Amir Moment: Just Long Enough for a Joke

by Eric Martin

Last week, Amir Taheri, a columnist for Rupert Murdoch's New York Post (with a history of playing fast and loose with the facts), made a rather shocking claim as noted by Marc Lynch:

Amir Taheri is getting some attention today with a remarkable piece in the New York Post alleging that Barack Obama "tried in private to persuade Iraqi leaders to delay an agreement on a draw-down of the American military presence.  According to Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari, Obama made his demand for delay a key theme of his discussions with Iraqi leaders in Baghdad in July."  Ordinarily I'd ignore such silliness, but with the McCain campaign recklessly jumping all over it, and the usual suspects hopping on board, it's worth pointing out that how shoddy a piece of work it really is.

How shoddy you ask?  Well, it was based on one source, the source's statements do not actually corroborate the charges leveled against Obama by Taheri, the chronology and geography that Taheri associates with Obama's alleged statements defy the space-time continuum and, oh yeah, members from both parties that were in attendance at the meeting in question, as well as the Bush administration, back Obama and contradict Taheri:

Attendees of the meeting back Obama's account, including not just Sen. Jack Reed, D-RI, but Hagel, Senate Foreign Relations Committee staffers from both parties. Officials of the Bush administration who were briefed on the meeting by the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad also support Obama's account and dispute the Post story and McCain attack.  The Post story is "absolutely not true," Hagel spokesman Mike Buttry told ABC News.   

That's pretty bad. 

But it actually gets worse (you knew that was coming): Not only did Obama not ask to delay the withdrawal of US forces from Iraq, and not only did the McCain campaign flog a dubious article appearing in a partisan venue from a notoriously truth-challenged columnist claiming that Obama did, but Prime Minister Maliki asserts that Bush actually requested just such a delay in order to help the political fortunes of none other than...John McCain!  Matt Duss, recounting a September 17 interview of Maliki:

MALIKI: Actually, the final date was really the end of 2010 and the period between the end of 2010 and the end of 2011 was for withdrawing the remaining troops from all of Iraq, but they [the Bush administration] asked for a change [in date] due to political circumstances related to the domestic situation [in the US] so it will not be said to the end of 2010 followed by one year for withdrawal but the end of 2011 as a final date. Agreement has been reached on this issue. They are willing to respond positively because they, too, are facing a critical situation.

So much for letting military commanders on the ground dictate withdrawal policy.  Duss asks a couple of questions that deserve answers:

Two questions: What did McCain know about this, and when did he know it?

But since neither McCain nor Palin has submitted to a press conference since she was selected (that's 24 days and counting), I wouldn't advise holding your breath waiting for an answer.

Comments

[cleek]

i think it's safe to say that pretty much every attack McCain makes on Obama these days is:

1: a lie
2: but would actually be true if McCain was attacking himself

[MandyW]

Finally, some conservative commentators are starting to share the disgust I've felt with John McCain's behavior for a long time. This morning's Washington Post has a column by Will making the case that McCain may well be temperamentally unsuitable for a job as demanding as the Presidency.

George Will: McCain Loses His Head

George Will concludes by asking:

"It is arguable that, because of his inexperience, Obama is not ready for the presidency. It is arguable that McCain, because of his boiling moralism and bottomless reservoir of certitudes, is not suited to the presidency. Unreadiness can be corrected, although perhaps at great cost, by experience. Can a dismaying temperament be fixed?"

[wonkie]

If McCain wins, I'm moving to Canada. And Paul and I are dead serious about that.

[doretta]

Hey, the McCainiacs are just running an efficient campaign.

Today's anti-Obama campaign ads are yesterday's to-do list.

Saves paper too.

[Eric Martin]

good stuff doretta.

[russell]

MALIKI: Actually, the final date was really the end of 2010 and the period between the end of 2010 and the end of 2011 was for withdrawing the remaining troops from all of Iraq, but they [the Bush administration] asked for a change [in date] due to political circumstances

I'm sure families of all of the American servicepeople who will die in Iraq between the end of 2010 and 2011 will understand the vital importance of the delay. To say nothing of the likely order-of-magnitude larger set of Iraqis who will suffer from our continued presence.

My personal list of People I Would Send To Hell If I Were God is quite short, but has long included Henry Kissinger for his efforts in extending the Vietnam War for domestic political advantage. Looks like there's a spot on the bench for Bush and Cheney as well.

Amir Taheri should be pelted with rotten fruit whenever he appears in public. And no, that is not an attempt at humor. The man has made a serious claim, and if he can't back it up, he should hide his face in shame. If shame is not part of his emotional repertoire, it should be taught to him.

Thanks -

[hairshirthedonist]

Wonkie, given this comment, maybe we'll be neighbors.

