Economist's Iran coverage: a bunch of lies, repeated over and over and . . .

An article in the Economist entitled "They think they have right on their side" (Nov 22 2007) repeats (among other spurious claims) the old canard that Iran doesn't need nuclear power and can instead use flared gas:

"The same money could have built ten conventional plants of the same capacity, fired solely by the natural gas that Iran currently flares off into the sky, because it has not invested in the technology to recover it."

I believe it was Churchill who said that a lie gets half-way around the world before the truth has a chance to put its pants on - but apparently the Economist still remains blissfully unaware of the findings of a Foreign Affairs Select Committee on this very question:

"The Foreign Affairs Select Committee of Britain's Parliament said last March that based on a study it commissioned: "It is clear ... that the arguments as to whether Iran has a genuine requirement for domestically produced nuclear electricity are not all, or even predominantly, on one side."

Some U.S. arguments against Iran "were not supported by an analysis of the facts" the committee added, noting that much of the natural gas flared off by Iran -- which U.S. officials say could be harnessed instead of nuclear power -- was not recoverable for energy use."

(SOURCE: Iran's arguments for nuclear power make some sense by Paul Hughes, Reuters, Sunday, March 6, 2005)

And in making its economic argument against Iran's nuclear program, the Economist quite deliberately disregards the strategic issue for Iran having a secure source of fuel that cannot be a victim of energy blackmail.

Apparently the Economist thinks that simply repeating a lie over and over again is the role of a journalist.

I ask the following question in all seriousness:
What is it about Iran that causes otherwise respected news sources to feel free to completely lose any pretense of accuracy or objectivity? Can this really be attributed to utter journalistic incompetence alone?

Comments

[Mohammad Memarian]

For sure the truth would find the opportunity to put its pants on and go all around the world, albeit just few months after they do what they dream... Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq was such a truth.

[Rahmat]

US and some European dream of full control over the middle east energy resources no matter what Iran is currently doing or planning to do.
Even if Iran complies with their home made resolutions to stop Nuk research / development would anybody with a rational mind believe they will let us free?
The answer is NO. They will then begin other aligations like not supporting the peace process or financially supporting hezbollah and so on.
Therefore, we need to stand still and let the people of the world know its all about energy !!!

[Amir]

very true! And these journalists also forget that some 4 decades ago, an American institution (Stanford) suggested that Iran will be in need of nuclear energy. Americans then put forward a plan to build a couple of nuclear power plants in Bushehr, Arak, etc. (these are the locations that current projects are being completed). And now they say Iran doesn't need Nuclear Energy.