PENTAGON PUNDIT SCANDAL BROKE THE LAW !

Media's Military Analysts Involved in "Psyops on Steroids"
Source: New York Times, April 20, 2008

Victoria "Torie" Clarke

In early 2002, as "detailed planning for a possible Iraq invasion" began, then-Assistant Secretary of Defense for Public Affairs Victoria Clarke launched the Pentagon military analyst program as "the main focus of the public relations push to construct a case for war," reports David Barstow. The gist of the program was the recruitment of "key influentials" to help sell a wary public on the war. The former Hill & Knowlton executive and her senior aide, Brent Krueger, signed up more than 75 retired military officers, who appeared on television and radio news shows as military analysts, and/or penned newspaper op/ed columns. The Pentagon referred to the military analysts as "message force multipliers" or "surrogates," and held weekly meetings with them, which continue to this day. The Defense Department also paid for some analysts to travel to Iraq and Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, encouraging them to counter negative press with Pentagon talking points. Former NBC military analyst Kenneth Allard called the effort "psyops on steroids." Many of the analysts were also lobbyists for defense contractors, and boasted of their Pentagon access to potential clients. This financial conflict discouraged the analysts from questioning or criticizing the Pentagon's claims. The Pentagon also tracked what the analysts said, via a six-figure contract with Omnitec Solutions, as William Cowan learned. He was fired from the Pentagon analysts group after saying on Fox News that the United States was "not on a good glide path right now" in Iraq.

Thank God for President Bush and his ability to stand strong against the know-nothings.

Dear Politiste,

Look who's in first and last on this list provided by our own CIA…

Rank Order - Current account balancehttps://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2187rank.html

One could think the citizen’s money could be more wisely spent at home than on some… poorly staged rendition of Wag the Dog, interpreted for the morbidly stupid and performed by the criminally insane. - Jules Carlysle

I’m just sick & tired of seeing the little people used, abused & oh so confused by this executive branch, whom I think belongs in prison for treason & war crimes.

Now about what they have done to the American people…

We have watched assets shifted out of governments and central banks worldwide and moved into private hands at below-market prices-or simply stolen-while liabilities have been shifted back, often for free. Governments are not so much being privatized as piratized. - Catherine Austin Fitts

"Private interests have looted the treasury, and the administration has sanctioned unrestrained fraud and corruption. We have watched Congress and the press become weak and willing handmaidens to those who would rip apart the fabric and laws of our democratic society. We hunger for the restoration of hope, common sense and purpose." - Jann S. Wenner 10/26/07 RS40

This explains a lot... HIGHEST BIDDER

“When will the American people actually vote to give to the world more than bombs and missiles, sweatshops, dubious science, frankenfood, poverty and misery?” - Cynthia McKinney

Everything in war is barbaric... But the worst barbarity of war is that it forces men collectively to commit acts against which individually they would revolt with their whole being. - Ellen Key

Ignorance is the downfall of all cultures and we are about to hit bottom.

While on the other hand...

We take the pain and the fight or become slaves.

EXECUTIVE RESUME

Uh, the flag comment didn't let me say anything.
what an incredible amount of work providing all those reference links. What is that CIA account rank page all about. It wouldn't let me scroll down and froze my browser. I had to force quit.

Dear René,

Thanks for the flowers ;)

Seems like the CIA is not 100% reliable...

Here it is for all to see. These numbers bring the whole shabang into perspective indeed.

For Americans, who like to brag about being No1... It is a rude awakening but I'm affraid this is but the opening salvo of an economic war that future generations will read about in history books and will make FDR's Economic Bill of Rights an ideal to shoot for.

