Skipper

Last Wednesday I posted on how blogosphere sources had questioned the received wisdom that it was Hizbullah which precipitated the war in the Lebanon, citing sources which claimed Israel had tested out its plans to neutralize the Shia organization several months in advance of the outbreak of hostilities. I argued we needed more evidence to support blogosphere claims and now, it seems, we have it. Dan Glaister, today supports the Israeli-US collaboration analysis by drawing on the work of the veteran investigative reporter, Seymour Hersh(pictured) who claims in the New Yorker:

'several Israeli officials visited Washington earlier this summer to get a green light for the bombing operation and to find out how much the United States would bear.'

Hersh further claims that the US were keen to weaken Hizbullah's ability to attack Israel should USA decide to 'destroy Iran's nuclear installations'.

So the Lebanon war was to be a feint/prelude to a possible attack on the real target: Iran. It seems the mainstream media can indeed get it (or be manipulated to get it) wrong. And maybe it takes the bloggers to seek out and publicize the alternative narratives which eventually turn out to be closer to the truth. Pity, in retrospect, though not at all surprising, that it yet another best laid US plan for the Middle East has gone ever so slightly pear-shaped. But the more important worry is whether the embryonic plan to attack Iran has been abandoned or flagged for implementation in the near future. Straw condemned such a plan in advance as 'nuts' but I wonder what combination of weasel words Blair would use to justify going along with Bush in such a dangerous new direction.