Protection Racket Media Fumbles Facts
For the past week, the so-called Protection Racket Media has embarked on a series of bizarre spin attempts regarding President Trump's decisive actions against Iran's nuclear capabilities. This kind of narrative manipulation—what we used to call "modified limited hangouts"—has reached new heights. First, they released a carefully crafted, low-confidence assessment claiming that the U.S. and Israeli strikes on Fordow had minimal impact. When that narrative faltered under scrutiny and even Iranian officials admitted significant damage, the media quickly pivoted to claim that Iran could still assemble a nuclear weapon within weeks.
New York Times Engages in Blame Game
Today's report from the New York Times is a textbook example of this media malpractice. While acknowledging the substantial setbacks inflicted on Iran's nuclear ambitions, they pivot to blaming Trump for the very existence of these threats. According to their narrative, the destruction of key facilities, including those at Isfahan, is somehow a consequence of Trump abandoning the disastrous Iran nuclear deal orchestrated by Barack Obama.
How Did We Get Here?
Let’s break it down. The NYT claims that Trump's withdrawal from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) led to an escalation of Iran's nuclear development. This assertion conveniently ignores the fact that Iran had been covertly advancing its nuclear program long before Trump took office. In fact, evidence shows that Iran ramped up its activities at Isfahan shortly after Obama’s administration signed the JCPOA, and that strategic deception was part of their game plan all along.
Historical Context Matters
As reported by various sources, including the NYT itself, Iran was already violating enrichment limits set by the JCPOA before the ink had dried on the deal. In a May 2013 interview, then-President Hassan Rouhani boasted about outsmarting the West, using negotiations as a smokescreen to enhance their nuclear capabilities. This is not a narrative that the mainstream media wants to confront, as it undermines their hero-worship of Obama and the flawed policies of his administration.
Fordow nuclear site: What we know about Iran’s facility harden…
Expert Opinions and Media Bias
Now, the NYT leans on so-called experts to support their narrative. One of these experts was part of the negotiating team for the JCPOA, a clear conflict of interest. Another, a former lobbyist, has a history of disparaging Trump. There’s a pattern here: the media seeks out voices that reinforce their biases while ignoring the broader spectrum of expert opinions that contradict their narratives.
Trump's Maximum Pressure Strategy Works
Contrary to the NYT's spin, Trump's "maximum pressure" strategy has yielded tangible results. The strikes on Iranian facilities have effectively delayed their nuclear ambitions, with experts now suggesting that the destruction of metallization plants will set back their progress by years. This is a victory for nuclear non-proliferation, yet the media chooses to focus on how they can twist this success into a critique of Trump.
What Lies Ahead for Iran
The reality is that if Iran attempts to rebuild their nuclear infrastructure, they will face further military action, as Trump has made clear. The existing stores of enriched uranium are likely well-guarded at Fordow, a facility designed for maximum secrecy and security. U.S. and Israeli intelligence have monitored these sites closely, making any attempts to relocate or enhance their nuclear capabilities a risky endeavor for the Iranian regime.
Instead of celebrating a strategic win against a regime hell-bent on acquiring nuclear weapons, the media continues to push a narrative that paints Trump as the architect of this crisis. This is not just irresponsible journalism; it is a disservice to American security and a blatant example of bias in action.
Anger inside the New York Times as divided newsroom erupts in debate ...
