The minute I see a journalist using unnamed sources, I know there’s a good chance I’m being lied to, often big time. In this post Rathergate world anyone who believes such reporting should have what’s left of his or her head examined. A case in point this morning is the ever-popular Robert Novak who is informing us a Quick exit from Iraq is likely.
Inside the Bush administration policymaking apparatus, there is strong feeling that U.S. troops must leave Iraq next year. This determination is not predicated on success in implanting Iraqi democracy and internal stability. Rather, the officials are saying: Ready or not, here we go.
This prospective policy is based on Iraq’s national elections in late January, but not predicated on ending the insurgency or reaching a national political settlement. Getting out of Iraq would end the neoconservative dream of building democracy in the Arab world. The United States would be content having saved the world from Saddam Hussein’s quest for weapons of mass destruction.
Note the use of weasel words like “strong feeling.” Whose strong feeling Novak isn’t saying. He almost never does. He’s not a journalist. He’s a disinformation service.
UPDATE: Ali agrees. I wonder if Novak would ever consider the feelings (or the lives) of real Iraqis on the subject. I doubt anything more than fifty yards from the Washington Monument gets through his radar.
I came to the same conclusion when I saw this over at Vodkapundit.
“He’s not a journalist.”
He’s also not a conservative and he has never been a Republican. He is also tight as a tick with every Arabist at the State Department. I would not be surprised to hear that he and Hersh have never been seen in the same room.
Good call Roger. I can’t stand the man.A neo-isolationist he has been opposed to the Iraq situation from before it actually became a situation.
I would not believe a word this guy says.
Novak has been notorious – in fact, infamous – the past four years for always playing up _anything_ that’s bad news for Bush in his column. Given that I am disinclined to believe that he has any kind of real entree to what GWB is actually thinking, or planning. I might also note that this column goes directly counter to the latest maunderings from the Kerry campaign about a supposed Evil Seekrit Plan to do a massive NG/Reserve call-up right after the election. One or the other can be true, but not both (and, more likely, neither).
I’m sure Novak trusts his source. But I’m equally sure his source doesn’t know what he’s talking about. Why would Bush pull out early–after the election, when political risks fall to zero?
It’s also worth noting that Novak has opposed the war from the beginning.
In a way it’s neat.
One source says we’re pulling out. Another says we’re sending more troops.
Very confusing.
All it takes is for Bush to open his mouth and tell us he’s staying the course.
Sigh of relief.
People trust Bush.
In case you haven’t seen it yet, click over to Drudge and see Rather’s “retraction.” The next question, are the applicable law enforcement authorities going to subpeona him to give up the source of these documents, which are forgeries perpetrated in an attempt to influence an election? Seems to me that serious offenses have been committed here, and I don’t believe journalists have any obligation to protect sources who have provided them with false information. Does any sane person on this planet believe this last sentence?
“Please know that nothing is more important to us than people’s trust in our ability and our commitment to report fairly and truthfully.”
ìWhose strong feeling Novak isn’t saying. He almost never does. He’s not a journalist. He’s a disinformation service.î
That I live to see the day when American free press is treated with the same disdain as the old communist press back in the Commie days!Ö.
Over there we had Samizdat, Radio Free Europe and publications smuggled from London. Here we have talk radio and the blogophereÖ.and, much more importantly, the certainty that we can log on and post without fear of being hauled to a police station for a little interrogation.
When things reach this level of distrust, the system of news presentation will have to reform itself. As I am great believer in market forces and Darwinian evolution in human affairs, I think we are on our way to a better information system and consequently better-informed citizenry. We are watching creative destruction at work; the unfortunate part is that destruction is always painful, and we just started witnessing the beginning of it. It is not going to be prettyÖ.but in the end we will all be better for it. May the best adaptable win.
We’ll have combat formations in the sandbox for years to come – probably beyond the next administration at a minimum.
There’s lots of work to be done. Thank goodness we’ve got (and are going to emphatically keep) the leadership up to the task.
Katherine,
May the the most truthful win – even if they are not the most adaptable.
Hmm.
The article rings true to me.
I would be surprised if there weren’t strong feeling within the realist faction of the administration that the U.S. should pull out.
Though it does surprise me to hear Wolfowitz associated with that position.
OTOH, we’ve got other problems to deal with, Iran being one. We know for a fact Iraq isn’t about to acquire nuclear weapons; we also know for a fact that Iran is about to do so.
Worse yet, the entire world now sees us as “tied up in Iraq” & unable to move against anyone else.
This perception is universal.
Is it the consensus here that Novack’s reporting is not to be trusted?
