Why is the MSM buying the same lies about Iran that they bought about Iraq?
posted by
Wally
6:56 AM
In the run up to the Iraq war, the Bush administration spewed a series of lies about how dangerous Iraq was, and how we had no choice but to use military force. The main stream media bought the lies hook, line, and sinker, and repeated them relentlessly like well trained parrots (without bothering to do even remedial fact-checking - i.e. basic "journalism"). We are all witness to how that worked out.
Now we are finding out that not only is the main stream media too lazy to do simple investigation to find out if the politicians are misleading them (ya' think), they are also too stupid to learn from their mistakes. Bush, the Bomb and Iran
To bomb or not to bomb Iran, that's the question the Bush Administration appears to be debating these days, once again revealing the extraordinary disconnect between the White House and the American people. With a catastrophic occupation of Iraq and polls showing the American public so skeptical about the use of military force that only eight percent support military action against Iran, there is nevertheless a clear and present danger that Cheney and the neocons will again prevail and lead this Administration into another disastrous military misadventure.
The parallels between now and the run-up to the Iraq War are troubling. Nobel Peace Prize-winner Dr. Mohamed ElBaradei, the Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), who warned the Bush administration in 2003 about the lack of a nuclear program in Iraq and was subsequently attacked for his position by the Bush machine, the neocons and by many in the mainstream media, has now struck a deal with Iran to answer questions about its nuclear program within a defined timeline and improve access for inspectors. ElBaradei has called for a "double time-out" of all enrichment activities and new sanctions.
The result of ElBaradei's attempt to shed light on Iran's nuclear program? More attacks by the Bush administration. More outright hit jobs like this one from the Washington Post, or even the more subtle shading by the New York Times that ultimately portrays ElBaradei as a dictatorial loon. The result is, once again, an amplifying of the Administration's drumbeat calling for war.
(snip)
"Administration officials, including Secretary Rice, attacked the credibility of the director-general [in 2003] too," Cirincione says. "The Washington Post also blasted ElBaradei on his Iraq assessment. They were dead wrong. But this hasn't stopped them from attacking with guns blazing again. ElBaradei's record is far better on these issues than either the secretary of state's or the Washington Post's. You would think they would have some humility given the magnitude of their past mistakes. But some people have no shame." And the main stream media wonders why subscriptions and ratings are down. They're useless - less than useless - they're dangerous. People are finally realizing it in sufficient numbers to take their search for accurate information elsewhere - like to the internet where they can find something other than just the "Bush" side of the story, where they can find international and unbiased news sources where "journalists" still occasionally do "journalism".
We at dubyaD40 say "you're welcome." (not that we do journalism, but we try to find tne news sources anyway). Now your job is to take this information and do whatever you have to do to NOT let them get away with Iran like they got away with Iraq.
The Nation
Permalink
::
0 comments
::
|
