A 'Spoon-Fed' Terror Threat: The Truth About Khorasan
"Once it served its purpose of justifying the start of the bombing campaign in Syria, the Khorasan narrative simply evaporated as quickly as it materialized," Intercept writers reveal
In an effort to win support for its bombing campaign against Syria, the Obama Administration concocted a new terror threat--the so-called 'Khorasan Group'--and got the mainstream media to run with the story, according to reporting by Glenn Greenwald and Murtaza Hussain, published at The Intercept over the weekend.
"After spending weeks depicting ISIS as an unprecedented threat--too radical even for Al Qaeda!--administration officials suddenly began spoon-feeding their favorite media organizations and national security journalists tales of a secret group that was even scarier and more threatening than ISIS, one that posed a direct and immediate threat to the American Homeland," Greenwald and Hussain write. "Seemingly out of nowhere, a new terror group was created in media lore."
The piece cites the Associated Press, CBS News, CNN, the New York Times, and other outlets as media organizations that went along for the ride, repeating anonymous claims that "hardened terrorists" in Syria represented an "imminent" and direct threat to America. Between September 13, when the Khorasan storyline was "unveiled" by the AP, and September 22, when the first U.S. bombs fell in Syria, "[t]his Khorasan-attacking-Americans alarm spread quickly and explosively in the landscape of U.S. national security reporting," the authors note.
Even more troubling, according to The Intercept:
[O]nce it served its purpose of justifying the start of the bombing campaign in Syria, the Khorasan narrative simply evaporated as quickly as it materialized...Literally within a matter of days, we went from "perhaps in its final stages of planning its attack" (CNN) to "plotting as 'aspirational'" and "there did not yet seem to be a concrete plan in the works" (NYT).
In fact, by this point, "[t]here are serious questions about whether the Khorasan Group even exists in any meaningful or identifiable manner"--as evidenced by recent stories to that effect in the very publications that first hyped the group in the first place.
The reason for all this intrigue this is clear, Greenwald and Hussain assert:
What happened here is all-too-familiar. The Obama administration needed propagandistic and legal rationale for bombing yet another predominantly Muslim country. While emotions over the ISIS beheading videos were high, they were not enough to sustain a lengthy new war.
So after spending weeks promoting ISIS as Worse Than Al Qaeda(tm), they unveiled a new, never-before-heard-of group that was Worse Than ISIS(tm). Overnight, as the first bombs on Syria fell, the endlessly helpful U.S. media mindlessly circulated the script they were given: this new group was composed of "hardened terrorists," posed an "imminent" threat to the U.S. homeland, was in the "final stages" of plots to take down U.S. civilian aircraft, and could "launch more-coordinated and larger attacks on the West in the style of the 9/11 attacks from 2001."
Of course, to do so was both strategically unsound and irresponsible, Kia Makarechi charges at Vanity Fair.
Not only could spreading Khorasan claims damage the U.S.'s credibility in Syria, but: "Domestically, it's dishonest to launder talking points through the media and claim Americans are facing an imminent threat while dropping bombs, only to quietly disown such heady statements a few days later," he writes. "The initial, scary news will always find more readers and broadcast news viewers than the nuances of press conferences at the Pentagon, and the federal government knows this."
On Democracy Now on Monday, Hussain called it an "egregious case of media spin."
"[T]he Khorasan group itself, which we had been hearing about in the media was a new enemy and was a definable threat against the United States, did not really exist per se; it was simply a group of people whom the U.S. designated within a Syrian opposition faction as being ready to be struck," Hussain said. "So, the entire narrative that had been developed, and within the media developed, was completely put to a lie after the strikes."
See the full interview below:
FINAL DAY! This is urgent.
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission from the outset was simple. To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It’s never been this bad out there. And it’s never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed and doing some of its best and most important work, the threats we face are intensifying. Right now, with just hours left in our Spring Campaign, we're still falling short of our make-or-break goal. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Can you make a gift right now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? There is no backup plan or rainy day fund. There is only you. —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
In an effort to win support for its bombing campaign against Syria, the Obama Administration concocted a new terror threat--the so-called 'Khorasan Group'--and got the mainstream media to run with the story, according to reporting by Glenn Greenwald and Murtaza Hussain, published at The Intercept over the weekend.
"After spending weeks depicting ISIS as an unprecedented threat--too radical even for Al Qaeda!--administration officials suddenly began spoon-feeding their favorite media organizations and national security journalists tales of a secret group that was even scarier and more threatening than ISIS, one that posed a direct and immediate threat to the American Homeland," Greenwald and Hussain write. "Seemingly out of nowhere, a new terror group was created in media lore."
The piece cites the Associated Press, CBS News, CNN, the New York Times, and other outlets as media organizations that went along for the ride, repeating anonymous claims that "hardened terrorists" in Syria represented an "imminent" and direct threat to America. Between September 13, when the Khorasan storyline was "unveiled" by the AP, and September 22, when the first U.S. bombs fell in Syria, "[t]his Khorasan-attacking-Americans alarm spread quickly and explosively in the landscape of U.S. national security reporting," the authors note.
Even more troubling, according to The Intercept:
[O]nce it served its purpose of justifying the start of the bombing campaign in Syria, the Khorasan narrative simply evaporated as quickly as it materialized...Literally within a matter of days, we went from "perhaps in its final stages of planning its attack" (CNN) to "plotting as 'aspirational'" and "there did not yet seem to be a concrete plan in the works" (NYT).
