Coverage of the "dissolution" of the Tripoli-based GNC government

As the UN-brokered Government of National Accord, led by PM-designate Faiez Serraj, begins to establish more power in Tripoli and western Libya, the mainstream western media are beginning to take some notice of events in Libya.

This article will analyze CNN's recent coverage of the reported dissolution of the Tripoli-based General National Congress (GNC), a rival to the Tobruk-based House of Representatives (HoR) in the east of Libya. CNN repeats an account also found in the Libya Observer. Both accounts note that the statement came from Libya's Justice Ministry. The Observer adds that it was on the Ministry's Facebook page. Neither report bothers to note that a report that the Tripoli or Salvation Government as it calls itself is dissolved should surely come from the official government itself, not a ministry. The CNN report reads as follows:

The self-declared, Islamist-leaning National Salvation Government, headquartered in the capital, Tripoli, said in a statement it was ceasing its work in the "supreme interest of the nation," in a move to prevent further violence and division and remove the capital "from the specter of armed conflict." "We inform you that we are stopping our work as an executive power, as the presidency, members of parliament and ministers of the government," read the statement published by Libya's Justice Ministry on Monday.

The statement probably represents an attempt by Ministry officials to force the government to hand over power. The PM of the government,Khalifa Ghweil, sanctioned by the EU, issued his own statement contradicting the announcement: "Given the requirements of public interest... you are requested to continue your mission in accordance with the law." He even threatened to prosecute anyone who works with the new government. Alarabiya also reports on Ghweil's statement. The CNN account does not include it.

The Observer account gives more background to what has happened. It notes that on March 29 the Salvation Government issued a statement in which it described the Presidential Council members who came to Tripoli as infiltrators and said they should go back to Tunis. A later statement, on March 31, said the government decided to pass all legislative issues and decisions to the GNC. It said the GNC is the only legitimate authority in Libya and should do as it sees fit. The CNN article fails even to note that the GNC still exists. Even the contested declaration of the Justice Ministry says nothing about the GNC, just the associated government.

The CNN article cites Maher Shami, spokesperson for the HoR, as saying the government there is not ready to cede power to the GNA because "it was not properly consulted on the transfer of power." This makes it sound as if somehow it is merely a demand that it be consulted on the transfer of power that is at issue. This is quite wrong. It is one of the requirements of the Libya Political Agreement (LPA) that the GNA receive a vote of confidence by the HoR before its term even begins. Reading CNN one would never have an inkling that there might be something wrong in the GNA even claiming power. There is nothing in the CNN report about Khalifa Haftar, or the HoR demand that he stay on as commander-in-chief of the Libyan National Army. All we learn is that the HoR wants proper consultation on the transfer of power. There is no mention of the fact that if Haftar is not kept on as commander-in-chief, eastern Libya could separate.

Although the CNN is reporting on the dissolution of the Salvation Government, it has nothing to say about the meeting of the State Council of the GNA that met in a Tripoli hotel. There, the State Council decided that they were also the General National Congress and dissolved it and then unanimously passed a resolution approving the GNA and amending the Constitutional Declaration of 2011. They have no power to do the latter. There is nothing of Abusahmain's condemnation of the meeting and its actions or threats of court action.

The CNN report, as with many mainstream reports, is not so much wrong as simply misleading since it leaves out important information necessary to understand what is happening. The Salvation Government and the GNC might as well have dissolved as they do not seem to have any power but the CNN account does not give the reader any idea of what is behind the failure of the HoR to relinquish power and neglects the fact the General Haftar is a key player in any solution to the problems in the east.

CNN continues ludicrous drone reporting style

 CIA drone attacks continue in Pakistani tribal areas in spite of several resolutions in the Pakistani parliament demanding they stop. CNN reports on drones continue to call the attacks "suspected" drone attacks and use anonymous officials as sources.
 CNN, The Cable News Network, is a large U.S. based media outlet. CNN is in turn owned by giant Time Warner. "Time Warner is an American multinational media corporation headquartered in the Time Warner Center in New York City..As of mid-2010, it was the world's second largest media and entertainment conglomerate in terms of revenue (behind Disney), as well as the world's largest media conglomerate ."
Even with these impressive credentials CNN does not fear to sound ridiculous as it joins the media parade of drone drivel. Recently in a headline CNN reports:"Suspected drone attack kills 12 in Pakistan"
 Everyone knows that it was a drone attack and that it was directed by the CIA on behalf of the U.S. The CNN however feels duty bound to follow the position of the U.S. that to officially admit that this program exists or does not exist would endanger U.S. security. CNN is just carrying out its patriotic duty.
CNN is much more patriotic than President Obama or Defense Secretary Leon Panetta who have not only talked about the program but defended and boasted about it. The body of the CNN report notes that their information comes from two unidentified Pakistani intelligence officers. The officers cannot be identified since they were not authorized to talk to CNN.
"" A suspected U.S. drone strike killed 12 militants Monday evening in Pakistan's tribal region bordering Afghanistan, two Pakistani intelligence officials told CNN.""
 Note that CNN even when reporting what the two Pakistani intelligence officials told them put in the term "suspected" before "U.S. drone strike". Were the Pakistani intelligence officers really so cautious? The targets are now clearly identified as militants but only through the testimony of the anonymous Pakistani officials. There is no independent verification.
 Not all sources are as careful as CNN. Antiwar.com simply says straight out. "US Drone Strike Kills 13 in North Waziristan " The site does not go on to label those killed as suspected militants but instead remarks: "None of the people killed in the attack have been identified, but all were predictably labeled suspects by officials." Most reports list targets as militants or suspected militants. However there are reports of attacks that are different but they are rare.
 The Muslim News in the UK reports on a drone attack in Afghanistan: Afghanistan:"US drone attack kills young girl and 5 others " This headline contrasts with the constant refrain of militants or suspected militants being killed common in most mass media reports on the strikes. Of course this headline is propaganda too. Propaganda however can be true. It is the spin and the function that make the reports propaganda.
The Muslim News report actually says in the body of the report that four of those killed were Taliban commanders according to officials." Four Taliban commanders and two civilians were killed in a drone attack carried out by the international troops in eastern Nuristan province on Monday, officials said."
 Unlike the mass media professionals in the mainstream press this source actually names officials rather than citing anonymous official sources." The incident took place at around 12:30 pm in Want Waigal district, when the individuals were travelling on a passenger vehicle to the district centre, Governor Tamim Nuristani, told Pajhwok Afghan News." and" Police chief, Col. Ghulamullah Nuristani, identified the dead rebel commanders as Habibullah alias Dadullah, Mullah Yahiya Rakiti, Younus and Haroon"
 In contrast the ISAF (International Security Assistance Force) media office confirmed the attack but provided no details. While the Muslim News does try to evoke sympathy for some victims in their headline compared to CNN their overall report is much more specific and better sourced. For more see here, and here

