Bachmann on Iran

Posted at 5:19 PM on February 23, 2007 by Tom Scheck (3 Comments)

GOP Rep. Michele Bachmann appears to be backing away from her earlier comments on Iran. The 6th District Congresswoman told St. Cloud Times reporter Lawrence Schumacher earlier this month that Iran had a plan to partition Iraq. Schumacher posted the podcast but it didn't really surface with the MSM (which includes me by the way) until The Big Question posted it today. MPR and AP also have stories out there.

Bachmann's spokeswoman declined an interview request. She released this statement:

Bachmann Responds to Misconstrued Coverage of Iran Statement

(Woodbury, Minnesota) - Congresswoman Michele Bachmann released the following statement this afternoon:

"I am sorry if my words have been misconstrued, but it is well known that Iraq is a conglomeration of many groups of people that emerged out of European colonialization. The three primary sects in Iraq are Kurds, Sunnis and Shi'a, and the idea that Iraq might be partitioned into three distinct entities - Kurdish, Shiite and Sunni - has been intermittently considered since the beginning of the Iraq war in 2003. One of the reasons that this never became policy is because the Shi'a and the Kurds had larger states that many believed would have engulfed them, either peacefully or by force - Turkey in the case of the Kurds, and Iran in the case of the Shi'a.

"In the case of Iran, there are multiple reasons to believe they would seek to expand their territory to include Shi'a Iraq - namely, their natural cultural ties, the long history of Iran and Iraq wars, and regional security. A fourth and powerful reason is that success in Iraq for the West could threaten the future of the current Iranian leadership and its Islamic Revolution. There is already a strong antagonism against the ruling regime in Iran and a successful, democratic Iraq could pose trouble for Iran.

"Although it is difficult to ascertain Iran's intentions toward Iraq, they are clearly not in the U.S. interest - for example, the Iranian weapons that have fallen into the hands of insurgents. If Iran is allowed to freely operate in Iraq and continues to thwart the U.S. and the Iraqi government, then we may very well see a de facto partition in which the western Anbar province continues to house and develop terrorists."

# # #

Comments (3)

Hey, come on, Tom, you can do better than just reprinting Bachmann’s attempted retraction. Let’s look at what she originally claimed, in her Feb. 9 taped interview with Larry Schumacher of the St. Cloud Times (when I transcribed this I left all the “uhs” and stuff in to give the reader an idea of how hard she was struggling to remember what she was trying to tell interviewer):

“Iran is the troublemaker trying to tip over apple carts all over Baghdad right now because they want America to pull out. And you know why? It’s because they’ve already decided, that they’re going to territory, they’re- they’re going to partition Iraq and half of Iraq, the western northern portion of Iraq is going to be called, the United, uh, uh, the, the uh, -oh, I’m sorry, I can’t remember the actual name of it now, but it’s going to be called, um, uh, the, the, uh, uh the Iraq State of Islam, something like that. And I-I’m sorry, I-I don’t have the official name, but it is meant to be the training ground for the terrorists. There’s already an agreement made; they’re going to get half of Iraq and that is going to be a –a terrorist free,-a terrorist safe haven zone.”

She did not say how she knew about this plan or who the parties to this plan to carve up Iraq were.

There’s nothing to “misconstrue” about Bachmann’s statements; she was telling the reporter that such a plan existed, and she indicated that the plan had specifics. And today she retracted. So the question remains: where the hell did she get the idea that there was such a plan? Where’d she get this name, “the United Iraq State of Islam” or whatever? What sources she was relying on when she disclosed the existence of “the plan” to the St. Cloud Times. That’s the real story; what kind of information is this particular Congresswoman relying on in her decision making about the war?

No answer to that one so far. Maybe some brave reporter will ask her when she starts taking their calls again.

Posted by Bill Prendergast | February 23, 2007 11:33 PM

Yeah! I agree with Bill! Lazy reporting! Why do reporters just repeat press releases, as if what they say is true?! Her comments were NOT misconstrued! She claims that in order to make it look like it was the media that got it wrong, when the truth is that her actual comments are outrageous, and she should disclose where she got these "ideas."

Posted by frankenbattle | February 24, 2007 6:25 PM

I believe there is some extensive community belief that Michele Bachmann owes us all, in Minnesota and nationally, a DC press conference; naming names of her sources to show their veracity and credibility, if any.

Then, the "sunshine" of an extended Q & A with the press, to dispel any hint or suggestion that this is some crazed misinterpretation of some ultrarightwing rant she heard second-hand in a WELS church or from Pastor Mac while testflying [not testifying, not this instance] one of his church's several aircraft. My guess: either the Kline people are feeding her information she misunderstands; or the Defense Attache in the State Dept. office in Baku has a back-door to influencing votes in MN 6.

But it is worthy of you to think to keep us informed.

Please aim for either the exclusive follow-up interview, a coup to you; or join the press conference bandwagon.

It's a story that should go beyond the AM 1500 crowd.

Posted by Eric Zaetsch | February 25, 2007 12:26 PM

Services

• Hourly Newscast
• HD Radio
• iPhone App / Mobile
• E-mail newsletters
• RSS feeds
• Podcasts
• Submit your photos
• Videos
• Weather
• Most e-mailed stories