflicting partial information of varying reliability. The implicit assumption that somehow the "intelligence agencies" have magical powers of discernment is ridiculous, but central to this sophomoric worldview that suffuses the "elite" media.

Check out Newsweek's dismissal of the WS article. Talk about thin and unimpressive.
Or even silly -- they assert that Osama's pre-Iraq War tape, which of course contains the standard boilerplate about socialists and infidels (Ba'athists), is of any probative value whatever in pondering the possible AQ-Iraq relationship. I get it -- mutliple reports of certain meetings and relationships that can't be verified with video, sworn testimony, or credit card receipts must be viewed skeptically, but the throw-away language of a propaganda recording aimed at the wackiest and most alienated violent people on Earth must be taken seriously.

I don't think it's a question of "case closed." But common sense plus history plus the Tenet letter plus the best elements of the WS article add up to reasonable belief that AQ and Iraq actually dallied with each other -- and it removes the tiny pre-existing doubt among realistic observers that they could cooperate if they so chose.

Oddly enough, it all seems moot, as the Iraqi regime has been destroyed. Hey, wait a minute! Maybe that's what this "pre-emption" thing is all about???

[The Kid]

Ha! al Qaeda and Saddam working together against a common enemy despite their ideological and philosophical differences? Get serious.

That’s as likely as, say, committed capitalists and communists teaming up, and analogy we old-timers find relevant. What could possibly drive a stanch believer in liberty into making a bargain with the devil?

[HH]

Shafer didn't have to be a psychic to figure out where the press would come down on this...

[The Kid]

Icecold -
Hayes responded this afternoon (11/20/03, 1:26 PM) to Newsweek - See this update.