RankCountryCurrent account balanceDate of Information1China$ 363,300,000,0002007 est.2Japan$ 195,900,000,0002007 est.3Germany$ 185,100,000,0002007 est.4Saudi Arabia$ 88,890,000,0002007 est.5Russia$ 74,000,000,0002007 est.6Switzerland$ 67,890,000,0002007 est.7Netherlands$ 59,280,000,0002007 est.8Norway$ 55,820,000,0002007 est.9Kuwait$ 51,490,000,0002007 est.10Singapore$ 41,390,000,0002007 est.11United Arab Emirates$ 36,110,000,0002007 est.12Algeria$ 31,500,000,0002007 est.13Sweden$ 30,190,000,0002007 est.14Canada$ 28,460,000,0002007 est.15Malaysia$ 25,930,000,0002007 est.16Taiwan$ 24,700,000,000200617Hong Kong$ 19,870,000,0002007 est.18Iran$ 19,000,000,0002007 est.19Venezuela$ 17,020,000,0002007 est.20Nigeria$ 14,610,000,0002007 est.21Angola$ 13,640,000,0002007 est.22Austria$ 12,610,000,0002007 est.23Libya$ 11,710,000,0002007 est.24Luxembourg$ 11,300,000,0002007 est.25Finland$ 11,240,000,000200726Belgium$ 11,040,000,0002007 est.27Indonesia$ 10,210,000,0002007 est.28Brazil$ 10,200,000,0002007 est.29Thailand$ 8,619,000,0002007 est.30Chile$ 8,184,000,0002007 est.31Iraq$ 7,802,000,0002007 est.32Qatar$ 7,733,000,0002007 est.33Azerbaijan$ 7,535,000,0002007 est.34Argentina$ 7,438,000,0002007 est.35Philippines$ 6,700,000,0002007 est.36Korea, South$ 5,950,000,000200737Israel$ 5,941,000,0002007 est.38Denmark$ 4,699,000,0002007 est.39Turkmenistan$ 4,300,000,0002007 est.40Trinidad and Tobago$ 3,884,000,0002007 est.41Oman$ 3,785,000,0002007 est.42Egypt$ 3,115,000,0002007 est.43Uzbekistan$ 3,045,000,0002007 est.44Botswana$ 2,231,000,0002007 est.45Peru$ 2,045,000,0002007 est.46Bahrain$ 2,009,000,0002007 est.47Burma$ 1,676,000,0002007 est.48Gabon$ 1,626,000,0002007 est.49Cyprus$ 1,469,000,0002007 est.50Bolivia$ 1,325,000,0002007 est.51Congo, Republic of the$ 1,094,000,0002007 est.52Namibia$ 1,065,000,0002007 est.53Cote d'Ivoire$ 1,056,000,0002007 est.54Bangladesh$ 683,000,0002007 est.55Morocco$ 433,900,0002007 est.56Papua New Guinea$ 314,000,0002007 est.57Equatorial Guinea$ 250,000,0002007 est.58Yemen$ 178,000,0002007 est.59British Virgin Islands$ 134,300,000199960Cook Islands$ 26,670,000200561Palau$ 15,090,000FY03/0462Samoa$ -2,428,000FY03/0463Tuvalu$ -11,680,000200364Comoros$ -17,000,0002005 est.65Kiribati$ -19,870,000200466Tonga$ -25,200,000FY06/0767Swaziland$ -26,710,0002007 est.68Lesotho$ -28,000,0002007 est.69Vanuatu$ -28,350,000200370Gambia, The$ -31,690,0002007 est.71Micronesia, Federated States of$ -34,300,000FY05 est.72Macedonia$ -37,560,000November 200773Anguilla$ -42,870,0002003 est.74Belize$ -54,000,0002007 est.75Sao Tome and Principe$ -58,000,0002007 est.76Kosovo$ -58,300,000200777Paraguay$ -73,000,000200778Antigua and Barbuda$ -83,400,000200479Tajikistan$ -102,000,0002007 est.80Burundi$ -137,300,0002007 est.81Seychelles$ -141,000,0002007 est.82Chad$ -144,500,0002007 est.83Togo$ -165,500,0002007 est.84Rwanda$ -172,800,0002007 est.85Guinea$ -175,000,0002007 est.86Malawi$ -180,000,0002007 est.87Haiti$ -184,800,0002007 est.88Cape Verde$ -218,000,0002007 est.89Guyana$ -229,700,0002007 est.90Uganda$ -241,000,0002007 est.91Benin$ -278,800,0002007 est.92Eritrea$ -343,100,0002007 est.93Laos$ -355,000,0002007 est.94Uruguay$ -400,000,0002007 est.95Cambodia$ -410,000,0002007 est.96Malta$ -411,000,0002007 est.97Armenia$ -440,000,0002007 est.98Honduras$ -446,000,0002007 est.99Fiji$ -465,800,0002006 est.100Cameroon$ -501,000,0002007 est.101Zimbabwe$ -538,000,0002005 est.102Mauritius$ -552,000,0002007 est.103Moldova$ -569,000,0002007 est.104Ecuador$ -600,000,0002007 est.105Kyrgyzstan$ -677,300,0002007 est.106Mozambique$ -726,000,0002007 est.107Cuba$ -750,000,0002007 est.108Burkina Faso$ -752,000,0002007109Nicaragua$ -754,000,0002007 est.110Zambia$ -856,000,0002007 est.111Panama$ -861,000,0002007 est.112Albania$ -918,000,0002007 est.113El Salvador$ -929,000,0002007 est.114Tunisia$ -935,000,0002007 est.115Kenya$ -980,000,0002007 est.116Senegal$ -1,085,000,0002007 est.117Sri Lanka$ -1,118,000,0002007 est.118Madagascar$ -1,145,000,0002007 est.119Slovenia$ -1,165,000,0002007 est.120Vietnam$ -1,199,000,0002007 est.121Costa Rica$ -1,259,000,0002007 est.122Tanzania$ -1,422,000,0002007 est.123Jamaica$ -1,573,000,0002007 est.124Georgia$ -1,582,000,0002007 est.125Jordan$ -1,690,000,0002007 est.126Guatemala$ -1,772,000,0002007 est.127Ethiopia$ -1,851,000,0002007 est.128Ghana$ -1,885,000,0002007 est.129Dominican Republic$ -1,993,000,0002007 est.130Bosnia and Herzegovina$ -2,021,000,0002007 est.131Syria$ -2,160,000,0002007 est.132Belarus$ -3,056,000,0002007 est.133Estonia$ -3,092,000,0002007 est.134Slovakia$ -3,119,000,0002007 est.135Lebanon$ -3,337,000,0002007 est.136Iceland$ -3,384,000,0002007 est.137Croatia$ -3,836,000,0002007 est.138Ukraine$ -3,890,000,0002007 est.139Sudan$ -4,465,000,0002007 est.140Kazakhstan$ -4,643,000,0002007 est.141Colombia$ -5,132,000,0002007 est.142Lithuania$ -5,320,000,0002007 est.143Mexico$ -5,414,000,0002007 est.144Czech Republic$ -5,701,000,0002007 est.145Latvia$ -5,839,000,0002007 est.146Pakistan$ -6,477,000,0002007 est.147Hungary$ -6,681,000,0002007 est.148Serbia$ -6,700,000,0002007 est.149Bulgaria$ -7,189,000,0002007 est.150New Zealand$ -9,973,000,0002007 est.151Ireland$ -12,600,000,0002007 est.152Poland$ -18,130,000,0002007 est.153India$ -18,530,000,0002007 est.154Portugal$ -18,530,000,0002007 est.155South Africa$ -20,060,000,0002007 est.156Romania$ -22,600,000,0002007157France$ -35,940,000,0002007 est.158Turkey$ -36,270,000,0002007 est.159Greece$ -36,400,000,0002007 est.160Australia$ -50,960,000,0002007 est.161Italy$ -57,940,000,0002007 est.162United Kingdom$ -111,000,000,0002007 est.163Spain$ -126,300,000,0002007 est.164United States$ -747,100,000,0002007 est.

