 |
|
 |

 |
elfs | |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
This will be my one braindump for Sunday. It's that important. Read it all. Records and interviews show how the Bush administration has used its control over access and information in an effort to transform the analysts into a kind of media Trojan horse – an instrument intended to shape terrorism coverage from inside the major TV and radio networks.
Analysts have been wooed in hundreds of private briefings with senior military leaders, including officials with significant influence over contracting and budget matters, records show. They have been taken on tours of Iraq and given access to classified intelligence. They have been briefed by officials from the White House, State Department and Justice Department, including Mr. Cheney, Alberto R. Gonzales and Stephen J. Hadley.
In turn, members of this group have echoed administration talking points, sometimes even when they suspected the information was false or inflated. Some analysts acknowledge they suppressed doubts because they feared jeopardizing their access.
A few expressed regret for participating in what they regarded as an effort to dupe the American public with propaganda dressed as independent military analysis.
"It was them saying, 'We need to stick our hands up your back and move your mouth for you,' " Robert S. Bevelacqua, a retired Green Beret and former Fox News analyst, said.
Kenneth Allard, a former NBC military analyst who has taught information warfare at the National Defense University, said the campaign amounted to a sophisticated information operation. "This was a coherent, active policy," he said. The New York Times: Behind Military Analysts, the Pentagon's Hidden Hand.Tags: news, shrill Current Mood: disgusted
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |

 |

 |
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
From: shunra |
Date: April 21st, 2008 05:22 pm (UTC) |
| (Link) |
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|

 |
|

 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
It's nothing new. From Gustave Gilbert's Nuremberg Diaries, in his interview with Hermann Goering on April 18, 1946: We got around to the subject of war again and I said that, contrary to his attitude, I did not think that the common people are very thankful for leaders who bring them war and destruction.
"Why, of course, the people don't want war," Goering shrugged. "Why would some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best that he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece. Naturally, the common people don't want war; neither in Russia nor in England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship."
"There is one difference," I pointed out. "In a democracy the people have some say in the matter through their elected representatives, and in the United States only Congress can declare wars."
"Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country."
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|

 |
|

 |
|

 |
|

 |
|

 |
|

 |
|

 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| From: (Anonymous) |
Date: April 22nd, 2008 10:55 pm (UTC) |
| (Link) |
|
Thanks for the definition... I didn't want to jump to any unwarranted conclusions.
Now, your assertion was propaganda was being used to carry on a "leftist, pro-gay, anti-Christian agenda."
Now, I don't know you, your ideology, your politics, etc. However, when I've seen assertions like this in the past, it has been my experience that they have generally broken down as follows:
"leftist" - does not absolutely and unequivocally adhere to a strict, socially conservative position
"pro-gay" - does not portray gays and lesbians as, at best, mentally disturbed, confused pawns of the Gay Agenda, and, at worst, sick, depraved animals who should be, at the very least, behind bars and kept away from "normal" people
"anti-Christian" - acts in a manner inconsistent with the absolute assumption that the only real Deity is the Christian Deity, the only real religion is the Christian religion, and all good, right, moral people are, of course, devout Christians
As I said, I don't know you, so I can't just assume that the above characterization is in any way an accurate portrayal of your particular views.
So, if you wouldn't mind, would you put your own descriptions to those terms, so that I don't end up making any false assumptions?
Thanks...
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|

|  |
 |

|
 |