Media Blog

A Media Blind to the Threat

Jim Geraghty sends along this interesting quote from a column by retired Col. Ken Allard in the San Antonio Express-News:

Earlier this month, just after another on-air stint as a military analyst up at MSNBC, I told the network’s new leadership to be prepared for either war abroad or another terrorist attack at home. Maybe even both. (They nodded politely and then went back to presenting “Crime Time in Prime Time.”)
Or at least for a while. But you really can’t blame them because everything on cable news is driven by the ratings and that means you and me.

Allard proceeds to go into more detail on why he thinks another attack in the United States might be imminent, and might come from Hezbollah this time. Jim looks at this analysis and concludes:

There is a part of me that marvels at the stupidity of Hezbollah, if they think launching a terrorist attack in America will help their cause. Most of Europe’s elites, and more than a few here in America, think Hezbollah’s members are noble resistance fighters whose gripe is with Israel, not America… A strike on America would persuade a vast majority of Americans that these guys have to be wiped out, and that their paymasters and helpers in Tehran have to go, too.

If you agree that Hezbollah’s “cause” is to wipe Israel off the map — something that the United States will never allow as long as it is within our power to stop it — you have to consider that Hezbollah views a conflict with the United States as inevitable. Second, think back to the document discovered in Zarqawi’s hideout after we wiped him off the map. After listing off a bunch of reasons why the insurgency was losing in Iraq, the author of this document proposed some possible solutions:

In general and despite the current bleak situation, we think that the best suggestions in order to get out of this crisis is to entangle the American forces into another war against another country or with another of our enemy force, that is to try and inflame the situation between American and Iraq* or between America and the Shi’a in general.
Specifically the Sistani Shi’a, since most of the support that the Americans are getting is from the Sistani Shi’a, then, there is a possibility to instill differences between them and to weaken the support line between them; in addition to the losses we can inflict on both parties. Consequently, to embroil America in another war against another enemy is the answer that we find to be the most appropriate […]
We have noticed that the best of these wars to be ignited is the one between the Americans and Iran, because it will have many benefits in favor of the Sunni and the resistance, such as:
1. Freeing the Sunni people in Iraq*, who are (30 percent) of the population and under the Shi’a Rule.
2. Drowning the Americans in another war that will engage many of their forces.
3. The possibility of acquiring new weapons from the Iranian side, either after the fall of Iran or during the battles.
4. To entice Iran towards helping the resistance because of its need for its help.
5. Weakening the Shi’a supply line.
The question remains, how to draw the Americans into fighting a war against Iran? It is not known whether American is serious in its animosity towards Iraq*, because of the big support Iran is offering to America in its war in Afghanistan and in Iraq. Hence, it is necessary first to exaggerate the Iranian danger and to convince America and the west in general, of the real danger coming from Iran, and this would be done by the following:
1. By disseminating threatening messages against American interests and the American people and attribute them to a Shi’a Iranian side.
2. By executing operations of kidnapping hostages and implicating the Shi’a Iranian side.
3. By advertising that Iran has chemical and nuclear weapons and is threatening the west with these weapons.
4. By executing exploding operations in the west and accusing Iran by planting Iranian Shi’a fingerprints and evidence.
5. By declaring the existence of a relationship between Iran and terrorist groups (as termed by the Americans).
6. By disseminating bogus messages about confessions showing that Iran is in possession of weapons of mass destruction or that there are attempts by the Iranian intelligence to undertake terrorist operations in America and the west and against western interests.
Let us hope for success and for God’s help.
* Context leads me to think the author meant to write “Iran” instead of “Iraq” here.

We know that al Qaeda wants to execute a terrorist attack inside the United States and blame it on Iran – in order to form an alliance with the Shi’a against America, among other stated goals. And we have every reason to believe that Hezbollah views a confrontation with the U.S. as inevitable. Isn’t it conceivable that these two groups would put aside their differences in order to confront the West in a unified way?
Maybe the next time Allard makes a suggestion like this, his bosses at MSNBC should do more than smile and nod. Maybe they should start connecting the dots.


The Latest