 

A MOCKERY OF DEMOCRACY !

 

Check the "Ring of Fire's Weekly News Vol. 7" segment at Go Left TV (www.goleft.tv ) for an assessment of what should have been the story of the year but was overshadowed by flag pins & elitist rhetoric (it seems like being able to read a book could now become a capital crime ;)

 

Anywho… Robert Kennedy jr & Pap are giving us the lowdown on this "Pentagate" affair that underlines the complete lack of public respect & basic decency by the industrial military/media complex that is leading us all into oblivion.

 

SUBSIDIZING CORPORATE CRIME & REWARDING CONSTITUTIONAL ABUSES * Government handouts to corporations might seem untenable at a time when more and more Americans suffer every day from the impacts of a mounting economic crisis. Yet efforts to bolster the economy have largely taken the form of corporate welfare — much like an appalling effort, in the closing days of the Bush administration, to subsidize corporate violations of the rule of law and individual liberties. By Shahid Buttar

 

After the Federal Reserve's $30 billion bailout for investment bank Bear Stearns last month came the Senate's recent decision to set aside $25 billion in tax breaks for corporate homebuilders, and then last week's revelation of "a historic collapse in audits" of major corporations by the IRS. All three stories prompted outrage from observers noting the implications for American workers.

 

BAILOUT BONANZA By Ralph Nader * As large corporations, and their trade associations, complete their takeover of the federal government—a process that President Franklin Delano Roosevelt called fascism in 1938—the corporations become the government. Just look at the recent headlines in the business press. Article after article features abuses and over-runs by companies contracting with the Department of Defense and other agencies.

 

The enormous volumes of waste, fraud and poor delivery affecting the Iraq war-occupation now only produces ho hum newspaper and television stories.The New York Times' prize-winning reporter David Cay Johnston, has written two books "Perfectly Legal" and just recently, the best seller "Free Lunch" that document these megatrends of corporate socialism—privatizing corporate profits and socializing corporate losses on the backs of individual taxpayers.

 

JUSTICE DEPARTMENT INCREASINGLY AVOIDING CORPORATE PROCECUTIONS * Smack in the middle of the biggest corporatte crime wave in history * The Justice Department has put off prosecuting more than fifty companies suspected of wrongdoing over the last three years. Info at www.corporatecrimereporter.com

 

The corporate crime lobby, both Democrats and Republicans, have for years, throughout most of the century, wanted to get rid of corporate criminal liability. And the Chicago School theorists put it this way: a corporation is not a person. Or as Jeffrey Parker put it, a corporation has no mind and therefore can commit no crime. And if a corporation isn't a person, it shouldn't be treated as a person in the criminal justice system. That's their argument.

 

If a corporation is not a person and shouldn't be treated as a person in the criminal justice system, then it shouldn't have the constitutional rights of a person. It should be stripped of its rights to free speech, commercial and political speech. It should be stripped of its rights to a trial by jury. It should be stripped of its protection against unreasonable searches and seizures. You can't have it both ways, but they want it both ways.

 

"THE DECRIMINALIZATION OF CORPORATE CRIME" - With our economic and financial crises deepening, government insiders reportedly are debating whether we need to restore some regulation—or not. Given the state of things, we can expect further woes and no regulation. by Stanley Kutler

 

The Pentagon Strangles Our Economy: Why the U.S. Has Gone Broke

By Chalmers Johnson, Le Monde diplomatique
http://www.alternet.org/story/83555/

EXCERPT

The military adventurers in the Bush administration have much in common with the corporate leaders of the defunct energy company Enron. Both groups thought that they were the "smartest guys in the room" -- the title of Alex Gibney's prize-winning film on what went wrong at Enron. The neoconservatives in the White House and the Pentagon outsmarted themselves. They failed even to address the problem of how to finance their schemes of imperialist wars and global domination.

As a result, going into 2008, the United States finds itself in the anomalous position of being unable to pay for its own elevated living standards or its wasteful, overly large military establishment. Its government no longer even attempts to reduce the ruinous expenses of maintaining huge standing armies, replacing the equipment that seven years of wars have destroyed or worn out, or preparing for a war in outer space against unknown adversaries. Instead, the Bush administration puts off these costs for future generations to pay or repudiate. This fiscal irresponsibility has been disguised through many manipulative financial schemes (causing poorer countries to lend us unprecedented sums of money), but the time of reckoning is fast approaching.

