CBC's choice of words in this article is misleading. "Iran's history with al-Qaeda"; and in the sub-headline a "rocky relationship" are both phrases that suggest that there is or was a functioning relationship. Moreover a rocky relationship, like a complicated love affair, implies periods of love and cooperation alternating with periods of animosity and antagonism. One might say, in the same vein, that CBC has had a rocky relationship with TRUTH, or as above, with WARMONGERING.
The reality is that Iran has not ever wanted to have anything to do with al-Qaeda, and al-Qaeda has never had anything but scorn for Iran. They are natural enemies. The article fails to make this point clearly enough, but does admit that the two have been thrown together by uncomfortable circumstances, particularly the fact that al-Qaeda took uninvited refuge in Iran when they were driven out of Afghanistan.
Another thing that CBC fails entirely to mention is that the one group in Iran that is often described as al-Qaeda are the Baluchi separatists (from southwestern Iran), who are Sunni and up in arms against the Iran Government. They have conducted terrorist attacks against Iranian targets, and there is strong reason to believe, that they receive weapons and financial support from the US Government. So the one group in Iran that probably warrants the name "al Qaeda in Iran" is actually a Western-supported, anti-Iranian group. This is very relevant information. Is CBC so incompetent that they were not aware of this, or did they leave it out intentionally because it would not serve their Iran-demonizing agendas?
In the lead up to the US invasion of Iraq, the media constantly juxtaposed the words "Iraq" and "al Qaeda", even though Saddam Hussein had no relationship with al Qaeda and 911. Even if the articles themselves revealed this non-relationship, the propaganda effect of this constant juxtaposition resulted in the majority of Americans thinking that Saddam had a hand in 911. CBC is doing the same thing today, by juxtaposing "Iran" and "al Qaeda" in headlines and sub-headlines and using misleading phrases like "history together" and "rocky relationship". This must be intentionally misleading, because the relevance of the Iran connection in the case of this Canadian threat is negligible and does not warrant this kind of high profile.
CBC could claim that they included in their articles that the Iranian Government was not likely to be aware of the Canadian plot, and that Iran has denied involvement. However, given the high profile CBC has given to the Iran connection in this case, these CBC sentences probably have the same effect as when Richard Nixon declared "I am not a crook"; which convinced everyone he was a crook.
The reality is that Iran has not ever wanted to have anything to do with al-Qaeda, and al-Qaeda has never had anything but scorn for Iran. They are natural enemies. The article fails to make this point clearly enough, but does admit that the two have been thrown together by uncomfortable circumstances, particularly the fact that al-Qaeda took uninvited refuge in Iran when they were driven out of Afghanistan.
Another thing that CBC fails entirely to mention is that the one group in Iran that is often described as al-Qaeda are the Baluchi separatists (from southwestern Iran), who are Sunni and up in arms against the Iran Government. They have conducted terrorist attacks against Iranian targets, and there is strong reason to believe, that they receive weapons and financial support from the US Government. So the one group in Iran that probably warrants the name "al Qaeda in Iran" is actually a Western-supported, anti-Iranian group. This is very relevant information. Is CBC so incompetent that they were not aware of this, or did they leave it out intentionally because it would not serve their Iran-demonizing agendas?
In the lead up to the US invasion of Iraq, the media constantly juxtaposed the words "Iraq" and "al Qaeda", even though Saddam Hussein had no relationship with al Qaeda and 911. Even if the articles themselves revealed this non-relationship, the propaganda effect of this constant juxtaposition resulted in the majority of Americans thinking that Saddam had a hand in 911. CBC is doing the same thing today, by juxtaposing "Iran" and "al Qaeda" in headlines and sub-headlines and using misleading phrases like "history together" and "rocky relationship". This must be intentionally misleading, because the relevance of the Iran connection in the case of this Canadian threat is negligible and does not warrant this kind of high profile.
No comments:
Post a Comment