AJ at Americablog writes on today's incidence of the constant lie about AQ in Iraq:

This is, quite simply, completely and totally false.

Anyone who claims that the so-called al Qaeda in Iraq group is the "principal threat" to anything in that nation -- whether its citizens, the government, the political process, or any specific ethnic or sectarian group -- is either grossly ignorant of the realities of the Iraq war or blatantly lying. I honestly have no idea which it is in this case, though it's worth noting that the chief U.S. military spokesman, Brig. Gen. Kevin Bergner, was employed as a Special Assistant to the President prior to his current appointment.

Most reliable estimates put the fundamentalist/jihadist/al Qaeda actors in Iraq at around 3-5% of the total insurgency, with virtually no approximations exceeding 10%. I really cannot overstate how misleading it is to focus on al Qaeda when the driving forces of the conflict are average, native, very pissed-off -- but not religious fundamentalist -- Iraqis. The vast majority of the Sunni population is relatively secular (more secular, in fact, than Iraqi Shia), and even tacit support of jihadists is founded in anti-American sentiment. Even the sectarian violence is fueled more by localized conflicts between Sunni and Shia families, tribes, and militias than by al Qaeda.

It is true that AQI groups commit the most spectacular attacks, including the vast majority of suicide bombings, but if the underlying problems were solved, or even addressed (including, but not limited to, oil revenue sharing, federalism, de-Ba'athification, provincial elections, etc.), AQI would lose most of its ability to operate because it would have no support on the ground.

The administration just keeps saying it, and saying it and saying it and the media, including the print media, just repeat it. Which, I'll point out, is propaganda rule #1. I'd love to see a poll showing how many Americans think AQ is the primary enemy in Iraq - I'd be quite surprised if it isn't a majority.

This is why decision making in the US is so broken, because it's based on lies and those lies are established through, honestly, no exageration, classic Big Lie propaganda techniques right out of a 1930's handbook.

Every journalist, every editor who repeats this stuff is morally culpable in the deaths that they cause; and be clear they do cause deaths - both by ginning up support for war, and because of the effect on both Americans soldiers and civilians. A lot of soldiers buy this bullshit, and its one of the reasons they are so brutal - they think Iraq was behind 9/11, they think their primary enemy is AQ, who caused 9/11 (do note the contradiction) and they feel justified in using brutal and inhumane tactics against those whom they believe were responsible.

The Post, to its credit, does spend considerable article space describing opposing view of "analysts," and those anonymous voices are absolutely right. Again, these latest statements are either shockingly misinformed or shockingly mendacious. Either way, shameful.

It's all about the inverted pyramid and the lede. Most people just skim the title and the first paragraph or two and never get to the buried information later in the article that disproves the lede.