I haven’t found that to be the case, but maybe I haven’t read closely enough.
I never take insider reports as a prediction of what Bush will or will not do, and the furthest out Novack has gone on that limb is to tell us that insiders are predicting Bush will decide to exit quickly.
That sounds like wishful thinking to me. Or, alternatively, the quick-exit leak could be a trial balloon, or disinformation intended to neutralize Kerry’s anti-war position, or both.
Are we all assuming no one inside the administration thinks we should exit sooner rather than later?
Rick:
This is all part of the Washington game to get your point of view spun in the press. I am sure there are a number of people who are disillusioned that Iraq is messier then they thought it would be. Everybody knows that inside sources talk to reporters then support their views in the hopes that they can get a media tidal wave that forces the administration to move in their direction.
As much as I dislike Robert Novak, he is a Republican and he is a Conservative. However, he is also extremely anti-Semitic, which probably comes from growing up in an east European Chicago neighborhood. There is another Chicago born columnist with some of the same prejudices, Georgie Ann Geyer, who during the Balkan Wars took umbrage at peacekeepers protecting a Serb cemetery in Croatia from defilement. She felt that the Croats ought to be allowed to remove a symbol of their WWII enemies. She is also virulently anti-Semitic as well.
Catherine
–Are we all assuming no one inside the administration thinks we should exit sooner rather than later?—
I don’t know about ‘no one’ but I’m assuming Bush has no such notion.
But this kind of stuff scares the Iraqi’s. Allawi will be here this week and Bush can reassure him in person.
Kerry is definitely pulling a Vietnam on us.
Novak often gets it wrong, but I don’t think he makes stuff up (or that anyone has implied that). There are definitely people within the administration who favor the State Dept. and have been against the Iraq War from the start; it’s reasonable to expect that they want to see the US pullout ASAP. They may see the situation as intractable, but in so doing believe that the president will come to see it the same way when presented with the “facts.” It’s not going to happen.
The only way Bush pulls out is if Allawi’s govt. requests it, which isn’t going to happen anytime soon. Kondracke reported that Allawi is terrified of a Kerry victory because it might mean the withdrawal of US troops. (Is Kondracke more reliable than Novak? Probably.)
No way is Wolfowitz part of the immediate withdrawal crowd. I believe that to be wishful thinking on someone’s part.
Marek ñ ìMay the most truthful win – even if they are not the most adaptableî
I expect that in this new news climate the trait that makes an entity most adaptable is the ability to tell the truth and admit mistakes.
If we were looking strictly for entertainment and partisanship the MSM Dinosaurs would not have to worry about the future. However, the environment has changed. Dinosaurs can either evolve or die.
Jerry,
Finally. This is the very first time I’ve read something incorrect from you. Bob Novak is a lifelong Democrat. His reputation as a “conservative” comes from his favoring tax cuts – and that is the sum total of “conservative” positions that he holds. He’s a dog in the manger and always has been. Why do you think CNN used him for “Crossfire”?
Katherine:
Dinosaurs did evolve into substantially less threatening creatures, i.e., birds. However, they didn’t make the change in one jump. After the large dinosaurs became extinct birds remained the most fearsome predators around until large carniverous mammels entered the scene some 20-30 million years after the K-T event marked the end of T-Rex and Co. So we can expect the MSM to begin to evolve in a way that slowly reduces their power and influence.
Rick:
I must issue a retraction of my claim that Novak is a Republican. However, I must say that given his positions on taxes and cold war politics the characterization of him as a Republican is accurate even thought it was false. Well at least I can remove another Nazi-sympathizer from the hallowed halls or Republicanism. But seriously, hasn’t Novak supported every Republican Presidential nominee since Nixon? I believe Jean Kirkpatrick never changed her registration either.
20-30 million years?
How long will that take in Internet time?
Katherine:
As long as it takes for say Jonah Goldberg and Mickey Kaus to get together and set up lively bi-ideological web-based newspaper that would report the news and combine a set of point-counterpoint OPED features. It would absolutely devour the old fashion MSM approach by capturing all the reasonable people regardless of party leaving the MSM the fringe socialist tinfoil hat crew. Do we have any well know volunteers for this project?
jerry,
The only problem that I see with your excellent scheme is ñ us usual ñ the business plan i.e. financing. The online advertising is still jeered at, and I do not expect anyone with disposable cash (like George Soros) to put down any angel money. If it was to further the cause of ìthe fringe socialist tinfoil hat crewî (see Salon) then yes, perhaps.
People with real money remain strangely attached to idea of central control and dislike free markets.
