Before we get too far a disclaimer to keep in mind:
“Several current and former officials, as well as outside experts, spoke on the condition of anonymity because the intelligence surrounding the Israeli strike remains highly classified.”
The “intelligence” is “highly classified,” so how do they know anything and are they worth quoting or basing an article on? Now on the chosen colors representing the bad and the good.
According to The NY Times:
“A sharp debate is under way in the Bush administration about the significance of the Israeli intelligence that led to last month’s Israeli strike inside
, according to current and former American government officials.” Syria
This debate revolves around intelligence provided by
One thing worth noting is that the
toilet paper has in the past written of debates within the administration, rarely described as “debates” but more colorfully described as “rifts” between “hawks” and doves regarding Iran. We might be comforted with the fact that the administration does debate issues, but that would require injecting connotation that weakens the “hawk/dove” angle; this is just something the msm doesn’t do.
toilet paper rarely passes an opportunity to report as factually as it can stand while implying with words of choice who is on the rights side and wrong side of the “debate.”
The two sides in the “fight” are “Vice President Dick Cheney and conservative hawks” and “Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and her allies.” Remember WWII, a war fought between the “Axis” and “Allies.” Any questions as to which side the
toilet paper is more supportive of? Reporting the news with an eye toward swaying opinion; this is not reporting the news, but the toilet paper does it seven days a week.
Trackposted to Outside the Beltway, Faultline USA, third world county, Right Truth, Big Dog's Weblog, The Populist, Shadowscope, Blue Star Chronicles, Webloggin, The Pink Flamingo, Cao's Blog, Leaning Straight Up, Dumb Ox Daily News, Adeline and Hazel, and Right Voices, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.