Angry Arab on the Iranian Protests
As’ad AbuKhalil blogs:
Having said all that, it is just dumb at this point, as I read about Obama’s new war in Yemen in the New York Times, to discount the dirty hand of US/Israel/Saudi Arabia in Iranian affairs. This does not stigmatize the protesters but it stigmatize their leaders and some members. Just read All the Shah’s Men and know what I mean. Of course, Abbas Milani in his article in the New Republic–what a choice to write about revisionism of Iranian history–now absolves the US government of responsibility for the coup and blames Khumayni for the coup. For him, Roosevelt of the CIA was working for Iranian cleric. Now let us go to the coverage: now while I respect the practice of the New York Times to cover Iran from Toronto, I believe that we don’t have a clear picture of what is happening. This is why I am not sure that we can announce the death of the regime. And I read in the first section of the Iran article in the paper edition of the New York Times (from Toronto of course) a reference to witnesses cited by website. So the New York Times relies in its coverage on its correspondent in Toronto who relies on Websites who rely on unnamed witnesses in Iran. That is called journalism. Can you imagine the New York Times following that formula in covering Israeli crimes against the Palestinians? And to my surprise, the New York Times added this today (not in the paper edition but in the web version): “Foreign journalists have been banned from covering the protests, and the reports could not be independently verified.” It is time for that caveat, and it should be added to every article on daily basis.