CNN Whitewash of Iran's Terror Role in Iraq: Portrays Tehran as Wanting to "Help America a Lot"

During last night’s installment of CNN’s Anderson Cooper 360, Cooper aired a segment titled, “Evidence of Iranian Involvement in Iraq” (transcript here). From this title, a curious viewer would assume that the segment would include evidence or examples of Iranian interference and support for the “insurgents” fomenting attacks on American and Iraqi forces. In classic CNN form, however, Cooper first worked to frame the Iranian interference story in the context of criticism of the troop surge strategy. Cooper led into the expected updated body count from Baghdad with the statement, “If lawmakers needed any more evidence that Iraq will be a tough place to fix, if possible at all, they got plenty more today.” Following that gloomy introduction, CNN efforts to whitewash Iranian involvement in Iraq began in earnest.

Cooper deferred to the “expertise” of seasoned CNN Chief International Correspondent Christiane Amanpour, reporting from Tehran, to provide insight into the Iranian reaction to accusations that Iran is supplying Iraqi militias with powerful weaponry and other forms of support. Amanpour, who notably lacks the word “terrorist” in her otherwise immense vocabulary, used quotations from “sources very close to the government” in Tehran to portray Iran as having no reason for or interest in harming American forces that had liberated their Shiite brethren in Iraq. Fighting the Americans, these sources have convinced Amanpour, is not in Iran’s national interest. Less believable was this gem from Amanpour regarding her Iranian government sources:

They say that they want a democratic and freely elected government in Iraq, which they say exists right now, and that, yes, their position is that they want the U.S. -- quote -- "occupying forces" out, but only have they have laid the groundwork for the possibility to get out, and not to get out precipitously, which would leave -- quote -- "Iraq in a bigger mess than it is in already.”

The idea that Iran would prefer a strong, stable, oil-rich and well-armed Iraq on its border rather than a weak, vulnerable, defenseless oil-rich neighbor is patently absurd. Hitler desired to seize and assimilate neighbors with abundant natural resources (Czechoslovakia, Poland, etc) and Ahmadinejad possesses that same lust for expansion (as well as a similar desire to exterminate Jews).

It is very instructive that a reporter with Amanpour’s extensive experience takes statements like those above from the Iranian government at face value, but does not take seriously that same government’s outspoken threats to annihilate Israel and then the US with nuclear weapons and denies the Holocaust and Israel’s right to exist. How are viewers to decide whether Iran means us no harm in Iraq because we freed the Shiites there or whether Iran wants to destroy America, “the Great Satan,” a term previously coined in Iran? Since actions speak louder than words, and a picture is worth a thousand words, perhaps Iran’s continued reckless drive to develop nuclear weapons, its own stated installment of 3,000 new centrifuges, and satellite images of ever-expanding Iranian nuclear facilities should be the basis of our final judgment on Iranian intentions.

Cooper then sets the stage for his next question to Amanpour by first reminding viewers that the Bush administration, despite the urgings of former National Security Advisor Brent Scowcroft, continues to reject any diplomatic negotiations with Iran. Cooper then asks Amanpour whether the Iranian government is open to the idea of talks with the US on the Iraq War. Amanpour offers this remarkable response containing another portrayal of Iran as an innocent, unjustly maligned nation that holds the answers to lasting peace in Iraq:

Well, I think they do want to. And they have made that representation in the past.

Certainly, officially, it's really difficult to get a straight answer on this. But, unofficially, those people who I have been talking to say: Look, we were -- and they use the word partners with the United States over the war in Afghanistan, when the Taliban was kicked out, and we helped the United States, in a very constructive way, usher in the new democratic government of Hamid Karzai.

And even the U.S. admits that. So, these very same people are saying that: We should be having the same kind of cooperation in Iraq. "We know -- who knows Iraq better than us?" they say. We were at war with Iraq for eight years. We have this long border, as Michael pointed out. So many of the leadership and, by the way, the Badr Brigades, the militias, the people in Iraq now who are in the armed camps, were inside Iran. We know a lot, and we can help a lot. And we can help the Americans a lot.

So, on this side, many of the officials are wondering why they can't get to talks to -- with America about this issue.

Cooper and Amanpour neglect to provide the answer to why Iran “can’t get to talks” with America regarding Iraq, despite Cooper having mentioned earlier in this segment that Iran yesterday rejected UN requests to install monitoring cameras or allow inspections of Iran’s underground nuclear facilities. Cooper and Amanpour, always quick to point out perceived distortions or duplicity in the Bush administration, seem unwilling to point out the obvious deception from Amanpour’s Iranian government sources. Her sources claim innocence in Iraq and claim no animosity toward American troops or efforts there while funneling weapons, funds, and tactical expertise in terror operations into Iraq, facts acknowledged by the Pentagon and the US intelligence community.

Those same Iranian sources claim to innocently wonder why the US will not negotiate with them while they publicly vow to end Israel’s and America’s existence with nuclear weapons and refuse to comply with UN and UN Security Council resolutions and sanctions intended to prevent Iran from building nuclear weapons.

If Iran will abandon its suicidal obsession with establishing itself as a nuclear power, the US and other nations will be willing to enter diplomatic talks on Iraq and a host of other issues. If these Iranian officials are truly wondering and confused, as Amanpour reports, she could relieve them of that burden by pointing out the hypocrisy of offering to help America and the Iraqi democracy while arming and supplying terrorists in Iraq and simultaneously racing to enrich sufficient uranium to destroy “the Great Satan.”

Perhaps CNN should dispatch its White House Press Corps reporters to Tehran to question Amanpour’s sources with the same impatient zeal and cynical distrust employed to interrogate and embarrass the Bush administration.

Technorati Search Tags: Christiane Amanpour Anderson Cooper Iranian Interference in Iraq Nuclear Diplomacy Iranian nuclear program Ahmadinejad Iraq War Global War On Terror White House Press Corps CNN