Topic: WorldNetDaily
We've noted how WorldNetDaily has been trying to get attention -- in the form of lots of whining by Joseph Farah -- for its claim that the Obama administration will announce an "October surprise" in the form of a deal with Iran to curtail its nuclear weapons program. That's been overtaken by events, and WND is desperately trying to take credit for it.
Over the weekend, the New York Times reported that the U.S. and Iran have agreed to one-on-one negotiations over Iran's nuclear program. That claim -- which the White House has denied -- is not what WND's Reza Kahlili claimed, which was that a full-fledged deal exists.Nevertheless, WND wants credit for its still-unproven story.
WND posted an Oct. 20 article that tries to glom onto the Times story, insisting that it "fits the template for an “October surprise” already suggested by WND’s report this week that the Obama administration had cut a deal with Iran that would end many of the sanctions against the Islamic Republic in exchange for the promise of a temporary halt to uranium enrichment." WND claimed to have a "highly placed source, who remains anonymous for security reasons and is highly placed in Iran’s regime," to back up its claim. (Gee, ya think the guy is highly placed?)
Again, WND offers no evidence to back up the veracity of its source. Nor does WND mention Reza Kahlili's history of overwrought, fearmongering claims, like his discredited claim that Iran was planning nuclear suicide bombings with "a thousand suitcase bombs spread around Europe and the U.S."
WND also reposted Kahlili's original article under the headline "The story that started it all" -- even though Kahlili's claim goes far beyond what the Times reported and no evidence is presented that Kahlili's article "started" anything. Nevertheless, the reposted article includes an "editor's note" asserting that Kahlili's articles "provide the depth and context for this announcement."
Meanwhile, Farah uses his latest column to promote Kahlili's story yet again, asserting that "The media are asleep at the switch on what could prove to be the biggest story of the presidential campaign" issuing his usual complaint that "Even alternative media and talk radio are largely ignoring the critical details of the breakthrough reporting by Reza Kahlili for WND."
Farah, of course, doesn't mention that the reason WND's reporting is being ignored is because nobody believes it anymore. Even if there's some shred of truth to be found -- which WND repeatedly insists is the case here -- there's still no reason to believe it because of Kahlili's history of factually inaccurate fearmongeringand WND's pathological anti-Obama obsession, which has led it to publish lies and ignore inconvenient facts.
We've said it before, and we'll say it again: If Farah is looking for someone to blame for the rest of the media ignoring WND, all he has to do is look in the mirror.
