|
WSWS : News
& Analysis : North
America
Fallout from McClellan book: The Iraq wars complicit
enablers, then and now
By Bill Van Auken
30 May 2008
Use
this version to print
| Send this
link by email | Email
the author
Former White House press secretary Scott McClellans new
book indicting the Bush administration for employing a political
propaganda campaign and deception to drag the US into an
unnecessary war in Iraq has unleashed a wave of bitter
recriminations from the Republican right, while prompting opportunist
attempts by Democrats to exploit the tell-all memoir for their
own political purposes.
As McClellan began making the rounds of television news interviews,
former White House counselor Dan Bartlett described the book,
What Happened: Inside the Bush White House and Washingtons
Culture of Deception, as total crap and called
the ex-press secretarys actions beyond the pale.
Former White House counter-terror aide Frances Townsend told CNN
that McClellan was self-serving, disingenuous and unprofessional.
Meanwhile, both Senators Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton worked
McClellans book into their Democratic presidential campaigns.
Clinton lionized McClellan, declaring this young man
essentially apologizes for having been part of misleading America
for three years. He talks about how difficult it was that our
president and those working with him didnt, either level
with the American people, or didnt change course when circumstances
demanded it.
Apparently anxious to shift the subject from the run-up to
the Iraq war, when Clinton was one of the majority of Democrats
in the Senate voting Bush a blank check to invade Iraq, she continued:
There isnt any doubt that President Bush has misled
us. The question now is, what kind of president do we need going
forward.
The Obama campaign used the book to counter charges by Republican
candidate Senator John McCain that the Democratic front-runner
lacked experience in relation to Iraq. On the day after
the former White House press secretary conceded that the Bush
administration used deception and propaganda to take us to war,
it seems odd that Senator McCain, who bought the flawed rationale
for war so readily, would be lecturing others on their depth of
understanding about Iraq, read a statement issued by the
Obama campaign.
No attempt was made to draw out the staggering implications
of the confirmation, from inside the White House, that a war that
has cost over one million Iraqi lives and killed or wounded tens
of thousands of US troops was launched through deception
and propaganda. It was merely used as a talking point to
promote Obama as a better candidate than his Republican rival.
One Democratic congressman, Robert Wexler of Florida, called
for McClellan to testify under oath before the House Judiciary
Committee. He focused on the section in the former presidential
spokesmans book dealing with the leaking of the identity
of CIA operative Valerie Plame Wilson and the implication that
Karl Rove, Lewis Scooter Libby and Vice President Dick Cheney
participated in a conspiracy to obstruct justice.
In a letter to supporters, Wexler said that the statements
in McClellans book justified impeachment hearings against
Cheney. He quickly acknowledged, however, that the continuing
revelations of outright criminality in the administration have
not been enough to convince even a majority of the liberal and
progressive Members of Congress to support impeachment hearings.
In addition, the leadership of the Democratic Party in Congress
genuinely feels that pursuing impeachment will jeopardize our
congressional agenda and threaten gains in the November elections.
In other words, the Democratic leadershipwhich has repeatedly
declared impeachment off the tableintends to
do absolutely nothing about McClellans damning testimony,
outside of milk it for a few cheap political points. It cannot
follow the logical course of pursuing those responsible for a
criminal war of aggression, because the Democrats are themselves
wholly complicit. Indeed, the partys leadership in the House
and Senate are in the process of approving another $165 billion
to continue a war that, as House Speaker Pelosi admitted yesterday,
is based on lies.
Perhaps the most revealing reaction was that of the media itself
to McClellans indictment of those whom he fed the false
propaganda for war. He essentially accused them of serving as
a willing accomplice of the Bush administration in deceiving the
American people.
In his book, McClellan charges that the press was too
deferential to the White House and to the administration in relation
to the most important decision facing the nation during my years
in Washington, the choice over whether to go to war in Iraq.
The discrediting of the false pretexts used by the administration
to launch the war, he added, should never have come as such
a surprise, implying that the media was well aware that
it was regurgitating false propaganda, but never told its viewers
and readers.
He added that the liberal media didnt
live up to its reputation, and, most damning of all, referred
to themquite accuratelyas complicit enablers
of the Bush war drive.
In response, some members of the media made partial admissions
that McClellans charges had merit. CNNs correspondent
Jessica Yellin, appearing on the cable news network Wednesday
night, acknowledged that news executivesshe later clarified
that she was referring to MSNBC, where she worked in 2003pressured
her and others to put on positive stories about the president.
She added that they would edit my pieces...they would turn
down stories that were more critical.
Yellin explained, The press corps was under enormous
pressure from corporate executives, frankly, to make sure the
war was presented in a way that was consistent with the patriotic
fervor in the nation and the presidents high approval ratings.
Appearing together on the Today show Wednesday,
three news anchorsBrian Williams of NBC, Katie Couric of
CBS and Charlie Gibson of ABCwere asked about McClellans
indictment of the media.
The ex-press secretarys assessment was fairly accurate,
Couric acknowledged. I know when we were covering itand
granted in the spirit of 9/11, people were unified and upset and
angry and frustratedI do think we were remiss in not asking
some of the right questions. She added, There was
such a significant march to war, and people who questioned it
very early on, and really as the war progressed, were considered
unpatriotic. And I think it did affect the waythe level
of aggressiveness that was exercised by the media.
Gibson denied that the media bore any blame for broadcasting
administration lies, insisting, It was just a drumbeat of
support from the administration. It is not our job to debate them.
