title: The Existential Question Of Whom To Trust
text: 21st Century Wire says Investigative reporter Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories for The Associated Press and Newsweek in the 1980 s and has been a featured guest on Patrick Henningsen LIVE at 1100KFNX.  In this report, Robert asks due to mainstream media experts who ve fallen to  careerism , whom can we trust to deliver us the information to describe the world and its conflicts. (Image   Former Secretary of State, Colin Powell addressing the United Nations on Feb. 5. 2003)Robert Parry Consortium NewsThe looming threat of World War III, a potential extermination event for the human species, is made more likely because the world s public can t count on supposedly objective experts to ascertain and evaluate facts. Instead, careerism is the order of the day among journalists, intelligence analysts and international monitors   meaning that almost no one who might normally be relied on to tell the truth can be trustedThe dangerous reality is that this careerism, which often is expressed by a smug certainty about whatever the prevailing groupthink is, pervades not just the political world, where lies seem to be the common currency, but also the worlds of journalism, intelligence and international oversight, including United Nations agencies that are often granted greater credibility because they are perceived as less beholden to specific governments but in reality have become deeply corrupted, too.In other words, many professionals who are counted on for digging out the facts and speaking truth to power have sold themselves to those same powerful interests in order to keep high-paying jobs and to not get tossed out onto the street. Many of these self-aggrandizing professionals   caught up in the many accouterments of success   don t even seem to recognize how far they ve drifted from principled professionalism.A good example was Saturday night s spectacle of national journalists preening in their tuxedos and gowns at the White House Correspondents Dinner, sporting First Amendment pins as if they were some brave victims of persecution. They seemed oblivious to how removed they are from Middle America and how unlikely any of them would risk their careers by challenging one of the Establishment s favored groupthinks. Instead, these national journalists take easy shots at President Trump s buffoonish behavior and his serial falsehoods   and count themselves as endangered heroes for the effort.FOILS FOR TRUMPIronically, though, these pompous journalists gave Trump what was arguably his best moment in his first 100 days by serving as foils for the President as he traveled to Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, on Saturday and basked in the adulation of blue-collar Americans who view the mainstream media as just one more appendage of a corrupt ruling elite.Breaking with tradition by snubbing the annual press gala, Trump delighted the Harrisburg crowd by saying:  A large group of Hollywood celebrities and Washington media are consoling each other in a hotel ballroom  and adding:  I could not possibly be more thrilled than to be more than 100 miles away from [the] Washington swamp   with much, much better people.  The crowd booed references to the elites and cheered Trump s choice to be with the common folk.Trump s rejection of the dinner and his frequent criticism of the mainstream media brought a defensive response from Jeff Mason, president of the White House Correspondents  Association, who complained:  We are not fake news. We are not failing news organizations. And we are not the enemy of the American people.  That brought the black-tie-and-gown gathering to its feet in a standing ovation.Perhaps the assembled media elite had forgotten that it was the mainstream U.S. media   particularly The Washington Post and The New York Times   that popularized the phrase  fake news  and directed it blunderbuss-style not only at the few Web sites that intentionally invent stories to increase their clicks but at independent-minded journalism outlets that have dared question the elite s groupthinks on issues of war, peace and globalization.THE BLACK LISTProfessional journalistic skepticism toward official claims by the U.S. government   what you should expect from reporters   became conflated with  fake news.  The Post even gave front-page attention to an anonymous group called PropOrNot that published a black list of 200 Internet sites, including Consortiumnews.com and other independent-minded journalism sites, to be shunned.But the mainstream media stars didn t like it when Trump began throwing the  fake news  slur back at them. Thus, the First Amendment lapel pins and the standing ovation for Jeff Mason s repudiation of the  fake news  label.Yet, as the glitzy White House Correspondents Dinner demonstrated, mainstream journalists get the goodies of prestige and money while the real truth-tellers are almost always outspent, outgunned and cast out of the mainstream. Indeed, this dwindling band of honest people who are both knowledgeable and in position to expose unpleasant truths is often under mainstream attack, sometimes