This NPR article, by David Folenflik, is written with an extraordinary care, to spin the matter and give a you a skewed impression of what’s wrong here.

Please note these important and truthful points in the article [with an ALL CAPS emphasis added]:

“Others had an even stronger reason to want to be able to boast of access to Pentagon officials — THEY WORKED FOR, OR ON BEHALF OF, MILITARY CONTRACTORS. CNN last year dropped one analyst after belatedly discovering his work for a CONTRACTOR, included bidding on a MULTIBILLION DOLLAR CONTRACT.”

“[Retired Air Force Maj. Gen. Don Shepperd, CNN CONSULTANT] Shepperd, who has also had MILITARY CONTRACTORS as CLIENTS, declined to be interviewed, as did officials for CNN and every other major television news outlet.”

“[Retired Army Gen. Robery Scales and Fox News Channel analyst, and also a consultant for NPR from 2003 to 2004] Scales’ work for DEFENSE CONTRACTORS has rarely been mentioned on our [NPR’s] air.”

And also, please note this:

“…former Army Maj. Gen. John Batiste… although he was a commentator for CBS News for a time, he did not get invited to the Pentagon briefing sessions. (CBS dropped Batiste after he appeared in an anti-Bush ad… Batiste says …that he does no MILITARY CONTRACTING or other work directly related to the DEFENSE INDUSTRY)”

As you can see from the points I quoted (and the EMPHASIS given), the crux of the matter is about MILITARY CONTRACTORS and DEFENSE INDUSTRY LOBBYISTS being used on television and radio broadcasts, to sell the American People the invasion and occupation of Iraq, under the guise of being “military analysts”.

Again, DEFENSE INDUSTRY LOBBYISTS being promoted by broadcasters as “military analysts”.

That’s the story.

Never mind the somewhat innocent matters of propaganda, or of Pentagon spokespersons appearing on television… that’s nothing compared to DEFENSE LOBBYISTS disguised as “military analysts” promoting Iraq and defense spending, on the Public Airwaves.

The title of this cleverly written NPR article (and NPR are themselves involed in this conflict of interest, so why should we expect them to report honestly about it?)… the title should be:

“MILITARY CONTRACTORS Used DEFENSE LOBBYISTS To Deliver Message”

…as opposed to the somewhat innocuous (if you read and consider it carefully):

“Pentagon Used Military Analysts To Deliver Message”