There are three broad aspects to the U.S. debt crisis. First, in the current fiscal year (2008) we are spending insane amounts of money on "defense" projects that bear no relation to the national security of the U.S. We are also keeping the income tax burdens on the richest segment of the population at strikingly low levels.

Second, we continue to believe that we can compensate for the accelerating erosion of our base and our loss of jobs to foreign countries through massive military expenditures -- "military Keynesianism" (which I discuss in detail in my book Nemesis: The Last Days of the American Republic). By that, I mean the mistaken belief that public policies focused on frequent wars, huge expenditures on weapons and munitions, and large standing armies can indefinitely sustain a wealthy capitalist economy. The opposite is actually true.

Third, in our devotion to militarism (despite our limited resources), we are failing to invest in our social infrastructure and other requirements for the long-term health of the U.S. These are what economists call opportunity costs, things not done because we spent our money on something else. Our public education system has deteriorated alarmingly. We have failed to provide health care to all our citizens and neglected our responsibilities as the world's number one polluter. Most important, we have lost our competitiveness as a manufacturer for civilian needs, an infinitely more efficient use of scarce resources than arms manufacturing.

Fiscal disaster

It is virtually impossible to overstate the profligacy of what our government spends on the military. The Department of Defense's planned expenditures for the fiscal year 2008 are larger than all other nations' military budgets combined. The supplementary budget to pay for the current wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, not part of the official defense budget, is itself larger than the combined military budgets of Russia and China. Defense-related spending for fiscal 2008 will exceed $1 trillion for the first time in history. The U.S. has become the largest single seller of arms and munitions to other nations on Earth. Leaving out President Bush's two on-going wars, defense spending has doubled since the mid-1990s. The defense budget for fiscal 2008 is the largest since the second world war.

© 2008 Le Monde diplomatique All rights reserved.
View this story online at: http://www.alternet.org/story/83555/

The Pentagon's Puppets

The Bush administration has covertly tried to influence public opinion in its favor throughout the Iraq war, planting stories in Iraqi newspapers and disseminating misleading polls. Last week, The New York Times reported that the Pentagon has been using more than 75 "military analysts" as "puppets," revealing one of the most extensive attempts at domestic propaganda in this war. These retired military officials, many of whom have contracting business with the government, have pushed the Bush administration's talking points but without revealing their contracts with the Pentagon. In a disturbing tit-for-tat, analysts admitted that they were reluctant to buck the Bush administration out of fear that they might lose access to future briefings and information. "Our military services have an important story to tell, and public affairs offices are critical to that task," said Rep. Ike Skelton (D-MO) on the House floor this pasts week. "But credibility is paramount. Once lost, it is difficult or impossible to regain."

PRIVILEGED ACCESS: Day after day, the American public has watched distinguished retired military officers go on television and assess progress in the Iraq war. Many of these analysts, however, were repeating talking points given to them during private briefings by the administration, using this special access "as a marketing and networking opportunity or as a window into future business possibilities." They were all instructed to not "quote their briefers directly or otherwise describe their contacts with the Pentagon." "It was them saying, 'We need to stick our hands up your back and move your mouth for you,'" said Robert S. Bevelacqua, a retired Green Beret and former Fox News analyst. Certainly not all retired military officials have parroted Pentagon talking points. Last year, for example, CBS asked Iraq veteran Gen. John Batiste to step down as a consultant because he appeared in a VoteVets ad criticizing the war. A CBS vice president justified the network's decision by saying of Batiste, "By putting himself front and center in an anti-Bush ad, the viewer might have the feeling everything he says is anti-Bush." The largest contingent of "puppets" was affiliated with Fox News, followed by MSNBC and CNN, although analysts also appeared on CBS and ABC. At least nine of them wrote op-eds for The New York Times. After significant public outcry, the Pentagon announced last week that it would be temporarily suspending the program, pending a review of the situation.
 
MEDIA BLACKOUT: "The degree of behind-the-scenes manipulation -- including regular briefings by then-defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld and other officials -- is striking, as is the lack of disclosure by the networks of some of these government and business connections," wrote Washington Post media reporter Howard Kurtz last week, who also addressed the controversy on CNN. On the whole, however, the media have been disappointingly silent on their role in the Pentagon's scheme since the story broke last week. On Thursday, PBS's News Hour did a lengthy segment on the scandal, but it could not convince the other networks to join in. "And for the record, we invited Fox News, CNN, MSNBC, CBS, ABC and NBC to participate," said senior correspondent Judy Woodruff, "but they declined our offer or did not respond." Since The New York Times report, Fox News has repeatedly used quotes from one of the military analysts named in the story, without mentioning his ties to the Pentagon. Several conservatives have also rushed to dismiss the expose. Council on Foreign Relations Senior Fellow Max Boot said simply, "All this is part and parcel of the daily grind of Washington journalism." Neoconservative pundit John Podhoretz added that the revelations showed "nothing more than that the Pentagon treated former military personnel like VIPs."

