Scott Horton Interviews Greg Mitchell
Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.
Greg Mitchell, editor of Editor and Publisher, discusses the sixth year anniversary of Bush’s “Mission Accomplished” stunt, the spread of revisionist history claiming that everyone was for the Iraq war when it started, the abject failure of mainstream media on the biggest issues of the day and how online resources are challenging traditional media’s stranglehold on the truth.
MP3 here. (27:32)
Greg Mitchell is the author of So Wrong for So Long: How the Press, the Pundits–and the President–Failed on Iraq and Why Obama Won: The Making of a President 2008. His article looking back at the media coverage of “Mission Accomplished” is on Editor and Publisher.
Claus-Erik Hamle
May 2nd, 2009 at 12:35 pm
According to former Trident missile engineer Bob Aldridge-www.plrc.org-the Pentagon aims to achieve a disarming and unanswerable first-strike capability. According to Bob Aldridge the US Navy can track and destroy all enemy submarines simultaneously. Please see the article by Keir Lieber and Daryl Press, “The Rise of US Nuclear Primacy” in the 2006 March/April issue of Foreign Affairs. Minuteman-3s and Trident-2 D5s linked to NAVSTAR obtain a CEP of 30-40 metres, enough to destroy any hard target. A First-Strike Capability won´t be complete without the missiles in Poland to shoot down any surviving Russian missiles. Even if it´s only for blackmail, the Russians may have no choice but implementing Launch On Warning.
Jim
May 4th, 2009 at 5:52 am
Enuf of the “media got it wrong” stuff and more of why they purposefully mislead the country and aggressively supported this war. I mean, I knew we were being lied to thanks to people like Amy Goodman, Justin Raimondo, etc. The MSM had to know too!!! This nonsense about it being a mistake is just nauseating. People should be held accountable for the crimes that have been committed and I include the media in this. So much blood has been spilled and that blood is also on their keyboards as well.
Herman King
May 4th, 2009 at 8:21 am
The media is an arm of the war-mongering elites. They gull the dumbed-down public into believing anything they want them to believe. We need a new, free and independent media. Keep the internet free from these evil elites. It’s our best–perhaps only–hope.
Johan
May 4th, 2009 at 1:54 pm
Isn’t the very premise of this interview, that the media somehow did not do their job, thoroughly preposterous?
Couldn’t it be that the indigenous salaried “mainstream media” in fact did do their job, highly successfully, and that they continue to do so, manipulating the public “opinion” to the outlets owners’ (and in turn, their owners’) complete satisfaction?
…
Dano
May 4th, 2009 at 5:12 pm
Media hasn’t been free for decades. See the film Panama Deception. Media was serving the government back then. Our media are not much different than the media of the old Soviet Union.
Dale A. Sender
May 4th, 2009 at 7:14 pm
the navy is full of, uh, shit. they do not have a space based method of maintaining fleet surveillance on russian boomers without patrol aircraft augmentation. there are enough TOPOL M’s and SLBMS in the russian navy and russian strategic rocket forces, to turn at least a 3rd. of the united states into molten slag if we pulled one of these ‘first strikes’ the navy is so delusionally sure it can get away with. and yes, the ratcheting up will indeed force the russians to launch on warning, and that means, perhaps 6 minutes from the time they think we’re pushing buttons and turning keys over here.
this was the big problem with GLCM’s. they were silo busters, and the russians had nearly 26 minutes before them to decide whether or not they had to empty their multi shot ICBM silos. if the united states keeps this shit up, it’ll accidentally start a nuclear war it can little afford to putz around with. it makes little difference that we have numerical superiority in our strategic ballistic missiles. what does matter is that you are able to stop the incoming stuff during boost phase when it’s still climbing and accellerating. TOPOL M makes this very very very difficult, and it essentially defeats this wonderful version of star wars two that the obombaton inherited from the last sabre rattling punk on the block.
it’s advisable not to push the russians too very far. they are not likely to back down if we launch first. they’ll make sure we never launch anything except sticks and stones if we pull a stupid moron stunt like that.
Claus-Erik Hamle
May 4th, 2009 at 11:50 pm
Unfortunately, you are so right, Dale A. Sender. Bob Aldridge realised this long ago and resigned. The striving at Nuclear Primacy, a disarming and unanswerable first-strike capability, of course including fully developed Anti-Submare Warfare capabilities, even if it´s only for blackmail purposes, is suicidal. You are so right, the Russians will no doubt implement Launch On Warning. That´s the reason the First Strike NUTS in the Pentagon must be stopped NOW – or it´s only a question of when a technical mistake will happen. What if the Warning is wrong ? Can the bloody Pentagon really afford that ?
Claus-Erik Hamle
May 5th, 2009 at 12:05 am
Another thing is that if the crazy Israelis/Americans attack Iran, the Russians will probably go to Launch On Warning. “Stuff happens” and half the USA or more is obliterated. According to Bob Aldridge the Pentagon aims to achieve a disarming and unanswerable first-strike capability. The logical consequence is Launch On Warning and Nuclear War by mistake. Are they nuts, bonkers or whatever ? With Launch On Warning they can´t use a First-Strike Capability for anything, not even blackmail. But the likely end-result of striving at Nuclear Primacy is Nuclear War by mistake.
Claus-Erik Hamle
May 5th, 2009 at 12:31 am
The SLBMs in the Russian Navy don´t matter because as Bob Aldridge has pointed out on numerous occasions, the US Navy can track and destroy all enemy submarines simultaneously.
Mike
May 5th, 2009 at 6:56 am
Gotta love David Frum calling the anti-war Conservatives “un-American” – he’s Canadian.
Fernando Leza
May 6th, 2009 at 3:41 pm
Seems to me the US media supported the Iraq war during and just after the invasion on purpose, even though they knew they were kowtowing to the thugs in the Bush administration and the whole thing was a pile of garbage. I can’t tell you exactly why, but I suspect the Israel lobby was pushing very hard for the iraq war, and the US media is after all a business. And it’s not good business to mess with the Israel lobby.
tim
May 10th, 2009 at 12:31 pm
I have always thought the the episode on the aircraft carrier was a celebration of achievement. The goal was to get America into a war by hook or crook, and the mission was accomplished. From that day, the military industrial cabal was firmly in charge. And here we are, with the second war president and they are still in the saddle.
Gary
May 14th, 2009 at 5:57 am
I think Scott does a wonderful job critiquing the media. He’s done several interesting shows on it. It would be interesting to hear a show on Project Mockingbird. I also agree with Jim we need “more of why they purposefully mislead the country and aggressively supported this war.” Is their propaganda well-funded, coerced, or do they just not want to deal with the truth.
Thanks for a really wonderful alternative news site.