for unrelated personal failings and other times just for rubbing the powers-that-be the wrong way.Perhaps, the clearest case study of this up-is-down rewards-and-punishments reality was the Iraq War s WMD rationale. Nearly across the board, the American political/media system   from U.S. intelligence analysts to the deliberative body of the U.S. Senate to the major U.S. news organizations   failed to ascertain the truth and indeed actively helped disseminate the falsehoods about Iraq hiding WMDs and even suggested nuclear weapons development. (Arguably, the  most trusted  U.S. government official at the time, Secretary of State Colin Powell, played a key role in selling the false allegations as  truth. )Not only did the supposed American  gold standard  for assessing information   the U.S. political, media and intelligence structure   fail miserably in the face of fraudulent claims often from self-interested Iraqi opposition figures and their neoconservative American backers, but there was minimal accountability afterwards for the  professionals  who failed to protect the public from lies and deceptions.PROFITING FROM FAILUREIndeed, many of the main culprits remain  respected  members of the journalistic establishment. For instance, The New York Times  Pentagon correspondent Michael R. Gordon, who was the lead writer on the infamous  aluminum tubes for nuclear centrifuges  story which got the ball rolling for the Bush administration s rollout of its invade-Iraq advertising campaign in September 2002, still covers national security for the Times   and still serves as a conveyor belt for U.S. government propaganda.The Washington Post s editorial page editor Fred Hiatt, who repeatedly informed the Post s readers that Iraq s secret possession of WMD was a  flat-fact,  is still the Post s editorial page editor, one of the most influential positions in American journalism.Hiatt s editorial page led a years-long assault on the character of former U.S. Ambassador Joseph Wilson for the offense of debunking one of President George W. Bush s claims about Iraq seeking yellowcake uranium from Niger. Wilson had alerted the CIA to the bogus claim before the invasion of Iraq and went public with the news afterwards, but the Post treated Wilson as the real culprit, dismissing him as  a blowhard  and trivializing the Bush administration s destruction of his wife s CIA career by outing her (Valerie Plame) in order to discredit Wilson s Niger investigation.At the end of the Post s savaging of Wilson s reputation and in the wake of the newspaper s accessory role in destroying Plame s career, Wilson and Plame decamped from Washington to New Mexico. Meanwhile, Hiatt never suffered a whit   and remains a  respected  Washington media figure to this day.CAREERIST LESSONThe lesson that any careerist would draw from the Iraq case is that there is almost no downside risk in running with the pack on a national security issue. Even if you re horrifically wrong   even if you contribute to the deaths of some 4,500 U.S. soldiers and hundreds of thousands of Iraqis   your paycheck is almost surely safe.The same holds true if you work for an international agency that is responsible for monitoring issues like chemical weapons. Again, the Iraq example offers a good case study. In April 2002, as President Bush was clearing away the few obstacles to his Iraq invasion plans, Jose Mauricio Bustani, the head of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons [OPCW], sought to persuade Iraq to join the Chemical Weapons Convention so inspectors could verify Iraq s claims that it had destroyed its stockpiles.The Bush administration called that idea an  ill-considered initiative    after all, it could have stripped away the preferred propaganda rationale for the invasion if the OPCW verified that Iraq had destroyed its chemical weapons. So, Bush s Undersecretary of State for Arms Control John Bolton, a neocon advocate for the invasion of Iraq, pushed to have Bustani deposed. The Bush administration threatened to withhold dues to the OPCW if Bustani, a Brazilian diplomat, remained.It now appears obvious that Bush and Bolton viewed Bustani s real offense as interfering with their invasion scheme, but Bustani was ultimately taken down over accusations of mismanagement, although he was only a year into a new five-year term after having been reelected unanimously. The OPCW member states chose to sacrifice Bustani to save the organization from the loss of U.S. funds, but   in so doing   they compromised its integrity, making it just another agency that would bend to big-power pressure. By dismissing me,  Bustani said,  an international precedent will have been established whereby any duly elected head of any international organization would at any point during his or her tenure remain vulnerable to the whims of one or a few major contributors.  He added that if the United States succeeded in removing him,  genuine multilateralism  would succumb to  unilateralism in a multilateral disguise Continue this report at Consortium News READ MORE US NEWS AT: 21st Century Wire US FilesSUPPORT OUR WORK BY SUBSCRIBING & BECOMING A MEMBER @21WIRE.TV