Maybe we disgruntled consumers of MSM can start our own venture fund to further enable the demise of those nasty media dinosaurs.
Catherine -
“I would be surprised if there weren’t strong feeling within the realist faction of the administration that the U.S. should pull out.”
You also proposed this sentiment might be a balloon.
I submit, with all due respect, that you are framing your analysis through the lens of the last administration and obsolete conventional wisdom.
This administration IS realist – not of the stripe that asks itself “What will people think about this next policy” but rather “We know what must done, and will do it.” They are doing the right thing, not the easy thing, and have bet their political futures on the supposition that a majority of citizens will validate their choices in November. That’s how the system is supposed to work, and I think that the Bush team believes in it a lot more than the opposition does. Looks like their right so far.
Balloons? Yes, they do go up now and again. That’s just politics. On the issue of troops remaining in Iraq, the end game/exit strategy is already published. We stay until the sovereign government of Iraq asks us to leave.
Catherine:
I find Novak very suspect. He is presupposed to this kind of thinking, has never been helpful or supportive of Bush and I just don’t think Bush plans to do this. If he did I think he would say so himself. Another American was beheaded in iraq today, it is not a happy place to be.
But as far this stuff with “sources” go, I am tired of it.
Novak started all that stuff with Wilson because of some source and now he is blowing off with some big news from another source.
I wouldn’t be surprised if he was not making it up.
I’m with TmjUtah on this one: Some deputy assist undersecretary is trying to float his or her’s trial balloon, but I dont see any chance the administration is going to cave on this one. Their position has been clear: a long and messy war, but focus on the outcomes; support for the Iraqi interim government and for their successor after elections; stay in Iraq until the Iraqi government asks us to leave; and not one day longer than necessary.
I dont see how the president could back down on that position (s). The one thing I do admire him for is his consistency–and the American public, I think, do as well.
And…there are a lot of excellent geopolitical reasons to keep forces there for as long as practicable.
I can imagine that there is a plan to move troops out of Iraq by moving them into Iran. Otherwise not.
ìI wouldn’t be surprised if he was not making it up.î
Terrye:
Novak is simply maintaining the journalistic standard of the day of using fake sources to push ìaccurateî ideas forward.
jerry – “However, he is also extremely anti-Semitic, which probably comes from growing up in an east European Chicago neighborhood. There is another Chicago born columnist with some of the same prejudices, Georgie Ann Geyer”
Yes that’s right jerry, all East Europeans are obviously anti-Semites, including those like Novak who converted from Judaism! Between the Democrats’ downgrading of the importance of East European allies and Republicans tarring them as anti-Semites and taking their support for granted I’m sure it won’t be long before the most pro-American part of the world starts to turn against the US as well. To automatically classify East European Christians as anti-Semites is no different from putting all East European Jews in the Soviet collaborator category.
“She [Geyer]is also virulently anti-Semitic as well.”
You sound like a paleocon/leftist stereotype of a neocon tarring anyone who disagrees with you. I don’t always agree with Geyer and Novak but they strike me as being more reputable than “conservatives” who were up to their necks in the Iran-Contra scandal.
Rick Ballard – “This is the very first time I’ve read something incorrect from you. Bob Novak is a lifelong Democrat. His reputation as a “conservative” comes from his favoring tax cuts – and that is the sum total of “conservative” positions that he holds.”
no he also takes conservative social positions, unlike a lot of people here, and his nationalistic foreign policy views could be seen as right wing. I believe Novak is also a member of Opus Dei. Look them up Rick, they are not exactly knee-jerk liberals!
Anybody,
I know Krugman has a truth squad, and Rather had RatherBiased, but does anyone know of a best blog or site that has good summaries of the various lies and machinations of the media?
One along the lines of factcheck.org that focuses on summary listing over rants?
Agree that Novak’s carrying water for the anti’s in State & CIA with this report.
Also agree that Novak’s a useful conduit for these folks because his past writings strongly suggest he’s in the “Arabist” camp.
Disagree that there’s any “there” there – there’s only one vote that counts in this Administration, and it belongs to GWB. Thus far, he’s not given any indication that he’ll settle for less than a stable, peaceful Iraq whose presence undermines the governments of the dictatorships which surround it.
Finally – at what point in time do we say “enough” with anonymous sourcing? In this day and age, all it does is allow people with axes to grind to spread crappola with impunity.
After Rathergate, our position ought to be “If you’re using anonymous sources, you’re lying to us.”
Coisty;
Down graded? I see we are either buying their love or ignoring them.