Reports on drone strikes often misleading

 News sources differ in the precise wording they choose to use in reports. This article illustrates these differences in reports on drone strikes in Pakistan.

 For several years the CIA has been launching drone attacks on targets in the tribal areas of Pakistan. Almost everyone knows this. However the official position of the CIA is that to even assert or deny the existence of these attacks could endanger the security of the U.S. Important officials including President Obama and the U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta have acknowledged the attacks and even boasted about them. Nevertheless the official position is "" The Central Intelligence Agency continues to refuse to confirm or deny the covert military use of drones to kill suspected terrorists overseas, despite President Barack Obama’s and even a former CIA director’s admission of the agency’s targeted killing program. ""


While this position appears ludicrous it has a rational function and that is to block the release of any information about the program. At the same time any information that the administration wants released for propaganda purposes can be leaked or announced. The American Civil Liberties Union and the New York Times attempted to obtain information about the strikes through the Department of Justice with no success. They have now turned to the courts. The case is continuing but the Obama administration has tried to have the request for documents denied."" The Obama administration has sought to block the release of documents related to its use of robot drones to strike suspected terrorists overseas, claiming that it can still not admit that the secretive programme of targeted killing exists"".
The official policy is often quite visible in reports of drone attacks. The language used in reports often avoids mentioning that the attacks are by the U.S. Phrases used vary. Some sources speak of "suspected U.S. drone attacks". Other sources simply speak of "drone attacks" with no reference as to who might have launched them. Here for example is a headline from 2010 in CNN."Drone attack kills 20 in Pakistan" Even back in 2010 some sources must have thought it ridiculous to not attribute the attacks to the U.S. A Reuters report headline from 2010 is as follows."" U.S. drone strikes kill 18 militants in Pakistan"" However in the body of the report Reuters notes that the headline statement is according to Pakistan intelligence officials. Reuters itself is simply reporting what anonymous officials said and are not themselves affirming or denying that the U.S. launched the attacks.

 CNN is still in 2012 going along with the official story even while many outlets have moved on. CNN reports recently with a headline that speaks only of a drone attack:"" 20 dead in drone attack in Pakistan ""Even when reporting what a Pakistani intelligence official said the word "suspected" is inserted before "U.S. drone strike""" A suspected U.S. drone strike killed 20 people in North Waziristan, a region along the Pakistan-Afghanistan border, a Pakistani intelligence official told CNN Friday""

. Usually those killed in the attacks are described as militants or suspected militants or not described at all. The CNN report cited above reports that an intelligence official claims that 20 people were killed but has no description of the victims. The Reuters report cited earlier has a headline reporting that 18 militants were killed. Only later does the report note that this is according to Pakistani intelligence officials. Pakistani intelligence officials are not likely to report civilian deaths or women and children as victims. Reports of drone strikes rarely report any civilian deaths. Even if there are such reports they will be from local people and will often conflict with official statements. Estimates of how many civilians are killed by drone strikes in Pakistan vary.. Officials often give very low estimates. However the Bureau of Investigative Journalism studied the issue at some length.""Based on extensive research, the Bureau of Investigative Journalism found that between 391 – 780 civilians were killed out of a total of between 1,658 and 2,597 and that 160 children are reported among the deaths. The Bureau also revealed that since President Obama took office at least 50 civilians were killed in follow-up strikes when they had gone to help victims and more than 20 civilians have also been attacked in deliberate strikes on funerals and mourners, tactics that have been condemned by legal experts.""

 Most reports on drone strikes provide no evidence of civilian deaths. Those killed are militants or suspected militants. Victims are identified only if they are believed to be significant militant leaders. Mainstream media reports on drone strikes seem designed to mislead the reader.

Video on Georgia Russia Conflict

This is an interesting interview on the Georgia Russia conflict moderated by Fareed Zakaria on CNN. It is reasonably balanced although it has precious little to say about the original actions of Georgia who tried to take control by force of South Ossetia killing a number of Russian peacekeepers in the process.