It is our job to ask the questions.
Williams said that the White House and the Pentagon exerted
enormous pressure on the news media to stick to the propaganda
line. The tone of the time was quite extraordinary.
While there was a significant element of intimidation involvedboth
Williams and Couric cited cases where the administration threatened
to block access for reporters who asked critical questionsthe
corporate-controlled media was hardly a passive or unwilling collaborator
in the march to war.
The news media did not capitulate to patriotic fervor
and the spirit of 9/11, giving the people what they
wanted to hear. It was the media that actively sought to whip
up pro-war sentiment and to falsely link the impending unprovoked
invasion of Iraq with the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001.
In fact, the period leading up to the invasion saw the biggest
demonstrations in history, in the US and around the world, with
tens of millions taking to the streets to oppose a war against
Iraq. Polls conducted at the time showed a majority opposed to
the Bush administrations drive to end weapons inspections
in order to launch an immediate war. There was widespread skepticism
about the pretexts given by the administration for invadingweapons
of mass destruction and alleged ties between Saddam Hussein and
Al Qaeda.
Virtually none of these sentiments found expression in the
media, while the massive demonstrations themselves went virtually
unreported. There was no doubt an element of cowardice in this
phenomenon, fear of being branded unpatrioticnot
by the public, but by the political right, which set the agenda.
Commenting on McClellans book Wednesday, NBCs Washington
bureau chief Tim Russert, noted that it indicted the Bush administration
for war propaganda and taking the country to war on
false pretenses. This is not Moveon.org, he declared.
This is someone who was serving in the White House for seven
years.
This distinction is telling. The mass media instinctively rejectedand
continues to rejectany critique of the war from the lefteven
from a Democratic Party-oriented pressure group like Moveon.org.
There are no new revelations in McClellans book. That the
Bush administration was using lies and propaganda to prepare a
war of aggression was something that the World Socialist Web
Site continuously reported and documented from 2001 onwards.
But from the standpoint of the corporate-controlled media, anything
coming from the left is not a legitimate part of public opinion
or debate.
More fundamental than political cowardice in this process are
social interests. The mass media is owned almost entirely by massive
capitalist conglomerates. Viacom Inc.s CBS, Walt Disney
Co.s ABC, AOL Time Warners CNN, General Electric Co.s
NBC and Fox, owned by Rupert Murdochs News Corp., did not
merely bow to pressure from the White House and the right, they
actively promoted the war, which was seen as furthering the profit
interests of corporate owners and major shareholders whose holdings
also extend to other sectors of the economy, including oil, arms
and finance capital.
For its part, the New York Times published a cynical
editorial on McClellans book entitled I knew it all
along, suggesting that the ex-press secretarys exposures
of the Bush administration were motivated only by a lucrative
book deal. The Times commented: For all of its self
serving, the book does serve one good purpose: It is a reminder
that we still do not know precisely how far Mr. Bush, Mr. Cheney
and the others were willing to wade into that culture of
deception.
That the Times itself was up to its neck in the campaign
to deceive the American people and promote the agenda of a war
against Iraq is nowhere acknowledged. It played perhaps the most
influential and odious role in this operation, not only echoing
but embellishing the administrations phony charges about
weapons of mass destruction in preparation for the
invasion.
The Times and other sections of the media, meanwhile,
are engaged once again in the same kind of operation, paving the
way to yet another eruption of American militarism, this time
against Iran.
Whatever McClellans intention, culture of deception,
the provocative phrase included in the books title, describes
not to the Bush administration or partisan politics in Washington,
but the political establishment a wholeincluding the Congress,
the Democratic Party, the media and the major banks and corporationswhich
has based its entire policy, both foreign and domestic, on systematic
and increasingly blatant lying to the American people.
The lies about weapons of mass destruction were driven by the
need of the American ruling establishment to hide from the American
people the predatory class interests that underlay the war drive.
The war was waged not to protect the American people,
but to secure by means of aggressive war a key strategic objective
of US imperialism, hegemony over the oil-rich Persian Gulf.
McClellan, it should be noted, continues this practice of lying,
claiming in his book that the real motive for the war was not
WMD and terrorism, but the desire of Bush and Co. to spread democracy
in the Middle East, perhaps the most ludicrous pretext of them
all.
Such lies have profound social roots. They become a necessity,
and a political reflex, because the interests of the financial
elite, represented by both political parties, stand in such sharp
contradiction to those of American working people, the overwhelming
majority of society.
The controversy surrounding the McClellan book has once again
demonstrated that even when these lies, involving criminality
and mass murder, are exposed, there are no real consequences.
The same forces that McClellan refers to as Bushs complicit
enablers in launching the war in Iraq are still at work,
allowing him to continue the bloodbath right to the day he leaves
the White House.
It is thus a remarkable fact that despite all the efforts of
administration propaganda, bolstered by the myriad enablers
in the media and the Democratic Party, the vast majority of the
American people have turned decisively against the war. They did
so, not in response to criticism of the war within the political
establishment or the media, but independently, out of their own
bitter experiences with the war and the broader social crisis
of American capitalism.
In the end, holding accountable those who told the lies and
carried out a criminal war of aggression depends upon the emergence
of a new, independent political movement of working people in
struggle against both the war and the capitalist system that gave
rise to it.
See Also:
Ex-Bush spokesman: White House fed war
propaganda to a "complicit" media
[29 May 2008]
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |