Washington Post joins NYT in trumpeting 'anonymous' claims on Iranian weapons in Iraq

First it was Michael Gordon in The New York Times. Now The Washington Post and others media outlets have joined in suggesting a slam dunk case for Iranian weapons killing US soldiers in Iraq. A Feb. 12 article by Joshua Partlow from Baghdad carried the declarative headline, "Iran Sending Explosives to Extremist Groups in Iraq," without even "US officials say." Not that those officials could be named anyway. As in the case of Michael Gordon's article, the officials are unnamed. The Associated Press, The New York Times, Reuters and others also reported on the briefing in Baghdad the same day, agreeing beforehand to the condition that none of the three US officials taking part could be named or even described closely. The Times, after accepting the terms, found itself in the embarrassing position of reporting: "During the briefing, the senior United States military officials were repeatedly pressed on why they insisted on anonymity in such an important matter affecting the security of American and Iraqi troops." It added: "The official also criticized recent news reports, saying they overstated the importance of today's presentation, which had been previously announced and then delayed." This didn't stop the Times, the Post and other outlets from featuring these new charges on their front pages. The Washington Post article states: "Iranian security forces, taking orders from the 'highest levels' of the Iranian government, are funneling sophisticated explosives to extremist groups in Iraq, and the weapons have grown increasingly deadly for US-led troops over the past two years, senior defense officials said Sunday in Baghdad." "Three defense officials from the US-led Multi-National Force in Baghdad, laid out for reporters what they described as a 'growing body of evidence' that Iran is manufacturing and exporting into Iraq the armor piercing explosives, known as 'explosively formed penetrators,' or EFPs, that have killed more than 170 coalition troops, and wounded more than 620 others, in the past two years." The officials all spoke "on condition of anonymity." Partlow added: "The allegations against Iran marked the farthest that coalition forces have gone to make the case that Iran is working to attack US and Iraqi troops. The revelations threaten to further enflame tensions between America and Iran." Of course, the article itself–and its placement on the paper's front page with that headline–is sure to "enflame" as well. Newsweek reported in a major article this week on the many ways the US is trying to provoke Iran into war, stating flatly: "The Iranians have reason to feel paranoid." The officials in Baghdad who blamed Iran for killing US soldiers said they decided to speak "on the condition of anonymity so the trio's explosives expert and analyst who would normally not speak to reporters could provide more information. The analyst's exact job description was not revealed to reporters. Reporters' cell phones were taken before the briefing, and the officials did not allow reporters to record or videotape the proceedings.... "On two tables in a briefing room in Baghdad, military officials laid out tubular rocket propelled grenades, football-shaped mortars, a cylindrical EFP, and about 40 tail fins of exploded mortars, which they say are manufactured in Iran–just a 'smattering' of the examples they have found in Iraq, said the defense analyst. Iran is the only country in the region that produces these weapons, the officials said." The Associated Press also attended the briefing and noted that it could not reveal the names of the three officials. The AP's Steven Hurst did open his article on a more neutral note, saying that the US officials "accused" Iran in this case. The New York Times' James Glanz also covered the briefing–again, accepting the terms of allowing total anonymity–but he did note, "Today's presentation of evidence is bound to generate skepticism among those suspicious that the Bush administration is trying to find a scapegoat for its problems in Iraq and, some political analysts and White House critics believe, is looking for an excuse to attack Iran."