At least Bush did not tell them to shut up which is modre than can be said for their Euro neighbors.
Catherine:
No, there are a number of smart people in the administration who have different takes on how things should be done. A lot of people fault W for excessive loyalty (re: Tennet, Clarke, probably others I don’t know) but I see it as a recognition on Bush’s part that living in an echo chamber is dangerous.
For instance, I’m sure that Collin Powell and W have very different views on any given situation. Likewise, the dreaded Neocon decision-making process is probably different from both the above. And then there’s Rice, who strikes me as Bush’s closest ideological match within the group. But what strikes me about this Administration is the degree of internal loyalty. This really is a team that is playing well together, and there is no better indicator of effective leadership than that.
In the end, Bush listens to the input and makes his decision, and the team goes forth and implements the best it can. (Powell probably has the worst job in Washington; State seems to be more-or-less a rogue agency, and Powell has to wrestle it to get it to perform to specs he himself might not like. And he still seems to do a decent job.)
During the buildup to the Second Gulf War, lots of talking heads competed for who could best read between the lines and predict what was going to happen. Pretty soon the press corps noticed that the best way to predict what would happen next was to take the Administration at its word.
Novak’s been talking to the scrubs on the bench. I suggest we continue to listen to the manager.
Coisty, dear, where does jerry say that all Eastern Europeans are anti-Semites?
As it happens I am former Eastern European and somehow missed this implication.
But I can imagine that some neighborhoods consisting of some ethnic groups can have higher percentage of anti-Semitic people. Sadly, many of them would be my former compatriots.
Pulling out of Iraq would signal to Iran that they had a free hand in the Middle East and could pursue their ambition of being the regional superpower.The chance of having a formidable force next to Iran and Syria would not come again for decades, if ever.The EU would be also ecstatic because a strong Iran is European policy,pace Chris Patton.
I will be glad when your election is over,because although this kind of destabilising opinion will still seep out it won’t matter.
Honestly, I don’t see much reason to believe anything Novak says — when’s the last time he was right about much of anything? — and even less this, which has all the earmarks of the usual Novak bloviation: it’s an “admission” the Bush Administration should have done what Novak wanted; it shows that Bush can’t be trusted (he’s not really a conservative, don’t you know) ; and it blames everything on the Joooos, er, neocons.
I call him, fondly, Novakula…
Jamie Irons
But he’s not anti-Semitic, he’s anti-Zionist…
And we all know there’s a huge distinction between the two.
A distinction without a difference.
Jamie irons
Well I just can not keep all the secret plans straight.
Secret plans to call up more reserves, secret plans to pull out, secret plans to build pipelines, secret defense contracts with evil corporations, secret deals with the Jews, secret plans to steal all the oil in the ME, this on top of the secret plan to carry out the attack on 9/11 and the secret plan with mossad to cover it up and on and on and on….
How about a secret plan to wait and see what actually happens in the real world which will probably have more to do with unfolding events than any fantasy of Novak’s.
Well Coisty, I see that Katherine has defended me. Thank you. My wife from eastern Europe, a native Pole as a matter of fact. I am also from Chicago and I know where Novak is coming from, although I have never heard he converted from Judaism. I would like to see that. [Gee whiz wrong twice on the same day] but that might explain his behavior. After all Marx had Jewish ancestry and the entire idea of a final solution to the Jewish question comes from him. Geyer is another story. Anybody would think that the Croats have a legitimate right to cleanse their WWII enemies from the homeland is a Nazi. Why would I say that. Well the Croatian Ustashi party, which had returned to power under Tudjman at that time was the Croatian Nazi party. She clearly stated that Nazis have a right to cleanse their land of the symbols of their enemies. I think most reasonable people would clearly say she is a Nazi sympathizer.
Katherine – “Coisty, dear, where does jerry say that all Eastern Europeans are anti-Semites?”
Well, jerry made the following remark: “However, he is also extremely anti-Semitic, which probably comes from growing up in an east European Chicago neighborhood.”
Katherine – “But I can imagine that some neighborhoods consisting of some ethnic groups can have higher percentage of anti-Semitic people”
Polls show that most Jewish Americans are very hostile to evangelical Protestant Americans, so should all Protestants automatically dismiss anything a Jewish reporter says? Some neighbourhoods of NYC have a higher percentage of people with an emotional attachment to Israel than in your more typical American neighbourhoods. Should I dismiss what they have to say on the Middle East and assume they just hate Arabs? I think that would be harsh. But the intemperate remarks of Jerry’s post indicate he has already taken that path when it comes to East Europeans. Though he probably doesn’t object to them being cannon-fodder in Iraq.