[KCinDC]

members from both parties that were in attendance at the meeting in question, as well as the Bush administration, back Obama

Clearly that's just more evidence that Obama is the true continuation of the Bush administration, while His Maverickiness is honorably standing up against the Washington establishment that he's never been involved with.

[spartikus]

Perhaps I hopelessly naive, but it really surprised me that...well...for one that Taheri still has a job, but mostly that having been burned by him relatively recently he would be cited by the usual suspects so enthusiastically.

Or perhaps that's just a sign of desperation? Really, you just have to wait the wingnutosphere eventually implodes on it's own.

[mightygodking]

I certainly hope all the prospective refugees headed have done their homework and taken French classes beforehand. (No joke: bilingual individuals are more attractive prospects from an immigration officer's standpoint.)

Aside: Canadians are traditionally not happy with their banking establishment (a cabal of five enormous banks which essentially dictate the path of the Canadian economy), but given the events of the past few months, our banks' refusal to engage in unreliable mortgage instruments has probably saved our economy, relative to everybody else's. We'll take a bad hit from our banks' investments in other countries' bad debt instruments, but only a bad hit and not a collapse. (A couple of our biggest banks, like Toronto Dominion, didn't even touch those instruments.)

[Michael Drake]

I would follow wonkie and others in moving if McCain wins. The problem, though, is that with McCain/Palin at the helm, there will be no territory outside the U.S. that is secure against a U.S. invasion.

[Roger Moore]

Or perhaps that's just a sign of desperation? Really, you just have to wait the wingnutosphere eventually implodes on it's own.

Don't hold your breath waiting for the wingnutosphere to implode on its own. If it's managed to survive this long without imploding, it's nothing but wishful thinking to believe that it will happen RSN. If you really want to see it implode, it's best to give it all the help it needs.

[JayS]

I'm a bit confused. If Obama asked for the delay it was to hurt McCain, but if the administration asked for it, it was to help McCain?

The "domestic situation" excuse is a bit vague, but it strikes me as more to help Bush save face than to help McCain.

[Turbulence]

JayS, the distinction is that Obama is accused of trying to delay the time when the parties agreed to a deal whereas the Bush administration is accused of delaying the end date specified as part of the deal. In both cases we're talking about delaying things for political gain, but we're not talking about delaying the same thing.

[spartikus]

Don't hold your breath waiting for the wingnutosphere to implode on its own.

Sorry, I should have said "their narrative". And yes, of course, claims by anyone should always be examined and scrutinized (I was being a bit factitious)

[Eric Martin]

Yeah Jay, what Turbo said. Part of the confusion comes from the lack of logical progression in Taheri's argument. It's full of leaps, bounds and head scratchers. Also: lies.

[JayS]

Yeah, I got that the alleged delays were to somewhat different things, even though I didn't say it well. I think it's kind of a distinction without much difference though.

Taheri's argument was incoherent, but if you squinted at it just right you could see a political advantage to Obama if it had been true.

Anyway I squint at the Maliki claim, I don't see it politically helping McCain, or even Bush much. It kicks the can further down the road operationally, but a time line/time table is what they were refusing to accept, no matter what length. It's not clear to me what "domestic situation" was being advanced by the delay.

[Eric Martin]

If Maliki were requesting a more rapid withdrawal, that would more soundly undercut the Bush administration claims that calling for an Obama style withdrawal is irresponsible.

By drawing it out, it gives McCain room to claim that the withdrawal is closer to being on his terms.

[Eric Martin]

Not just Bush administration claims, but McCain claims as well, I should add.

[Turbulence]

It's not clear to me what "domestic situation" was being advanced by the delay.

The end data that Bush pushed Maliki to delay is the main difference between what Obama was proposing and what the US settled on with Maliki. If Maliki hadn't pushed the end data back, Obama could go on TV and say "Look! The two governments have agreed on exactly my plan!", but now, he can't do that. Instead, Republicans can claim that the deal underscores Obama's incompetence: he pushed for an end data far before what Maliki could tolerate which is exactly the mistake you'd expect from a rookie who knew nothing of foreign affairs and was bent on removing troops NOW no matter how many people suffered as a result. Changing the date allows Republicans to advance one of their strongest narratives against Obama.

I think these questions of narrative are second order effects compared to the question of whether we agree to a timetable at all. But Bush had to play the hand that was dealt him, and it seemed like avoiding a timetable was no longer possible. Assuming Bush felt he had to concede the timetable, the question then becomes "how can we rejigger things to minimize the political damage for McCain?"...Even if the effect is small or inconsequential, people who have had their hand forced often cling all the more strongly to such token actions.

[Lee]

cleek

Bravo. Short, sweet, bullseye.

[rea]

Bush actually requested just such a delay in order to help the political fortunes of none other than...John McCain!

As I have observed many times before, it is always--always--about projection with these people.