Aug 9, 2007

Shaping Debate

Robin Wright, the WaPo reporter in charge of the paper's participation in the anti-iran info op, has a piece this morning in which she itemizes the work of various think tankers on the need (getting urgent now) for a U.S. attack on Iran.

The emerging debate -- evident in an array of new reports, conferences and commentaries -- is still in the early stages, but some of the language urging the Bush administration to be more aggressive during its final 17 months is reminiscent of arguments from think tanks and commentators that shaped the case for invading Iraq.

Funny, her take on the "debate" gives short shift to any skeptics.

Shaping debate, an invaluable contribution to the team.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

i'm surprised it hasn't happened yet really. but the MSM is prepping their liberal base for the need and inevitability of an iranian campaign (the conservative base has wanted to bomb iran for 30 years so there's no propaganda necessary).

if you parse the article carefully you'll notice it consists almost exclusively of neocon 'experts' advocating the need for a new war: william kristol (son of irving kristol, one of the founders of the neocon movement), norman podhoretz, michael rubin, danielle pletka (" described her as ‘a conduit for neocon disinformation’") - all members of likudnik or ultra-right-wing 'think tanks' in the US (american enterprise institute, washington institute for near east policy, hoover institution, heritage foundation, etc).

the message is: "we're trying oh so hard to be tolerant but ahmadinejad is like hitler and if he keeps pursuing the building of nuclear power plants - one step away from nuclear weapons! - then we'll sadly have to (get the US to) bomb the hell out of iran...with deep regret of course."

so, as you point out, it's not 'journalism' as much as a cheerleading piece to 'bomb iran' by the same prostitute who was paid to sell the iraq war to her readers.