Rekindling Its Iraq WMD Fiasco The New York Times Is Back At Printing 'Officials Said'

 

moon of alabama

At first I wondered why the New York Times homepage editor would put a piece about Putin and his alleged involvement in war strategy under 'U.S. Politics'.

bigger

But after reading

As Russian Losses Mount in Ukraine, Putin Gets More Involved in War Strategy

I understand the qualification.

Some quotes:

President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia has [...], American officials said, ...

American officials briefed on highly sensitive intelligence said ...

... his involvement has created tensions, American officials said.

The officials said ...

..., Gen. Mark A. Milley, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said in an interview on Friday.

... is to both sides, American officials said.

Some American officials said they saw trouble ahead ...

A senior U.S. official said this week ...

...could eventually be threatened, American officials said.

Senior Russian officers repeatedly questioned [...], American officials said, ...

The Russian officers believed [...], American officials said.

... focused on massive artillery barrages, American officials said.

... hit by Ukrainian fire, Ukrainian officials said.

... said Seth G. Jones, senior vice president at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

... said Michael Kofman, director of Russia studies at CNA, a defense research institute in Arlington, Va.

..., U.S. officials say Mr. Putin believes ...

... American officials have said that Mr. Putin has not been given accurate information ...

Mr. Putin, an American official said, has opposed ...

..., American officials said Russian officers themselves are divided ...

Adding up we have:

• anonymous American/U.S. official/s [said/have said/say]: 15 times,
• named American semi-officials (Jones, Kofman): 2 times,
• a named American official (Milley): 1 time,
• anonymous Ukrainian officials: 1 time.

There are no other sources in the piece.

Would you believe that it took 4 (FOUR) NYT 'reporters', Julian E. Barnes, Helene Cooper, Eric Schmitt and Michael Schwirtz, to stenograph that nonsense?

A lot of anonymous American officials said that the U.S. was winning its wars in Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan etc. Anonymous American officials said that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. The NYT printed all those false claims without providing evidence for their veracity.

There was some agonizing after the Iraq WMD claims turned out to be false. The NYT and other media promised to do better and to restrict the use of anonymous sources:

Under our guidelines, anonymous sources should be used only for information that we think is newsworthy and credible, and that we are not able to report any other way.
...
We understand readers’ wariness, but many important stories in sensitive areas like politics, national security and business could never be reported if we banned anonymous sourcing. Sources often fear for their jobs or business relationships — sometimes even for their safety.

Those anonymous American officials quoted in the above NYT piece are distributing 'newsworthy' and 'credible' information? Even some they very obviously have no way to obtain ('Mr. Putin believes ...')? They must be fearing for their jobs and safety when they reveal the secrets of Putin's believes to those assiduous NYT 'reporters'?

Or its all just another bunch of lies. Not only what the American officials say but also what the NYT claims to be. The above piece is not the result of journalism by independent media but the outcome of intense collaboration between a quasi state organ and the Biden administration. It is an information operation waged against its own people and propaganda for a real war waged against Russia.

Why do they expect anyone to pay for this dreck?

Posted by b on September 24, 2022 at 7:50 UTC | Permalink

https://www.moonofalabama.org/2022/09/rekindling-its-iraq-wmd-fiasco-the-new-york-times-is-back-at-printing-officials-said.html