PATTERN OF PROPAGANDA: While The New York Times's revelation was galling, it was hardly the first instance of abuse of public information by the Bush administration. In 2005, the Los Angeles Times revealed that the U.S. military was "secretly paying Iraqi newspapers to publish stories written by American troops in an effort to burnish the image of the US mission in Iraq." However, most of those stories were presented as "unbiased news accounts written and reported by independent journalists." Officials said the stories were "basically factual" but would often "present only one side of events and omit information that might reflect poorly on the US or Iraqi governments." Even at this time, conservatives were backing the Bush administration's propaganda. The National Review's Stephen Spruiell said, "We need more operations like this in Iraq, and more respect for their classified nature." Also in 2005, then-Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Gen. Richard Myers touted poll results of Iraqis that supposedly demonstrated the insurgency was losing political steam, without revealing that the poll surveyed only Iraqis who had actively worked against the insurgents. More recently, in October 2007, it was revealed that the U.S. military was attempting to use funds from the independent military newspaper Stars and Stripes to bolster a PR campaign, which some Pentagon officials described as "tax-payer-funded propaganda."

 

Which Is Worse: the Pentagon or the Media?  

 

Apparently the Defense Department felt the pressure - I have no idea from whom - sufficient to stop feeding information to retired generals who play pundits on TV.

(Robert Hastings, principal deputy assistant secretary of Defense for public affairs) said he is concerned about allegations that the Defense Department's relationship with the retired military analysts was improper.

"Following the allegations, the story that is printed in the New York Times, I directed my staff to halt, to suspend the activities that may be ongoing with retired military analysts to give me time to review the situation," Hastings said in an interview with Stripes on Friday.

Hastings said he did not discuss the matter with Defense Secretary Robert Gates prior to making his decision. He could not say Friday how long this review might take.

"We'll take the time to do it right," he said.

Funny, because there has not been one stitch of coverage of this important issue in virtually any broadcast news outlet, while the retired generals remain on their payrolls. You'd think that for the Pentagon to shut down a program that gave them obvious benefits, they would have to feel some public outcry, which would arise from, you know, wide reporting on the matter. True, Democrats are finally coming around to speaking out about this issue, including Rep. Ike Skelton (chair of the House Armed Services Committee), Rep. Rosa DeLauro and even the Presidential candidates. Certainly, Skelton could haul Pentagon brass into hearings and make things very uncomfortable, and their suspension of the program could be a pre-emptive strike. But the fact that DeLauro sent letters to the heads of the television networks asking for details about the Pentagon pundits, and while the Defense Department shut down the program, the broadcast media did ZIPPO, shows you how deeply corrupt and desirous of avoiding responsibility they are.

In fact, I would go so far as to say that the Pentagon, George Bush's Pentagon, is showing themselves to be MORE accountable to the public than the traditional broadcast media. That's a pretty low bar, and the media couldn't get over it. On the other hand, they must be really proud of the Miley Cyrus topless story.

Glenn Greenwald has more.

© 2008 Hullabaloo All rights reserved.
View this story online at: http://www.alternet.org/bloggers/http://www.digbysblog.blogspot.com//83854/

 

Seems like almost everybody is in collusion. All so-called representatives, party members, Fed Reserve board, and all corporation executives and board members (incestuous, since many are on several boards). And they all should be held responsible. Start taking apart the corporations that have gobbled up smaller companies, including publishing and media. Reveal the major investors who influence corporation policy and hold them also responsible. Particularly those corporations who 'count' the votes and voters.

Jack Anderson revealed how major Republicans and their families were heavily involved in illegal drug trade back in the 70s. Is it any different now?

But who is going to try to correct all these problems? The misinformed public whose lives are being torn apart by these criminals? What happened to equal time for political candidates on the media? Why do they have to have so much money to run a campaign? This is what makes them so susceptible to being bought.

Don't call the American people apathetic. We have tried and been taken for a ride by both parties. We are still trying. But our tools have been subverted and taken away from us.

Our media should not be owned by foreign powers or persons!

Indeed...

 "A cynical, mercenary, demagogic press will produce in time a people as base as itself " - Joseph Pulitzer

I'm afraid that..

"America is the first empire to go from barbarity to decadence without going through civilization" - Oscar Wilde

or at least...

"The civilized have created the wretched, quite coldly and deliberately, and do not intend to change the status quo; are responsible for their slaughter and enslavement; rain down bombs on defenseless children whenever and wherever they decide that their 'vital interests' are menaced, and think nothing of torturing a man to death: these people are not to be taken seriously when they speak of the 'sanctity' of human life, or the conscience' of the civilized world." - James Baldwin

Any which way, we are in a lot of trouble and when things are going to change my friend is just everybody’s guess...

"So I’m watching & I’m waiting, hopping for the best. Even think I’ll go to praying everytime I hear them say that there is no way to delay that trouble coming everyday" – Frank Zappa

 

 

What the Pentagon Pundits Were Selling on the Side

By Diane Farsetta, Center for Media and Democracy

The Pentagon launched its covert media analyst program in 2002, to sell the Iraq war. Later, it was used to sell an image of progress in Afghanistan, whitewash the U.S. detention center at Guantanamo Bay, and defend the Bush administration's warrantless wiretapping, as David Barstow reported in his New York Times expose.

But the pundits weren't just selling government talking points. As Robert Bevelacqua, William Cowan and Carlton Sherwood enjoyed high-level Pentagon access through the analyst program, their WVC3 Group sought "contracts worth tens of millions to supply body armor and counterintelligence services in Iraq," reported Barstow. Cowan admitted to "push[ing] hard" on a WVC3 contract, during a Pentagon-funded trip to Iraq.

Then there's Pentagon pundit Robert H. Scales Jr. The military firm he co-founded in 2003, Colgen, has an interesting range of clients, from the Central Intelligence Agency and U.S. Special Operations Command, to Pfizer and Syracuse University, to Fox News and National Public Radio.

Of the 27 Pentagon pundits named publicly to date, six are registered as federal lobbyists. That's in addition to the less formal -- and less transparent -- boardroom to war-room influence peddling described above. (There are "more than 75 retired officers" who took part in the Pentagon program overall, according to Barstow.)

The Pentagon pundits' lobbying disclosure forms help chart what can only be called a military-industrial-media complex. They also make clear that war is very good for at least some kinds of business.

Some disclosures we would have liked to see

Fox News analystTimur J. Eads works for the military contractor Blackbird Technologies. His job title there, "vice-president of government relations," is often used to describe someone who crafts lobbying strategies but may not take part in lobbying meetings. So, it's not surprising that Eads isn't listed on Blackbird's lobbying disclosure forms. (In 2007 and 2008, Blackbird lobbied Congress on "communications technologies" and the National Guard on "information systems.")

From 2001 to 2003, Eads was in the lobbying trenches for EMC Corporation, a multinational "information infrastructure" company. Eads helped lobby Congress and a long list of federal agencies -- including the Air Force, Army, Marine Corps, Navy and Coast Guard -- for "funding for data storage infrastructure." EMC's annual report (PDF) for 2003 lists the Air Force Materiel Command and Pentagon Renovation and Construction Program Office among its U.S. government clients.

Prior to EMC, Eads lobbied for the major defense contractor Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC). In 1999 and 2000, he was on SAIC's million-dollar-plus lobbying team, influencing federal spending on the armed services, foreign operations, national security and Veterans Administration, among many other appropriations bills.

Another Fox analyst and Pentagon pundit, John C. Garrett, has an even longer list of lobbying clients. He's worked for the Patton Boggs firm since at least 1999. Thanks to the Pentagon analyst program, Garrett offers clients the benefits of his "weekly access and briefings with the secretary of defense, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and other high level policy makers," as Barstow noted.

Garrett has helped Bushmaster Firearms lobby Congress, the Defense and Homeland Security Departments on the "procurement of small arms" and "foreign military sales of small arms." He's lobbied Congress and Homeland Security on "government smart card initiatives," for the Datacard Group; the Defense and Homeland Security Departments on "foreign military sales," for Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica; on Homeland Security "open source intelligence and fusion center programs," for Factiva; the Defense Department on "federal battery purchases," for Interstate Batteries; and Congress and the Defense, Commerce, Homeland Security and Treasury Departments for "rules to prohibit or regulate foreign government subsidization of M&A [mergers and acquisitions] activity," for Terex Corporation, a multinational heavy equipment manufacturer.

And those are just some of Garrett's lobbying contracts in 2007.

The lobbying activity of Pentagon pundit and CBS analystJeffrey D. McCausland has been more focused on Iraq. He's the "director of national security affairs" at the Washington, D.C. law and lobby firm Buchanan Ingersoll & Rooney.

McCausland lobbied on "private security contracting issues in Iraq," for Securewest International in 2004. The UK-based security firm announced that it had landed a $2.5 million contract with the Coalition Provisional Authority in March 2004, to supply "guards for the military complex at Umm Qasr as well as bodyguards for Iraqi and other personnel," according to the Herald Express in South Devon. At the time, Securewest vice-president Paul Singer said, "Kuwait and Iraq have long been our target markets. … We had a chance to visit the region only to realise how massive the market is." But when the contract ended in late 2004, Securewest decided against seeking more Iraq work. Singer explained, "It was always a difficult place to work and … the kidnapping and execution of 12 Nepalese workers caused great concern." Many of Securewest's staff are from Nepal or India.

But McCausland was hardly at a loss for clients. In 2003, he lobbied Congress and the Defense and Commerce Departments for "contract procurement in Iraq," on behalf of Al-Najat. In 2004, he lobbied on "government procurement / Coalition Provisional Authority" issues for Cross VetPharm, and on "business development in the Middle East," for Educational Testing Service. In 2004 and 2005, McCausland lobbied the State and Commerce Departments on "healthcare development in the Middle East," on behalf of Gemini Consulting.

Fellow CBS commentator Joseph W. Ralston is the last publicly named Pentagon pundit with a significant stack of of lobbying disclosure forms. "Soon after signing with CBS, General Ralston was named vice chairman of the Cohen Group, a consulting firm headed by a former defense secretary, William Cohen, himself now a 'world affairs' analyst for CNN," reported Barstow.

Not surprisingly, Ralston's lobbying clients include major military contractors. In 2006, he lobbied the Defense Department on "issues related to export of tactical fighter aircraft and defense technology," for Lockheed Martin; and the State Department on "federal funding of demilitarization efforts abroad," for General Dynamics. In 2006 and 2007, Ralston helped Fischer Properties identify "military family housing opportunities," and Pratt & Whitney find "market opportunities for military aircraft engines."

Multiple media mistakes, on lobbying and propaganda

As The Nation pointed out shortly after the U.S. invaded Iraq, many of the retired officers hired to provide war commentary had significant conflicts of interest. At the time, Fox and NBC brushed off questions about their military analysts' financial and other interests as irrelevant to or separate from their on-air commentary.

Today, the broadcast and cable networks are steadfastly refusing to cover or otherwise address the Pentagon military analyst program, with very few exceptions. In this case, though, the pundits' undeclared financial interests are only part of a larger and much more serious problem. These officers participated in a covert government program designed to shape U.S. public opinion -- an illegal program, and one that relied on the willingness of major media to play along, without asking too many questions. And that's exactly what happened.

The media outlets that featured the Pentagon's pundits need to address both aspects of this debacle -- that they failed to identify or disclose conflicts of interest, and that they helped propagandize U.S. news audiences. NPR Ombudsman Alicia C. Shepard's recent column only mentioned the former. She pointed to NPR's new "detailed guidelines for vetting on-air guests and looking for potential conflicts of interests" as the solution. But those guidelines don't include questions about contacts with or materials provided by government officials, or trips funded by government agencies. Instead, Shepard concerned herself with the question of whether NPR analyst Robert Scales does or "does not spout the Pentagon's line."

Memo to Shepard: It's illegal for the U.S. government to propagandize its own citizens, regardless. And instead of debating shades of gray, shouldn't NPR be denouncing any propaganda attempt as antithetical to the ideal of a free press?

Increasingly, news audiences are realizing the many ways in which interested parties skew media coverage. Media outlets need to wake up to that reality and work to strengthen their safeguards in defense of the public interest. Their only alternative is to start composing their next weak and belated mea culpa, in a desperate attempt to protect their ever-dwindling credibility.

Diane Farsetta is senior researcher at the Center for Media and Democracy.

Posted on May 5, 2008
http://www.alternet.org/story/84387/

 

 

MILITARY More Spin Uncovered

Last month, in a major exposé, the New York Times reported that the Pentagon had created a domestic propaganda program that made use of more than 75 "military analysts" to disseminate favorable coverage of the Bush administration's war efforts. The program included, for example, private briefings with former defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld and other top officials, commercial airfare, and the distribution of favorable "talking points" to analysts prior to media appearances. Virtually all of the major networks were involved in the program, including ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, Fox News, MSNBC, CNBC, and NPR. The retired military officials serving as media analysts often had contracting ties with the government but pushed the Pentagon line on air without revealing the conflict of interest.  Earlier this month, the Pentagon released a major document collection in response to the Times's article, shining even more light on the magnitude of the operation. In a recent letter, Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) called on the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to conduct a "full investigation of this program and report its findings." Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI) also wrote to the GAO, observing: "Allegedly, the Pentagon discouraged the analysts from publicly describing the nature of their relationship with the Pentagon. This clearly violates the spirit, if not the letter, of the law."

PRO-BUSH SPIN OPERATION: An examination of the Pentagon's internal conversations confirms that the Pentagon created "a kind of media Trojan horse -- an instrument intended to shape terrorism coverage," as the Times put it. A July 6, 2006 e-mail from Pentagon official Jeffrey Gordon circulated "thoughtful" words by right-wing talkers Bill O'Reilly and Michelle Malkin on Guantanamo Bay. In the Malkin column, she decried the "unseriousness and hypocrisy of the terrorist-abetting left" on Guantanamo. O'Reilly said there were only "minor cases of abuse" at the prison. A "talking points" document from the summer of 2003 pushed the infamous words "dead-enders" and "bitter-enders" to refer to Iraqis who attacked American troops. A later memo reiterated that "the dead-enders are not driving us out of anywhere." Other e-mails reveal a deliberate attempt by the Pentagon to cover up its heavy hand. In a Feb.16, 2006 exchange, Pentagon media staffers discussed coordinating with the Heritage Foundation for a speaker on Guantanamo. An anonymous staffer suggested retired Army Sergeant Major Steve Short because "he seems to be on message and very articulate." "Important to remember that heritage can invite anyone to present and that we don't really have an opinion on anyone," responded Allison Barber of the Pentagon. "[G]asp. are you telling me to tell a lie???? surely not ;)," the anonymous staffer responded.

WHITE HOUSE INVOLVEMENT?: Last month, reporter Eric Brewer asked White House Press Secretary Dana Perino about whether the White House was involved in the military analyst program. Perino responded, "I just said, no." But the Pentagon's document collection raises questions about the White House's role. A March 16, 2006 e-mail from Pentagon official Dallas Lawrence referenced "a closed call opened only to our retired military analysts...to get them on message heading into the weekend on Iraqi troop strength, advances, etc." A follow-up from an anonymous e-mailer said he or she was "hoping to have Hadley brief these guys next week," referring to National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley. Responding to this e-mail, Lawrence added, "Id love to see if we ocould [could] get them in with potus [President Bush] as well. (I think that was submitted to karl and company...last week)." A May 23, 2006 from Lawrence also references "karl." As Salon's Glenn Greenwald noted, the "karl" references strongly suggest that at least former Bush political adviser Karl Rove was involved.

MEDIA STILL QUIET: The media has been curiously silent on the Times's exposé, despite clear involvement in the program. "Did we drink the government kool-aid? -- of course," said CNN military analyst Don Sheppard in a June 23, 2006 e-mail about his government-sponsored trip to Guantanamo. In the week after the story broke, the Project for Excellence in Journalism found that out of roughly 1,300 news stories, "only two touched on the Pentagon analysts scoop," both airing on PBS. "I can only conclude that the networks are staying away...because they are embarrassed about what some of their military analysts did or don't want to give the controversy more prominence," said Howard Kurtz of the Washington Post. As Media Matters reported, the military analysts cited in the Times article have been quoted more than 4,500 times by a range of news outlets since Jan. 1, 2002. On April 24, Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-CT) wrote letters to the heads of the major networks on the "specifics about each outlet's policies surrounding the hiring and vetting of military analysts reporting on the Iraq War." As of May 8, only ABC and CNN responded.

Pentagon Propagandist General Calls for US to Sponsor Terrorism Against Iran

Last month on Fox News, Ret. Gen. Thomas McInerney, one of the Pentagon’s propaganda team of military analysts exposed by David Barstow in the NYT, openly called for the US to begin committing “tit-for-tat” terrorist attacks by proxy inside Iran.

McInerney: Here’s what I would suggest to you. Number one, we take the National Council for Resistance to Iran off the terrorist list that the Clinton Administration put them on as well as the Mujahedin-e Khalq at the Camp Ashraf in Iraq. Then I would start a tit-for-tat strategy which I wrote up in the Wall Street Journal a year ago: For every EFP that goes off and kills Americans, two go off in Iran. No questions asked. People don’t have to know how it was done. It’s a covert action. They become the most unlucky country in the world. …

Media Matters’ exhaustive research into the NYT story shows that McInerney appeared on Fox News 144 times since Jan 2002, and according to this bio from last year’s “Intelligence Summit,” McInerney is on the Board of Directors for several companies with defense-related contracts that would seem to benefit from his pro-war propaganda. For example, Alloy Surfaces Company (ASC), whose contracts for “ammunition and explosives” with the Department of Defense appear to have grown from $15 million in 2002 to more than $169 million in 2006. A conflict of interest, perhaps?

The tactic that McInerney advocates of using Iranian opposition terrorist groups to carry out acts of terrorism inside Iran is not new, nor far-fetched. A little digging turned up numerous articles alleging that the pentagon had already been using the Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK) and other groups in cross-border operations into Iran, at least until shortly after Sec Gates took over (Some news reports of attacks in Iran here, here, here, here, here. Iranian news video here).

The MEK (aka MKO, NLA, PMOI, NCRI) is a terrorist group, as designated still by the State Dept, that has killed US troops and civilians before back in the 1970s. Even Bush’s first deputy secretary of state, Richard Armitage, said of the MEK, “I lived there [in Iran] for a year, and it was during that time that our people were killed by the MEK, assassinated. … So from my point of view they were terrorists.” David Ignatius wrote in the WaPo that back in 2003 the US actually rejected a deal with Iran to exchange MEK captives for several top al-Qaeda leaders.

The White House apparently doesn’t want you to know about the MEK.

In Dec 2006, just days after Rumsfeld was forced to step down, the NYT published a heavily redacted op-ed by Flynt Leverett and Hillary Mann. Though none of the info was classified, all of which had previously “been extensively reported in the news media,” much of their article was blacked out because the “White House intervened” before it went to print. In response, Leverett and Mann followed up with an accompanying piece “What We Wanted to Tell You About Iran“ where they provided citations to previously reported sources for all of the redacted info. Raw Story compiled those sources in their “The redacted Iran op-ed revealed” and, surprise, many of the articles refer directly to the MEK terrorist group, but there had been nary a mention in the portions the White House allowed.

So, to recap: One of the Pentagon’s propaganda TV analysts who has clear ties to defense industries that would likely stand to benefit from any increased hostilities is advocating that the US ought to use a terrorist organization to commit acts of terrorism against Iran in response to alleged Iranian involvement in attacks against US forces in Iraq, which might be true, or maybe not. And if that wasn’t outrageous enough, it seems that Bush may have been authorizing such tactics already.

 

 "A cynical, mercenary, demagogic press will produce in time a people as base as itself": Joseph Pulitzer

Back to where we never left !

Big Media ignores its own travesty of information !

Call it now pure propaganda to be accurate ...

The Ongoing Pentagon Pundit Scandal

Mike Papantonio of GoLeft TV and Air America's Ring of Fire talks with Eric Boehlert, senior fellow with Media Matters, about the ongoing Pentagon Pundit scandal, and the news organizations that continue to use these puppets of the Administration.

http://www.goleft.tv/view.asp?c=7&v=1422

Back to where we never left indeed !

I would like tonight to call for a removal, an immediate removal, of all US troops from CBS, ABC, NBC, Fox, CNN, NBC, all of them. - MICHAEL MOORE

"The tyrant, who in order to hold his power, suppresses every superiority, does away with good men, forbids education and light, controls every movement of the citizens and, keeping them under a perpetual servitude, wants them to grow accustomed to baseness and cowardice, has his spies everywhere to listen to what is said in the meetings, and spreads dissension and calumny among the citizens and impoverishes them, is obliged to make war in order to keep his subjects occupied and impose on them permanent need of a chief." - Aristotle

Meanwhile...