Terrye – “Down graded? I see we are either buying their love or ignoring them”
John Kerry has clearly shown contempt for countries like Poland that have stuck their necks out for the US in Iraq. He talks as if only Germany and France matter as allies. I can tell you that has been noticed in Eastern Europe.
I don’t think the US has done that much buying of love in Europe. The Poles and others have faced tremendous US pressure to buy American products instead of similar ones from the EU, especially when it comes to military equipment. The Poles have also been stiffed by the US on visas at a time when the two leading candidates want an amnesty for Mexicans despite them being amongst the most anti-American people in the world – Mexico also opposed the Iraq war. The recent US surrender to the anti-American government of Spain regarding the US naval presence at the Gibraltar tercentenary celebration certainly doesn’t indicate American gratefulness to Gibraltar for allowing US ships to use the colonies facilities. And, of course, the East Europeans are just “anti-Semites” to many ignorant Americans. You really ought to show more respect for your friends.
BD: excellent post–thank you. I agree: anonymous sources are nothing more than slime and they should be disregarded a priori. If the MSM–or any media for that matter–what to float a story, they do what we do here on the blogs–we source it or tell folks it is our opinion. But regretably, anonymous sourcing is the bread and butter of the MSM and is accepted by all as somehow a first amendment right. Your solution, to which I fully subscribe, cuts right to the heart of the charade of sourcing.
Jamie Irons: isnt “ula” the diminutive ending for Romanian names? eg, drac (ula?). I ask only in the interests of linguistic exploration.
Agghh! I just wrote three paragraphs about the reasons for Croatian nationalists in the 90s embracing the symbols of the Ustashi – many of which had preceded the Pavelic regime. Unfortunately when I hit “Post” it turned out my sign in had lapsed and I lost it all!
Let’s just say to Croats anything that was seen as defiant towards the Serbs and the communist regime they’d suffered under for so long was favourably looked upon. I very much doubt if many were neo-Nazis, though the Serbs of Krajina can be forgiven for disagreeing. I believe the Serbs were the main victims of the Yugoslav wars yet just saying that can get one accused of supporting ethnic cleansing and racism. It’s easy to attach labels to others and then dismiss all they have to say. I disagreed with Geyer on Yugoslavia but I wouldn’t call her a Nazi for being pro-Croatian.
Terrye ó See, the secret plan is to have a secret mass call-up of the Guard and Reserve, send them all to Iraq, then suddenly cut and run to bring them all home here where they will occupy all the libraries so Ashcroft can investigate our reading habits at his leisure.
I may have left out a few minor irrelevant details but that is the nub of the gist of it…
Er, I wonder if Kerry sees this as another opportunity to flip-flop and accuse Bush of trying to “cut-and-run”, while he takes on a more “hawkish” position in iraq?
coisty:
It was not her support for the current Crotian nationalists that fingered her. It was her endorsement of actions aimed at Croatian’s WWII adversaries that give it away. As far as 1990′s Croatian nationalism just using the Ustashi symbols try again. There was a picture on the cover of Der Spiegel the week German peacekeepers came to Croatia. There were crowds of happy citizens cheering waving German flags and Sieg Heil-ing as the column road through town.
coisty:
It was not her support for the current Croatian nationalists that fingered her. It was her endorsement of actions aimed at Croatian’s WWII adversaries that give it away. As far as 1990′s Croatian nationalism just using the Ustashi symbols try again. There was a picture on the cover of Der Spiegel the week German peacekeepers came to Croatia. There were crowds of happy citizens cheering waving German flags and Sieg Heil-ing as the column road through town.
Croatia is still not a good place to be Jewish. Most of the Jews of the former Yugoslavia live in Belgrade where the population is much more hospitable
Novak’s screed was truly demented. I assume that it is the love child of some Saudi slave in the State Depatment, there are more of them there, than there are Americans, and Bay Buchanan, note the last paragraphs:
*This is code for the Buchananites. Clearly Novak thinks that the Bush Administration has learned its lesson in Iraq and is ready to follow true Buchananite wisdom and to raise the banner of isolationism as the true conservative faith.I agree with the commentors above who state that Novak is an anti-Semite. I have no idea why, but it fits with his being a buchananite fellow travellerAs a final note I think the one thing we have learned about President Bush is that when he articulates a policy he sticks with it. The type of cynical cut and run described by Novak completely contradicts the doctrine repeatedly stated by President Bush. Just This Morning at the UN.:
Does this sound like a man who is preparing to cut and run?