In fact, by this point, "[t]here are serious questions about whether the Khorasan Group even exists in any meaningful or identifiable manner"--as evidenced by recent stories to that effect in the very publications that first hyped the group in the first place.
The reason for all this intrigue this is clear, Greenwald and Hussain assert:
What happened here is all-too-familiar. The Obama administration needed propagandistic and legal rationale for bombing yet another predominantly Muslim country. While emotions over the ISIS beheading videos were high, they were not enough to sustain a lengthy new war.
So after spending weeks promoting ISIS as Worse Than Al Qaeda(tm), they unveiled a new, never-before-heard-of group that was Worse Than ISIS(tm). Overnight, as the first bombs on Syria fell, the endlessly helpful U.S. media mindlessly circulated the script they were given: this new group was composed of "hardened terrorists," posed an "imminent" threat to the U.S. homeland, was in the "final stages" of plots to take down U.S. civilian aircraft, and could "launch more-coordinated and larger attacks on the West in the style of the 9/11 attacks from 2001."
Of course, to do so was both strategically unsound and irresponsible, Kia Makarechi charges at Vanity Fair.
Not only could spreading Khorasan claims damage the U.S.'s credibility in Syria, but: "Domestically, it's dishonest to launder talking points through the media and claim Americans are facing an imminent threat while dropping bombs, only to quietly disown such heady statements a few days later," he writes. "The initial, scary news will always find more readers and broadcast news viewers than the nuances of press conferences at the Pentagon, and the federal government knows this."
On Democracy Now on Monday, Hussain called it an "egregious case of media spin."
"[T]he Khorasan group itself, which we had been hearing about in the media was a new enemy and was a definable threat against the United States, did not really exist per se; it was simply a group of people whom the U.S. designated within a Syrian opposition faction as being ready to be struck," Hussain said. "So, the entire narrative that had been developed, and within the media developed, was completely put to a lie after the strikes."
See the full interview below:
In an effort to win support for its bombing campaign against Syria, the Obama Administration concocted a new terror threat--the so-called 'Khorasan Group'--and got the mainstream media to run with the story, according to reporting by Glenn Greenwald and Murtaza Hussain, published at The Intercept over the weekend.
"After spending weeks depicting ISIS as an unprecedented threat--too radical even for Al Qaeda!--administration officials suddenly began spoon-feeding their favorite media organizations and national security journalists tales of a secret group that was even scarier and more threatening than ISIS, one that posed a direct and immediate threat to the American Homeland," Greenwald and Hussain write. "Seemingly out of nowhere, a new terror group was created in media lore."
The piece cites the Associated Press, CBS News, CNN, the New York Times, and other outlets as media organizations that went along for the ride, repeating anonymous claims that "hardened terrorists" in Syria represented an "imminent" and direct threat to America. Between September 13, when the Khorasan storyline was "unveiled" by the AP, and September 22, when the first U.S. bombs fell in Syria, "[t]his Khorasan-attacking-Americans alarm spread quickly and explosively in the landscape of U.S. national security reporting," the authors note.
Even more troubling, according to The Intercept:
[O]nce it served its purpose of justifying the start of the bombing campaign in Syria, the Khorasan narrative simply evaporated as quickly as it materialized...Literally within a matter of days, we went from "perhaps in its final stages of planning its attack" (CNN) to "plotting as 'aspirational'" and "there did not yet seem to be a concrete plan in the works" (NYT).
In fact, by this point, "[t]here are serious questions about whether the Khorasan Group even exists in any meaningful or identifiable manner"--as evidenced by recent stories to that effect in the very publications that first hyped the group in the first place.
The reason for all this intrigue this is clear, Greenwald and Hussain assert:
What happened here is all-too-familiar. The Obama administration needed propagandistic and legal rationale for bombing yet another predominantly Muslim country. While emotions over the ISIS beheading videos were high, they were not enough to sustain a lengthy new war.
So after spending weeks promoting ISIS as Worse Than Al Qaeda(tm), they unveiled a new, never-before-heard-of group that was Worse Than ISIS(tm). Overnight, as the first bombs on Syria fell, the endlessly helpful U.S. media mindlessly circulated the script they were given: this new group was composed of "hardened terrorists," posed an "imminent" threat to the U.S. homeland, was in the "final stages" of plots to take down U.S. civilian aircraft, and could "launch more-coordinated and larger attacks on the West in the style of the 9/11 attacks from 2001."
Of course, to do so was both strategically unsound and irresponsible, Kia Makarechi charges at Vanity Fair.
Not only could spreading Khorasan claims damage the U.S.'s credibility in Syria, but: "Domestically, it's dishonest to launder talking points through the media and claim Americans are facing an imminent threat while dropping bombs, only to quietly disown such heady statements a few days later," he writes. "The initial, scary news will always find more readers and broadcast news viewers than the nuances of press conferences at the Pentagon, and the federal government knows this."
On Democracy Now on Monday, Hussain called it an "egregious case of media spin."
"[T]he Khorasan group itself, which we had been hearing about in the media was a new enemy and was a definable threat against the United States, did not really exist per se; it was simply a group of people whom the U.S. designated within a Syrian opposition faction as being ready to be struck," Hussain said. "So, the entire narrative that had been developed, and within the media developed, was completely put to a lie after the strikes."
See the full interview below: